|
FILIPINOS may be tremendously benefiting from $12
billion worth of annual remittances sent by relatives
working abroad, but seen from a broader scale there
could be blips that might weigh down on income equality,
local employment and country competitiveness, a labor
economist said Friday.
For a
country whose outmigration rate is highest in the
region, the Philippines’ long-term risk of losing its
skilled labor may be costlier than gains the economy
gets from having higher foreign exchange inflows,
Winfred M. Villamil, associate professor of the
Economics Department of the De La Salle University, said
in an interview.
“Labor
migration is thought to alleviate poverty in the sending
country by reducing the domestic supply of workers such
that wages rise and consequently unemployment and
underemployment fall. Migration therefore provides a
safety valve for a country to ease pressures to provide
employment to its labor force,” Villamil commented.
The De
La Salle University associate professor had a caveat,
though: considering most of the almost one million
Filipinos who leave yearly for overseas work are mostly
the skilled ones, the country needs to compete
regionally and globally.
“The
gains may be large if those who leave are the unskilled
and who belong to the low-income class… but those who
leave are skilled. This might have dire consequences on
the Philippines, which hopes to compete with low-wage
countries such as China through industrial upgrading and
shift to skills-intensive industries to increase
productivity,” he told BusinessMirror.
What may
even be worse than the delay of structural
transformation is the ensuing risk of “brain waste”
wherein the educated and skilled Filipinos get employed
for unskilled work, he added.
This, as
Villamil pointed out, leads to another blip in terms of
social and income inequity. “Most of migrants are
skilled educated workers who are not necessarily poor…
you have a situation where migration is substantially
costly, so it is the relatively well-off who might have
better opportunities for migration,” he commented, and
leaves those unable to finance their migration having to
contend with their limited financial capability.
Remittances, which make up about 9.4 percent of gross
domestic product, also have a tendency to slow down
economic growth, Villamil claimed.
“Some
families who receive substantial remittances either stop
working, reduce their time working or take a longer time
looking for work because they now have reservation wages
or other sources of income,” he said, thereby reducing
potential household productivity.
Villamil
noted there is even evidence of higher unemployment
rates in households benefiting from overseas
remittances.
On the
contrary, the DLSU professor noted that remittances are
also countercyclical in the
Philippines’
case, as proven after the 1997 financial crisis and the
series of El Niño events in the country.
“We
experience higher remittances when there is a downturn
in the economy… this plays an important role to support
stability in the face of an economic shock and in
mitigating the effects of this economic shock,” Villamil
said. |