Sie sind auf Seite 1von 124

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates

Republika ng Pilipinas

PAMBANSANG LUPON SA UGNAYANG PANG-ESTADISTIKA


(NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD) http://www.nscb.gov.ph

in cooperation with The WORLD BANK


23 March 2009 Makati City, Philippines

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates is a publication prepared by the Poverty, Labor, Human Development, and Gender Statistics Division of the NATIONAL STATISTICAL COORDINATION BOARD (NSCB). For technical inquiries, please contact us at: (632) 896-7981 or email us at info@nscb.gov.ph.

TERMS OF USE OF NSCB PUBLICATIONS The NSCB reserves its exclusive right to reproduce all its publications in whatever form. Any part of this publication should not be reproduced, recopied, lent or repackaged for other parties for any commercial purposes without written permission from the NSCB. Any part of this publication may only be reproduced for internal use of the recipient/customer company. Should any portion of the data in this publication be included in a report/article, the title of the publication and the NSCB as publisher should be cited as the source of the data. Any information derived from the processing of data contained in this publication will not be the responsibility of NSCB.

Published by the National Statistical Coordination Board Midland Buendia Building 403 Sen. Gil Puyat Avenue Makati City 1200 Philippines

with funding assistance from the World Bank

23 March 2009

The 2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates is available in electronic formats (Excel/Word/PDF in CDRom). For details, please contact us at (632) 890-8456 or at info@nscb.gov.ph.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page ii

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates

The 2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates is a major output of the Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates Project implemented by the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) with funding assistance from the World Bank Trust Fund for Statistical Capacity Building (WB TFSCB).

23 March 2009 Makati City, Philippines

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page i

FOREWORD

This report features the 2003 small area poverty estimates (SAPE) for the 1,622 cities and municipalities in the country as part of the output of the Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates Project. The project was implemented by the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) with funding assistance from the World Bank Trust Fund for Statistical Capacity Building (WB TFSCB). It is a follow-up study to the NSCB project on Poverty Mapping in the Philippines funded through the WB-Asia Europe Meeting Trust Fund, which generated provincial and municipal level poverty estimates for 2000 using small area estimation (SAE) techniques. The SAE methodology employed in the project combined survey and census data to produce reliable poverty estimates at lower levels of geographic disaggregation. The SAE methodology was based on Elbers, Lanjouw and Lanjouw (ELL) methodology developed by the WB, which was modified to come up with estimates even during intercensal years. The methodology combined the data from the 2003 Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES), 2003 Labor Force Survey (LFS) and 2000 Census of Population and Housing (CPH) to estimate 2003 poverty incidence, poverty gap, and severity for all cities and municipalities in the country. We acknowledge the valuable assistance provided by the Project Technical Adviser, Dr. Peter Lanjouw of the WB, and the Project Consultants, Dr. Roy van der Weide also of the WB and Dr. Zita VJ. Albacea of the University of the Philippines Los Baos (UPLB). We also express our deepest appreciation to Mr. Karl Kendrick Chua, the Project Task Team Leader of the WB, for his encouraging support in this undertaking and for his untiring efforts to help us improve the Philippine Statistical System. This report also highlights actual policy uses in the Philippines as well as in other countries and the relevance of the project outputs to national policymaking. Thus, it is hoped that the results of this project will help local communities and policymakers in the formulation of appropriate programs and improvements in targeting schemes aimed at reducing poverty.

ROMULO A. VIROLA Secretary General National Statistical Coordination Board

23 March 2009

Table of Contents Page I. II. Introduction 2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates A. 2003 Poorest Cities and Municipalities Across the Nation 1. Poorest 40 Municipalities in 2003 2. 40 Municipalities in 2003 with Highest Poverty Gap 3. 40 Municipalities in 2003 with Highest Severity of Poverty 4. Critical Municipalities in Terms of Three Poverty Measures B. 2003 Poorest Cities and Municipalities: The Regional Situation III. Actual Policy Uses A. Philippines B. Other Country Experiences IV. V. Conclusions and Recommendations Annex A. Definition of Terms B. Methodology 1. Overview 2. Data Sources 3. Implementation of the Methodology a. Introduction/Background b. Selection of Explanatory Variables c. Statistical Modeling d. Production and Selection of Regional Models 4. Limitations of the Study C. Validation Workshops 1. Objectives 2. Mechanics 3. Workshop Design 4. Validation Forms 5. Matrix of Findings D. Advocacy E. Lessons Learned F. 2003 Small Area Poverty Estimates References Project Staff
2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates Page ii

1 3 3 6 8 10 12 14 36 36 40 42 43 44 46 46 49 50 50 51 56 57 63 66 66 66 67 69 74 76 80 81

Introduction The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which affirmed commitments of member countries of the United Nations towards reducing the worst forms of human deprivation, has as its primary goal halving poverty by 2015. Towards the achievement of this goal, it is imperative that policy- and decision-makers have access to subnational information on the poverty situation as program interventions are implemented and done at the local level. The National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB), under Executive Order No. 352 issued in 1996, Designation of Statistical Activities that will Generate Critical Data for Decision-making of the Government and the Private Sector, generates and release the countrys official poverty statistics using the official poverty estimation methodology as approved in NSCB Resolution No. 1 Series of 2003 Approving the Proposed Methodology for the Computation of Provincial Poverty Statistics. Poverty incidence and other measures of poverty are directly estimated using the Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) collected by the National Statistics Office (NSO) every three years. Due to limited resources of the government and the Philippine Statistical System (PSS), these are available only at the national, regional, and provincial levels. With increasing clamor for lower disaggregation of poverty statistics, the NSCB embarked on a Poverty Mapping Project with funding assistance from the World Bank Asia Europe Meeting (ASEM) Trust Fund in 2004. This Project made possible the release of 2000 poverty estimates for all the 1,623 municipalities in the country through small area estimation in 2005. Small area estimation is a statistical methodology that allows the estimation at lower levels of disaggregation by combining data from other sources such as the census, in addition to information collected from a survey. A variant of this methodology, called the Elbers, Lanjouw and Lanjouw (ELL) Method, was applied in this Project using the 2000 Census of Population and Housing (CPH), 4th Round of the 2000 Labor Force Survey (LFS) and 2000 FIES. Recognizing the need to update these 2000 city and municipal level poverty estimates, the NSCB implemented the Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates Project in 2006 through the World Bank Trust Fund for Statistical Capacity Building (WB TFSCB). The study aims to explore the possibility of generating reliable 2003 city

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 1

and municipal level poverty estimates using a slight modification of the ELL Methodology used in the earlier Project, using 2000 census data. It is hoped that the results of this Project like the earlier initiative, will be a useful guide to local government units, policy makers and program implementers in formulating/designing intervention programs aimed at reducing poverty.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 2

II. 2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates A. 2003 Poorest Cities and Municipalities Across the Nation A total of 1,622 municipal and city level poverty estimates were generated for the year 2003 using the small area estimation technique discussed in the Annex section. Annex F gives the complete list of these estimates. Based on the results, the poorest municipality is Siayan of Zamboanga del Norte with a poverty incidence of 97.5 percent and coefficient of variation (CV) equal to 1.4 percent. This municipality is located seven hours away from the poblacion. The figure indicates that 97.5 percent or almost all of the municipality residents are poor. Siayan is a third class municipality1 with a population of 34,588 in 2007 Census of Population (PopCen) and has fishing and farming as its main source of livelihood. On the other hand, the least poor residents are found in Binondo, where the biggest Chinatown in the City of Manila is located, with poverty incidence placed at 1.1 percent. In this area with a population of 12,100 in 2007 PopCen, only one out of every ten residents is considered in poverty. However, this estimate has a CV equal to 86 percent. It should be noted that it is generally believed that the reliability of an estimate is within acceptable level, if its CV is low, which is at most 20 percent.

On the average, the municipality and city level poverty incidence estimates is less than 50 percent, with a reported average value of 37.5 percent. Thus, on the average, around four out of every ten residents of a municipality or city are said to be poor. Table 1 shows the distribution of the poverty incidences at the municipality and city level estimates. As shown in the table, almost half (48 percent) of the 1,622 municipalities and cities have estimates ranging from 25 percent to 50 percent. Only 2 percent of the municipalities (36 out of 1,622) have higher than 75 percent poverty incidence.

Income classification is based on the Department of Finance Order No. 20-05, effective July 29, 2005.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 3

Table 1. Frequency distribution of 1,622 municipal and city level poverty incidence estimates for 2003 Poverty Incidence Estimates Frequency Percent <RCF (%) < 25 442 27 27 25 50 776 48 75 51 75 368 23 98 > 75 36 2 100

The 1,622 municipal and city level estimates generated are mostly reliable as shown in Table 2. Thirty eight percent of the estimates (623 out of 1,622) have CVs less than 10 percent while 757 estimates or around 47 percent have estimates with acceptable values of the CV. Hence, a total of 1,380 out of 1,622 municipalities and cities or around 85 percent are having reliable poverty incidence estimates, which can be used to better target the poor population in a province.
Table 2. Frequency distribution of the coefficients of variation of the 1,622 municipal and city level poverty incidence estimates for 2003 CV (%) Frequency Percent <RCF < 10 623 38 38 11 20 757 47 85 21 50 223 14 99 > 50 19 1 100

The confidence bounds of the estimates are plotted in Figure 1. It can be seen that only few estimates have wide intervals like in the Municipalities of Turtle Islands, Adams and Matanog while the rest of the estimates have narrow confidence interval estimates.
Figure 1. Confidence interval estimates of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidences

1.2 1
0.8
Turtle Island - 0.50 [0.15, 0.84] Adams, Ilocos Norte 0.48 [0.13, 0.83]

0.6 0.4 0.2 0


Matanog, Maguindanao - 0.65 [0.30, 1.0]

88

175

262

349

436

523

610

697

784

871

958

1045

1132

1219

1306

1393

1480

-0.2

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

1567
Page 4

A poverty map of the 1,622 city and municipal estimates of poverty is shown in Figure 2. The color shading indicates the degree of poverty in the locality. Red color indicates municipalities or cities with high poverty incidences while the green colors indicate the opposite condition. The map in Figure 2 shows that most of the Luzon group of islands is shaded with green indicating lower poverty incidence in these areas, while majority of the Visayas and Mindanao region are shaded with red and orange, indicating high poverty incidence.
Figure 2. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence

Luzon

Visayas

Visayas

Mindanao

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 5

1. The Poorest 40 Municipalities in 2003 As mentioned earlier, the Municipality of Siayan in the Province of Zamboanga del Norte found in Region IX tops the list of the municipalities and cities based on the estimated poverty incidence. The list is actually composed of municipalities with no city included. The 2nd poorest municipality is Tanudan, a fourth class municipality and a remote place in the Province of Kalinga. In this community, almost nine out of every ten residents are in poverty. The lowest poverty incidence estimate among these 40 municipalities is 74.3 percent indicating that at least seven out of every ten residents are poor. Among the poorest 40 municipalities, only five are in Luzon. Specifically, two are in the Province of Kalinga in Cordillera Autonomous Region (CAR), one in the Province of La Union in Region I, and two from Region 4-B; one each in the Provinces of Palawan and Oriental Mindoro. In the Visayas, the seven municipalities included in the list all came from Region VIII, specifically in the province of Western Samar, which is considered the poorest province in 2003 using the SAE. Mindanao has the rest of the municipalities (28 out of 40) and mostly from Regions IX, X, XI and Caraga. These municipalities in Mindanao are found in the provinces of Zamboanga del Norte (7), Zamboanga del Sur (7), Davao del Norte (1), Davao del Sur (3), Agusan del Sur (4), Surigao del Norte (2), and Lanao del Norte (4). The provinces with municipalities belonging to the poorest 40 are the same provinces identified in the 40 poorest provinces based on the SAE estimates for 2003. The list of 40 provinces includes the provinces mentioned above except for Davao del Norte and Davao del Sur. Hence, it can be said that within a province that is not generally considered poor, there are municipalities that are very poor and need more assistance compared to other municipalities or cities in the same province. All the 40 estimates are found to have CV of at most 16.4 percent. Only two estimates have CVs greater than ten but less than 20 percent, hence these two estimates are still with acceptable measures of reliability. The rest of the 40 estimates (38 out of 40) are reliable with CVs less than 10 percent.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 6

Table 3. Poorest 40 municipalities based on 2003 SAE of poverty among population


Region IX CAR IX X IX I IX XI IX IX
CARAGA

Province
ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE KALINGA ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR LANAO DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR LA UNION ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE DAVAO DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR AGUSAN DEL SUR KALINGA WESTERN SAMAR LANAO DEL NORTE WESTERN SAMAR DAVAO DEL SUR WESTERN SAMAR AGUSAN DEL SUR DAVAO DEL SUR DAVAO DEL NORTE AGUSAN DEL SUR WESTERN SAMAR WESTERN SAMAR LANAO DEL NORTE AGUSAN DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE WESTERN SAMAR PALAWAN ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE SURIGAO DEL NORTE LANAO DEL NORTE ORIENTAL MINDORO SURIGAO DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR WESTERN SAMAR

Municipality SIAYAN TANUDAN SOMINOT TANGKAL MIDSALIP BAGULIN BACUNGAN


JOSE ABAD SANTOS

Poverty Standard Incidence Error (%) (%) 97.5 88.1 87.5 86.7 86.3 85.5 85.2 84.6 84.6 84.3 83.1 82.1 81.9 81.7 81.4 80.8 80.1 80.0 78.7 78.6 78.4 78.0 78.0 77.9 77.7 77.7 77.7 76.9 76.6 76.5 76.4 76.1 75.8 75.7 75.5 75.1 74.7 74.5 74.5 74.3 1.4 4.2 4.1 4.8 3.1 9.6 4.3 4.7 4.3 3.7 3.3 5.8 3.1 4.3 3.1 6.0 2.7 4.5 6.7 12.7 2.8 2.2 2.3 7.0 3.6 3.5 3.9 3.7 3.6 2.5 5.2 5.0 4.4 5.8 6.1 3.4 3.3 4.0 4.3 2.7

CV 1.4 4.8 4.7 5.6 3.6 11.2 5.1 5.6 5.1 4.4 4.0 7.0 3.8 5.2 3.8 7.4 3.3 5.7 8.5 16.4 3.5 2.8 2.9 9.0 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.8 4.7 3.2 6.8 6.5 5.8 7.6 8.1 3.6 4.4 5.3 5.8 3.7

Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

GODOD LAPUYAN SAN LUIS TINGLAYAN


SAN JOSE DE BUAN

CAR VIII X VIII XI VIII


CARAGA

POONA-PIAGAPO MATUGUINAO DON MARCELINO ZUMARRAGA LA PAZ SARANGANI TALAINGOD ESPERANZA TARANGNAN DARAM TAGOLOAN LORETO
PRES. MANUEL A. ROXAS

XI XI
CARAGA

VIII VIII X
CARAGA

IX IX IX IX VIII IV-B IX IX IX
CARAGA

MABUHAY SAN PABLO SIBUCO SANTA RITA LINAPACAN SIRAWAI VICENZO A. SAGUM MUTIA SAN ISIDRO MAGSAYSAY
BULALACAO (SAN PEDRO)

X IV-B
CARAGA

CAGDIANAO TIGBAO PINABACDAO

IX VIII

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 7

2. 40 Municipalities in 2003 with Highest Poverty Gap Another poverty measure is poverty gap, which measures the total income shortfall (expressed in proportion to the poverty line) of individuals with income below the poverty line divided by the total number of individuals. This could actually provide information as to how much, on the average, is needed by each individual for them to become non-poor. The 2003 municipal and city level poverty gap estimates were also generated using the SAE technique described in the Annex. The Municipality of Siayan in the Province of Zamboanga del Norte found in Region IX still tops the list of the municipalities and cities based on the estimated poverty gap. Thus, the people of Siayan are not only poor but their incomes are also the farthest from the threshold compared to other poor municipalities since their municipality has the highest poverty gap estimated at 63.2 percent. This means that on the average, the per capita income of Filipino families living in Siayan is 63.2 percent short of the poverty threshold. Again, no city was included in the list (see Table 5). The fifth class municipality of Tangkal in the Province of Lanao del Norte ranks 2nd highest in terms of poverty gap. The Municipality of Tanudan in Kalinga, which ranks 2nd in terms of poverty incidence, is now 5th in the list. Hence, while Tanudan has high proportion of poor, the income of its residents are closer to the poverty threshold, compared to those residing in Tangkal, the smallest municipality in Lanao del Norte. Six municipalities in the list of 40 poorest municipalities based on the poverty incidence were not included in the list based on the poverty gap. These six municipalities were replaced by municipalities coming from the province of Lanao del Norte in Region X. The list of 40 municipalities with high poverty gap is composed of two municipalities from the Province of Kalinga in Cordillera Autonomous Region (CAR); one in the Province of La Union in Region I, six municipalities from the Province of Western Samar, and the rest from the provinces in Mindanao. Only one of the 40 estimates in Table 4 has CV greater than 20 percent, at 26 percent. The rest in the list has CVs less than 20 percent, which indicates that the measures of reliability of the estimates are still acceptable.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 8

Table 4. 40 Municipalities in 2003 with Highest Poverty Gap


Region IX X IX IX CAR IX IX IX I X XI
CARAGA

Province
ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE LANAO DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR KALINGA ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE LA UNION LANAO DEL NORTE DAVAO DEL SUR AGUSAN DEL SUR KALINGA WESTERN SAMAR WESTERN SAMAR ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR AGUSAN DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE LANAO DEL NORTE WESTERN SAMAR LANAO DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR AGUSAN DEL SUR LANAO DEL NORTE LANAO DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR DAVAO DEL SUR LANAO DEL NORTE AGUSAN DEL SUR WESTERN SAMAR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE LANAO DEL NORTE WESTERN SAMAR SURIGAO DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR LANAO DEL NORTE WESTERN SAMAR LANAO DEL NORTE

Municipality SIAYAN TANGKAL SOMINOT MIDSALIP TANUDAN BACUNGAN LAPUYAN GODOD BAGULIN POONA-PIAGAPO
JOSE ABAD SANTOS

Poverty Standard Incidence Error (%) (%) 62.3 46.6 46.3 45.5 43.9 43.4 42.2 41.2 40.7 39.8 38.9 38.8 37.9 36.6 36.5 36.1 35.9 35.5 35.2 35.1 35.1 34.9 34.7 34.5 34.3 34.2 34.1 34.1 34.1 34.0 33.7 33.6 33.6 33.5 33.2 33.1 32.7 32.6 32.3 32.2 3.8 5.9 4.4 3.3 5.1 4.1 3.2 4.1 10.6 4.0 4.4 3.4 5.3 2.3 2.6 3.4 4.4 2.8 5.7 2.4 3.0 2.7 2.4 4.7 4.1 4.2 3.5 4.0 3.8 3.2 1.8 4.2 2.6 3.3 1.8 4.9 3.0 2.7 1.9 3.6

CV 6.0 12.7 9.4 7.2 11.5 9.4 7.6 9.9 26.2 10.2 11.3 8.9 14.0 6.3 7.3 9.4 12.2 8.0 16.1 6.7 8.6 7.8 7.0 13.7 11.9 12.4 10.3 11.6 11.2 9.4 5.4 12.6 7.7 9.7 5.4 14.9 9.2 8.4 5.8 11.3

Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

SAN LUIS TINGLAYAN MATUGUINAO


SAN JOSE DE BUAN

CAR VIII VIII IX


CARAGA

MABUHAY LA PAZ
PRES. MANUEL A. ROXAS

IX X VIII X IX
CARAGA

TAGOLOAN ZUMARRAGA MAGSAYSAY SAN PABLO ESPERANZA PANTAO RAGAT MATUNGAO SIRAWAI VICENZO A. SAGUM DON MARCELINO SALVADOR LORETO TARANGNAN MUTIA SIBUCO NUNUNGAN DARAM SAN ISIDRO TIGBAO
SULTAN NAGA DIMAPORO (KAROMATAN)

X X IX IX XI X
CARAGA

VIII IX IX X VIII
CARAGA

IX X VIII X

SANTA RITA SAPAD

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 9

3. 40 Municipalities in 2003 with Highest Severity of Poverty Severity of poverty is a poverty measure that estimates the inequality among poor. This measure is sensitive to the distribution of living standards among the poor. A high value indicates that the distribution is worse or that poverty is severe. The severity of poverty index of the 1,622 municipalities and cities were generated using the SAE technique. The Municipality of Siayan in the Province of Zamboanga del Norte found in Region IX still ranked first in the list of municipalities with high estimated severity of poverty. Thus, the most severe in poverty is being experienced by the people of Siayan. The 40 municipalities that comprise the list is shown in Table 6. On the average, the severity of poverty of the municipalities and cities in 2003 is 5.1 percent, which is higher than the countrys official measure in 2003. The highest index was observed in Siayan, which is equal to 42.9 percent while the least severe is the first class Municipality of Angono in the Province of Rizal with severity index equal to 0.1 percent. The municipalities comprising the list of 40 municipalities with the highest index of severity is the same as those in the list of 40 municipalities with highest poverty gap except for one municipality. The Municipality of Sta. Rita in the Province of Western Samar of Region VIII now ranks 42nd based on severity of poverty while it ranks 39th based on poverty gap. Hence, the residents of this municipality are said to be poor with incomes that are far from the poverty line but their state of poverty is less severe compared to those in the list. As mentioned before, the composition of the list of 40 municipalities is almost the same as that of the list based on poverty gap except for Sta. Rita in Western Samar. Thus, the list is composed of two municipalities from the Province of Kalinga in Cordillera Autonomous Region (CAR); one in the Province of La Union in Region I, five municipalities from the Province of Western Samar, and the rest from the provinces in Mindanao. In terms of reliability, the estimates for the municipalities of Baculin of Ilocos Norte and Tagoloan of Lanao del Norte have high CVs, with values greater than 20 percent. Hence, these estimates must be used with caution.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 10

Table 5. 40 Municipalities in 2003 with Highest Severity of Poverty


Region IX X IX IX IX CAR IX IX X I XI CAR IX X VIII IX Province
ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE LANAO DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE KALINGA ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE LANAO DEL NORTE LA UNION

Municipality SIAYAN TANGKAL SOMINOT MIDSALIP BACUNGAN TANUDAN LAPUYAN GODOD POONA-PIAGAPO BAGULIN SAN LUIS
JOSE ABAD SANTOS

Poverty Incidence (%) 42.8 28.8 28.2 27.6 25.8 25.5 24.7 23.6 23.1 22.8 21.3 21.2 21.0 20.0 19.7 19.5 19.5 19.4 19.3 19.3 19.3 19.3 19.1 19.0 18.7 18.6 18.5 18.4 18.3 18.2 18.0 17.9 17.8 17.7 17.7 17.5 17.5 17.4 17.1 17.0

Standard Error (%) 4.0 5.1 3.6 2.7 3.3 4.1 2.4 3.2 3.2 8.5 2.7 3.2 4.0 2.5 2.4 1.6 2.1 3.3 3.6 1.9 3.3 4.2 2.0 2.8 3.1 2.6 1.8 1.7 2.4 2.9 2.3 1.8 2.0 3.5 2.1 1.4 2.6 2.5 1.3 2.2

CV 9.4 17.8 12.7 9.8 12.6 16.0 9.7 13.4 14.0 37.5 12.6 15.2 19.3 12.7 12.3 8.3 10.8 17.1 18.6 10.0 16.9 21.7 10.2 14.9 16.6 13.7 9.7 9.5 12.8 16.1 13.0 10.1 11.2 19.6 12.0 7.8 15.1 14.6 7.4 12.6

Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

CARAGA AGUSAN DEL SUR DAVAO DEL SUR KALINGA ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR LANAO DEL NORTE WESTERN SAMAR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE

TINGLAYAN MABUHAY MAGSAYSAY MATUGUINAO


PRES. MANUEL A. ROXAS

CARAGA AGUSAN DEL SUR

LA PAZ PANTAO RAGAT


SAN JOSE DE BUAN

X VIII X X IX X IX IX VIII X IX IX X

LANAO DEL NORTE WESTERN SAMAR LANAO DEL NORTE LANAO DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR LANAO DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR

MATUNGAO TAGOLOAN SAN PABLO SALVADOR SIRAWAI VICENZO A. SAGUM ESPERANZA ZUMARRAGA NUNUNGAN MUTIA LORETO SIBUCO
SULTAN NAGA DIMAPORO (KAROMATAN)

CARAGA AGUSAN DEL SUR WESTERN SAMAR LANAO DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE

CARAGA AGUSAN DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE LANAO DEL NORTE

CARAGA SURIGAO DEL NORTE

SAN ISIDRO TIGBAO TARANGNAN DON MARCELINO SAPAD DARAM SALUG

IX VIII XI X VIII IX

ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR WESTERN SAMAR DAVAO DEL SUR LANAO DEL NORTE WESTERN SAMAR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 11

4. Municipalities in Terms of the Three Poverty Measures Using the three measures of poverty, namely; poverty incidence, poverty gap and severity of poverty, municipalities that have high estimates in the three poverty measures can be identified and targeted. These municipalities are those that are consistently in the list of 40 municipalities when each of the poverty measures was considered. This comprises a total of 31 municipalities as shown in Table 6. The Municipality of Siayan of Zamboaga del Norte in Region IX tops this list. Many residents of this municipality are poor with incomes that are far from the poverty line. In addition, the poor residents of the municipality are in very severe poverty state. Hence, being first in terms of the three poverty measures indicates that a considerable amount of resources is needed to alleviate poverty in this area. There are municipalities, which rank low in poverty incidences but rank high in poverty gap and severity of poverty. For example, the Municipality of Mabuhay in the Province of Zamboanga del Sur, has less percentage of poor residents but the condition of its poor residents is more severe compared to other municipalities. The case of the Municipality of Zumarraga of the Province of Western Samar of Region VIII, which was visited by four typhoons in 2003, is the opposite. There is a high percentage of poor residents in this municipality but the condition of the poor residents is less severe compared to other municipalities. The municipalities with high estimates on the three poverty measures are mostly from Mindanao provinces. Only three municipalities are from Luzon while five are from the Visayas. It is in Region IX where most of these municipalities can be found, specifically in the provinces of Zamboanga del Norte and Zamboanga del Sur. Each of these provinces has seven of its municipalities in the list. Other municipalities are from Lanao del Norte of Region X, Davao del Sur of Region XI and Agusan del Sur of the Caraga Region. Among the 1,622 cities and municipalities, these municipalities identified in Table 6 are said to have higher percentages of poor residents with incomes far from poverty line making their conditions more severe compared to others.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 12

Table 6. Municipalities with High Ranking Based on the Three Poverty Measures
Region IX CAR IX X IX I IX XI IX IX
CARAGA

Province
ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE KALINGA ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR LANAO DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR LA UNION ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE DAVAO DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR AGUSAN DEL SUR KALINGA WESTERN SAMAR LANAO DEL NORTE WESTERN SAMAR WESTERN SAMAR AGUSAN DEL SUR AGUSAN DEL SUR WESTERN SAMAR WESTERN SAMAR LANAO DEL NORTE AGUSAN DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR ZAMBOANGA DEL NORTE LANAO DEL NORTE ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR

Municipality SIAYAN TANUDAN SOMINOT TANGKAL MIDSALIP BAGULIN BACUNGAN


JOSE ABAD SANTOS

Rank based Rank based Rank based on Poverty on Poverty on Severity Incidence Gap of Poverty 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 32 33 34 36 39 1 5 3 2 4 9 6 11 8 7 12 13 15 10 14 20 17 23 31 35 19 30 18 16 22 33 26 27 32 21 37 1 6 3 2 4 10 5 12 8 7 11 13 20 9 16 28 18 27 36 39 22 31 17 14 23 32 25 26 30 15 35

GODOD LAPUYAN SAN LUIS TINGLAYAN


SAN JOSE DE BUAN

CAR VIII X VIII VIII


CARAGA CARAGA

POONA-PIAGAPO MATUGUINAO ZUMARRAGA LA PAZ ESPERANZA TARANGNAN DARAM TAGOLOAN LORETO


PRES. MANUEL A. ROXAS

VIII VIII X
CARAGA

IX IX IX IX IX IX IX X IX

MABUHAY SAN PABLO SIBUCO SIRAWAI VICENZO A. SAGUM MUTIA MAGSAYSAY TIGBAO

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 13

B. 2003 Poorest Cities and Municipalities: The Regional Situation 1. National Capital Region (NCR)
Figure 3. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in NCR

3rd District 2nd District 1st District

4th District

Metropolitan Manila or the National Capital Region (NCR) is the capital of the country and home to more than 11.5 million Filipinos based on the 2007 PopCen. Being the center of business, trade, and industry, poverty incidence in all of its 30 cities and municipalities have not exceeded ten percent, excluding Port Area in Manila with 13.2 percent, as shown in the map where the entire Region was shaded with green.
Table 7. Five Poorest Cities and Municipalities by District in NCR, 2003
1st District Municipalities PORT AREA SAN NICOLAS INTRAMUROS TONDO SAN MIGUEL Pov. Inc. 13.2 8.9 8.0 6.7 4.4 2nd District Municipalities CITY OF PASIG QUEZON CITY MANDALUYONG CITY CITY OF MARIKINA SAN JUAN Pov. Inc. 3.6 3.0 3.0 2.7 1.5 3rd District Municipalities NAVOTAS KALOOKAN CITY MALABON CITY OF VALENZUELA Pov. Inc. 7.4 5.2 5.1 4.4 4th District Municipalities TAGUIG PATEROS CITY OF MUNTINLUPA PASAY CITY CITY OF LAS PIAS Pov. Inc. 5.2 4.1 4.0 3.7 3.4

Unlike other regions, NCR is divided into four districts, which consists of several cities and municipalities. In 2003, the poorest three municipalities in NCR were found in the first district, more commonly known as Manila. Port Area registered

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 14

the highest poverty incidence with 13.2 percent, followed by San Nicolas and Intramuros, with 8.9 percent and 8.0 percent, respectively. In the second district, Pasig City had the highest poverty incidence estimated at 3.6 percent, followed by Quezon City (3.0 percent) and Mandaluyong City (3.0 percent). Navotas, which is also known as the fishing capital in the region, topped the list of the poorest municipalities in the third district with an estimated poverty incidence of 7.4 percent. This was followed by its nearby municipalities, Kalookan City and Malabon. The fourth district of NCR, consisting of five cities and two municipalities registered Taguig as its poorest municipality in 2003 with 5.2 percent of its total population classified as poor. Pateros, known for its balut-making industry, ranked 2nd poorest in the municipality at 4.1 percent followed by the City of Muntinlupa at 4.0 percent. Variables found to be significantly correlated with income in this region include those related to education, family size, and floor area of the house.

2. Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR)


Figure 4. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in CAR

Apayao

Abra

Kaling

Mountain Province

Ifugao Benguet

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 15

The Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) is the only land-locked region in the country and the least populous region based on the 2007 PopCen. It consists of six provinces and a total of 77 cities and municipalities. As indicated in Figure 4, poverty incidences are generally high in areas located in the middle portion of the region where Abra, Kalinga, and Mountain Province are situated.
Table 8. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in CAR, 2003
Abra Municipalities BOLINEY TINEG SAN ISIDRO LANGIDEN BUCLOC Pov. Inc. 73.5 69.0 65.5 63.8 62.7 Benguet Municipalities KAPANGAN BAKUN KABAYAN KIBUNGAN SABLAN Pov. Inc. 44.2 41.4 39.0 37.7 33.3 Ifugao Municipalities ASIPULO TINOC HUNGDUAN MAYOYAO AGUINALDO Pov. Inc. 55.5 46.0 40.9 35.4 34.3 Kalinga Municipalities TANUDAN TINGLAYAN PASIL PINUKPUK LUBUAGAN Pov. Inc. 88.0 82.1 70.0 52.2 50.4

Mt. Province Pov. Municipalities Inc. SADANGA 63.5 NATONIN PARACELIS BARLIG BESAO 60.6 59.9 40.9 36.9

Apayao Municipalities CONNER KABUGAO (Capital) PUDTOL FLORA CALANASAN (BAYAG) Pov. Inc. 40.4 36.3 30.7 23.9 22.9

Among all municipalities in the region, Tanudan in Kalinga registered the highest poverty incidence in 2003 with 88.1 percent of its total population classified as poor. Next in the poorest list are Tinglayan (also in Kalinga) and Boliney (in Abra), which registered 82.1 percent and 73.5 percent incidence, respectively. Variables found to be significantly correlated to income in this region include those related to education, presence of amenities in the barangay (e.g., presence of a market, health center, street pattern), and accessibility to national highway.

3. Ilocos Region (Region I) Ilocos Region consists of four provinces and a total of nine cities and 116 municipalities. As presented in Figure 5, poverty incidences are relatively low for municipalities located in the left side of the Region.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 16

Figure 5. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in Region I

Ilocos Norte

Ilocos Sur La Union

Pangasinan

Table 9 shows that among all the municipalities in the Region, poverty incidence is highest in Bagulin, La Union having 85.5 percent of its population classified as poor, followed by Santol (also in La Union) and Sugpon of Ilocos Sur.
Table 9. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in Region I, 2003
Ilocos Norte Pov. Municipalities Inc. NUEVA ERA MARCOS ADAMS CARASI PINILI 55.1 48.4 47.8 46.3 38.4 Ilocos Sur Municipalities SUGPON CERVANTES SUYO ALILEM SAN EMILIO Pov. Inc. 70.7 55.7 46.7 45.2 41.2 La Union Municipalities BAGULIN SANTOL SAN GABRIEL BURGOS ROSARIO Pov. Inc. 85.5 73.1 47.9 43.2 38.8 Pangasinan Municipalities AGNO BOLINAO BANI SUAL MABINI Pov. Inc. 46.0 45.5 43.6 36.8 36.6

Variables related to education, presence of a street pattern and number of hotels and similar establishments were found to be significantly related to income of families residing in the Region. 4. Cagayan Valley (Region II) Region II, home to more than 3 million Filipinos, is composed of five provinces and 93 cities and municipalities. Poverty incidences among cities/municipalities in the Region range from a low of 9.17 percent (Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya) to a high of 57.71 (Santa Maria, Isabela), wherein no area or municipality was shaded with red (i.e,, municipalities with poverty incidence higher than 60 percent) and very few

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 17

municipalities were shaded with dark green (municipalities with poverty incidence less than or equal to 18 percent).
Figure 6. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in Region II

Batanes

Cagayan

Isabela

Nueva Vizcaya

Quirino

Table 10. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in Region II, 2003


Batanes Municipalities ITBAYAT SABTANG MAHATAO UYUGAN IVANA Pov. Inc. 20.7 20.1 18.4 14.6 11.9 Cagayan Municipalities SOLANA AMULUNG CALAYAN TUAO SANTO NIO (FAIRE) Pov. Inc. 46.7 46.5 44.9 38.5 37.3 Isabela Municipalities SANTA MARIA PALANAN DIVILACAN QUIRINO SAN MARIANO Pov. Inc. 57.7 48.2 48.1 45.7 45.2

Nueva Vizcaya Municipalities AMBAGUIO ALFONSO CASTANEDA KASIBU QUEZON KAYAPA Pov. Inc. 51.0 41.7 39.3 32.7 30.2

Quirino Municipalities SAGUDAY NAGTIPUNAN DIFFUN AGLIPAY MADDELA Pov. Inc. 36.9 35.2 32.2 30.0 21.2

The municipality of Santa Maria, Isabela registered as the poorest municipality in the Region, with 57.7 percent of its population classified as poor. It may also be noted that among the municipalities of Batanes, Itbayat posted the highest poverty incidence at only 20.7 percent.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 18

For Region II, variables related to housing materials, education, presence of a postal system in the barangay, and proportion of houses with radio in the municipality, were found to be significantly related to income of households residing in this area. 5. Central Luzon (Region III) Region III, with seven provinces consisting of 130 cities and municipalities, is the third most populated region in the country based on the 2007 PopCen. From Figure 7, it can be observed that cities and municipalities in the Region posted relatively low poverty incidences.
Figure 7. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in Region III

Nueva Ecija

Aurora

Zambales

Tarlac

Pampanga

Bulacan

Bataan

Table 11. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in Region III, 2003


Aurora Municipalities DILASAG DINGALAN Pov. Inc. 23.7 22.8 Bataan Municipalities BAGAC HERMOSA Pov. Inc. 16.0 15.4 Bulacan Municipalities DOA REMEDIOS TRINIDAD NORZAGARAY SAN MIGUEL SAN ILDEFONSO PAOMBONG Pov. Inc. 51.6 20.1 16.9 16.3 15.2 Nueva Ecija Municipalities TALUGTUG GABALDON (BITULOK & SABANI) CARRANGLAN LAUR QUEZON Pov. Inc. 38.3 34.1 33.8 33.1 32.1

CASIGURAN DIPACULAO SAN LUIS

22.8 19.9 19.9

DINALUPIHAN SAMAL PILAR

12.4 10.9 10.2

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 19

Pampanga Municipalities CANDABA MASANTOL MINALIN PORAC SASMUAN (Sexmoan) Pov. Inc. 21.8 20.2 19.7 19.7 18.4

Tarlac Municipalities SAN JOSE LA PAZ SAN MANUEL CAPAS RAMOS Pov. Inc. 47.9 22.6 21.8 21.7 20.9

Zambales Municipalities PALAUIG SANTA CRUZ CANDELARIA CABANGAN SUBIC Pov. Inc. 24.4 18.4 17.4 16.7 14.7

Doa Remedios Trinidad in Bulacan registered as the poorest municipality in the Region at 51.6 percent, followed by San Jose, Tarlac at 47.9. It is worth noting that other than these above-mentioned municipalities, no other city or municipality in the Region had poverty incidence higher than 40 percent. Variables found to be significantly related to income of households residing in the Region were almost similar to the variables of NCR (e.g., education variables and characteristics of the house). 6. CALABARZON (Region IV-A)
Figure 8. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in Region IV-A

Rizal Quezon Cavite

Laguna

Batangas

Similar to the observation made on Region I, poverty incidences are relatively low for cities/municipalities located in the left side of the CALABARZON.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 20

Table 12. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in Region IV-A, 2003


Batangas Municipalities LOBO TINGLOY LAUREL SAN JUAN ROSARIO Pov. Inc. 49.6 49.3 44.5 42.0 39.7 Cavite Municipalities MAGALLANES MARAGONDON GENERAL EMILIO AGUINALDO TERNATE ALFONSO Pov. Inc. 23.3 22.2 21.9 18.4 16.0 Laguna Municipalities SANTA MARIA CAVINTI FAMY MAGDALENA PAKIL Pov. Inc. 37.8 27.5 27.1 25.4 25.1

Quezon Municipalities SAN FRANCISCO (AURORA) SAN ANDRES BUENAVISTA SAN NARCISO JOMALIG Pov. Inc. 60.9 59.1 58.1 58.0 55.0

Rizal Municipalities JALA-JALA BARAS TANAY CARDONA PILILLA Pov. Inc. 25.5 11.6 10.2 10.0 7.3

The municipality of San Francisco in Quezon, with an estimated poverty incidence of 60.9 percent, registered as the poorest municipality in the Region. It can also be observed that the five poorest municipalities in the Region are all from the province of Quezon. The variables used to estimate income and generate poverty incidence for the Region also include education-related variables and location variables (e.g., presence of a housing project or a telephone system in the barangay, and census means such as percentage of households in the municipalities owning a washing machine, subscribed to a telephone system, and other residential land). 7. MIMAROPA (Region (IV-B) MIMAROPA Region is composed of five provinces with 72 cities and municipalities. In contrast with the poverty situation in CALABARZON, majority of the areas in the Region have relatively high poverty incidence. As shown in Figure 9, very few municipalities have poverty incidence lower than 32 percent in 2003.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 21

Figure 9. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in Region IV-B
Oriental Mindoro Occidental Mindoro

Marinduque

Romblon

Palawan

The municipality of Linapacan in Palawan registered as the poorest municipality in the Region with poverty incidence estimated at 76.4 percent. Next in the poorest list are Bulalacao of Oriental Mindoro and Dumaran, Palawan, with estimated poverty incidences of 74.7 and 70.5 percents, respectively.
Table 13. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in Region IV-B, 2003
Marinduque Municipalities BUENAVISTA TORRIJOS SANTA CRUZ GASAN MOGPOG Pov. Inc. 49.4 39.2 31.6 28.2 22.0 Occidental Mindoro Pov. Municipalities Inc. PALUAN 58.4 MAGSAYSAY RIZAL SANTA CRUZ ABRA DE ILOG 55.6 55.0 54.0 53.8 Oriental Mindoro Pov. Municipalities Inc. BULALACAO 74.7 (SAN PEDRO) MANSALAY 68.4 POLA BANSUD BACO 55.6 52.4 51.7

Palawan Municipalities LINAPACAN DUMARAN AGUTAYA BUSUANGA BALABAC Pov. Inc. 76.4 70.5 66.7 66.7 65.1

Romblon Municipalities SAN JOSE CORCUERA SANTA FE SAN AGUSTIN CALATRAVA Pov. Inc. 62.2 57.5 54.5 52.8 50.5

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 22

8. Bicol Region (Region V)


Figure 10. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in Region V

Camarines Norte

Camarines Sur Catanduanes

Albay

Sorsogon

Masbate

Poverty incidences of municipalities in the six provinces of the Region were relatively high, ranging from 22.8 percent to 72.5 percent, except for those located in the province of Albay2. As illustrated in the map, it can be observed that relatively high poverty incidence is concentrated in the municipalities of Masbate, while municipalities with low poverty incidences are concentrated in Albay.
Table 14. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in Region V, 2003
Albay Municipalities LEGAZPI CITY (Capital) CITY OF TABACO SANTO DOMINGO (LIBOG) MALILIPOT PIO DURAN Pov. Inc. 36.5 21.7 20.1 14.9 14.9 Camarines Norte Pov. Municipalities Inc. CAPALONGA 54.0 PARACALE 50.2 SANTA ELENA 49.4 SAN LORENZO RUIZ (IMELDA) MERCEDES 48.7 47.6 Camarines Sur Pov. Municipalities Inc. BALATAN 61.0 GARCHITORENA CABUSAO PASACAO SIRUMA 59.3 57.9 57.0 56.0

It was observed that poverty incidence generated for Albay using the regional model developed in SAE was estimated as 15.1 percent with a CV of 3.7. The computed incidence is considered relatively low compared to the 2003 official poverty estimates of 42.7 percent with a CV of 7.3. While the Project Team recognizes that there may be other variables that are correlated with income (particularly for households of Albay), these, however, were not included in the model developed for the region due to some constraints (e.g., limited time, data, manpower and financial resources). Thus, users are adviced to take into consideration the above-mentioned concern in the analysis of the estimates for Albay, including all its cities and municipalities.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 23

Catanduanes Municipalities PANDAN BAGAMANOC CARAMORAN VIGA BARAS Pov. Inc. 44.8 42.7 42.7 41.8 37.0

Masbate Municipalities CAWAYAN SAN PASCUAL CLAVERIA PLACER MONREAL Pov. Inc. 72.5 72.0 69.6 68.7 66.7

Sorsogon Municipalities DONSOL PILAR CASTILLA MATNOG MAGALLANES Pov. Inc. 68.7 61.3 61.2 57.6 56.1

Highest poverty incidence in the Region was observed in Cawayan, Masbate at 72.5 percent, followed by San Pascual (72.0 percent) and Claveria (69.6 percent), which are also located in Masbate. These estimates were generated through the significant relation of income with variables like education-related variables, average family size, and housing materials. 9. Western Visayas (Region VI)
Figure 11. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in Region VI

Aklan Capiz Antique Iloilo

Guimaras Negros Occidental

Western Visayas, located in Central Philippines is composed of six provinces with six cities and 117 municipalities. percent. As can be observed from the map, most cities/municipalities in the Region have poverty incidences between 32.1 and 46

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 24

Table 15. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in Region VI, 2003


Aklan Municipalities MADALAG LIBACAO BURUANGA BALETE MALINAO Pov. Inc. 71.3 71.0 62.2 60.9 53.8 Antique Municipalities VALDERRAMA SAN REMIGIO LAUA-AN CALUYA BARBAZA Pov. Inc. 51.5 49.4 47.3 47.0 42.4 Capiz Municipalities JAMINDAN PANAY MA-AYON PILAR TAPAZ Pov. Inc. 44.4 41.6 40.2 39.7 39.7

Iloilo Municipalities CARLES CONCEPCION SAN DIONISIO SAN JOAQUIN AJUY Pov. Inc. 59.8 57.1 52.9 52.7 50.3

Negros Occidental Municipalities MOISES PADILLA (MAGALLON) CAUAYAN SALVADOR BENEDICTO CALATRAVA CANDONI Pov. Inc. 56.6 52.2 50.5 50.2 48.3

Guimaras Municipalities SAN LORENZO SIBUNAG NUEVA VALENCIA JORDAN BUENAVISTA Pov. Inc. 44.7 40.5 36.0 31.5 25.7

Among the poor municipalities in the Region, Madalag, Libacao and Buruanga, which are all located in Aklan, posted the highest poverty incidences estimated at more than 60 percent. It can also be observed that poverty incidence of municipalities in Guimaras, which consists of only five municipalities, are relatively low compared with other municipalities in the Region. These estimates were generated through a model containing variables found to be significantly related to income such as education, characteristics of the house, and general composition of families in a barangay. 10. Central VIsayas (Region VII)
Figure 12. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in Region VII

Cebu

Bohol Negros Oriental Siquijor

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 25

Central Visayas consists of four provinces, with 16 cities and 116 municipalities. It can be observed from the map that municipalities with low poverty incidence are generally concentrated in specific areas of the province, such as Cebu City of Cebu, Dumaguete City of Negros Oriental and Tagbilaran City of Bohol.
Table 16. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in Region VII, 2003
Bohol Municipalities DANAO BUENAVISTA PRES. CARLOS P. GARCIA (PITOGO) BIEN UNIDO UBAY Pov. Inc. 57.2 51.7 50.2 46.4 45.9 Cebu Municipalities MALABUYOC ALEGRIA TUBURAN GINATILAN TABOGON Pov. Inc. 54.9 53.1 51.2 49.5 47.9 Negros Oriental Pov. Municipalities Inc. JIMALALUD 65.7 LA LIBERTAD TAYASAN BASAY SANTA CATALINA 64.8 63.9 63.5 61.4 Siquijor Municipalities ENRIQUE VILLANUEVA LAZI MARIA SAN JUAN SIQUIJOR (Capital) Pov. Inc. 43.2 42.0 41.0 32.1 24.3

Across all cities and municipalities in the Region, Jimalalud in Negros Oriental posted the highest poverty incidence estimated at 65.7 percent. Negros Oriental. Variables found to be significantly related to the income of households in the Region include presence of accommodation establishments (e.g., hotels and dormitories), highest educational attainment of the household head, housing materials, and percentage of households in the municipality that own a television. 11. Eastern Visayas (Region VIII)
Figure 13. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in Region VIII

It can be

observed that the five poorest municipalities in Central Visayas are all located in

Northern Samar Western Samar Eastern Samar Leyte

Biliran

Southern Leyte

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 26

Eastern Visayas consists of six provinces, with seven cities and 136 municipalities. It can be observed in the poverty map presented in Figure 13 that poverty in the Region is highly concentrated in Western Samar. Table 17. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in Region VIII, 2003
Eastern Samar Pov. Municipalities Inc. JIPAPAD 45.8 ARTECHE MASLOG HERNANI SAN POLICARPO 45.7 44.7 42.4 39.3 Leyte Municipalities LEYTE SAN ISIDRO CALUBIAN MAYORGA TABANGO Pov. Inc. 55.1 54.3 52.0 49.4 49.3 Northern Samar Pov. Municipalities Inc. LAS NAVAS 53.3 SILVINO LOBOS PAMBUJAN MAPANAS SAN ROQUE 52.1 50.0 49.2 48.5

Western Samar Municipalities SAN JOSE DE BUAN MATUGUINAO ZUMARRAGA TARANGNAN DARAM Pov. Inc. 81.9 81.4 80.1 78.0 78.0

Southern Leyte Pov. Municipalities Inc. PINTUYAN 36.6 SAINT BERNARD BONTOC TOMAS OPPUS SAN RICARDO 36.3 35.8 35.2 34.9

Biliran Municipalities CULABA CABUCGAYAN CAIBIRAN KAWAYAN MARIPIPI Pov. Inc. 41.9 41.4 40.2 39.4 36.7

Consequently, municipalities from Western Samar were identified as the poorest municipalities in the Region with poverty incidence registering as high as 80 percent. It should be noted that variables on education, housing materials, and presence of community work in the barangay were found to be significantly related to income of families residing in the Region. 12. Zamboanga Peninsula (Region IX) The Zamboanga Peninsula is a region bounded by three bodies of water, namely Moro Gulf, Celebes Sea, and Sulu Sea. The Region consisting of three provinces, five cities and 67 municipalities is home to more than 3.2 million Filipinos based on the 2007 PopCen. As presented in Figure 14, poverty is heavily concentrated in Zamboanga del Norte. Ironically, the least poor municipality in the region, which was identified as Dipolog City with poverty incidence of 16.2 percent, is also located in this province.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 27

Figure 14. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in Region IX

Zamboanga del Norte Zamboanga del Sur Zamboanga Sibugay

Isabela City

Table 18. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in Region IX, 2003


Zamboanga del Norte Pov. Municipalities Inc. SIAYAN 97.5 BACUNGAN (Leon T. Postigo) GODOD PRES. MANUEL A. ROXAS SIBUCO 85.2 84.6 77.7 76.6 Zamboanga del Sur Pov. Municipalities Inc. SOMINOT (DON 87.5 MARIANO MARCOS) MIDSALIP 86.3 LAPUYAN SAN PABLO VINCENZO A. SAGUN 84.4 76.9 75.8 Zamboanga Sibugay Pov. Municipalities Inc. MABUHAY 77.7 TALUSAN ROSELLER LIM TUNGAWAN MALANGAS 69.1 67.7 66.6 58.7 Isabela City Municipalities CITY OF ISABELA Pov. Inc. 37.0

The poorest municipality in this region is also the poorest municipality in the whole country with 97.5 percent of the residents of Siayan are classified as poor. This was followed by two municipalities of Zamboanga del Sur, namely, Sominot and Midsalip, with poverty incidences estimated as 87.5 percent and 86.3 percent, respectively. Variables found to be significantly related to the income of its residents, include housing materials, census means (proportion in the municipality that are five years and older who knows how to speak English, proportion of households who own residential and agricultural lands) and location variables (presence of electric power and hospitals in the barangay).

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 28

13. Northern Mindanao (Region X)


Figure 15. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in Region X
Camiguin

Misamis Oriental Misamis Occidental Lanao del Norte

Bukidnon

The Northern Mindanao consists of five provinces, with nine cities and 84 municipalities. As illustrated in Figure 15, pockets of poverty can be found in the Region, specifically in the province of Lanao del Norte where all of its municipalities have poverty incidence greater than 46 percent. incidence lower than 18 percent. The five poorest municipalities in the Region were all located in Lanao del Norte. The municipality of Tangkal registered as the poorest municipality with a poverty incidence of 86.7 percent. Comparing the poverty incidences of the five poorest municipalities in each of the provinces in the Region, it is worth noting that poverty incidences of the municipalities in Camiguin were relatively low as compared to Table 19. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in Region X, 2003
Bukidnon Municipalities TALAKAG MALITBOG DAMULOG KITAOTAO SAN FERNANDO Pov. Inc. 62.9 60.9 60.3 59.5 58.7 Camiguin Municipalities SAGAY MAHINOG GUINSILIBAN CATARMAN MAMBAJAO (Capital) Pov. Inc. 38.0 37.8 35.0 32.2 23.6 Lanao del Norte Pov. Municipalities Inc. TANGCAL 86.7 POONA PIAGAPO TAGOLOAN MAGSAYSAY NUNUNGAN 81.7 77.9 75.1 74.3

For the entire

region, only Cagayan de Oro City was shaded with dark green indicating a poverty

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 29

Misamis Occidental Pov. Municipalities Inc. CONCEPCION 72.4 DON VICTORIANO CHIONGBIAN BONIFACIO BALIANGAO LOPEZ JAENA 72.0 64.1 60.5 59.0

Misamis Oriental Pov. Municipalities Inc. MAGSAYSAY 63.4 (LINUGOS) LAGONGLONG 53.1 ALUBIJID CLAVERIA BALINGASAG 50.7 50.4 49.2

municipalities in other provinces, with Sagay its poorest municipality, posting 38 percent in poverty incidence. Education of the household head, housing materials, presence of a street pattern in the barangay, proportion of households in the municipality with washing machine, and average proportion of household members who are children of the household head in the barangay were variables found to be significantly related to the income of families in the Region. 14. Southern Mindanao (Region XI) Southern Mindanao, home to almost 4.2 million Filipinos based on the 2007 PopCen or 19.3 percent of the total population in Mindanao, is composed of four provinces, with a total of six cities and 43 municipalities. Unfortunately, most of its residents, as shown in Figure 16, are still living in poverty. As can be observed in the map, the only areas shaded with dark green, which indicates poverty incidence of 18 percent and below, are areas of Davao City in Davao del Sur and City of Tagum in Davao del Norte.
Figure 16. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in Region XI
Davao del Norte Compostela Valley Davao Oriental Davao del Sur

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 30

Table 20. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in Region XI, 2003


Davao del Norte Pov. Municipalities Inc. TALAINGOD 78.6 KAPALONG 51.2 Davao del Sur Municipalities JOSE ABAD SANTOS (TRINIDAD) DON MARCELINO Pov. Inc. 84.6 80.8 Davao Oriental Pov. Municipalities Inc. MANAY 63.4 TARRAGONA CARAGA BAGANGA GOVERNOR GENEROSO 62.3 57.3 50.5 45.9 Compostela Valley Pov. Municipalities Inc. LAAK (SAN 69.6 VICENTE) MARAGUSAN (SAN MARIANO) NEW BATAAN PANTUKAN MONTEVISTA 50.3 48.8 44.1 42.0

NEW CORELLA ASUNCION (SAUG) ISLAND GARDEN CITY OF SAMAL

49.6 44.9 44.5

SARANGANI MALITA SANTA MARIA

78.7 64.6 63.6

Contrary to the situation in Davao City, considered as one of the more progressive cities in the country, other municipalities in the province particularly for the municipality of Jose Abad Santos, posted relatively high poverty incidences. Table 20 shows that poverty incidence in Jose Abad Santos was estimated at 84.6 percent, the highest among all the cities and municipalities in the Region. The municipalities of Don Marcelino and Sarangani, which are both located in Davao del Sur, ranked 2nd and 3rd poorest municipalities with poverty incidences of 80.8 and 78.7 percent, respectively. Variables found to be significantly related to income of families in this region include education variables, housing materials for urban areas, average family size in a barangay, and presence of electric power, telephone and housing project in a barangay. 15. Central Mindanao (Region XII) Based on the 2007 PopCen, the total population in Central Mindanao is home to more than 3.8 million or 4.3 percent of the countrys total population. It is composed of four provinces, with five cities and 45 municipalities, contributing 3.6 percent to the countrys total economy in 2003 the third largest contributor among the six regions in Mindanao. However, high incidences of poverty still persist in some of its municipalities, particularly those located in the southern part of the Region. As presented in Figure 17, poverty incidences of municipalities in Sultan Kudarat, South Cotabato, and Sarangani were estimated to be more than 60 percent.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 31

Figure 17. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in Region XII

Cotabato CIty

North Cotabato

Sultan Kudarat South Cotabato Sarangani

Table 21. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in Region XII, 2003


North Cotabato Pov. Municipalities Inc. BANISILAN 52.6 ARAKAN PRESIDENT ROXAS MAGPET PIKIT 50.7 48.8 48.4 47.6 South Cotabato Pov. Municipalities Inc. T'BOLI 66.5 LAKE SEBU BANGA NORALA TUPI 65.3 39.0 36.7 30.8 Sarangani Municipalities MALAPATAN MAASIM MALUNGON MAITUM KIAMBA Pov. Inc. 66.4 62.2 50.6 48.7 46.4

Sultan Kudarat Pov. Municipalities Inc. SEN. NINOY 63.6 AQUINO PALIMBANG 61.1 BAGUMBAYAN COLUMBIO KALAMANSIG 57.0 55.2 54.2

Cotabato City Pov. Municipalities Inc. COTABATO 41.4 CITY

Among the municipalities, the municipality of Tboli was estimated to have the highest poverty incidence in the region with 66.5 percent of its residents classified as poor. This was followed by Malapatan and Lake Sebu with poverty incidences estimated at 66.4 and 65.3 percent. It can also be noted that while Tboli and Lake Sebu have poverty incidences greater than 60 percent, all other municipalities in South Cotabato had poverty incidences not more than 40 percent.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 32

Variables found to be significantly related to the income of household are: education, proportion of persons in the municipality involved in agriculture, and presence of the following in the barangay: community work, hospitals, housing project, hotels and similar accommodation establishments. 16. Caraga Region The Caraga Administrative Region boasts of Butuan, the site of some of the oldest archeological discoveries in the country and Siargao Island, the surfing capital of the Philippines. The Region is composed of four provinces, with six cities and 67 municipalities and home to 2.3 million Filipinos based on the 2007 PopCen. As illustrated in Figure18, most of its residents were classified as poor in 2003, with most areas shaded red. In fact, only two areas were estimated to have poverty incidences lower than 32 percent, namely Butuan City and Nasipit, both of Agusan del Norte.
Figure 18. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in Caraga

Surigao del Norte

Agusan del Norte Surigao del Sur Agusan del Sur

Table 22. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in Caraga, 2003


Agusan del Norte Pov. Municipalities Inc. LAS NIEVES 65.9 JABONGA TUBAY SANTIAGO REMEDIOS T. ROMUALDEZ 63.2 60.6 59.1 53.2 Agusan del Sur Pov. Municipalities Inc. SAN LUIS 83.1 LA PAZ ESPERANZA LORETO VERUELA 79.7 78.4 77.7 70.6 Surigao del Norte Pov. Municipalities Inc. SAN ISIDRO 75.5 CAGDIANAO PILAR GIGAQUIT LIBJO (ALBOR) 74.5 72.6 70.2 69.8 Surigao del Sur Pov. Municipalities Inc. LINGIG SAN MIGUEL LANUZA HINATUAN TAGBINA 70.5 69.7 63.5 63.3 59.8

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 33

Among the municipalities in the Region, San Luis in Agusan del Sur was estimated to have the highest poverty incidence with 83.1 percent of its population or eight out of ten individuals considered to be poor in 2003. The 2nd and 3rd poorest municipalities in the region were also part of Agusan del Sur, namely, La Paz and Esperanza with poverty incidences of 79.7 percent and 78.4 percent, respectively. Variables that were significantly related to income of the families in this region were education, housing materials, presence of a market in a barangay, and proportion of individuals in the municipality five years and older who can speak Filipino. 17. Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) The Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) created in August 1, 1989 by virtue of Republic Act No. 6734 or known as the Organic Act of Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao, is composed of five provinces, with one city and 93 municipalities. As presented in Figure 19, only five areas were estimated to have poverty incidences lower than 32 percent: Marawi City, Bubong, Buadiposo Buntung and Taraka, which are all in Lanao del Sur, and Lamitan in Basilan. Poverty incidences among municipalities in the Region were generally high ranging from 34.0 to 66.5 percent.
Figure 19. Poverty map of the 2003 municipal and city level poverty incidence in ARMM

Lanao del Sur

Maguindanao Basilan

Sulu Tawi-Tawi

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 34

Table 23. Five Poorest Municipalities by Province in ARMM, 2003


Basilan Municipalities TIPO-TIPO SUMISIP LANTAWAN TUBURAN MALUSO Pov. Inc. 44.5 43.3 40.0 39.9 39.9 Lanao del Sur Municipalities SULTAN GUMANDER TUBARAN CALANOGAS MAROGONG KAPAI Pov. Inc. 65.7 65.2 61.5 60.5 60.2 Maguindanao Pov. Municipalities Inc. MATANOG 65.0 MAMASAPANO TALAYAN TALITAY GEN. S. K. PENDATUN 58.8 58.6 57.4 54.6

Sulu Municipalities PANGLIMA ESTINO (NEW PANAMAO) LUUK KALINGALAN CALUANG PANDAMI HADJI PANGLIMA TAHIL (MARUNGGAS) Pov. Inc. 66.5 65.4 65.0 63.1 62.8

Tawi-Tawi Municipalities SOUTH UBIAN TURTLE ISLANDS MAPUN (CAGAYAN DE TAWI-TAWI) TANDUBAS SAPA-SAPA Pov. Inc. 53.9 49.7 48.9 48.8 48.1

Among the cities and municipalities in the region, the municipality of Panglima Estino in Sulu posted the highest poverty incidence, estimated at 66.5 percent in 2003. This was followed by Sultan Gumander of Lanao del Sur at 65.7 percent and Luuk of Sulu at 65.4 percent. It can also be noted from Table 23 that among the five provinces, poverty incidences of municipalities in Basilan were relatively low as compared to the poverty incidences of other municipalities in the Region. Aside from proportion of households in the municipalities that has television, presence of health center in the barangay and proportion of non-Filipino citizen among urban municipalities, education variables were also found to be significantly related to income of families in ARMM.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 35

III. Actual Policy Uses Behind all these efforts by the NSCB to generate small area estimates of poverty, there is a need for statistical capacity building among the producers, users and the providers of statistics. As the NSCB responds to the need to produce more relevant statistics, there is a strong need for the data users to demonstrate better use of statistics to improve the relevance of the NSCB and the PSS. A. Philippines It is worth noting that the results of the earlier poverty mapping project undertaken by the NSCB played a significant role, especially in policy formulation and targeting. Following is a list of actual policy uses of the 2000 small area estimates of poverty released in 2005, which can also serve as a reference for other policyand decision-makers:

1. Targeting Beneficiaries of Programs/Projects


1.1 The Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) used the small area estimates of poverty in their Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program to identify the poorest municipalities from the 20 poorest provinces. Data will be collected from residents of these municipalities to determine beneficiaries of their poverty reduction programs. 1.2 The National Nutrition Council (NNC) and DSWD used the small area estimates of poverty in December 2007 to identify priority households for the Pamaskong Handog of GMA. 1.3 The Department of Agriculture (DA) used the 2000 small area estimates of poverty as one criterion in the identification of target sites of the Cordillera Highland Agricultural Resources Management Project (CHARMP II). 1.4 The Regional Development Council of Region I (RDC I) used the 2000 small area estimates of poverty in the identification of common priority areas for poverty-related programs in the region.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 36

1.5

The Regional KALAHI Convergence Group (RKCG) used the estimates to serve as one of the bases in identifying its convergence municipalities throughout the region (e.g., MIMAROPA, Region VI).

1.6

The NSCB RD VI provided a list of the five poorest municipalities for each of the six provinces of the region to the Office of the Presidential Adviser for Regional Development (OPARD). The list will be used in identifying target municipalities for the livelihood projects of the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE). These projects include the Integrated Services for Livelihood Advancement of Fisherfolks (ISLA) and Tulong Panghanapbuhay sa Ating Disadvantaged Workers (TUPAD).

1.7

The Philippine Health Insurance Corporation used the results as inputs to determine target enrolment for its health insurance sponsored programs in 2007 (e.g.,Regions VIII and XII).

1.8

The small area poverty estimates were used by the Local Government Units (LGUs) in Antique, DSWD, Department of Education (DepEd) and National Food Authority (NFA) in the estimation of the volume of rice needed for the Food for Children Program in the province.

1.9

The MPAI-World Vision used the poverty mapping results to determine priority municipalities in Leyte in May 2007 for: (i) sponsorship program for schooling of indigent children; and (ii) for micro-enterprise development (MED) projects.

1.10 The DSWD used the municipal poverty incidences in identifying priority municipalities for Kapit-Bisig Laban sa Kahirapan Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social Services (KALAHI-CIDSS) (e.g., Samar). 1.11 The LGUs in Zamboanga del Norte and Zamboanga Sibugay used the SAE of poverty extensively for the allocation of funds to and implementation of projects in priority/depressed areas.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 37

2. 2.1

Policy Formulation and Planning The SAE of poverty were used as reference by the Millennium Development Goals International Conference on Population and Development (MDG-ICPD) Localization Task Force in Region VI in its orientation to various Provincial Poverty Reduction Action Teams (PPRATs), in the design and implementation of their local poverty action plan.

2.2

The estimates were used by the KALAHI CIDDSS Project Management Team in Region VIII (RPMT) for project planning.

2.3

The NEDA XII used the estimates as inputs for their study on the socio economic reconstruction and development of conflict-affected areas in Mindanao and in the revision of their Medium Term Regional Development Plan (MTRDP).

2.4

The Runggiyan Social Development Foundation used the estimates in the preparation of a proposal on the Infrastructure for Rural Productivity Enhancement Sector Project of Barugo, Leyte.

2.5

The Compostela Valley Provincial Government used the results in the revision of their Provincial Development and Physical Framework Plan and in the preparation of their Provincial Plan for Children.

3. 3.1

Poverty Monitoring Various local government units (LGUs) of Regions I, IV, and VIII used the estimates in monitoring the attainment of the MDGs at the local level as basis in setting the MDG targets (Goal 1) as well as in the preparation of their MDG action plans in 2006.

3.2

The LGUs in CALABARZON used the small area poverty estimates, along with the official poverty statistics, in the preparation of their 2007 State of the Children Report.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 38

3.3

The NEDA Regional Development Council (NEDA RDC) used the estimates in the assessment of interventions being provided to the poorest municipalities in Eastern Visayas and for future targeting purposes of the different local government agencies.

3.4

The NNC Region VIII used the estimates in assessing the nutritional situation of municipalities in the region in October 2007.

3.5

The Asia Pacific and Policy Center (APPC)/Human Development Network (HDN) used the estimates as inputs in the preparation of the La Union Provincial Development Report.

3.6

The estimates were used by the LGUs in La Union in the development of their Provincial MDG database

Further, it is worth-noting that the relevance of the 2003 intercensal small area estimates of poverty was already demonstrated by various government agencies, within seven months3 from its release in September 2008. Below is a list of the actual policy uses of the 2003 estimates: 1. The 2003 intercensal small area estimates of poverty was used by the DSWD as basis for prioritizing target households for the National Household Targeting System for Poverty Reduction (NHTSPR) as well as in their conditional cash transfer (CCT) program presently being implemented.

2.

The DOLE, Department of Health (DOH), and the Professional Regulation Commission, Board of Nursing (PRC-BON) used the 2003 SAE of poverty as inputs in the design and implementation of their collaborative training/deployment Project on Nurses Assigned in Rural Service (NARS). The Project aims to mobilize unemployed registered nurses to the 1,000 poorest municipalities in the country to improve the delivery of health care services.

As of March 2009.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 39

B. International community Small area estimation methodology has been used not only in the Philippines but in numerous countries around the world. The following are just some of the experiences in the different countries around the world as presented by Dr. Roy van der Weide during the National Dissemination Forum last 4 September 2008: 1. Indonesia 1.1 In 2005, the government of Indonesia decided to cut fuel subsidies. The resulting increase in fuel prices would particularly affect the poor, and the government planned to cushion this negative shock by providing unconditional cash transfers to the poor. The Ministry of Finance used the poverty maps to estimate the budget for the cash transfers (Ahmad and Goh, 2007). 2. Cambodia 2.1 The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has used the poverty map as a guide in selecting target areas for agro-ecosystems analysis and to target the poorest communes for agricultural productivity improvement and crop diversification (Fujii, 2007). 3. China 3.1 Food-and-cash for work programs make use of the surplus labor resources in poor areas to build infrastructure such as roads, water management structures and drinking water treatment facilities. The program aims at providing poor farmers with job opportunities and sources of income (Ahmand and Goh, 2007). 4. Morocco 4.1 The impact of the poverty maps on Moroccan social policy has been strong and direct. They were released in June 2004, which was followed by a World Bank analysis of poverty and targeting at the local level, and in

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 40

May 2005, King Mohammed VI launched the National Initiative for Human Development. One Billion USD would be allocated, half of which would be invested in the poorest 360 rural communes and poorest 250 urban neighborhoods (Litvack, 2007). 4.2 Poverty maps played a role in promoting local governance. areas in which they live. The maps

provided citizens and local officials with relative poverty rankings of the This empowered them to question the government allocations to their communes and hold government officials accountable for any lack of equitable treatment in the geographical distribution of government programs (Litvack, 2007). 5. Bulgaria 5.1 Immediately after the 2005 maps had been completed, the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (MLSP) organized consultations with the mayors and other representatives of the 13 poorest municipalities, which resulted in the development of an ad hoc Program for Poverty Reduction It identified priority areas for intervention and the allocation of resources, including the generation of employment, especially among the long-term unemployed and disadvantaged groups in the labor market (Gotcheva, 2007). 5.2 Contributed in reducing poverty in the disadvantaged municipalities by creating alternative income sources such as agro-industries, bio-fuels, rural tourism, local crafts, wood working, carpentry (Gotcheva, 2007).

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 41

IV.

Conclusions and Recommendations 1. Using the modified ELL methodology, 1,380 out of 1,622 (85%) city and municipal level estimates for 2003 have Cvs not greater than 20 percent. 2. For further improvement of the estimates, inclusion of other indicators in the conduct of survey (i.e., FIES) or census (i.e., CPH) may be considered, such as migration and tourism indicators. Inclusion of these variables in the development of the regional models will likely improve poverty estimates that will be generated.

3.

In the intercensal updating of small area poverty estimates, variables to be used in the model-building process need not be restricted to only those that are considered to be time-invariant. Possibility of using regression model(s) to come up with intercensal estimates of independent variables, which may possibly be significantly correlated with income but may vary over time.

4.

Cognizant of the importance of this information for targeting and policymaking, the NSCB would like to update these estimates to further guide the national and local governments in targeting priority areas in the implementation of poverty reduction programs of the government. However, as this is beyond the regular work of the NSCB and in light of its limited manpower and financial resources, the Government should realize that statistics play a critical role for coming up with informed decisions, better design of programs; hence, should invest more on statistics.

5.

Behind all these efforts by the NSCB to generate small area estimates of poverty, there is a need for statistical capacity building among the producers, users and the providers of statistics. As the NSCB responds to the need to produce more relevant statistics, data users should demonstrate better use of statistics in policy-making and program implementation.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 42

ANNEX

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 43

A. Definition of Terms 1. Poor Based on Republic Act 8425, otherwise known as Social Reform and Poverty Alleviation Act, dated 11 December 1997, the poor refers to individuals and families whose income fall below the poverty threshold as defined by the government and/or those that cannot afford in a sustained manner to provide their basic needs of food, health, education, housing and other amenities of life. Poverty Threshold - the minimum income/expenditure required for a family/individual to meet the basic food and non-food requirements
Notes: Basic food requirements are currently based on 100% adequacy for the Recommended Energy and Nutrient Intake (RENI) for protein and energy equivalent to an average of 2000 kilocalories per capita, and 80% adequacy for other nutrients. On the other hand, basic non-food requirements, indirectly estimated by obtaining the ratio of food to total basic expenditures from a reference group of families, cover expenditure on: 1) clothing and footwear; 2) housing; 3) fuel, light, water; 4) maintenance and minor repairs; 5) rental of occupied dwelling units; 6) medical care; 7) education; 8) transportation and communication; 9) non-durable furnishings; 10) household operations; and 11) personal care & effects.

2.

3. Poverty Incidence - the proportion of families/individuals with per capita income/expenditure less than the per capita poverty threshold to the total number of families/individuals

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 44

4. Poverty Gap - the total income/ expenditure shortfall (expressed in proportion to the poverty threshold) of families/ individuals with income/ expenditure below the poverty threshold, divided by the total number of families/ individuals

5.

Severity of Poverty - the total of the squared income/expenditure shortfall (expressed in proportion to the poverty threshold) of families/ individuals with income/expenditure below the poverty threshold, divided by the total number of families/ individuals
Notes: This is equal to the Foster-Greer-Thorbecke (FGT) family of measures with alpha = 2. It is a poverty measure, which is sensitive to the income/ expenditure distribution among the poor the worse this distribution is, the more severe poverty is.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 45

B. Methodology 1. Overview In this study, the main consideration is to identify local areas that need to be prioritized in poverty alleviation programs. These areas, which have uncontained pockets of poverty, are often sought through the use of nationwide survey data that provide information on poverty indicators. These surveys usually have a great deal of information, such as income and expenditure, but have limited sample size that can only provide reliable estimates at larger geographic disaggregation such as regions, but not at smaller geographic level such as provinces or municipalities or cities. The census, on the other hand, has complete coverage and therefore can produce reliable estimates at smaller geographic levels. However, the census usually has limited information and does not contain data on income and expenditure, which are the variables usually needed as inputs in poverty estimation. A solution to this problem is the use of small area estimation (SAE) technique. There are numerous techniques that can be used to generate statistics at the local area. One of these techniques is the methodology developed by the World Bank, which is commonly referred to as the Elbers, Lanjouw and Lanjouw (ELL) methodology. Such methodology requires the use of census and survey data sets conducted on the same year. In the Philippines, this situation occurred in the year 2000. Consequently, a Poverty Mapping Project implemented by the NSCB with funding assistance from the World Bank used the ELL method to generate the municipal and city level poverty statistics for 2000. As mentioned in the previous section, the project made use of the FIES, LFS and CPH data sets that were all gathered in the same year, 2000, as required in the methodology. More so, the methodology in the project made use of a single regression model4 for the whole country to predict the family income per capita in logarithmic form. The situation, however, is different in 2003. While there are no census data set for the year to speak of there is a nationwide survey, which is the usual source of poverty statistics, in 2003. Thus, in updating the small area poverty estimates from
Regression is a statistical tool used to predict one variable using other variables/information. For example, one can predict a salespersons total yearly sales using information on age, education and years of experience of the salesperson.
4

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 46

the census year 2000 to the intercensal year 2003, a slightly different approach was used. The information from the 2003 FIES, 2003 LFS and 2000 CPH were combined to estimate poverty incidence, poverty gap, and poverty severity for the provincial and municipal levels. Statistical regression is used to predict per capita family income, expressed in natural logarithmic form Y, using explanatory variables, which are denoted as X. Similarly with 2000 poverty mapping project, X can be classified into two types: the survey-obtainable variables, at the household or individual level (e.g., educational attainment of household head); and the census-derivable location variables, which correspond to barangay or municipal means (e.g. average family size in the barangay). It is important that the Xs used in modeling should be comparable both in the survey and the census. In general, comparability means that X has the same definition in both survey and census. However, the 2000 poverty mapping project, comparability assessment was more straightforward because the data sets used (i.e., FIES, LFS and CPH) have the same reference period: the year 2000. Selection of survey-obtainable variables was done by examining the survey and census questionnaires to identify which questions elicit equivalent information. In several cases, equivalence were achieved by collapsing some categories of answers. When common variables had been identified, the appropriate summary statistics were compared for the survey and the census data. It is ideal that the summary statistics for the census data be within the confidence interval for the survey. Comparability assessment is not required for the case of location-effect variables because these are essentially sourced from the census, which were only merged with the survey; and as long as the geographic configurations between survey and census are the same. Assessing comparability in the case of updating small area poverty statistics requires more attention. It should be noted that the survey data were taken in 2003 while census data were obtained in 2000, while the goal is to come up with 2003 poverty statistics at the small area level. Hence, there is a time component that should be taken into consideration. Using the same methodology as in the 2000 poverty mapping project will result to ambiguity since such procedure captures
2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates Page 47

relationship between Y and X, through regression modeling using 2003 survey information but fitting the model using 2000 census data, which is of a different reference period. To address the issue, the survey-obtainable variables were carefully evaluated. First, the survey and census questionnaires were examined carefully not only to identify which questions refer to equivalent information but also those, which are time-invariant. Time invariance implies that the characteristic is not likely to change from time to time, or at least in three years in this case. This can be done by purposely collapsing some categories of answers to pre-defined categories. For example, a binary variable head_athsgrad1 can be created, with value 1 if the head of the household is at least high school graduate and 0 otherwise. If the head of the household is at least high school graduate in 2000, he/she is still at least high school graduate in 2003. When there are sufficient number of time-invariant variables that have been created, appropriate summary statistics are compared for the survey and census data. A variable will be included in the list of possible Xs if the summary statistics for the census data is within the confidence interval of the survey data. Likewise, location-effect variables represented by the census are also considered. After identifying possible Xs, several regression models were developed to estimate the natural logarithmic form of per capita income Y. A reasonable model is then chosen which satisfies the following practical criteria (in addition to the usual regression diagnostics): The relationship of the variables, whether positive or negative, on Y is generally consistent with earlier researches on poverty (e.g. education should have a positive effect on income). The models should be robust, which means that small changes to the model do not greatly affect the significance or signs of the variables. Estimated regional poverty incidence does not largely differ from the official regional poverty estimates. Selected regional models were then used to generate 2003 per capita income for all households in the CPH and these were compared to the poverty lines to estimate the different poverty measures, poverty incidence, poverty gap and severity of poverty at the provincial, city and municipal levels.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 48

2. Data Sources A. 2003 Official Poverty Statistics The NSCB generates official poverty statistics based on the NSCB Resolution No. 1 Series of 2003, Approving the Proposed Methodology for the Computation of Provincial Poverty Statistics. Official Poverty Statistics include food threshold, The 2003 official provincial poverty threshold, subsistence incidence, poverty incidence, magnitude of poor, income gap, poverty gap and severity of poverty. poverty thresholds, with urban and rural disaggregation, were applied in the estimation of the 2003 small area poverty estimates in this Project. B. This study also made used of the following datasets from the National Statistics Office (NSO): 2003 Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) The FIES is a nationwide survey conducted every three years where information on household income and expenditure, as well as, some socio-demographic characteristics of the household head are collected. It is the main source of data in the estimation of official poverty statistics in the country. The 2003 FIES is a regular module of the Integrated Survey of Household (ISH), which contains 42,094 sample households, distributed across the 17 regions of the country. January 2004 Round of the Labor Force Survey (LFS) The LFS is another regular module of the ISH conducted every quarter of the year. It collects data on the demographic and socio-economic characteristics of population 15 years old and over. Sample households of the second and fourth quarter round of the LFS coincide with the sample households of the FIES. Thus, these two data sets were combined to form a richer data set. 2000 Census of Population and Housing (CPH) The CPH is a complete enumeration of the population in the country conducted at least every ten years. It is a vital source of information on the composition of the population and characteristics of their housing units. It covers all areas under the jurisdiction of the Philippines as defined by the 1987 Constitution.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 49

3. Implementation of the Methodology5 This section presents a general perspective on small area estimation following the ELL method implemented in the Philippines for the intercensal year 2003. As the methodology used in this updating is similar to the previous poverty mapping project up to a certain extent, some parts of this section are lifted directly from the previous Estimation of Local Poverty in the Philippines report. a. Introduction/Background In introducing the concept of small area estimation, we consider the thrust of the national government of alleviating the poverty status of the country. To maximize the effect of any poverty alleviation program, there are a number of factors that have to be carefully taken into account before implementation. One of the most common considerations is the proper identification of priority areas. Answers to questions such as which areas need most help and assistance from the government are often sought from national surveys that provide information on poverty indicators. Needless to say, users want surveys to have as much coverage as that of a census. However, this is not usually feasible because survey coverage is directly proportional to the amount of administrative and financial resources required to carry out the survey. Thus, surveys being incomplete enumeration of all populations units, have limitations and sampling errors. Due to the sampling design, surveys may not be representative at the province and district level, such that estimates may tend to be biased. In this context, survey domains provide information on the level of disaggregation of direct estimates that can be derived from a survey which are theoretically reliable. For example, the domain of the 2003 FIES conducted by NSO corresponds to the geographic region. Therefore, it is not surprising to get relatively high standard errors for some poverty estimates at the provincial level. This could imply that the sample is not representative at that level, and so, the estimates may tend to be biased. Further, analogous estimates at the municipal level is expected to be less reliable should these be generated directly from the survey. In this example, the sets of geographic provinces and municipalities are referred to as statistical small areas. Hence, small area estimation is a collection of statistical techniques designed to provide reliable
Most of the procedures discussed in this section were implemented using PovMap version 2.06. PovMap is a software package that computes poverty and inequality indicators at a spatially disaggregated level.
5

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 50

estimates beyond the survey domain. There are a number of small area techniques and among them is the ELL method used to generate the municipal poverty statistics for the census year 2000. In updating the small area poverty estimates from the 2000 census year to the intercensal year 2003, a similar approach was used. The information from the 2003 FIES, 2003 Labor Force Survey (LFS), and 2000 Census of Population and Housing (CPH) were combined to estimate poverty incidence, poverty gap, and poverty severity at the provincial and municipal levels. Statistical regression was used to predict per capita family income, expressed in natural logarithmic form6, Y, using explanatory variables, which we denote as X. b. Selection of Explanatory Variables Similar to the earlier poverty mapping project, X can be classified into two types: the survey-obtainable variables, at the household or individual level (e.g., educational attainment of household head, etc.); and the census-derivable location variables, which correspond to barangay or municipal means (e.g., existence of a market in the barangay). It is important that X used in modeling should be (a) available both in the survey and census; (b) comparable and/or consistent with both the survey and census (i.e., X follows the same definition in both survey and census) and (c) have survey and census statistics (mean value) that match. It may be noted that the overall objective is to compute city and municipal level poverty statistics, with reliable and/or acceptable levels of precision. This can be done by modeling income using X and fitting the resulting model using its census counterpart. Once this has been done, there will be predicted (per capita) income for all family units in the population. Effectively, strength is borrowed from the census which has a larger coverage than the survey. Note that such procedure requires that the variables constituting X should also be available from the census. In addition to availability, comparability is also an essential component in order to make the substitution of X with its census counterpart to compute predicted (per capita) family income become valid.
6

Using natural logarithmic form of income is a usual approach in a number of econometric models. This is done because log of income has symmetric distribution (while income has a highly skewed distribution). The error term in the model, which denotes the unexplained part of the dependent variable, is also assumed symmetric. Such that a model specification where the dependent variable and the error term have a similar distribution will be preferred to a model where they have very different distributions. For a more thorough discussion of this approach, the readers are referred to statistical regression theory texts. Page 51

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

In the earlier poverty mapping project, comparability assessment is more straightforward as the data sets used (i.e., FIES, LFS and CPH) have the same reference period (i.e., 2000). Selection of survey-obtainable explanatory data can be done by examining the survey and census questionnaires to identify which questions elicit equivalent information. In several cases, equivalence may be achieved by collapsing some categories of answers. When common variables have been identified, the appropriate summary statistics are compared for the survey and the census data. For variables to be considered as consistent, summary statistics for the census data should be within the confidence interval for the survey. Comparability assessment is not required for the case of location-effect variables as these are sourced from the census, which were merged with the survey; and as long as the geographic configurations between survey and census are the same. Assessing comparability in the case of updating small area poverty statistics requires more attention. Note that survey data is for 2003 while census data is for 2000, and our goal is to come up with 2003 poverty statistics at the small area level. Hence, the time component has to be taken into consideration, otherwise ambiguity may arise when the relationship between Y and X is captured through regression modeling using 2003 survey information but fitting the model using 2000 census data. To address the issue, survey-obtainable variables were carefully screened by examining the survey and census questionnaires not only to identify which questions elicit equivalent information but also those, which are timeinvariant. Time invariance, as used in this Project, means that the characteristic is not likely to change from time to time (i.e., stable over time). For some of the variables, this can be done by purposely collapsing some categories of answers to pre-defined categories. For example, a binary variable hea_noed can be created, with value 1 if the head of the household did not have any formal education, 0 otherwise. If the head of the household has no formal education in 2003, he / she also has no formal education in 2000. When as many as possible of these at least type of variables have been created, appropriate summary statistics are compared for the survey and census data. A variable will be included in the list of explanatory variables X if the summary statistics for the census data is within the confidence interval of the survey data. Likewise, we also include in the list of explanatory variables X, location-effect variables represented by the census means.
2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates Page 52

Table 24. Complete List of Variables Considered


Variable Name 1. Household Characteristics extended_fam hea_ategrad hea_athsgrad hea_atleasthh hea_atlowed hea_lowed hea_noed hh_kids men_ategrad men_athsgrad 1 if household is extended 1 if household head has at least finished grade 6 1 if household head has at least finished high school 1 if household head has at least finished 4th year high school 1 if household head has at least finished grade 5 1 if household head has at least completed pre-school and at most finished grade 5 1 if household head has no education 1 if household has at least a member who is son/daughter of the household head proportion of male members in the household who have finished grade 6 proportion of male members in the household who have at least finished 4th year high school men_atleasthh proportion of male members in the household who have at least finished 4th year high school men_atlowed proportion of male members in the household who have no education men_lowed proportion of male members in the household who have at least completed pre-school and at most finished grade 5 roof_light 1 if roof is made of light materials (cogon, nipa, anahaw) single_fam 1 if household does not have "extended family members" wall_light 1 if wall is made of light materials (bamboo, sawali, nipa, cogon) wall_strong 1 if wall is made of strong materials (concrete, brick, stone, wood, galvanized iron) wom_ategrad proportion of female members in the household who have finished grade 6 wom_athsgrad proportion of female members in the household who have at least finished 4th year high school wom_atleasthh proportion of female members in the household who have at least finished 4th year high school wom_atlowed proportion of female members in the household who have no education wom_lowed proportion of female members in the household who have at least completed pre-school and at most finished grade 5 2. Barangay Characteristics Bgy_allcoed bgy_cemetery bgy_church bgy_college bgy_comwork bgy_elep bgy_elschool Bgy_fa_xxl Bgy_famsize bgy_hall bgy_health bgy_highway bgy_hischool bgy_hosp bgy_housprj bgy_library bgy_market bgy_nbank Average proportion of household members with college education within the barangay 1 if the barangay has a cemetery 1 if the barangay has a church, chapel or mosque with religious service at least once a month 1 if the barangay has a college/university 1 if the barangay has community water work system 1 if the barangay has electric power 1 if the barangay has an elementary school Average proportion of housing units in the barangay with floor area between 83.6 and 139.4 sqm Average family size in the barangay 1 if the barangay has a barangay hall 1 if the barangay hasa puericulture center/barangay health center 1 if the barangay is accessible to the national highway 1 if the barangay has a highschool 1 if the barangay has a hospital 1 if the barangay has housing projects (government or private) 1 if the barangay has a public library 1 if the barangay has a market place or building were trading activities are carried on at least once a week average number of (banking institution, pawnshop, financing/investment or insurance company or agency, etc.) in the barangay (where the value of the variable in the census is 10 if there are more than 10 establishment of this type) Description

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 53

Table 24. (continued)


Variable Name 2. Barangay Characteristics bgy_ncafe average number of (restaurants, cafeteria, or refreshment parlor excluding temporary restaurants, cafeteria, or refreshment parlor; beauty parlor; barber shop; industry shop; funeral parlor; and other personal services establishments) in the barangay (where the value of the variable in the census is 10 if there are more than 10 establishment of this type) 1 if the barangay has a newspaper circulation average number of (manufacturing establishments like rice or corn mill, tailor or dress shop or shoe factory, furniture factory, blacksmith shop) in the barangay (where the value of the variable in the census is 10 if there are more than 10 establishment of this type) average number of (hotel dormitory, and other lodging places) in the barangay (where the value of the variable in the census is 10 if there are more than 10 establishment of this type) average number of (recreational establishments like theater or movie house, night club, cabaret, bar, beer garden, billiard hall, bowling alley, pool room, etc.) in the barangay (where the value of the variable in the census is 10 if there are more than 10 establishment of this type) average number of (auto repair shop, vulcanizing shop and other repair shops) in the barangay (where the value of the variable in the census is 10 if there are more than 10 establishment of this type) average number of (wholesale store, department store, bazaar, hardware store, drugstore, sari-sari store and other store with current merchandise worth P600 or more; gasoine station) in the barangay (where the value of the variable in the census is 10 if there are more than 10 establishment of this type) 1 if the barangay has a public plaza or park for recreation Average Proportion of household members who are 61 and above Average proportion of household members who are children of household head in the barangay 1 if the barangay has postal service 1 if the barangay has a town/city hall or provincial capitol 1 if the barangay has a street pattern, i.e. networks of streets of at least three (3) streets or roads 1 if the barangay has telegraph 1 if the barangay has telephone 1 if barangay is a part of the town/city proper or former poblacion of the municipality, or poblacion/city district proportion of household heads in the barangay whose religion is Islam proportion of household heads in the barangay whose religion is not Islam but is not unknown proportion of household heads in the barangay who lived in a foreign country, five years ago proportion of household heads in the barangay who did not live in the same city/municipality five years ago proportion of houses/building in the barangay which were constructed in 1996 or later proportion of houses in the barangay whose state of repair was not reported proportion of houses in the barangay that require/ are under renovation proportion of houses in the barangay that need major repair proportion of houses in the barangay which can be considered as unfinished construction proportion of household members in the barangay who have disability proportion of household members in the barangay who are considered indigenous people Description

bgy_news bgy_nfactory bgy_nhotel

bgy_nplay bgy_nrepair

bgy_nstore bgy_park Bgy_per61up Bgy_perkids bgy_post bgy_provcap bgy_streets bgy_teleg bgy_telep bgy_towncity hea_rel_mus hea_rel_oth head_abroad head_nohere hou_9600 hou_nrprtd hou_reno hou_repair hou_unfconst per_disa per_indig

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 54

Table 24. (continued)


Variable Name 3. Municipality Characteristics hou_acq_2 hou_coelpg hou_const hou_dilap hou_gar_tru hou_lan_ag1 hou_lan_ag2 hou_lan_oth hou_lan_res hou_li_ele hou_notoi hou_own_rad hou_own_ref hou_own_tel hou_own_tv hou_own_vcr hou_own_veh hou_own_was hou_ren hou_renf1 hou_renf2 hou_untoi hou_waduns per_eng per_ind_1t5 per_ind_45 per_ind_52 per_ind_60 per_lit per_nonphi per_sch_abr per_sch_cit per_school per_taga per_wor_abr per_wor_gov per_wor_pre per_wor_prh % of houses constructed by owner % of households that use electricity or lpg for cooking proportion of houses in the barangay that are under construction proportion of houses in the barangay that are condemned/dilapidated % of households with pick-up by truck % of households that own agricultural lands % of households that own agricultural lands acquired through CARP % of households that own other agricultural lands % of households that own other residential lands % of households that use electricity for lighting % of households with no toilet % of households who have radio % of households who have refrigerator % of households who have telephone % of households who have TV % of households who have VCR % of households who have motorized vehicle % of households who have washing machine % of houses that are rented % of houses that are rent-free with consent of owner % of houses that are rent-free without consent of owner % of households with unsanitory (open pit) toilet % of households that use an unsanitary water source for drinking % of persons 5 and older who speak English % of persons employed in agriculture, hunting and forest % of persons employed in construction % of persons employed in retail trade % of persons employed in land transport % of persons 5 and older who can read in some language % of non-Philippine citizens % of persons ages 5 to 18 who attended school in foreign country % of persons ages 5 to 18 who attended school in same city/municipality % of persons ages 5 to 18 who attended school from June 99-March 2000 % of persons 5 and older who speak Filipino/Tagalog % of persons who worked overseas % who worked for private government % who worked for private establishment % who worked for private household Description

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 55

c. Statistical Modeling This section provides a brief discussion of the regression modeling for per capita income (Note: Please refer to the Estimation of Local Poverty in the Philippines released in 2005 for a discussion of more advanced statistical concepts such as multicollinearity, heteroscedasticity modeling, and bootstrapping.). Since there is limited number of time invariant variables at the household level, the explanatory variables X is dominated more by the location-effect variables. Recall that the dependent variable Y is expressed at the household level. To capture a significant amount of variability of Y, it is operationally useful to construct more time-invariant variables. This was done by computing two-way interactions among variables in X. Interactions of explanatory variables with urbanity were also computed. These approaches created more household-level auxiliary data. Separate models were fitted for each geographic region. The objective is to tailor the model to account for the differences of geographic regions in the country, such as spatial peculiarities. The set of geographic barangays comprise the clusters. Per geographic region, computing through PovMap begins in the estimation of the income function, ln Yij = E[ln Yij | Xij] + uij (1)

where Yij is the per capita income of jth household in ith cluster, X is the explanatory variable and u is the error component. This error component uij can be attributed into two components: variability among the clusters and variability among households. Thus, we can represent uij as, uij = hi + eij (2)

where hi is the cluster component and eij is the household component. For each region, a number of candidate models were estimated. As mentioned earlier, estimation of these models was implemented using PovMap.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 56

d. Development and Selection of Final Model After model estimation and fitting of parameter estimates to census, it is necessary to undo the log transform used for Y, also implemented through PovMap. The set of official provincial poverty thresholds for the year 2003 was used to compute poverty estimates. These estimates were determined at the municipal, provincial and regional levels. Bootstrap estimates were summarized by their mean and standard deviation giving a point estimate and standard error for the desired level of disaggregation. Bootstrapping is used to provide accurate estimates of the standard errors. As imputed income depends non-linearly on the stochastic variables involved (the estimated model parameters, the correlated error terms), computing the standard errors analytically will be very demanding. Assessment of candidate models for each region involved comparison of similarity of (subset of) parameter estimates and similarity of small area estimates, in addition to basic statistical criterion such as adjusted R squares, among others. This approach of assessment is also useful in identifying over-fitted models, aberrant fluctuations as well as robustly significant variables. Further, the resulting model-based poverty estimates at the regional levels were also compared to direct survey estimates. Selection of a reasonable model for a specific region was done by considering the following criteria: The relationship of the variables, whether positive or negative, on Y is generally consistent with earlier researches on poverty (e.g. education should have a positive effect on income). The models should be robust, which means that small changes to the model do not greatly affect the significance or signs of the variables. Estimated regional poverty incidence does not largely differ from the official regional poverty estimates. As illustrated in Figure 20, regional poverty incidences based on SAE are relatively close to the official poverty estimates although when they differ, SAE tends to underestimate poverty a bit.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 57

Figure 20 Official vs. SAE Poverty Incidence by Region, 2003

60.0 50.0 40.0 SAE 30.0 20.0 10.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 Official 40.0 50.0 60.0

This was also observed in a similar exercise in Vietnam. Possible reasons could be the following: Since variables used in model-building were limited to those that are considered to be time-invariant, variables such as household size and number of children were replaced with proxy indicators such as cluster means (i.e. average household size in a barangay). These variables, however, were not always significant. In cases that they are found to be significant, it was noted that these proxy indicators are not able to capture the dependency variables adequately, which are negatively correlated with income. Hence, it is expected to over-predict income, resulting to an underestimation of poverty. The assumption that the geographic distribution of households (household characteristics) has been stable over time may have been optimistic. It is possible that migration, and/or variations in birth and death rates between the poor and non-poor may have altered the picture.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 58

Table 25 Characteristics of the Different Regional Models


Region NCR CAR Region I Region II Region III Region IV-A Region IV-B Region V Region VI Region VII Region VIII Region IX Region X Region XI Region XII CARAGA ARMM Number of Observations 3,964 1,620 2,441 2,100 3,389 4,087 1,867 2,529 2,970 2,982 2,296 1,796 2,090 2,184 2,181 1,851 1,787 Adjusted R-square 28.3 49.0 24.1 28.4 24.3 35.0 36.8 48.1 37.3 46.3 43.3 47.4 32.8 43.4 31.5 38.3 21.4

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 59

Table 26 Variables Included in the Regional Models 1. Household Characteristics


Regions VARIABLES
NCR CAR
HEAD_ATHSGRAD 1 if hhld head has at least finished high school ROOF_LIGHT 1 if roof is made of light materials WALL_LIGHT 1 if wall is made of light materials WOM_ATEGRAD Prop. of female hhld members who have finished grade 6 MEN_ATEGRAD Prop. of male members in the hhld who have finished grade 6 MEN_ATLOWED Prop. of male members in the hhld who have no education EXTENDED_FAM 1 if hhld is an extended family MEN_ATLEASTHH Prop of male members in the hhld who have at least finished 4th yr high school MEN_LOWED Prop. of male members in the hhld who have at least completed preschool & at most finished grade V WOM_ATLOWED Prop. Of female members in the hhld who have no educ. HEA_NOED 1 if hhld head has no educ. HEAD_ATEGRAD 1 if household head has at least finihed grade VI WALL_STRONG 1 if wall is made of strong materials

# of Regions VIII IX X XI XII CARAGA ARMM 15 10 8 7 4 2 1

II

III

IV-A IV-B

VI

VII

1 1 1 1 1

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 60

2. Barangay Characteristics
VARIABLES Barangay Characteristics
BGY_WOM_COED Mean of the prop. of women hh members with college education in the bgy BGY_TELEP 1 if the bgy has a phone system BGY_HOSP 1 if the bgy has a hospital BGY_HOUSPRJ 1 if the bgy has housing project (govt. or private) BGY_NHOTEL Average number of lodging dormitories in the bgy. BGY_PER_KIDS Mean of the prop of hhld members who children of the hhld head BGY_STREETS 1 if the bgy has a street pattern BGY_HEALTH 1 if the bgy has a health/puericulture center BGY_COMWORK 1 if the bgy has community works system BGY_ELEP 1 if the bgy has electric power BGY_FA_XXL Prop of hhlds in the bgy w/ lot floor area between 83.6 & 139.4 sq. m. BGY_FAMSIZE Mean family size in the bgy BGY_HIGHWAY 1 if bgy is accessible to natl highway BGY_MARKET 1 if the bgy has has a market place BGY_PER_61UP Mean of the prop of hhld members aged 61 & up in the bgy BGY_TOWNCITY 1 if the bgy is part of a town/city BGY_ALL_COED Mean of the prop. of hhld members w/ college educ. In the bgy. BGY_POST 1 if the bgy has a postal service

Regions NCR CAR I II III IV-A IV-B V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII CARAGA ARMM

# of Models

5 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 61

3. Municipality Characteristics
VARIABLES Barangay Characteristics
HOU_OWN_TV % of hhld who owns TV in the municipality PER_ENG % of persons 5 yrs & older who speak English in the municipality HOU_LAN_RES % of hhlds that own other residential lands HOU_OWN_RAD % of hhlds who own radio HOU_OWN_WAS % of hhlds who own washing machine HOU_COELPG % of hhlds that use electricity or lpg for cooking HOU_LAN_AG1 % of hhlds that own agricultural lands HOU_NOTOI % of hhlds with no toilet HOU_OWN_TEL % of hhlds who have phone HOU_UNTOI % of hhlds with unsanitary toilet PER_IND_45 % of persons employed in construction PER_LIT % of persons 5 & older who can read in some language PER_SCH_CIT % of persons ages 5-18 who attended school in same city/municipality PER_TAGA % of persons who speak Filipino PER_WOR_PRH % of hhld members who worked for private hhld

Regions NCR CAR I II III IV-A IV-B V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII CARAGA ARMM

# of Models

3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 62

4.Limitations of the Study a. Data In the absence of a census, as well as panel data in 2003, in which case, survey household income from 2003 can be linked to X variables in 2000, only timeinvariant variables7 or location effect variables/census means were used in the development of the regression models to predict income of households in 2003. As a result, variables such as household size and number of children were replaced with proxy indicators such as cluster means (i.e., average household size in a barangay). These variables, however, were not always significant. In cases that they are found to be significant, it was noted that these proxy indicators are not able to capture the dependency variables adequately, which are negatively correlated with income. Hence, it is expected to over-predict income, resulting to an underestimation of poverty. b. Estimation of Magnitude of Poor Population in 2003 To be able to come up with the magnitude of poor population in 2003, poverty incidence in each municipality was multiplied with the estimated total population in each municipality. With estimated total population by municipality computed using the following data: 2000-based population projection for 2003 (provincial level) 2000-based population projection for 2007 (provincial level) Actual Population for 2007 (provincial and municipal level)

The difference between the 2007 projections and actual population at the provincial level were computed and used to adjust the 2000-based population projection for 2003. Further, the distribution of the 2007 actual population among the municipalities was also used to estimate the municipal level population projection for 2003.

Time-invariant variables are variables considered to be stable over time.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 63

c. Regional model may not necessarily capture the unique characteristics of provinces/municipalities As models specified are at the regional level, characteristics of the municipalities atypical of the province/region may not be fully captured by the model. 1. Siayan, Zamboanga del Norte This municipality is characterized8 as follows: Ranked as the poorest municipality in 2003 Has farming and fishing is known to be the common source of income Located very far from the poblacion (i.e., approx. 7 hrs. away) with roads that are described to be rugged and rough. Yet it was found that GIS-based maps of poverty related indicators done by NSCB Regional Division IX (NSCB RD IX) presented good status of the municipality, except for malnutrition. It was also noted that an e-center of the National Computer Center (NCC) has been established in this municipality. 2. Albay It was observed that poverty incidence generated for Albay using the regional model developed in SAE was estimated as 15.1 percent with a CV of 3.7. The computed incidence is considered relatively low compared to the 2003 official poverty estimates of 42.7 percent with a CV of 7.3. While the Project Team recognizes that there may be other variables that are correlated with income (particularly for households of Albay), these, however, were not included in the model developed for the region due to some constraints (e.g., limited time, data, manpower and financial resources).

Per consultation with NSCB Regional Division IX.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 64

d. Non-inclusion of variables on migration and tourism Although it has been recognized that migration and tourism might be significant variables that could have been considered in the model building, these were not included in the model due to limited time and data available. (Note: Tourism was somehow incorporated in the model building through the census variable number of hotel or accommodation establishments in the barangay). Nevertheless, with the availability of data on these areas of concern, the NSCB plans to consider these in the future endeavors on SAE. e. Comparison of the 2000 and 2003 SAE It is recognized that trend analysis, specifically for poverty measurement, is important. However, in consideration of the differences in model building, such as: National model for 2000 SAE and regional models for 2003 SAE 2003 models were only developed using time invariant variables, locationeffect/census means Thus, it might not be appropriate to do a trend analysis from 2000 SAE to 2003 SAE.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 65

C. Validation Workshops 1. Objectives Similar to the earlier poverty mapping project, which the NSCB conducted in 2004-2005, a series of provincial validation exercises were conducted in order to assess the acceptability and consistency of the estimates generated. These exercises were done to assess how well the estimates relate to the assessment of local government units, the academe, and non-government organizations in the province. Specifically, these activities aim to: Solicit the participants expert opinion and intimate knowledge of the poverty situation in their province; Present the initial results of the Intercensal Project; Serve as a forum for the exchange of ideas and discussion of the provincial and municipal level poverty estimates produced through the project and to evaluate how well they relate to the assessment of the local participants; Serve as an advocacy for poverty mapping at the local level; and Convince the local government units (LGUs) to invest on and appreciate statistics. 2. Mechanics Invited workshop participants were composed of: Group 1: Provincial key informants with detailed knowledge of all the municipalities in the province, e.g., provincial planning and development coordinator. Group 2: Municipal key informants, e.g., representatives from the municipal planning and development offices. The participants were asked to accomplish the validation form, which included the indicators significant in the small area modeling procedure, other correlates of poverty, and the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) indicators. The following indicators were included in the validation form: - Level of educational attainment - Age dependency ratio
2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates Page 66

- Employment - Absence of malnourished or underweight children under 5 years of age - Maternal mortality ratio - Access to health facilities - Literacy rate - Ownership of residence - Quality of housing - Access to safe water - Access to sanitary toilet - Access to electricity - Ownership of refrigerator - Peace and order 3. Workshop Design a. Areas that were covered include: Province 1. Sorsogon (29 April to 2 May 2008) Ranked 29 poorest; Representative of a poor province Poverty incidence from 2000 to 2003 dropped by 7.6 percentage points from 41.4% to 33.7%, respectively; then, posting 43.5% in 2006. Ranked 43th poorest; Representative of a not very poor province 2003 FIES sample size: 68 2003 estimated HHs (based on FIES): 15,509 Ranked 14th poorest; Representative of a very poor province For continuity of assessment/validation; One of the validation exercises in the earlier 2000 Poverty Mapping Project was conducted in Palawan.
th

Rationale

2. Camiguin (16 to 19 June 2008) 3. Palawan (15 to 18 July 2008)

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 67

b. Workshop Participants Participants Local Government Units Academe Non-Government Organizations Other Participants/ guests TOTAL No. of municipalities Sorsogon 24 0 1 0 25 16 Camiguin 24 0 0 Vice-Governor of the Province of Camiguin 25 5 Palawan 24 4 3 0 31 23 (excluding Kalayaan)

c. Field Validation In addition to the validation workshops conducted, ocular assessments were also done in some of the municipalities/barangays of the three provinces. Members of the Team were asked to accomplish an Ocular Assessment Form (See Annex C) containing the different variables found to be significant in the regional model. These were done for the Team to gain better insights on the province, as well as validate whether the variables are truly reflective of the actual poverty situation in the municipalities. Through these ocular assessments, some of the SAE results were verified such as Donsol being a poor municipality (perceived by some of the workshop participants as relatively non-poor municipality because of its popularity as a tourist destination) with most houses still made of light materials including those along the highway. These also gave the members of the Team the chance to actually talk to people residing in the visited municipalities and understand better their way of life.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 68

4. VALIDATION FORMS

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 69

VALIDATION WORKSHOP FOR THE WB ASEM/NSCB POVERTY MAPPING PROJECT Paras Beach Resort, Mambajao, Camiguin June 18, 2008

Municipal Key Informant Provincial Key Informant Note: Provincial key informants are requested to rate all the municipalities, while municipal key informants have the option to provide answers only for their respective municipalities.

Type of Informant (Please check the appropriate box):

Instructions: Based on your perception at present, please rate each municipality in terms of the identified poverty indicators using a rating of 1-10, with 1=lowest and 10=highest. [Please refer to the even numbered columns]. Indicate whether the present condition is 1 = an improvement over, 2 = the same as, or 3 = worse than the situation in 2003. [Please refer to the odd numbered columns, starting with column 3.]
Level of educational attainment For every 10 individuals aged 15 and above in the municipality, how many were able to reach at least secondary education? Age dependency ratio Employment Absence of malnourished or Maternal mortality ratio underweight children under 5 years of age For every 10 children under 5 For every 10 pregnant women in the municipality, how many years of age in the are able to give birth safely? municipality, how many are not malnourished/underweight?

Municipality

For every 10 individuals aged 15-64 in the municipality, how many have dependents (with age below 15 or above 64)?

For every 10 individuals aged 15 and above in the municipality, how many are employed (including selfemployed)?

Present condition compared with 2003 condition At present (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (1) Catarman Guinsiliban Mahinog Mambajao Sagay (2) (3) (4) At present

Present condition compared with 2003 condition At present (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (5) (6)

Present condition compared with 2003 condition At present (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (7) (8)

Present condition compared with 2003 condition At present (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (9) (10)

Present condition compared with 2003 condition (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (11)

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 70

VALIDATION WORKSHOP FOR THE WB ASEM/NSCB POVERTY MAPPING PROJECT Paras Beach Resort, Mambajao, Camiguin June 18, 2008

Access to health facilities

Literacy rate

Ownership of residence

Quality of housing

Access to safe water

Access to sanitary toilet

Municipality

For every 10 families in the municipality, how many have access to health facilities (e.g. RHUs, public hospitals, BHS)?

For every 10 individuals aged For every 10 families in the 10 and above in the municipality, how many municipality, how many are able own their house and lot? to read and write?

For every 10 families in the municipality, how many have houses made of strong construction materials (galvanized iron/aluminum, tile, concrete, brick stone or asbestos)?

For every 10 families in the municipality, how many have access to safe water (faucet, tubed or piped well)?

For every 10 families in the municipality, how many have access to sanitary toilets (water-sealed or closed pit type)?

Present condition compared with 2003 condition At present (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (1) Catarman Guinsiliban Mahinog Mambajao Sagay (12) (13) (14) At present

Present condition compared with 2003 condition At present (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (15) (16)

Present condition compared with 2003 condition At present (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (17) (18)

Present condition compared with 2003 condition At present (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (19) (20)

Present condition compared with 2003 condition At present (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (21) (22)

Present condition compared with 2003 condition (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (23)

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 71

VALIDATION WORKSHOP FOR THE WB ASEM/NSCB POVERTY MAPPING PROJECT Paras Beach Resort, Mambajao, Camiguin June 18, 2008

Access to electricity

Ownership of refrigerator

Peace and order

Overall level of poverty

Ranking of Municipalities

Municipality

For every 10 families in the municipality, how many have access to electricity?

For every 10 families in the For every 10 families in the municipality, how many own a municipality, how many will not refrigerator? consider peace and order/security a problem?

For every 10 families in the municipality, how many are not poor?

Present condition compared with 2003 condition At present (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (1) Catarman Guinsiliban Mahinog Mambajao Sagay (24) (25) (26) At present

Present condition compared with 2003 condition At present (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (27) (28)

Present condition compared with 2003 condition At present (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (29) (30)

Present condition compared with 2003 condition (1 = Improvement 2 = The same 3 = Worse) (31) (32)

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 72

INTERCENSAL UPDATING OF SMALL-AREA POVERTY ESTIMATES Ocular Assessment in Palawan 15-18 June 2008 Observer: ______________________ Municipality: _________ PovInc: ____

Highway
1 if bgy. Is accessible to national highway; 0 otherwise

Hospital
1 if bgy has a hospital; 0 otherwise

Bgy Telephone
1 if there is a phone in the bgy; 0 otherwise

Telephone
1 if there is a phone in the hhld; 0 otherwise

Roof Materials
1- light (cogon, nipa, anahaw) 0 - otherwise

Wall Materials
1- light (bamboo, sawali, cogon, nipa, anahaw) 0 - otherwise

Sample

BGY. Household 1 Household 2 Household 3 Household 4 Household 5 Household 6 Household 7 Household 8 Household 9 Household 10 BGY. Household 1 Household 2 Household 3 Household 4 Household 5 Household 6 Household 7 Household 8 Household 9 Household 10

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 73

5. Matrix of Findings In the validation workshops conducted in the three provinces, some of the general insights and findings of the Team were as follows: As the design of the validation form is expected to exhibit memory bias, it is not surprising that participants encountered some difficulties in recalling the situation five years ago. The results generated from the SAE methodology did not produce a unique ranking of the municipalities. While the poverty incidences were unique, due to sampling errors, it was not possible to establish definitive rankings of municipalities. SAE rankings were generally consistent with the participants assessment, except for some municipalities. The following were specific observations in each of the provinces:
Province 1. Sorsogon Aspect Methodology and regional model Reactions/Remarks The model does not include tourismspecific variables as significant predictors of income. Presence of financial institutions was included as one of the variables in the initial regional model of Bicol. However, per the citizens perception, this is not a strong indicator of the economic situation for all municipalities. Validation results Donsol ranked poorest in SAE but 10th poorest (among 16) based on participants assessment. A participant from an NGO noted that in their recently conducted poverty mapping activity in Sorsogon, Donsol also ranked as poorest, consistent with SAE. Participants also noted that their assessments are mostly based on their perception as a number of them have yet to personally see/visit Donsol.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 74

Province 2. Camiguin

Aspect Methodology and regional model

Reactions/Remarks In appreciation of the SAE experience and the usefulness of lower-level poverty statistics, they have strongly expressed interest to invest on statistics within their province (e.g., conduct of their own community-based data collection activities). Further, they stressed the need for their participation (e.g., as enumerators) in national governmentinitiated surveys/censuses.

Validation results

Sagay was identified to be the poorest municipality based on SAE but participants perceive it to be Guinsiliban. The following were noted as slightly varied rankings were observed: 1) There were only five municipalities in Camiguin; 2) Range of poverty incidence, excluding least poor, is 30.1 to 36.8

3. Palawan

Methodology and regional model Validation results

There is general agreement in the model developed for the region. The participants strongly recommended the exclusion of Kalayaan as this is a government regulated island. Hence, its characteristics are not comparable to the rest of the municipalities. During the validation workshop, municipal rankings of some participants slightly differed with the rankings based on SAE. Although, it should be noted that some participants have yet to personally see/visit some municipalities. Nonetheless, this was addressed by the Project by further improving the models based on the result of the validation workshop. Like what happened in Region V wherein the number of financial institutions in the barangay was considered to be dropped from the model.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 75

D. Advocacy 1. National Dissemination Forum A National Dissemination Forum was held on 4 September 2008 at the Crowne Plaza Hotel to: a. Present the project results, providing details on the methodology and variables used; b. Serve as a venue for the exchange of ideas and discussion of the estimates produced through the project; c. Develop awareness among national government agencies, the academe, nongovernment organizations, local government units and other institutions/ organizations on the importance of the small area estimation methodology and the results generated. Some of the important points raised during the forum include: Suggestion to include the magnitude of poor families in the poverty estimates to reflect the density of poverty across the country. An attempt to generate estimates of the magnitude of poor population has been done during the presentation of the SAE to the Congress, however, it should be noted that it entailed a number of assumptions since 2003 actual population is not available. Provided in Annex E is the table with magnitude of poor population. Possibility of generating poverty estimates at the barangay level. While it is possible to generate poverty estimates at the barangay level, the estimates might not even be useful or acceptable to data users due to expected large errors of the estimates. Difference of the 2003 small area poverty estimates with the 2003 official poverty estimates and how to relate them. Which provincial ranking should be used? Although it has been presented during the forum that the 2003 provincial poverty estimates based on SAE have lower coefficients of variation as compared to the official poverty estimates, the SAE methodology adopted in the Philippines is still undergoing further review/refinements/ improvements. Thus, ranking of poverty estimates should still be based on the 2003 official poverty estimates. Need for better data dissemination schemes for better appreciation at the local level. As NSCB recognized the need to communicate the results of the Project to policy makers and local government units, presentations have been

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 76

done with various data users of poverty. In addition, this final report has also been prepared such that it will be more user-friendly, easy to understand and not very technical. Timeliness of release of poverty data. At present, the generation of SAE is not yet included in the regular work of NSCB since this exercise will entail additional resources and manpower. However, its implementation is part of the future plans of NSCB. Possibility of partnership between the Philippine Statistical System (PSS) and the local government units (LGUs), specifically, in maximizing the use of Community Based Monitoring System (CBMS) database. This issue was raised by the City Planning and Development Coordinator (CPDC) of Pasay City as one of the discussant during the forum. The NSCB, in response, has already communicated with the Office of the Mayor the willingness of NSCB to provide technical assistance in the analysis of CBMS data. Use of the SAE in monitoring poverty over time. It is recognized that monitoring of poverty over time is important, specifically, if we want to determine whether gains in poverty reduction programs have been significant. However, with a slight variation of the methodology used in the earlier project, (used of only time-invariant variables in the model and developing regional models in the 2003 SAE, as compared to the national model used in the earlier project) it might not be appropriate to do a trend analysis between the 2000 and 2003 SAE. Explore other SAE methods, such as the Bayes Hierarchical Model. This may be considered in the future studies of NSCB on SAE. Effectiveness of the SAE method in estimating poverty, specifically when dealing with non-censal year, considering the fact that one is only limited into using time-invariant variables. In this Project, regional models using only timeinvariant variables were able to produce poverty estimates with acceptable level of error for most of the provinces and even for majority of the cities and municipalities. Variables such as housing materials, which were considered to be timeinvariant, can actually be affected by typhoon and other external factors. While this may be correct, average values were used in the computation of estimates thereby negating the contribution of extreme values.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 77

As this is a regression modeling study, there is a need to also present the diagnostic checks done to assess the effectiveness/robustness of the models developed. In the dissemination fora, the results of the diagnostic tests were not fully discussed because of time limitation but in this report, indicators used to assess the appropriateness of the models are provided.

Use of consumption/expenditure instead of income as welfare measure. There is indeed a debate on the use of consumption/expenditure instead of income in welfare measure. However, since the official methodology of poverty measures in the Philippines makes use of income, the study considered the same as the welfare measure.

Given the assumption of area homogeneity with the use of regional models, questions on how cultural diversity and conflict areas, specifically in Mindanao, were taken into consideration in the models developed. The cultural diversity within a region was not accounted for in the model building process since there is no measure of such characteristic in the data sets used in the study.

Need to make available subsistence incidence, which are useful to government agencies like the DSWD who are targeting those who are food poor. This may actually be done but will entail some time. Also, DSWD has already started using the ranking of provinces and municipalities based on poverty incidence among families.

Need to check the consistency of the model and estimates across the years, 2000, 2003 and 2006. It might not be appropriate to do a comparative analysis of the 2000 and 2003 SAE because of its differences in the model building: a) national model for 2000 and regional model for 2003 and b) 2003 model were developed using only time-invariant variables.

It might be useful to compare the result of the CBMS data with the SAE. Although comparison of the result of the CBMS and SAE is feasible, it must be noted that the methodologies used in these two studies as well as the data sets are different. Hence, the comparison is baseless.

The sustainability of this activity, specifically, on whether there will already be a regular generation of SAE through the help of World Bank. It is recognized that World Bank can only support this activity to a certain extent and thus, the NSCB, and also with the help of World Bank, started to explore other possibilities like seeking the help of Congress to fund this activity and make it part of the regular work of NSCB.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 78

2. Various presentations to various agencies/organizations Various presentations on the SAE were also made to the following to disseminate the results and methodology, generate comments and gather support, specifically from policymakers, to be able to have the necessary resources to sustain the generation of small area poverty estimates: House of Representatives through the Congressional Planning and Budget Department (CPBD) NSCB Executive Board Provincial Social Welfare and Development in Rizal Inter-agency Committee of the Department of Labor and Employment National Economic Development Authority - Region IV-A UP Junior Executive Society UNSD / UNESCAP Workshop on MDG Monitoring

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 79

E. Lessons Learned 1. In producing SAE on poverty, variables to be used in the model-building process need not be restricted to only those that are time-invariant. Possible regressors that are perceived to be significantly correlated with income, but may vary over time, may be estimated through regression modeling. 2. Use of latest/up-to-date version of the PovMap software is expected to greatly improve the model building process. 3. In designing and conducting validation/dissemination workshops, the following should have been considered by the Team to ensure outputs presented are fully optimized: Inclusion of an activity wherein participants will be requested to identify actual programs in their locality where the small area poverty estimates presented to them can possibly be used.

Identification of more targeted participants by selecting agencies/ organization which are possible users of the estimates.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 80

Annex F 2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 81

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region NCR Province 1st district Municipality TONDO BINONDO QUIAPO SAN NICOLAS SANTA CRUZ SAMPALOC SAN MIGUEL ERMITA INTRAMUROS MALATE PACO PANDACAN PORT AREA SANTA ANA 2nd district MANDALUYONG CITY CITY OF MARIKINA CITY OF PASIG QUEZON CITY SAN JUAN 3rd district KALOOKAN CITY MALABON NAVOTAS CITY OF VALENZUELA CITY OF LAS PIAS CITY OF MAKATI CITY OF MUNTINLUPA CITY OF PARAAQUE PASAY CITY PATEROS TAGUIG CAR Abra BANGUED (Capital) BOLINEY BUCAY BUCLOC DAGUIOMAN DANGLAS DOLORES LA PAZ LACUB LAGANGILANG LAGAYAN LANGIDEN LICUAN-BAAY (LICUAN) LUBA MALIBCONG MANABO PEARRUBIA PIDIGAN PILAR SALLAPADAN SAN ISIDRO SAN JUAN Poverty Incidence 6.73 1.14 4.18 8.93 3.35 1.93 4.37 2.40 7.97 3.90 3.07 3.66 13.17 3.79 2.96 2.72 3.62 3.03 1.50 5.16 5.10 7.41 4.40 3.40 1.86 3.98 2.03 3.73 4.13 5.23 19.74 73.52 37.19 62.68 40.97 49.56 38.99 40.53 61.48 38.54 52.54 63.81 50.84 52.42 53.46 26.52 35.89 34.44 39.00 37.95 65.52 33.70 Standard error (SE) 1.09 0.98 1.89 4.78 0.88 0.46 2.76 1.58 4.26 1.07 0.87 0.96 9.99 0.93 1.77 1.91 1.67 0.88 1.03 1.70 1.82 3.12 1.52 1.57 0.89 1.84 1.15 0.67 3.21 2.26 2.43 6.58 4.25 8.46 7.67 7.79 4.87 4.96 5.69 4.21 7.28 8.23 5.07 6.01 6.13 5.48 5.45 3.77 4.62 5.18 5.65 4.61 Coefficient of variation (CV) 16.2 86.0 45.2 53.5 26.3 23.8 63.2 65.8 53.5 27.4 28.3 26.2 75.9 24.5 59.8 70.2 46.1 29.0 68.7 32.9 35.7 42.1 34.5 46.2 47.8 46.2 56.7 18.0 77.7 43.2 12.3 8.9 11.4 13.5 18.7 15.7 12.5 12.2 9.3 10.9 13.9 12.9 10.0 11.5 11.5 20.7 15.2 10.9 11.8 13.6 8.6 13.7 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 1557 1622 1582 1523 1599 1615 1580 1611 1535 1587 1602 1592 1463 1590 1605 1609 1593 1604 1619 1575 1576 1543 1579 1598 1617 1585 1613 1591 1583 1574 1310 47 817 161 689 415 754 698 174 770 347 138 378 349 325 1145 866 916 752 791 116 944 45,300 147 1,032 4,120 4,247 7,303 752 159 427 3,253 2,271 2,974 6,844 7,232 9,073 10,727 20,928 78,710 2,024 65,183 17,575 17,484 22,676 15,010 9,618 15,446 10,340 15,067 2,584 27,149 8,622 2,476 5,766 1,392 761 2,346 3,974 5,734 1,857 4,958 2,163 1,956 1,958 3,325 1,755 2,642 2,242 3,765 3,697 2,309 2,957 3,205 1.25 0.19 0.77 1.71 0.59 0.32 0.80 0.41 1.47 0.69 0.51 0.62 2.71 0.67 0.52 0.47 0.63 0.55 0.26 0.91 0.90 1.37 0.73 0.58 0.31 0.66 0.34 0.66 0.72 0.95 5.28 31.64 11.28 23.34 13.39 17.21 13.19 12.71 24.09 12.11 18.44 25.25 18.18 18.12 18.16 7.02 11.10 10.32 11.85 11.86 26.34 9.96 SE 0.30 0.26 0.51 1.24 0.23 0.11 0.69 0.39 1.08 0.25 0.19 0.23 3.11 0.25 0.44 0.50 0.39 0.26 0.30 0.39 0.48 0.80 0.35 0.37 0.24 0.42 0.28 0.17 0.76 0.62 0.87 4.70 1.84 4.85 3.39 3.77 2.30 2.21 3.68 1.88 3.95 5.54 2.72 3.05 2.99 2.04 2.26 1.59 1.99 2.38 3.97 1.87 Severity of Poverty 0.37 0.06 0.22 0.52 0.17 0.09 0.22 0.11 0.42 0.20 0.13 0.17 0.86 0.19 0.15 0.14 0.17 0.16 0.08 0.26 0.26 0.39 0.20 0.16 0.09 0.18 0.10 0.19 0.20 0.28 2.04 16.94 4.72 11.23 5.90 7.96 6.01 5.45 12.03 5.19 8.55 12.75 8.61 8.32 8.20 2.67 4.73 4.29 4.94 5.09 13.34 4.09 SE 0.12 0.13 0.19 0.47 0.10 0.04 0.24 0.15 0.40 0.10 0.06 0.09 1.43 0.11 0.16 0.22 0.14 0.11 0.14 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.13 0.14 0.10 0.16 0.11 0.06 0.27 0.25 0.41 3.35 0.98 3.08 1.88 2.18 1.32 1.18 2.54 1.02 2.36 3.73 1.65 1.80 1.69 0.98 1.17 0.84 1.04 1.34 2.71 0.94

4th district

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 82

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality SAN QUINTIN TAYUM TINEG TUBO VILLAVICIOSA Benguet ATOK BAGUIO CITY BAKUN BOKOD BUGUIAS ITOGON KABAYAN KAPANGAN KIBUNGAN LA TRINIDAD (Capital) MANKAYAN SABLAN TUBA TUBLAY Ifugao BANAUE HUNGDUAN KIANGAN LAGAWE (Capital) LAMUT MAYOYAO ALFONSO LISTA (POTIA) AGUINALDO HINGYON TINOC ASIPULO Kalinga BALBALAN LUBUAGAN PASIL PINUKPUK RIZAL (LIWAN) TABUK (Capital) TANUDAN TINGLAYAN Mountain Province BARLIG BAUKO BESAO BONTOC (Capital) NATONIN PARACELIS SABANGAN SADANGA SAGADA TADIAN Poverty Standard error Incidence (SE) 36.76 36.67 68.96 51.04 54.79 20.83 2.80 41.39 14.50 21.16 19.74 38.98 44.19 37.65 5.64 14.37 33.32 19.13 23.97 31.10 40.92 32.22 29.95 29.24 35.40 32.83 34.35 29.55 46.00 55.53 49.54 50.37 70.01 52.16 34.91 28.11 88.06 82.14 40.86 29.74 36.89 21.13 60.56 59.91 30.81 63.53 23.07 34.33 9.60 5.61 7.06 6.08 7.84 5.21 0.89 8.17 4.43 4.24 5.10 6.28 4.78 6.22 1.79 3.42 5.53 4.61 5.36 4.14 6.83 4.60 3.09 4.04 3.54 4.13 5.11 6.24 7.20 6.16 5.24 6.09 5.84 4.56 4.53 3.77 4.23 5.77 6.30 3.87 5.21 4.13 5.86 4.61 4.30 6.57 3.31 4.39 Coefficient of variation (CV) 26.1 15.3 10.2 11.9 14.3 25.0 31.8 19.7 30.6 20.0 25.8 16.1 10.8 16.5 31.7 23.8 16.6 24.1 22.4 13.3 16.7 14.3 10.3 13.8 10.0 12.6 14.9 21.1 15.7 11.1 10.6 12.1 8.3 8.7 13.0 13.4 4.8 7.0 15.4 13.0 14.1 19.5 9.7 7.7 14.0 10.3 14.3 12.8 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 834 837 86 374 294 1278 1607 670 1434 1266 1311 755 580 801 1567 1436 952 1328 1203 1018 690 984 1049 1070 879 968 918 1062 524 279 416 393 76 356 902 1105 2 12 691 1058 828 1268 189 196 1025 144 1227 919 1,831 4,625 2,666 2,871 2,758 3,835 7,379 4,542 1,861 6,615 9,911 4,655 8,052 5,440 4,739 4,649 3,408 7,629 3,351 6,509 3,885 5,115 5,157 5,560 6,112 7,240 6,094 2,596 4,848 6,757 5,599 5,072 6,950 13,675 4,934 22,668 6,407 9,465 2,300 7,944 2,615 5,035 5,674 13,408 2,719 5,701 2,470 5,589 10.83 11.17 27.83 17.69 19.76 4.70 0.50 12.16 3.07 4.79 4.64 11.11 13.72 11.41 1.10 3.13 9.38 4.72 6.09 8.06 11.90 8.90 8.44 7.96 10.55 9.32 9.62 7.74 13.61 17.73 16.76 16.46 27.37 18.34 10.41 8.08 43.87 37.89 12.49 7.96 10.53 5.06 21.58 23.64 8.38 22.79 5.61 9.76 SE 3.91 2.43 4.56 2.93 4.34 1.73 0.19 3.65 1.21 1.30 1.68 2.59 2.17 2.56 0.46 1.07 2.08 1.50 1.86 1.48 2.62 1.97 1.27 1.49 1.52 1.62 1.97 2.24 3.23 3.02 2.44 2.80 4.30 2.42 1.77 1.34 5.06 5.32 2.77 1.36 2.22 1.35 3.31 2.88 1.55 3.77 1.13 1.87 Severity of Poverty 4.43 4.68 14.12 8.15 9.33 1.59 0.14 4.94 0.99 1.62 1.62 4.33 5.82 4.83 0.34 1.03 3.68 1.71 2.23 2.98 4.80 3.48 3.37 3.07 4.33 3.73 3.78 2.90 5.47 7.56 7.59 7.21 13.52 8.51 4.31 3.28 25.54 20.96 5.22 3.03 4.19 1.76 10.01 11.87 3.21 10.55 1.98 3.86 SE 1.96 1.27 2.98 1.70 2.62 0.77 0.06 1.93 0.47 0.56 0.76 1.27 1.21 1.40 0.18 0.45 1.03 0.67 0.86 0.69 1.29 1.01 0.65 0.72 0.82 0.83 0.98 1.06 1.69 1.73 1.38 1.59 2.88 1.43 0.90 0.66 4.09 4.04 1.48 0.65 1.16 0.59 2.00 1.91 0.75 2.33 0.52 0.96

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 83

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Apayao Municipality CALANASAN (BAYAG) CONNER FLORA KABUGAO (Capital) LUNA PUDTOL SANTA MARCELA Region I Ilocos Norte ADAMS BACARRA BADOC BANGUI BATAC BURGOS CARASI CURRIMAO DINGRAS DUMALNEG BANNA (ESPIRITU) LAOAG CITY (Capital) MARCOS NUEVA ERA PAGUDPUD PAOAY PASUQUIN PIDDIG PINILI SAN NICOLAS SARRAT SOLSONA VINTAR Ilocos Sur ALILEM BANAYOYO BANTAY BURGOS CABUGAO CITY OF CANDON CAOAYAN CERVANTES GALIMUYOD GREGORIO DEL PILAR (CONCEPCION) LIDLIDDA MAGSINGAL NAGBUKEL NARVACAN QUIRINO (ANGKAKI) SALCEDO (BAUGEN) SAN EMILIO SAN ESTEBAN Poverty Standard error Incidence (SE) 22.90 40.44 23.90 36.27 19.42 30.67 22.60 47.78 32.88 32.54 23.17 24.63 26.67 46.34 20.01 35.23 30.74 30.29 17.12 48.41 55.14 29.30 27.85 34.20 35.12 38.40 20.17 30.30 31.79 36.77 45.23 10.99 24.71 17.12 25.84 16.29 15.15 55.66 26.76 34.21 12.56 28.37 38.19 22.74 35.90 24.14 41.21 14.28 5.14 5.05 4.35 5.14 2.62 3.71 4.35 17.85 3.94 3.37 4.62 2.70 4.80 11.00 4.16 4.74 15.74 4.43 2.49 8.18 10.47 4.61 4.06 3.86 3.92 4.86 3.41 3.59 4.11 4.33 7.14 3.71 4.28 3.25 3.81 2.80 3.44 7.93 4.53 6.93 5.07 4.97 6.75 2.83 7.81 4.54 11.49 4.20 Coefficient of variation (CV) 22.4 12.5 18.2 14.2 13.5 12.1 19.2 37.4 12.0 10.4 19.9 11.0 18.0 23.7 20.8 13.5 51.2 14.6 14.5 16.9 19.0 15.7 14.6 11.3 11.2 12.7 16.9 11.8 12.9 11.8 15.8 33.8 17.3 19.0 14.7 17.2 22.7 14.2 16.9 20.3 40.4 17.5 17.7 12.4 21.8 18.8 27.9 29.4 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 1228 700 1205 852 1320 1031 1241 475 965 979 1223 1189 1142 516 1301 882 1029 1042 1374 455 285 1068 1112 925 889 776 1294 1040 999 833 550 1490 1186 1375 1164 1390 1420 275 1141 923 1468 1098 782 1238 865 1200 678 1440 2,093 8,397 3,570 4,855 3,111 3,702 2,469 670 9,906 9,339 3,277 11,906 2,181 596 2,126 12,102 461 5,239 16,582 7,610 3,825 5,602 6,158 8,444 6,714 6,030 6,439 6,961 6,640 10,404 2,710 753 7,767 1,876 8,471 8,728 2,793 7,379 2,601 1,367 455 7,476 1,722 9,135 2,628 2,452 2,649 1,071 5.97 12.05 6.09 10.79 4.92 9.09 5.47 13.02 8.37 8.28 5.38 5.90 6.40 13.58 4.43 9.22 7.37 7.47 3.74 14.28 18.05 7.28 6.80 8.89 9.05 10.20 4.54 7.53 7.94 9.79 12.91 2.19 5.63 3.49 5.97 3.39 3.08 17.80 6.16 8.52 2.48 6.76 10.02 5.10 9.15 5.38 11.37 2.87 SE 1.69 2.05 1.48 2.20 0.90 1.29 1.39 7.51 1.48 1.27 1.46 0.91 1.57 4.90 1.12 1.74 5.22 1.55 0.70 3.62 5.70 1.54 1.37 1.42 1.44 1.90 1.07 1.30 1.44 1.72 3.19 0.91 1.36 0.89 1.14 0.74 0.91 4.20 1.36 2.67 1.25 1.63 2.37 0.90 2.81 1.33 5.00 1.04 Severity of Poverty 2.25 4.96 2.25 4.43 1.83 3.78 1.96 4.87 3.02 2.99 1.82 2.05 2.22 5.37 1.46 3.38 2.58 2.63 1.23 5.68 7.78 2.58 2.39 3.26 3.29 3.77 1.51 2.68 2.82 3.63 5.01 0.68 1.87 1.08 2.02 1.07 0.95 7.48 2.07 3.02 0.75 2.33 3.67 1.69 3.27 1.77 4.34 0.87 SE 0.78 1.03 0.66 1.13 0.42 0.67 0.61 3.68 0.68 0.59 0.60 0.40 0.68 2.47 0.44 0.77 2.24 0.69 0.27 1.79 3.23 0.67 0.60 0.65 0.67 0.89 0.45 0.59 0.63 0.82 1.64 0.34 0.57 0.34 0.48 0.28 0.35 2.31 0.55 1.27 0.45 0.68 1.09 0.37 1.24 0.54 2.53 0.37

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 84

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality SAN ILDEFONSO SAN JUAN (LAPOG) SAN VICENTE SANTA SANTA CATALINA SANTA CRUZ SANTA LUCIA SANTA MARIA SANTIAGO SANTO DOMINGO SIGAY SINAIT SUGPON SUYO TAGUDIN CITY OF VIGAN (Capital) AGOO ARINGAY BACNOTAN BAGULIN BALAOAN BANGAR BAUANG BURGOS CABA LUNA NAGUILIAN PUGO ROSARIO CITY OF SAN FERNANDO (Capital) SAN GABRIEL SAN JUAN SANTO TOMAS SANTOL SUDIPEN TUBAO Pangasinan AGNO AGUILAR CITY OF ALAMINOS ALCALA ANDA ASINGAN BALUNGAO BANI BASISTA BAUTISTA BAYAMBANG BINALONAN BINMALEY BOLINAO BUGALLON Poverty Incidence 17.13 30.63 23.63 14.68 18.53 20.35 19.79 11.64 20.01 17.77 37.23 17.05 70.71 46.68 25.36 13.60 25.85 30.48 20.54 85.50 25.07 31.13 19.67 43.17 26.19 29.91 26.17 27.19 38.79 14.47 47.93 19.80 20.49 73.13 35.18 37.22 45.96 31.64 20.76 15.28 34.71 17.23 19.26 43.56 25.90 20.82 29.53 16.75 21.28 45.53 27.57 Standard error (SE) 3.97 4.12 5.16 3.44 5.00 2.50 3.25 2.67 3.86 3.13 9.92 2.88 15.40 10.87 3.62 2.39 2.69 5.20 2.97 9.61 3.32 3.73 2.73 9.90 4.01 3.72 3.58 5.22 4.47 2.75 6.56 3.02 3.46 9.52 5.31 5.47 7.21 5.34 3.17 3.35 4.91 3.39 3.41 9.57 5.23 4.32 2.42 3.05 3.01 7.20 4.44 Coefficient of variation (CV) 23.2 13.5 21.8 23.4 27.0 12.3 16.4 22.9 19.3 17.6 26.6 16.9 21.8 23.3 14.3 17.6 10.4 17.1 14.5 11.2 13.2 12.0 13.9 22.9 15.3 12.4 13.7 19.2 11.5 19.0 13.7 15.3 16.9 13.0 15.1 14.7 15.7 16.9 15.3 21.9 14.1 19.7 17.7 22.0 20.2 20.7 8.2 18.2 14.1 15.8 16.1 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 1373 1032 1214 1429 1336 1292 1307 1481 1302 1359 813 1376 67 504 1172 1451 1162 1037 1287 6 1180 1017 1316 610 1152 1053 1154 1130 762 1435 469 1306 1288 51 886 815 526 1000 1281 1416 910 1371 1325 601 1160 1279 1064 1383 1263 543 1119 1,054 6,997 2,748 2,023 2,404 6,995 4,605 3,152 3,201 4,338 851 4,094 2,554 4,779 8,534 6,207 14,047 12,404 7,548 9,755 8,831 9,875 12,890 3,274 5,183 10,212 11,060 4,546 17,862 15,413 7,158 6,093 6,531 8,110 5,315 9,262 11,283 10,809 15,430 5,637 11,055 8,877 4,686 19,081 6,767 5,454 28,731 8,373 15,368 29,563 16,219 3.62 7.43 5.32 2.93 3.90 4.43 4.30 2.35 4.30 3.70 9.38 3.56 27.41 13.75 5.86 2.78 6.07 7.54 4.49 40.65 5.74 7.69 4.38 12.25 6.17 7.30 6.14 6.42 10.27 3.06 14.23 4.36 4.54 28.63 8.95 9.78 13.54 7.90 4.71 3.25 9.17 3.65 4.23 12.56 6.10 4.63 7.17 3.63 4.81 13.58 6.51 SE 1.09 1.39 1.78 0.86 1.40 0.77 0.98 0.68 1.08 0.82 3.66 0.81 10.51 4.99 1.14 0.63 0.86 1.77 0.84 10.64 0.99 1.33 0.82 4.12 1.36 1.27 1.19 1.72 1.76 0.74 2.94 0.87 0.97 6.99 1.90 2.06 3.20 1.92 0.97 0.89 1.90 0.88 0.98 4.20 1.77 1.26 0.86 0.85 0.94 3.17 1.52 Severity of Poverty 1.14 2.59 1.76 0.89 1.22 1.43 1.39 0.73 1.38 1.17 3.28 1.12 13.28 5.49 1.97 0.87 2.08 2.66 1.46 22.75 1.93 2.71 1.44 4.75 2.12 2.56 2.09 2.20 3.79 0.97 5.69 1.43 1.50 13.90 3.22 3.59 5.40 2.82 1.58 1.04 3.40 1.17 1.39 4.97 2.09 1.53 2.51 1.18 1.61 5.47 2.22 SE 0.42 0.60 0.78 0.31 0.53 0.33 0.39 0.25 0.42 0.31 1.68 0.32 6.76 2.52 0.46 0.24 0.36 0.75 0.33 8.52 0.40 0.58 0.34 1.99 0.59 0.55 0.52 0.75 0.82 0.29 1.49 0.35 0.39 4.59 0.84 0.96 1.61 0.86 0.41 0.34 0.89 0.33 0.40 2.11 0.76 0.50 0.38 0.33 0.39 1.61 0.65

La Union

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 85

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality BURGOS CALASIAO DAGUPAN CITY DASOL INFANTA LABRADOR LINGAYEN (Capital) MABINI MALASIQUI MANAOAG MANGALDAN MANGATAREM MAPANDAN NATIVIDAD POZZORUBIO ROSALES SAN CARLOS CITY SAN FABIAN SAN JACINTO SAN MANUEL SAN NICOLAS SAN QUINTIN SANTA BARBARA SANTA MARIA SANTO TOMAS SISON SUAL TAYUG UMINGAN URBIZTONDO CITY OF URDANETA VILLASIS LAOAC Region II Batanes BASCO (Capital) ITBAYAT IVANA MAHATAO SABTANG UYUGAN Cagayan ABULUG ALCALA ALLACAPAN AMULUNG APARRI BAGGAO BALLESTEROS BUGUEY CALAYAN CAMALANIUGAN CLAVERIA ENRILE GATTARAN Poverty Standard error Incidence (SE) 35.74 24.40 10.82 28.92 30.11 16.61 23.24 36.60 34.39 20.90 21.64 31.22 20.79 28.18 24.70 22.83 28.03 28.86 27.62 27.13 31.93 27.70 23.13 30.21 16.82 21.40 36.75 17.54 25.81 36.22 16.00 18.18 28.32 9.97 20.66 11.93 18.40 20.07 14.61 23.90 28.97 26.58 46.47 22.40 33.93 25.75 34.77 44.85 20.86 16.84 29.59 27.09 8.89 3.70 2.84 4.54 6.88 4.83 3.39 6.14 3.73 3.44 2.79 2.90 3.99 4.77 2.80 2.97 3.18 3.75 4.50 4.46 4.33 4.53 3.07 4.08 5.89 3.57 6.38 3.42 2.51 5.91 1.98 3.40 3.30 3.44 5.37 4.85 5.18 5.24 6.09 2.82 3.00 2.58 3.68 2.60 3.17 2.65 3.59 6.30 2.18 2.57 3.06 2.48 Coefficient of variation (CV) 24.9 15.2 26.2 15.7 22.8 29.1 14.6 16.8 10.8 16.5 12.9 9.3 19.2 16.9 11.3 13.0 11.3 13.0 16.3 16.4 13.6 16.4 13.3 13.5 35.0 16.7 17.4 19.5 9.7 16.3 12.4 18.7 11.7 34.5 26.0 40.7 28.2 26.1 41.7 11.8 10.4 9.7 7.9 11.6 9.3 10.3 10.3 14.0 10.5 15.3 10.3 9.2 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 871 1195 1495 1084 1046 1386 1221 839 917 1274 1259 1013 1280 1104 1187 1232 1106 1087 1117 1133 996 1114 1226 1043 1381 1262 835 1362 1165 855 1401 1348 1101 1511 1283 1478 1338 1300 1432 1206 1083 1144 508 1246 936 1166 908 559 1276 1380 1061 1137 6,624 19,200 15,402 7,082 6,488 3,170 21,139 7,999 39,061 12,409 18,094 19,369 6,361 5,807 14,700 12,328 42,629 19,591 9,133 12,130 10,199 8,119 15,592 8,751 2,141 8,527 10,265 6,305 15,201 14,836 17,923 9,779 7,510 690 640 141 286 293 159 6,910 9,684 7,455 19,511 13,145 23,163 7,705 9,349 6,764 4,492 4,994 8,407 12,949 9.57 5.65 2.23 7.17 7.42 3.48 5.32 9.90 8.79 4.65 4.78 7.73 4.66 6.82 5.70 5.20 6.73 7.05 6.62 6.52 8.01 6.56 5.32 7.58 3.53 4.84 9.96 3.78 6.09 9.49 3.45 3.91 6.79 2.18 5.27 2.71 4.59 4.93 3.49 5.77 7.16 6.40 13.40 5.21 8.74 6.27 9.28 12.55 4.69 3.63 7.52 6.56 SE 3.38 1.11 0.73 1.60 2.39 1.36 1.01 2.34 1.39 1.02 0.82 1.05 1.19 1.61 0.91 0.94 1.02 1.33 1.49 1.49 1.54 1.48 0.97 1.39 1.61 1.07 2.39 0.98 0.84 2.20 0.56 0.98 1.14 0.92 1.65 1.48 1.60 1.70 1.89 0.94 1.10 0.84 1.50 0.83 1.20 0.92 1.35 2.41 0.65 0.72 1.09 0.86 Severity of Poverty 3.58 1.90 0.70 2.56 2.63 1.10 1.79 3.73 3.18 1.53 1.56 2.74 1.54 2.39 1.93 1.74 2.33 2.47 2.29 2.27 2.86 2.25 1.81 2.71 1.11 1.62 3.76 1.22 2.08 3.50 1.12 1.26 2.35 0.71 1.90 0.91 1.63 1.74 1.20 1.99 2.51 2.18 5.19 1.75 3.14 2.17 3.42 4.78 1.53 1.14 2.67 2.26 SE 1.55 0.44 0.27 0.71 1.06 0.53 0.42 1.10 0.63 0.41 0.33 0.48 0.50 0.70 0.39 0.40 0.42 0.59 0.64 0.65 0.69 0.63 0.41 0.60 0.61 0.43 1.12 0.39 0.36 1.02 0.23 0.39 0.51 0.39 0.71 0.63 0.73 0.76 0.82 0.41 0.49 0.36 0.73 0.35 0.55 0.42 0.63 1.12 0.28 0.28 0.50 0.37

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 86

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality GONZAGA IGUIG LAL-LO LASAM PAMPLONA PEABLANCA PIAT RIZAL SANCHEZ-MIRA SANTA ANA SANTA PRAXEDES SANTA TERESITA SANTO NIO (FAIRE) SOLANA TUAO TUGUEGARAO CITY (Capital) ALICIA ANGADANAN AURORA BENITO SOLIVEN BURGOS CABAGAN CABATUAN CITY OF CAUAYAN CORDON DINAPIGUE DIVILACAN ECHAGUE GAMU ILAGAN (Capital) JONES LUNA MACONACON DELFIN ALBANO (MAGSAYSAY) MALLIG NAGUILIAN PALANAN QUEZON QUIRINO RAMON REINA MERCEDES ROXAS SAN AGUSTIN SAN GUILLERMO SAN ISIDRO SAN MANUEL SAN MARIANO SAN MATEO SAN PABLO SANTA MARIA CITY OF SANTIAGO SANTO TOMAS TUMAUINI Poverty Incidence 34.23 29.45 19.72 27.50 30.61 35.22 31.47 32.96 18.08 34.92 11.22 33.02 37.27 46.74 38.52 10.47 22.60 32.77 17.94 38.38 21.05 38.09 12.21 23.17 23.76 20.59 48.05 22.66 25.17 26.44 14.79 19.62 19.31 29.27 36.60 26.00 48.20 32.66 45.65 21.48 25.31 20.39 16.10 33.43 19.39 30.76 45.21 20.30 33.26 57.71 11.67 30.78 34.64 Standard error (SE) 4.83 3.19 2.39 2.79 4.07 3.45 3.57 3.46 3.14 6.28 3.31 4.10 3.64 4.11 2.99 1.86 2.30 2.85 2.30 4.25 3.56 4.02 2.38 2.38 2.66 6.72 10.24 1.64 3.27 1.96 2.42 2.77 4.13 2.75 4.20 2.89 5.30 3.72 4.38 3.06 3.28 2.71 2.74 3.03 3.02 3.39 4.15 2.19 3.71 6.08 1.68 3.25 2.75 Coefficient of variation (CV) 14.1 10.8 12.1 10.1 13.3 9.8 11.3 10.5 17.4 18.0 29.5 12.4 9.8 8.8 7.8 17.8 10.2 8.7 12.8 11.1 16.9 10.6 19.5 10.3 11.2 32.6 21.3 7.2 13.0 7.4 16.4 14.1 21.4 9.4 11.5 11.1 11.0 11.4 9.6 14.2 13.0 13.3 17.0 9.1 15.6 11.0 9.2 10.8 11.2 10.5 14.4 10.6 7.9 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 922 1065 1312 1123 1033 883 1005 962 1349 900 1486 961 811 503 771 1499 1242 970 1353 778 1269 786 1475 1224 1208 1285 466 1240 1176 1149 1428 1317 1324 1069 840 1154 461 974 537 1261 1173 1290 1397 949 1321 1028 552 1293 954 242 1480 1026 912 11,374 7,383 7,418 9,431 6,332 13,222 7,002 5,305 4,053 8,254 360 5,226 8,893 30,826 20,491 12,469 12,675 12,529 5,339 9,259 4,287 15,862 3,906 24,011 8,224 730 2,103 14,248 6,248 32,345 5,893 2,906 788 6,893 9,158 7,031 7,144 6,664 9,070 9,143 5,238 10,037 3,269 4,940 3,842 8,364 19,355 11,291 6,532 11,234 13,601 6,630 17,621 8.97 7.32 4.38 6.69 7.76 9.47 8.06 8.29 3.98 9.04 2.25 8.74 9.86 13.81 10.33 2.10 5.23 8.50 3.92 10.28 4.82 10.44 2.47 5.49 5.59 4.61 13.98 5.38 6.13 6.51 3.15 4.36 4.35 7.41 9.85 6.34 14.24 8.49 13.57 5.02 6.03 4.70 3.41 8.65 4.41 7.81 13.01 4.64 8.71 19.06 2.39 7.79 9.13 SE 1.72 1.18 0.74 0.92 1.47 1.28 1.29 1.29 0.87 2.10 0.86 1.46 1.43 1.84 1.23 0.46 0.72 1.03 0.66 1.63 1.04 1.45 0.61 0.79 0.83 1.98 4.05 0.57 1.12 0.70 0.66 0.80 1.25 1.00 1.54 1.03 2.21 1.41 1.94 0.98 1.09 0.85 0.75 1.12 0.96 1.23 1.72 0.72 1.31 3.07 0.47 1.18 1.05 Severity of Poverty 3.27 2.56 1.42 2.30 2.76 3.51 2.90 2.93 1.27 3.26 0.67 3.20 3.60 5.45 3.81 0.63 1.74 3.07 1.25 3.79 1.59 3.92 0.75 1.86 1.88 1.47 5.49 1.83 2.12 2.27 0.98 1.41 1.40 2.63 3.65 2.20 5.66 3.07 5.39 1.69 2.05 1.55 1.06 3.12 1.44 2.78 5.03 1.53 3.16 8.16 0.73 2.76 3.32 SE 0.77 0.53 0.31 0.40 0.65 0.60 0.58 0.58 0.34 0.91 0.35 0.68 0.67 0.94 0.59 0.17 0.31 0.47 0.27 0.78 0.42 0.67 0.22 0.33 0.35 0.77 1.93 0.26 0.49 0.32 0.25 0.33 0.51 0.45 0.71 0.47 1.10 0.64 1.02 0.41 0.46 0.34 0.29 0.52 0.41 0.55 0.87 0.30 0.59 1.68 0.18 0.53 0.49

Isabela

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 87

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Nueva Vizcaya Municipality AMBAGUIO ARITAO BAGABAG BAMBANG BAYOMBONG (Capital) DIADI DUPAX DEL NORTE DUPAX DEL SUR KASIBU KAYAPA QUEZON SANTA FE SOLANO VILLAVERDE ALFONSO CASTANEDA AGLIPAY CABARROGUIS (Capital) DIFFUN MADDELA SAGUDAY NAGTIPUNAN Region III Aurora BALER (Capital) CASIGURAN DILASAG DINALUNGAN DINGALAN DIPACULAO MARIA AURORA SAN LUIS Bataan ABUCAY BAGAC CITY OF BALANGA (Capital) DINALUPIHAN HERMOSA LIMAY MARIVELES MORONG ORANI ORION PILAR SAMAL Bulacan ANGAT BALAGTAS (BIGAA) BALIUAG BOCAUE BULACAN BUSTOS CALUMPIT GUIGUINTO HAGONOY CITY OF MALOLOS (Capital) Poverty Incidence 50.95 20.64 17.39 17.45 9.17 27.90 19.04 18.33 39.28 30.15 32.67 25.08 13.58 17.88 41.69 30.04 20.48 32.23 21.16 36.86 35.16 10.12 22.75 23.72 19.02 22.78 19.93 9.72 19.89 4.50 16.02 7.15 12.41 15.36 9.98 7.88 7.93 10.00 10.13 10.16 10.91 10.81 10.97 7.89 7.17 12.27 3.47 7.22 6.90 9.60 7.41 Standard error (SE) 9.05 2.45 3.05 2.38 2.14 3.68 3.46 3.50 4.98 3.90 4.16 3.83 2.07 3.68 7.66 2.93 3.04 3.16 2.35 4.81 5.43 2.79 3.96 4.67 4.39 5.85 2.98 1.66 3.71 1.90 2.95 1.48 1.79 2.45 3.27 2.11 3.00 2.01 2.05 2.26 2.58 2.57 3.55 1.79 2.29 3.60 2.05 1.69 2.11 1.86 1.34 Coefficient of variation (CV) 17.8 11.9 17.5 13.6 23.3 13.2 18.2 19.1 12.7 12.9 12.7 15.3 15.2 20.6 18.4 9.8 14.8 9.8 11.1 13.0 15.4 27.6 17.4 19.7 23.1 25.7 15.0 17.1 18.7 42.2 18.4 20.7 14.4 16.0 32.8 26.8 37.8 20.1 20.2 22.2 23.6 23.8 32.4 22.7 31.9 29.3 59.1 23.4 30.6 19.4 18.1 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 376 1284 1367 1364 1519 1111 1329 1344 738 1044 974 1179 1452 1356 657 1047 1289 983 1267 829 888 1506 1237 1211 1330 1235 1303 1514 1304 1578 1398 1551 1472 1414 1510 1540 1538 1509 1505 1503 1493 1496 1491 1539 1550 1474 1596 1548 1554 1517 1544 4,689 6,807 5,368 7,439 4,684 3,865 4,305 2,944 10,799 6,063 5,245 3,013 7,253 2,976 2,508 6,877 5,401 12,540 6,563 4,535 6,169 3,281 4,828 3,223 1,808 4,220 4,689 3,338 4,209 1,695 3,632 5,636 10,812 7,612 4,965 7,355 1,937 5,615 4,737 4,148 3,579 5,478 6,240 10,428 7,225 8,512 1,990 6,879 5,480 11,983 15,773 14.82 4.89 3.92 3.98 1.83 7.07 4.34 4.01 10.43 7.46 8.46 6.02 2.93 4.05 12.20 7.77 4.75 8.62 4.90 10.16 9.27 2.01 5.24 5.24 4.02 4.97 4.34 1.89 4.29 0.77 3.54 1.39 2.62 3.36 2.05 1.47 1.47 1.99 2.06 2.01 2.32 2.11 2.16 1.49 1.31 2.46 0.58 1.31 1.28 1.87 1.42 SE 3.93 0.78 0.93 0.72 0.55 1.25 0.99 1.01 1.70 1.25 1.58 1.31 0.58 1.11 2.92 1.06 0.92 1.15 0.75 1.71 1.93 0.77 1.28 1.48 1.36 1.78 0.94 0.44 1.14 0.44 0.92 0.35 0.49 0.71 0.91 0.48 0.73 0.57 0.59 0.62 0.70 0.69 0.94 0.45 0.58 1.01 0.38 0.41 0.49 0.50 0.36 Severity of Poverty 5.80 1.67 1.29 1.32 0.56 2.53 1.44 1.27 3.84 2.58 3.04 2.05 0.95 1.35 4.83 2.81 1.58 3.18 1.63 3.84 3.39 0.61 1.76 1.71 1.26 1.60 1.41 0.56 1.39 0.21 1.17 0.42 0.83 1.09 0.64 0.43 0.43 0.60 0.64 0.60 0.74 0.63 0.64 0.43 0.37 0.75 0.15 0.37 0.37 0.56 0.42 SE 1.92 0.34 0.38 0.29 0.21 0.55 0.40 0.39 0.76 0.53 0.74 0.55 0.24 0.47 1.40 0.49 0.39 0.53 0.32 0.78 0.87 0.30 0.55 0.65 0.56 0.73 0.40 0.17 0.49 0.16 0.39 0.13 0.20 0.30 0.36 0.17 0.27 0.22 0.24 0.23 0.28 0.26 0.35 0.17 0.21 0.39 0.11 0.14 0.18 0.20 0.14

Quirino

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 88

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality MARILAO MEYCAUAYAN NORZAGARAY OBANDO PANDI PAOMBONG PLARIDEL PULILAN SAN ILDEFONSO CITY OF SAN JOSE DEL MONTE SAN MIGUEL SAN RAFAEL SANTA MARIA DOA REMEDIOS TRINIDAD ALIAGA BONGABON CABANATUAN CITY CABIAO CARRANGLAN CUYAPO GABALDON (BITULOK & SABANI) CITY OF GAPAN GENERAL MAMERTO NATIVIDAD GENERAL TINIO (PAPAYA) GUIMBA JAEN LAUR LICAB LLANERA LUPAO SCIENCE CITY OF MUOZ NAMPICUAN PALAYAN CITY (Capital) PANTABANGAN PEARANDA QUEZON RIZAL SAN ANTONIO SAN ISIDRO SAN JOSE CITY SAN LEONARDO SANTA ROSA SANTO DOMINGO TALAVERA TALUGTUG ZARAGOZA Pampanga ANGELES CITY APALIT ARAYAT Poverty Incidence 4.20 7.97 20.12 6.00 11.46 15.20 7.08 11.59 16.34 8.61 16.91 13.29 11.13 51.58 22.58 24.87 10.01 17.94 33.81 27.23 34.05 13.44 24.11 12.48 28.27 20.36 33.11 27.61 20.95 25.22 17.91 31.22 23.22 28.78 23.76 32.08 19.78 23.73 12.34 14.93 16.69 12.86 20.76 19.34 38.31 24.30 6.44 15.14 16.23 Standard error (SE) 1.58 1.85 4.75 2.34 2.49 3.27 2.14 2.58 1.95 1.69 2.11 2.36 2.40 6.36 2.64 2.94 1.08 3.18 4.08 2.40 4.48 2.37 3.68 3.39 2.45 2.33 3.83 4.31 2.78 2.82 2.06 3.89 2.77 3.68 5.78 3.80 2.69 4.11 3.54 2.20 3.07 1.90 2.86 2.37 3.28 3.35 1.56 3.51 2.34 Coefficient of variation (CV) 37.6 23.2 23.6 39.0 21.7 21.5 30.2 22.3 11.9 19.6 12.5 17.8 21.6 12.3 11.7 11.8 10.8 17.7 12.1 8.8 13.2 17.6 15.3 27.2 8.7 11.4 11.6 15.6 13.3 11.2 11.5 12.5 11.9 12.8 24.3 11.8 13.6 17.3 28.7 14.7 18.4 14.8 13.8 12.3 8.6 13.8 24.2 23.2 14.4 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 1581 1536 1297 1564 1484 1419 1552 1483 1389 1527 1378 1461 1488 365 1242 1182 1508 1354 940 1129 930 1457 1201 1470 1102 1291 958 1118 1272 1175 1355 1014 1222 1091 1209 993 1308 1210 1473 1425 1385 1466 1282 1323 780 1198 1562 1421 1392 6,009 14,272 18,331 3,252 6,384 8,107 6,702 9,588 14,626 31,092 23,103 10,762 20,700 8,564 12,972 17,429 24,292 11,397 10,590 14,873 9,414 12,841 7,587 4,612 26,414 12,328 9,660 6,292 6,510 8,998 12,358 3,609 6,841 6,757 6,070 10,343 9,758 15,405 5,330 17,058 8,577 7,047 9,406 19,032 7,648 9,355 19,274 13,720 17,934 0.75 1.50 4.63 1.07 2.28 3.30 1.34 2.27 3.55 1.66 3.75 2.76 2.19 15.36 5.28 6.04 2.09 3.86 8.83 6.86 9.03 2.80 5.85 2.60 7.13 4.63 8.86 6.82 4.85 6.24 4.12 8.26 5.73 7.34 5.67 8.36 4.56 5.59 2.53 3.35 3.56 2.69 4.83 4.42 10.77 5.81 1.18 3.08 3.52 SE 0.34 0.42 1.40 0.52 0.64 1.03 0.52 0.70 0.56 0.46 0.64 0.64 0.62 3.17 0.88 1.01 0.32 0.93 1.64 0.87 1.74 0.65 1.23 0.97 0.84 0.73 1.51 1.62 0.96 1.01 0.68 1.46 0.95 1.35 1.90 1.42 0.84 1.34 0.95 0.68 0.93 0.55 0.97 0.69 1.38 1.13 0.39 0.93 0.70 Severity of Poverty 0.21 0.44 1.55 0.30 0.69 1.08 0.39 0.68 1.16 0.49 1.24 0.87 0.66 6.16 1.80 2.13 0.67 1.25 3.25 2.47 3.38 0.89 2.06 0.81 2.57 1.56 3.32 2.42 1.65 2.23 1.40 3.09 2.04 2.67 1.97 3.09 1.55 1.92 0.79 1.11 1.15 0.86 1.65 1.49 4.17 2.02 0.34 0.95 1.14 SE 0.12 0.15 0.58 0.19 0.25 0.45 0.19 0.28 0.24 0.18 0.26 0.25 0.23 1.72 0.39 0.46 0.13 0.38 0.81 0.41 0.85 0.26 0.54 0.39 0.38 0.32 0.73 0.78 0.43 0.47 0.30 0.71 0.45 0.67 0.84 0.69 0.35 0.59 0.36 0.29 0.39 0.23 0.43 0.28 0.71 0.50 0.15 0.36 0.29

Nueva Ecija

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 89

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality BACOLOR CANDABA FLORIDABLANCA GUAGUA LUBAO MABALACAT MACABEBE MAGALANG MASANTOL MEXICO MINALIN PORAC CITY OF SAN FERNANDO (Capital) SAN LUIS SAN SIMON SANTA ANA SANTA RITA SANTO TOMAS SASMUAN (Sexmoan) Tarlac ANAO BAMBAN CAMILING CAPAS CONCEPCION GERONA LA PAZ MAYANTOC MONCADA PANIQUI PURA RAMOS SAN CLEMENTE SAN MANUEL SANTA IGNACIA CITY OF TARLAC (Capital) VICTORIA SAN JOSE Zambales BOTOLAN CABANGAN CANDELARIA CASTILLEJOS IBA (Capital) MASINLOC OLONGAPO CITY PALAUIG SAN ANTONIO SAN FELIPE SAN MARCELINO SAN NARCISO SANTA CRUZ SUBIC Poverty Incidence 15.25 21.80 18.30 8.48 18.08 7.86 11.17 9.92 20.16 14.23 19.70 19.68 6.55 15.75 11.42 15.52 16.42 8.12 18.38 12.16 15.58 13.88 21.71 19.77 19.47 22.56 20.15 16.12 16.17 12.50 20.86 17.77 21.77 15.60 12.59 17.77 47.93 13.95 16.72 17.36 14.23 13.94 12.98 3.82 24.38 10.84 5.56 13.57 8.88 18.37 14.65 Standard error (SE) 4.13 2.62 2.09 1.72 2.01 2.95 2.26 2.41 3.10 2.50 4.02 3.00 1.68 3.54 3.13 3.60 4.46 3.62 4.07 2.33 4.12 1.56 4.21 2.12 1.81 3.07 2.72 2.62 2.07 2.80 3.85 3.75 3.41 2.51 1.38 2.44 5.42 2.80 2.57 3.09 3.11 3.20 2.95 1.62 3.15 2.26 2.38 2.40 1.95 2.48 3.27 Coefficient of variation (CV) 27.1 12.0 11.4 20.3 11.1 37.5 20.2 24.3 15.4 17.6 20.4 15.2 25.6 22.5 27.4 23.2 27.2 44.6 22.1 19.2 26.4 11.2 19.4 10.7 9.3 13.6 13.5 16.3 12.8 22.4 18.5 21.1 15.7 16.1 11.0 13.7 11.3 20.1 15.4 17.8 21.9 23.0 22.7 42.4 12.9 20.8 42.8 17.7 22.0 13.5 22.3 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 1417 1254 1345 1529 1350 1541 1487 1512 1295 1442 1313 1315 1561 1406 1485 1409 1388 1534 1339 1476 1408 1448 1257 1309 1319 1245 1296 1396 1394 1469 1277 1360 1256 1407 1467 1361 470 1446 1384 1369 1443 1447 1464 1589 1196 1494 1570 1453 1524 1341 1431 3,573 19,637 17,612 8,367 24,157 14,554 7,514 8,740 9,894 18,465 7,436 18,452 16,033 7,027 5,042 6,959 5,681 3,015 4,769 1,273 8,715 10,827 24,109 24,919 15,280 13,264 5,219 8,407 12,877 2,665 3,927 2,096 4,787 6,462 37,289 9,807 14,214 6,520 3,260 3,988 5,524 5,704 5,050 8,579 7,080 3,365 1,136 3,921 2,144 9,120 10,005 3.20 4.93 4.30 1.65 4.02 1.48 2.21 2.03 4.40 3.01 4.38 4.57 1.26 3.28 2.32 3.37 3.57 1.54 3.95 2.54 3.40 3.05 5.07 4.45 4.54 5.28 4.74 3.61 3.63 2.67 4.89 4.14 5.02 3.49 2.72 3.98 14.13 3.01 3.69 3.81 3.06 2.97 2.76 0.65 5.84 2.21 1.08 3.01 1.81 4.11 3.21 SE 1.02 0.85 0.64 0.45 0.64 0.71 0.58 0.62 0.94 0.70 1.22 0.95 0.46 0.90 0.86 1.09 1.39 0.82 1.21 0.66 1.20 0.48 1.31 0.62 0.60 1.04 0.84 0.84 0.64 0.85 1.30 1.23 1.04 0.78 0.40 0.74 2.52 0.83 0.87 0.93 0.92 0.90 0.91 0.34 1.10 0.59 0.67 0.75 0.56 0.81 1.03 Severity of Poverty 0.99 1.64 1.49 0.49 1.34 0.43 0.67 0.63 1.42 0.95 1.43 1.56 0.38 1.02 0.72 1.10 1.17 0.46 1.28 0.80 1.12 1.00 1.74 1.49 1.56 1.81 1.63 1.20 1.21 0.86 1.68 1.40 1.70 1.16 0.88 1.32 5.64 0.97 1.21 1.24 0.98 0.94 0.88 0.18 2.03 0.69 0.32 0.98 0.56 1.36 1.05 SE 0.37 0.37 0.28 0.17 0.28 0.26 0.22 0.23 0.39 0.28 0.50 0.41 0.18 0.35 0.34 0.46 0.59 0.29 0.51 0.27 0.51 0.20 0.57 0.27 0.27 0.45 0.38 0.36 0.27 0.36 0.59 0.53 0.45 0.33 0.16 0.30 1.32 0.34 0.38 0.39 0.38 0.36 0.39 0.13 0.51 0.24 0.27 0.31 0.23 0.35 0.44

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 90

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality AGONCILLO ALITAGTAG BALAYAN BALETE BATANGAS CITY (Capital) BAUAN CALACA CALATAGAN CUENCA IBAAN LAUREL LEMERY LIAN LIPA CITY LOBO MABINI MALVAR MATAAS NA KAHOY NASUGBU PADRE GARCIA ROSARIO SAN JOSE SAN JUAN SAN LUIS SAN NICOLAS SAN PASCUAL SANTA TERESITA SANTO TOMAS TAAL TALISAY CITY OF TANAUAN TAYSAN TINGLOY TUY Cavite ALFONSO AMADEO BACOOR CARMONA CAVITE CITY DASMARIAS GENERAL EMILIO AGUINALDO GENERAL TRIAS IMUS INDANG KAWIT MAGALLANES MARAGONDON MENDEZ (MENDEZNUEZ) Poverty Standard error Incidence (SE) 17.78 15.87 25.71 31.99 13.80 9.09 37.56 39.41 20.91 23.39 44.51 23.68 34.01 13.40 49.64 17.18 15.50 21.80 32.54 21.23 39.65 26.45 42.04 33.19 22.86 8.87 32.39 14.36 22.34 17.44 13.49 36.92 49.34 37.36 16.02 7.42 2.82 10.92 5.66 6.94 21.87 8.43 1.89 10.66 6.66 23.26 22.20 6.16 2.74 2.88 3.32 5.39 1.95 1.73 3.64 4.21 3.68 3.14 5.38 2.40 4.70 1.60 4.80 4.45 3.08 3.62 3.33 3.26 3.18 3.13 3.31 4.74 4.58 2.11 4.70 2.57 2.88 4.02 2.56 4.36 6.86 4.58 3.29 1.94 0.76 2.82 1.12 1.12 5.58 1.75 0.51 2.37 1.80 4.02 3.34 1.78 Coefficient of variation (CV) 15.4 18.1 12.9 16.8 14.1 19.0 9.7 10.7 17.6 13.4 12.1 10.1 13.8 11.9 9.7 25.9 19.9 16.6 10.2 15.4 8.0 11.8 7.9 14.3 20.0 23.8 14.5 17.9 12.9 23.1 19.0 11.8 13.9 12.3 20.5 26.1 27.0 25.8 19.8 16.1 25.5 20.8 27.0 22.2 27.0 17.3 15.0 28.9 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 1358 1404 1167 995 1449 1522 804 733 1273 1218 570 1212 931 1459 412 1372 1410 1255 980 1264 729 1148 649 957 1231 1523 982 1437 1247 1365 1455 827 428 809 1399 1542 1606 1492 1566 1553 1253 1530 1616 1497 1559 1220 1248 1563 5,756 3,516 19,260 5,702 38,714 7,060 23,382 19,300 5,887 10,366 15,157 17,260 14,739 33,222 18,260 6,758 6,172 5,364 35,614 8,783 36,632 15,392 35,768 9,584 4,213 4,764 5,347 15,413 11,234 6,477 18,553 11,688 8,976 14,775 7,394 2,320 10,952 7,280 6,056 31,744 3,874 17,455 4,097 6,294 4,837 4,195 7,174 1,626 3.95 3.36 6.32 8.28 2.92 1.74 10.57 11.12 4.68 5.47 13.08 5.66 9.14 2.82 15.34 3.77 3.26 5.19 8.71 4.69 11.35 6.48 12.47 8.97 5.25 1.73 8.52 3.03 5.36 3.86 2.82 10.11 15.18 10.38 3.53 1.38 0.45 2.20 1.01 1.27 5.08 1.59 0.29 2.10 1.21 5.43 5.20 1.13 SE 0.87 0.78 1.04 1.83 0.53 0.39 1.42 1.72 1.01 1.00 2.18 0.78 1.75 0.43 2.25 1.33 0.81 1.21 1.29 0.93 1.17 1.05 1.38 1.68 1.32 0.49 1.66 0.67 0.99 1.19 0.70 1.57 2.95 1.79 0.92 0.48 0.15 0.75 0.26 0.24 1.65 0.44 0.10 0.61 0.39 1.24 1.04 0.42 Severity of Poverty 1.28 1.07 2.23 2.99 0.93 0.51 4.10 4.32 1.54 1.86 5.21 1.95 3.43 0.89 6.34 1.23 1.02 1.79 3.27 1.54 4.45 2.28 5.03 3.39 1.76 0.52 3.14 0.96 1.86 1.27 0.89 3.84 6.23 3.99 1.15 0.40 0.12 0.68 0.28 0.36 1.72 0.46 0.07 0.63 0.34 1.84 1.76 0.32 SE 0.36 0.30 0.43 0.83 0.21 0.14 0.68 0.84 0.39 0.43 1.09 0.34 0.81 0.16 1.21 0.52 0.31 0.54 0.61 0.37 0.57 0.46 0.72 0.76 0.51 0.18 0.74 0.26 0.44 0.48 0.27 0.72 1.48 0.86 0.35 0.18 0.05 0.29 0.09 0.08 0.67 0.16 0.03 0.23 0.13 0.53 0.43 0.15 Region IV-A Batangas

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 91

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality NAIC NOVELETA ROSARIO SILANG TAGAYTAY CITY TANZA TERNATE TRECE MARTIRES CITY (Capital) GEN. MARIANO ALVAREZ ALAMINOS BAY BIAN CABUYAO CITY OF CALAMBA CALAUAN CAVINTI FAMY KALAYAAN LILIW LOS BAOS LUISIANA LUMBAN MABITAC MAGDALENA MAJAYJAY NAGCARLAN PAETE PAGSANJAN PAKIL PANGIL PILA RIZAL SAN PABLO CITY SAN PEDRO SANTA CRUZ (Capital) SANTA MARIA CITY OF SANTA ROSA SINILOAN VICTORIA Quezon AGDANGAN ALABAT ATIMONAN BUENAVISTA BURDEOS CALAUAG CANDELARIA CATANAUAN DOLORES GENERAL LUNA GENERAL NAKAR GUINAYANGAN Poverty Incidence 12.90 2.41 13.67 10.29 13.30 7.21 18.35 4.60 14.98 10.28 8.21 3.42 3.28 3.12 15.36 27.50 27.10 18.35 14.18 3.04 17.49 13.27 24.42 25.39 24.69 17.36 7.36 14.56 25.14 18.97 11.12 14.67 6.70 1.43 7.31 37.83 1.94 18.63 13.41 44.23 41.17 31.84 58.13 52.39 42.43 20.99 51.19 26.05 51.87 50.77 45.80 Standard error (SE) 2.52 1.10 2.70 1.83 2.49 1.42 4.39 1.46 2.45 2.34 2.03 1.45 1.05 0.75 2.97 5.22 4.66 7.18 3.09 1.24 4.24 2.93 4.57 4.84 3.37 2.38 2.68 3.19 4.98 5.06 2.48 3.24 1.08 0.85 1.84 5.03 0.86 2.96 3.87 5.53 4.98 3.92 4.17 6.51 3.40 2.81 3.67 4.26 5.89 6.85 3.54 Coefficient of variation (CV) 19.5 45.6 19.8 17.8 18.7 19.7 23.9 31.7 16.4 22.8 24.7 42.4 32.0 24.0 19.3 19.0 17.2 39.1 21.8 40.8 24.2 22.1 18.7 19.1 13.6 13.7 36.4 21.9 19.8 26.7 22.3 22.1 16.1 59.4 25.2 13.3 44.3 15.9 28.9 12.5 12.1 12.3 7.2 12.4 8.0 13.4 7.2 16.4 11.4 13.5 7.7 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 1465 1610 1450 1500 1460 1549 1342 1577 1422 1501 1532 1597 1600 1601 1415 1124 1136 1343 1444 1603 1363 1462 1194 1171 1188 1370 1545 1433 1178 1331 1489 1430 1558 1621 1547 795 1614 1333 1458 579 681 997 232 350 635 1271 371 1156 360 380 533 10,879 889 11,960 19,164 7,736 11,761 3,512 3,885 19,106 3,785 3,734 7,935 5,909 9,810 7,638 5,284 3,199 3,357 4,310 2,753 3,159 3,493 3,873 4,592 5,586 9,092 1,705 4,736 4,546 3,974 4,453 2,117 14,656 3,350 6,825 9,171 4,394 5,789 4,107 4,827 5,984 18,207 13,615 11,690 28,367 20,681 32,274 6,449 11,780 11,520 17,215 2.68 0.37 2.78 2.04 2.75 1.32 4.03 0.75 3.15 1.97 1.49 0.55 0.52 0.50 3.23 6.89 6.61 3.93 2.93 0.49 3.79 2.76 5.74 6.27 5.99 3.76 1.35 3.01 6.07 4.13 2.26 3.00 1.19 0.22 1.33 10.49 0.29 4.12 2.75 13.16 11.90 8.35 19.33 16.79 12.48 4.84 16.32 6.32 16.78 15.88 13.77 SE 0.66 0.22 0.70 0.46 0.62 0.33 1.20 0.32 0.65 0.54 0.46 0.28 0.20 0.15 0.81 1.59 1.54 1.99 0.76 0.26 1.18 0.78 1.37 1.54 1.08 0.70 0.66 0.89 1.58 1.39 0.64 0.92 0.24 0.18 0.44 1.94 0.17 0.85 0.92 2.42 2.09 1.42 2.24 2.83 1.43 0.91 1.80 1.32 2.77 3.34 1.53 Severity of Poverty 0.84 0.09 0.86 0.61 0.86 0.38 1.31 0.19 1.00 0.58 0.42 0.14 0.13 0.13 1.02 2.46 2.32 1.26 0.91 0.13 1.22 0.87 1.96 2.21 2.09 1.21 0.38 0.94 2.11 1.33 0.70 0.92 0.33 0.06 0.38 4.01 0.07 1.33 0.85 5.30 4.70 3.08 8.35 7.12 4.99 1.63 6.89 2.20 7.18 6.63 5.58 SE 0.25 0.07 0.27 0.17 0.23 0.12 0.48 0.11 0.25 0.20 0.16 0.08 0.07 0.05 0.32 0.67 0.66 0.80 0.27 0.09 0.45 0.29 0.56 0.64 0.46 0.28 0.24 0.35 0.67 0.55 0.25 0.35 0.09 0.06 0.16 0.93 0.06 0.35 0.33 1.26 1.04 0.66 1.27 1.45 0.73 0.40 0.98 0.56 1.47 1.79 0.81

Laguna

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 92

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality GUMACA INFANTA JOMALIG LOPEZ LUCBAN LUCENA CITY (Capital) MACALELON MAUBAN MULANAY PADRE BURGOS PAGBILAO PANUKULAN PATNANUNGAN PEREZ PITOGO PLARIDEL POLILLO QUEZON REAL SAMPALOC SAN ANDRES SAN ANTONIO SAN FRANCISCO (AURORA) SAN NARCISO SARIAYA TAGKAWAYAN TAYABAS TIAONG UNISAN Rizal ANGONO CITY OF ANTIPOLO BARAS BINANGONAN CAINTA CARDONA JALA-JALA RODRIGUEZ (MONTALBAN) MORONG PILILLA SAN MATEO TANAY TAYTAY TERESA Region IV-B Marinduque BOAC (Capital) BUENAVISTA GASAN MOGPOG SANTA CRUZ TORRIJOS Poverty Standard error Incidence (SE) 35.46 29.08 55.00 37.85 16.01 8.79 53.60 42.20 54.52 50.61 26.02 41.55 47.37 50.01 46.44 44.02 47.00 47.93 35.17 29.05 59.14 42.05 60.86 57.99 32.89 43.91 27.27 31.24 46.83 1.45 4.08 11.60 6.66 1.84 10.04 25.54 6.83 2.73 7.32 2.09 10.21 3.57 3.57 18.55 49.40 28.23 22.02 31.58 39.23 3.65 4.24 8.48 3.27 2.88 1.88 4.89 4.00 4.82 5.12 4.51 9.43 8.53 6.60 4.71 7.76 5.81 6.07 4.94 5.88 7.30 4.61 6.45 4.88 3.30 4.31 2.91 3.34 4.52 1.00 1.32 2.93 1.30 1.28 2.74 5.30 2.57 1.37 2.76 1.07 2.52 2.08 1.59 2.15 3.43 2.93 2.42 2.12 3.21 Coefficient of variation (CV) 10.3 14.6 15.4 8.6 18.0 21.4 9.1 9.5 8.8 10.1 17.3 22.7 18.0 13.2 10.1 17.6 12.4 12.7 14.0 20.2 12.3 11.0 10.6 8.4 10.0 9.8 10.7 10.7 9.7 69.0 32.4 25.3 19.5 69.6 27.3 20.8 37.6 50.2 37.7 51.2 24.7 58.3 44.5 11.6 6.9 10.4 11.0 6.7 8.2 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 878 1078 289 794 1400 1526 324 645 304 385 1157 664 483 404 509 590 496 471 887 1079 216 648 186 236 964 594 1128 1012 501 1620 1584 1482 1560 1618 1507 1170 1556 1608 1546 1612 1502 1594 1595 1335 423 1103 1249 1001 740 21,760 16,369 3,331 31,652 7,071 18,890 13,444 22,762 24,865 9,923 14,906 4,652 5,574 5,115 9,405 4,282 12,629 7,037 10,272 3,829 15,265 12,017 30,827 22,205 39,760 20,137 21,903 25,805 10,891 1,240 19,285 3,377 14,758 4,159 4,343 6,873 13,974 1,343 4,028 3,441 8,747 8,477 1,483 9,130 9,919 9,343 7,223 18,971 11,113 9.80 7.44 18.23 10.73 3.42 1.72 17.15 12.29 17.55 15.72 6.50 12.05 14.31 15.94 14.15 13.03 14.38 14.71 9.65 7.34 19.97 11.99 21.01 19.35 8.74 13.21 6.88 8.06 14.09 0.21 0.68 2.30 1.21 0.27 1.92 6.20 1.24 0.44 1.35 0.33 2.00 0.58 0.55 4.57 16.02 7.44 5.37 8.64 11.54 SE 1.40 1.42 3.86 1.35 0.77 0.48 2.29 1.68 2.31 2.45 1.42 3.89 3.67 3.10 2.03 3.12 2.53 2.69 1.86 1.78 3.61 1.90 3.25 2.40 1.26 1.72 0.93 1.12 2.07 0.22 0.29 0.76 0.31 0.27 0.67 1.65 0.55 0.31 0.64 0.22 0.60 0.45 0.31 0.64 1.79 1.01 0.75 0.82 1.20 Severity of Poverty 3.77 2.70 7.93 4.18 1.09 0.52 7.26 4.88 7.45 6.52 2.31 4.75 5.85 6.77 5.79 5.25 5.91 6.05 3.69 2.65 8.77 4.67 9.38 8.43 3.25 5.38 2.47 2.93 5.72 0.05 0.18 0.70 0.34 0.07 0.56 2.16 0.35 0.12 0.39 0.09 0.59 0.15 0.13 1.65 6.85 2.77 1.91 3.31 4.64 SE 0.68 0.62 2.12 0.67 0.30 0.18 1.21 0.87 1.25 1.33 0.59 1.90 1.87 1.65 1.03 1.50 1.29 1.39 0.88 0.75 2.05 0.94 1.83 1.35 0.59 0.87 0.40 0.50 1.08 0.08 0.10 0.29 0.11 0.10 0.25 0.71 0.18 0.12 0.22 0.07 0.22 0.16 0.10 0.29 1.05 0.47 0.33 0.41 0.61

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 93

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Occidental Mindoro Municipality ABRA DE ILOG CALINTAAN LOOC LUBANG MAGSAYSAY MAMBURAO (Capital) PALUAN RIZAL SABLAYAN SAN JOSE SANTA CRUZ Oriental Mindoro BACO BANSUD BONGABONG BULALACAO (SAN PEDRO) CITY OF CALAPAN (Capital) GLORIA MANSALAY NAUJAN PINAMALAYAN POLA PUERTO GALERA ROXAS SAN TEODORO SOCORRO VICTORIA Palawan ABORLAN AGUTAYA ARACELI BALABAC BATARAZA BROOKE'S POINT BUSUANGA CAGAYANCILLO CORON CUYO DUMARAN EL NIDO (BACUIT) LINAPACAN MAGSAYSAY NARRA PUERTO PRINCESA CITY (Capital) QUEZON ROXAS SAN VICENTE TAYTAY CULION RIZAL (MARCOS) SOFRONIO ESPAOLA ALCANTARA BANTON CAJIDIOCAN CALATRAVA CONCEPCION CORCUERA LOOC MAGDIWANG Poverty Incidence 53.78 52.53 44.94 34.21 55.59 27.50 58.40 54.97 49.93 33.67 53.99 51.72 52.35 49.36 74.70 17.84 47.18 68.38 39.09 36.53 55.63 25.64 40.35 49.31 41.75 32.20 53.77 66.68 59.50 65.08 53.17 51.84 66.67 53.46 60.08 45.74 70.50 62.19 76.37 53.97 48.46 23.51 61.23 59.64 64.18 64.93 55.68 59.86 57.74 40.24 46.59 38.42 50.45 49.26 57.54 38.70 44.15 Standard error (SE) 4.78 4.20 4.88 3.90 4.51 3.13 5.53 3.56 3.39 2.14 4.22 2.61 3.08 2.57 3.30 2.74 2.51 3.31 1.70 2.39 2.80 3.75 2.62 4.41 2.41 2.34 3.18 5.61 4.69 6.07 3.95 3.65 4.32 4.87 3.92 3.13 3.52 3.36 5.23 4.54 3.15 2.49 3.75 2.90 4.34 3.57 5.14 5.30 5.20 4.20 5.33 3.58 4.43 5.35 4.86 3.71 4.05 Coefficient of variation (CV) 8.9 8.0 10.9 11.4 8.1 11.4 9.5 6.5 6.8 6.4 7.8 5.0 5.9 5.2 4.4 15.4 5.3 4.8 4.3 6.5 5.0 14.6 6.5 8.9 5.8 7.3 5.9 8.4 7.9 9.3 7.4 7.0 6.5 9.1 6.5 6.8 5.0 5.4 6.8 8.4 6.5 10.6 6.1 4.9 6.8 5.5 9.2 8.9 9.0 10.4 11.4 9.3 8.8 10.9 8.4 9.6 9.2 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 319 348 556 924 278 1125 230 290 406 943 314 362 351 424 37 1357 490 94 746 843 277 1169 703 430 656 985 321 103 207 123 334 361 104 326 194 534 70 169 31 315 451 1216 180 204 134 126 274 197 240 704 506 775 389 432 245 765 584 13,316 13,144 4,912 9,364 15,869 8,896 7,891 16,507 32,844 37,712 14,481 16,593 17,803 28,543 20,729 19,278 18,227 28,632 33,606 26,228 17,334 6,493 18,068 7,029 14,680 13,269 13,807 6,487 7,117 18,161 24,575 29,595 11,288 3,368 23,150 9,088 11,752 16,808 8,317 6,092 27,856 43,681 30,602 27,540 13,655 35,276 8,654 18,758 14,978 5,976 3,312 7,871 4,662 2,012 6,180 7,680 5,421 18.07 17.17 14.01 9.73 19.72 7.51 19.90 18.70 16.53 10.28 17.95 17.39 17.86 16.35 31.23 4.45 15.09 26.64 11.68 10.85 19.42 7.01 12.69 15.66 12.83 9.17 17.80 24.80 21.00 22.95 17.00 16.73 23.84 17.45 21.50 14.63 26.42 22.12 30.22 18.38 15.47 6.10 21.38 20.44 23.12 23.67 20.17 19.44 18.67 12.03 14.39 11.07 16.49 15.71 19.32 11.38 13.40 SE 2.78 2.00 2.29 1.49 2.22 1.23 2.99 1.88 1.74 0.90 2.21 1.35 1.54 1.33 2.61 0.83 1.19 2.15 0.78 0.91 1.52 1.34 1.06 2.04 1.02 0.91 1.56 3.77 2.25 3.11 1.89 1.84 2.55 2.32 2.03 1.44 2.20 2.06 3.70 2.39 1.53 0.91 1.94 1.51 2.67 1.97 2.60 2.82 2.63 1.76 2.35 1.59 2.41 2.38 2.36 1.54 1.67 Severity of Poverty 7.88 7.32 5.84 3.85 9.00 2.87 8.77 8.27 7.14 4.28 7.78 7.70 7.94 7.09 15.75 1.63 6.43 12.85 4.76 4.42 8.81 2.72 5.34 6.60 5.34 3.63 7.64 11.57 9.44 10.28 7.10 7.04 10.75 7.45 9.77 6.21 12.30 9.98 14.57 8.19 6.51 2.26 9.48 9.03 10.53 10.88 9.30 8.17 7.85 4.87 5.95 4.35 7.09 6.62 8.35 4.54 5.47 SE 1.70 1.13 1.23 0.77 1.27 0.64 1.74 1.09 0.99 0.52 1.28 0.78 0.94 0.78 1.87 0.35 0.66 1.43 0.42 0.46 0.92 0.66 0.56 1.14 0.56 0.47 0.90 2.38 1.30 1.77 1.02 1.04 1.55 1.28 1.22 0.81 1.42 1.30 2.42 1.46 0.89 0.43 1.19 0.90 1.65 1.20 1.56 1.62 1.50 0.89 1.21 0.81 1.44 1.25 1.28 0.79 0.91

Romblon

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 94

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality ODIONGAN ROMBLON (Capital) SAN AGUSTIN SAN ANDRES SAN FERNANDO SAN JOSE SANTA FE FERROL SANTA MARIA (IMELDA) BACACAY CAMALIG DARAGA (LOCSIN) GUINOBATAN JOVELLAR LEGAZPI CITY (Capital) LIBON CITY OF LIGAO MALILIPOT MALINAO MANITO OAS PIO DURAN POLANGUI RAPU-RAPU SANTO DOMINGO (LIBOG) CITY OF TABACO TIWI Camarines Norte BASUD CAPALONGA DAET (Capital) SAN LORENZO RUIZ (IMELDA) JOSE PANGANIBAN LABO MERCEDES PARACALE SAN VICENTE SANTA ELENA TALISAY VINZONS Camarines Sur BAAO BALATAN BATO BOMBON BUHI BULA CABUSAO CALABANGA Poverty Standard error Incidence (SE) 24.62 39.99 52.82 48.32 45.71 62.16 54.54 48.11 49.53 10.53 9.43 13.46 5.75 7.97 36.48 8.32 10.14 14.92 5.55 11.86 6.85 14.86 9.65 14.27 20.10 21.65 5.48 38.63 54.03 30.56 48.68 43.44 42.29 47.57 50.19 40.08 49.35 30.51 44.27 35.75 60.96 43.73 42.77 43.25 46.31 57.86 42.79 2.52 2.53 3.39 3.20 3.76 5.94 4.26 5.12 5.24 0.70 0.69 1.14 0.52 0.70 1.83 0.51 0.70 1.34 0.44 1.64 0.55 0.86 0.74 1.53 2.17 1.35 0.77 3.58 4.06 2.28 6.59 3.86 2.62 3.19 3.46 7.62 3.68 4.58 4.10 3.24 5.00 3.20 3.44 2.55 3.05 4.73 2.74 Coefficient of variation (CV) 10.2 6.3 6.4 6.6 8.2 9.6 7.8 10.6 10.6 6.6 7.3 8.5 9.0 8.8 5.0 6.1 6.9 9.0 7.9 13.8 8.0 5.8 7.7 10.7 10.8 6.2 14.1 9.3 7.5 7.5 13.5 8.9 6.2 6.7 6.9 19.0 7.5 15.0 9.3 9.1 8.2 7.3 8.0 5.9 6.6 8.2 6.4 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 1190 715 341 457 536 172 303 462 417 1498 1518 1456 1565 1537 845 1531 1504 1426 1571 1479 1555 1427 1516 1441 1298 1258 1572 766 313 1034 443 604 640 479 400 712 426 1035 577 870 183 598 625 608 517 237 624 9,979 14,196 11,575 6,490 10,004 5,621 8,602 3,025 3,481 6,100 5,391 13,778 4,032 1,306 59,424 5,471 9,602 4,718 2,072 2,377 4,232 6,216 7,029 4,436 5,733 24,671 2,461 13,122 14,822 26,496 5,284 20,079 33,506 18,837 20,952 3,578 17,711 6,391 16,317 17,763 14,792 18,145 5,644 28,655 26,490 9,651 28,603 6.29 12.12 17.69 15.44 13.87 22.61 18.58 14.69 15.30 3.36 2.84 4.04 1.73 2.89 12.22 2.85 3.14 4.52 1.62 3.64 2.14 5.28 2.96 5.02 6.20 6.78 1.60 10.82 17.38 9.61 15.38 13.25 12.53 14.47 16.21 12.03 15.42 8.25 13.52 10.57 21.20 13.50 13.70 13.25 14.20 20.83 13.19 SE 0.87 1.03 1.88 1.71 1.72 3.37 2.25 2.31 2.52 0.36 0.30 0.44 0.22 0.45 0.90 0.31 0.32 0.66 0.21 0.77 0.25 0.53 0.34 0.91 0.97 0.65 0.31 1.55 2.04 0.98 3.37 1.74 1.18 1.49 1.84 3.47 1.84 1.96 2.10 1.44 3.00 1.61 1.63 1.31 1.47 2.92 1.34 Severity of Poverty 2.28 4.94 7.69 6.50 5.63 10.37 8.18 5.98 6.26 1.44 1.17 1.69 0.71 1.33 5.51 1.27 1.32 1.88 0.65 1.52 0.90 2.42 1.24 2.30 2.62 2.89 0.64 4.21 7.42 4.15 6.59 5.49 5.08 5.95 7.02 4.95 6.49 3.14 5.57 4.32 9.54 5.62 5.92 5.50 5.86 9.74 5.53 SE 0.41 0.54 1.15 0.97 0.94 2.01 1.31 1.22 1.36 0.21 0.16 0.22 0.12 0.29 0.52 0.19 0.18 0.39 0.11 0.42 0.13 0.33 0.19 0.57 0.52 0.36 0.15 0.78 1.14 0.53 1.90 0.91 0.61 0.79 1.09 1.83 1.04 0.98 1.18 0.77 1.78 0.90 0.91 0.73 0.81 1.83 0.73

Region V

Albay

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 95

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality CAMALIGAN CANAMAN CARAMOAN DEL GALLEGO GAINZA GARCHITORENA GOA IRIGA CITY LAGONOY LIBMANAN LUPI MAGARAO MILAOR MINALABAC NABUA NAGA CITY OCAMPO PAMPLONA PASACAO PILI (Capital) PRESENTACION (PARUBCAN) RAGAY SAGAY SAN FERNANDO SAN JOSE SIPOCOT SIRUMA TIGAON TINAMBAC Catanduanes BAGAMANOC BARAS BATO CARAMORAN GIGMOTO PANDAN PANGANIBAN (PAYO) SAN ANDRES (CALOLBON) SAN MIGUEL VIGA VIRAC (Capital) Masbate AROROY BALENO BALUD BATUAN CATAINGAN CAWAYAN CLAVERIA DIMASALANG ESPERANZA MANDAON CITY OF MASBATE (Capital) MILAGROS MOBO MONREAL PALANAS Poverty Incidence 37.08 32.70 50.96 50.05 38.59 59.29 38.08 30.01 42.82 48.64 48.56 36.47 36.03 49.35 29.33 23.49 44.29 45.62 56.96 32.85 49.51 50.30 49.63 42.80 33.96 44.01 55.97 38.51 54.70 42.74 36.97 28.42 42.74 35.80 44.83 35.40 32.85 33.77 41.79 22.79 65.40 55.81 64.11 52.85 57.24 72.46 69.59 59.00 63.66 64.82 40.08 64.26 57.72 66.66 62.48 Standard error (SE) 4.72 3.39 2.97 3.55 4.43 4.06 2.31 2.42 4.49 2.58 3.96 2.98 3.69 3.09 2.37 2.41 4.91 5.47 3.32 2.83 5.53 4.11 3.95 2.95 3.13 2.53 5.42 2.99 3.14 5.09 4.27 3.82 2.67 4.58 3.78 3.65 2.61 3.11 4.01 1.81 2.24 3.42 3.64 3.74 2.66 2.91 3.36 3.79 5.01 3.15 1.93 4.21 3.84 4.30 3.15 Coefficient of variation (CV) 12.7 10.4 5.8 7.1 11.5 6.8 6.1 8.1 10.5 5.3 8.2 8.2 10.2 6.3 8.1 10.3 11.1 12.0 5.8 8.6 11.2 8.2 8.0 6.9 9.2 5.7 9.7 7.8 5.7 11.9 11.5 13.4 6.2 12.8 8.4 10.3 7.9 9.2 9.6 7.9 3.4 6.1 5.7 7.1 4.6 4.0 4.8 6.4 7.9 4.9 4.8 6.6 6.7 6.5 5.0 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 820 972 375 402 769 211 787 1048 619 445 449 846 863 427 1067 1217 576 540 258 966 419 396 413 622 933 591 271 773 296 626 825 1096 627 869 560 880 967 941 655 1235 118 273 135 338 251 55 80 219 140 127 713 132 241 105 164 6,879 9,406 19,670 9,857 3,406 14,567 19,463 28,701 18,916 42,897 13,095 7,602 8,673 20,869 20,838 34,882 16,011 13,351 21,488 22,712 9,662 24,477 13,120 12,030 11,180 23,974 9,074 15,785 30,532 4,175 4,102 4,951 10,346 2,526 8,524 3,167 10,212 4,152 7,448 13,324 40,741 12,002 19,882 6,292 27,675 40,983 26,642 12,422 10,362 21,458 31,234 29,610 18,750 14,462 15,215 11.61 9.56 16.12 15.79 11.03 19.68 11.31 8.97 12.52 15.39 14.75 10.91 10.19 15.17 7.97 7.02 13.46 14.02 18.87 9.64 15.10 16.14 15.31 13.30 9.33 13.61 17.78 11.18 17.91 12.96 10.40 7.76 13.52 10.46 13.80 10.60 8.97 9.05 12.53 6.10 23.87 18.45 22.60 17.57 19.41 27.56 26.30 20.83 22.40 23.20 13.17 23.04 19.47 24.51 22.37 SE 2.20 1.45 1.51 1.87 1.82 2.17 1.03 1.06 2.05 1.27 2.02 1.38 1.51 1.51 0.91 0.96 2.46 2.71 1.91 1.18 2.87 2.30 2.07 1.42 1.30 1.29 2.67 1.23 1.61 2.59 1.74 1.57 1.31 1.88 1.80 1.63 1.04 1.21 1.88 0.73 1.47 1.89 2.48 2.19 1.56 2.14 2.20 2.22 3.17 1.82 1.00 2.47 2.22 2.87 1.89 Severity of Poverty 4.98 3.86 6.80 6.66 4.36 8.58 4.59 3.73 5.02 6.50 6.05 4.47 4.02 6.25 3.03 2.93 5.56 5.83 8.21 3.91 6.21 6.89 6.35 5.54 3.57 5.71 7.48 4.47 7.80 5.34 4.07 2.98 5.90 4.26 5.75 4.33 3.44 3.43 5.13 2.33 11.04 8.00 10.17 7.67 8.60 13.05 12.46 9.44 10.14 10.58 5.73 10.53 8.57 11.42 10.24 SE 1.20 0.76 0.85 1.04 0.91 1.24 0.55 0.57 1.08 0.70 1.12 0.73 0.75 0.82 0.44 0.49 1.34 1.47 1.16 0.60 1.59 1.33 1.17 0.79 0.64 0.72 1.41 0.62 0.93 1.45 0.86 0.79 0.74 0.95 0.97 0.87 0.51 0.60 1.00 0.36 0.95 1.09 1.59 1.38 0.92 1.42 1.42 1.36 1.96 1.09 0.58 1.50 1.34 1.83 1.17

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 96

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality PIO V. CORPUZ (LIMBUHAN) PLACER SAN FERNANDO SAN JACINTO SAN PASCUAL USON Sorsogon BACON BARCELONA BULAN BULUSAN CASIGURAN CASTILLA DONSOL GUBAT IROSIN JUBAN MAGALLANES MATNOG PILAR PRIETO DIAZ SANTA MAGDALENA CITY OF SORSOGON (Capital) ALTAVAS BALETE BANGA BATAN BURUANGA IBAJAY KALIBO (Capital) LEZO LIBACAO MADALAG MAKATO MALAY MALINAO NABAS NEW WASHINGTON NUMANCIA TANGALAN Antique ANINI-Y BARBAZA BELISON BUGASONG CALUYA CULASI TOBIAS FORNIER (DAO) HAMTIC LAUA-AN LIBERTAD PANDAN PATNONGON SAN JOSE (Capital) SAN REMIGIO SEBASTE SIBALOM TIBIAO VALDERRAMA Poverty Incidence 56.78 68.67 54.28 56.93 72.02 62.23 38.37 45.01 47.52 47.56 44.18 61.16 68.73 41.30 44.69 47.58 56.08 57.60 61.34 49.15 44.32 35.11 50.85 60.92 39.62 47.97 62.18 43.00 18.71 36.52 70.99 71.29 42.21 40.21 53.84 46.56 40.67 23.38 49.01 38.52 42.37 24.74 39.68 47.01 36.99 35.11 34.06 47.28 41.87 33.68 40.13 14.97 49.36 38.01 32.61 40.70 51.54 Standard error (SE) 4.47 2.73 4.14 2.81 2.93 3.28 2.76 4.14 2.85 3.94 4.33 2.92 2.83 2.45 3.46 4.77 3.66 3.23 3.02 4.08 3.80 2.43 3.82 5.45 2.82 4.25 3.90 3.23 2.55 3.89 3.63 3.54 3.53 4.39 3.94 3.60 3.63 2.71 3.56 3.86 3.34 5.09 3.44 3.90 2.70 2.89 2.59 3.35 4.28 3.12 3.34 1.90 3.42 5.17 2.07 3.39 4.02 Coefficient of variation (CV) 7.9 4.0 7.6 4.9 4.1 5.3 7.2 9.2 6.0 8.3 9.8 4.8 4.1 5.9 7.7 10.0 6.5 5.6 4.9 8.3 8.6 6.9 7.5 8.9 7.1 8.9 6.3 7.5 13.6 10.7 5.1 5.0 8.4 10.9 7.3 7.7 8.9 11.6 7.3 10.0 7.9 20.6 8.7 8.3 7.3 8.2 7.6 7.1 10.2 9.3 8.3 12.7 6.9 13.6 6.3 8.3 7.8 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 264 90 307 261 60 168 779 555 481 480 582 181 88 674 564 478 270 244 177 436 575 890 377 184 730 468 170 616 1332 844 66 64 644 706 318 507 697 1219 437 772 638 1185 726 495 822 891 929 486 653 945 711 1423 425 789 977 696 366 12,262 33,012 10,288 14,991 29,890 31,018 17,680 8,517 42,366 10,042 13,082 28,941 29,948 22,486 21,238 13,260 18,527 19,102 38,157 9,134 6,743 34,226 11,466 15,332 12,985 13,538 9,468 17,680 11,932 4,449 18,213 12,381 9,772 10,733 12,248 12,578 15,322 5,940 8,651 7,065 8,374 2,844 11,182 11,252 13,009 10,085 13,349 10,592 5,619 9,329 12,861 7,527 13,147 6,008 16,294 9,471 8,974 18.87 25.94 18.05 20.19 27.25 21.89 10.92 13.60 14.88 14.57 13.30 21.77 27.74 12.42 13.43 14.66 18.44 18.85 20.97 15.33 13.45 11.03 17.34 21.19 12.13 15.41 23.84 13.50 4.74 10.87 28.74 28.14 13.33 12.29 19.02 14.93 12.39 6.07 16.13 11.04 12.77 6.24 11.47 15.03 10.64 9.63 9.50 14.35 12.52 9.35 11.35 3.49 15.83 10.71 9.03 12.08 16.35 SE 2.45 2.06 2.33 1.88 2.16 1.95 1.23 1.92 1.36 1.99 2.03 1.74 2.21 1.13 1.57 2.26 2.02 1.83 1.79 1.93 1.84 1.15 1.88 2.74 1.32 1.98 2.63 1.36 0.83 1.64 2.65 2.52 1.59 1.74 2.22 1.66 1.47 0.96 1.79 1.47 1.38 1.62 1.39 1.70 1.06 1.15 1.10 1.47 1.86 1.18 1.35 0.56 1.67 1.95 0.80 1.39 1.82 Severity of Poverty 8.24 12.27 7.88 9.19 12.84 9.89 4.30 5.60 6.26 6.02 5.49 10.07 13.97 5.09 5.48 6.10 7.96 8.13 9.29 6.45 5.52 4.74 7.72 9.45 5.02 6.56 11.54 5.70 1.73 4.41 14.22 13.72 5.66 5.09 8.68 6.39 5.11 2.25 7.01 4.32 5.19 2.25 4.49 6.38 4.18 3.65 3.65 5.81 5.04 3.57 4.37 1.19 6.74 4.13 3.46 4.86 6.81 SE 1.41 1.35 1.37 1.18 1.42 1.19 0.64 1.01 0.74 1.12 1.07 1.07 1.53 0.61 0.81 1.21 1.15 1.09 1.05 1.04 1.00 0.64 1.10 1.57 0.71 1.07 1.75 0.71 0.37 0.84 1.83 1.72 0.87 0.88 1.34 0.90 0.74 0.45 1.03 0.71 0.69 0.70 0.72 0.93 0.52 0.56 0.55 0.76 0.95 0.56 0.65 0.23 0.91 0.92 0.38 0.72 0.97

Region VI

Aklan

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 97

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Capiz Municipality CUARTERO DAO DUMALAG DUMARAO IVISAN JAMINDAN MA-AYON MAMBUSAO PANAY PANITAN PILAR PONTEVEDRA PRESIDENT ROXAS ROXAS CITY (Capital) SAPI-AN SIGMA TAPAZ Iloilo AJUY ALIMODIAN ANILAO BADIANGAN BALASAN BANATE BAROTAC NUEVO BAROTAC VIEJO BATAD BINGAWAN CABATUAN CALINOG CARLES CONCEPCION DINGLE DUEAS DUMANGAS ESTANCIA GUIMBAL IGBARAS ILOILO CITY (Capital) JANIUAY LAMBUNAO LEGANES LEMERY LEON MAASIN MIAGAO MINA NEW LUCENA OTON CITY OF PASSI PAVIA POTOTAN SAN DIONISIO SAN ENRIQUE SAN JOAQUIN SAN MIGUEL SAN RAFAEL SANTA BARBARA SARA TIGBAUAN TUBUNGAN ZARRAGA Poverty Incidence 36.43 33.95 31.50 36.83 34.09 44.38 40.23 34.19 41.61 34.78 39.71 35.09 37.87 19.37 37.22 33.27 39.66 50.27 40.19 44.09 36.26 41.36 40.82 31.07 42.53 48.78 42.72 31.08 42.46 59.84 57.13 30.30 42.23 29.77 34.79 26.13 44.41 9.70 42.66 43.15 23.98 47.65 41.53 45.23 39.67 33.11 29.02 24.59 41.07 15.25 29.02 52.85 44.19 52.71 21.58 44.93 26.49 40.19 31.04 42.80 27.11 Standard error (SE) 3.07 3.42 4.10 3.07 3.26 3.25 2.81 3.26 2.84 3.13 3.50 3.27 3.33 1.96 4.98 3.18 3.10 3.29 3.24 3.35 3.57 2.92 3.26 3.09 2.81 3.37 4.92 2.19 2.40 3.16 2.75 2.63 2.77 2.67 3.28 2.73 3.36 1.13 2.49 2.88 2.63 2.84 2.53 3.34 2.19 3.44 3.26 2.13 2.46 2.24 2.29 3.12 3.04 2.60 2.95 5.79 2.00 2.91 2.32 3.10 2.72 Coefficient of variation (CV) 8.4 10.1 13.0 8.3 9.6 7.3 7.0 9.5 6.8 9.0 8.8 9.3 8.8 10.1 13.4 9.6 7.8 6.5 8.1 7.6 9.8 7.1 8.0 9.9 6.6 6.9 11.5 7.0 5.7 5.3 4.8 8.7 6.6 9.0 9.4 10.4 7.6 11.6 5.8 6.7 11.0 6.0 6.1 7.4 5.5 10.4 11.2 8.7 6.0 14.7 7.9 5.9 6.9 4.9 13.7 12.9 7.6 7.2 7.5 7.2 10.0 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 847 935 1002 830 928 574 705 926 661 907 725 893 793 1322 816 953 728 397 708 587 853 672 692 1021 631 442 628 1020 634 198 256 1041 643 1057 906 1155 573 1515 629 613 1202 476 666 551 727 959 1080 1192 684 1418 1081 339 581 344 1260 558 1146 709 1022 623 1135 8,477 10,185 8,707 14,837 8,158 13,833 13,555 11,975 16,569 13,040 15,726 13,908 10,407 25,853 8,436 9,047 18,665 21,849 13,052 9,686 8,551 10,683 10,915 14,779 15,539 8,366 4,959 15,115 20,107 31,766 19,180 11,769 12,916 17,788 12,408 7,356 12,602 37,753 23,374 25,663 6,102 10,901 18,119 14,389 22,824 6,072 5,935 17,737 29,705 5,491 18,588 15,930 12,158 25,299 4,812 5,728 12,882 16,688 15,766 8,519 5,478 10.37 8.99 8.12 10.13 9.11 13.03 11.51 9.37 12.09 9.31 11.41 9.51 11.09 4.72 10.32 8.77 11.23 16.00 12.87 13.64 9.94 12.61 12.16 8.64 13.12 15.80 12.53 8.38 13.15 20.87 19.53 8.29 12.78 8.03 10.19 6.88 13.58 2.18 13.48 13.21 6.37 14.84 13.17 14.63 12.25 9.03 7.64 6.37 12.61 3.60 7.75 17.54 13.61 18.13 5.27 13.80 7.05 11.97 8.74 13.14 7.35 SE 1.31 1.23 1.54 1.34 1.35 1.48 1.18 1.27 1.22 1.18 1.46 1.25 1.37 0.68 2.00 1.19 1.25 1.64 1.37 1.65 1.44 1.35 1.49 1.25 1.24 1.69 1.93 0.79 1.19 1.67 1.50 0.99 1.25 0.97 1.30 0.94 1.45 0.32 1.24 1.36 0.95 1.35 1.27 1.57 0.99 1.36 1.10 0.77 1.10 0.69 0.86 1.58 1.47 1.44 1.04 2.46 0.74 1.26 0.87 1.40 1.04 Severity of Poverty 4.05 3.33 2.95 3.83 3.39 5.15 4.49 3.54 4.76 3.47 4.47 3.58 4.43 1.66 3.94 3.23 4.34 6.76 5.50 5.65 3.78 5.19 4.92 3.34 5.43 6.77 5.00 3.16 5.45 9.36 8.64 3.17 5.21 3.05 4.10 2.56 5.57 0.73 5.69 5.45 2.39 6.16 5.57 6.25 5.09 3.42 2.83 2.34 5.20 1.24 2.91 7.62 5.62 8.11 1.86 5.69 2.64 4.83 3.40 5.45 2.79 SE 0.67 0.57 0.72 0.67 0.65 0.77 0.60 0.61 0.62 0.55 0.73 0.60 0.70 0.30 0.96 0.57 0.61 0.90 0.74 0.90 0.69 0.73 0.79 0.61 0.66 0.99 0.94 0.37 0.66 0.98 0.90 0.46 0.65 0.46 0.64 0.42 0.73 0.13 0.69 0.73 0.46 0.71 0.72 0.86 0.53 0.67 0.49 0.36 0.60 0.30 0.41 0.89 0.80 0.85 0.47 1.26 0.35 0.64 0.43 0.76 0.49

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 98

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Negros Occidental Municipality BACOLOD CITY (Capital) BAGO CITY BINALBAGAN CADIZ CITY CALATRAVA CANDONI CAUAYAN ENRIQUE B. MAGALONA (SARAVIA) CITY OF ESCALANTE CITY OF HIMAMAYLAN HINIGARAN HINOBA-AN (ASIA) ILOG ISABELA CITY OF KABANKALAN LA CARLOTA CITY LA CASTELLANA MANAPLA MOISES PADILLA (MAGALLON) MURCIA PONTEVEDRA PULUPANDAN SAGAY CITY SAN CARLOS CITY SAN ENRIQUE SILAY CITY CITY OF SIPALAY CITY OF TALISAY TOBOSO VALLADOLID CITY OF VICTORIAS SALVADOR BENEDICTO BUENAVISTA JORDAN NUEVA VALENCIA SAN LORENZO SIBUNAG Region VII Bohol ALBURQUERQUE ALICIA ANDA ANTEQUERA BACLAYON BALILIHAN BATUAN BILAR BUENAVISTA CALAPE CANDIJAY CARMEN CATIGBIAN CLARIN CORELLA CORTES DAGOHOY DANAO DAUIS Poverty Incidence 5.57 27.43 31.19 33.21 50.23 48.26 52.20 29.10 Standard error (SE) 1.27 2.80 3.98 3.37 4.94 6.05 4.07 3.61 Coefficient of variation (CV) 22.8 10.2 12.8 10.1 9.8 12.5 7.8 12.4 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 1569 1126 1016 956 398 458 354 1076 25,424 40,409 19,533 49,450 39,024 10,072 46,476 15,934 1.10 6.98 9.07 9.13 15.83 14.76 16.03 7.71 SE 0.31 0.98 1.85 1.28 2.29 2.74 1.84 1.25 Severity of Poverty 0.33 2.52 3.59 3.49 6.65 6.02 6.52 2.87 SE 0.11 0.44 0.98 0.61 1.20 1.42 0.98 0.57

35.50 35.73 28.85 33.64 36.11 43.56 43.08 17.42 36.14 27.69 56.62 34.26 22.00 17.97 34.01 41.17 18.49 17.00 43.84 15.86 42.87 18.00 18.58 50.45 25.67 31.50 36.03 44.74 40.46 16.78 39.77 30.45 21.97 15.50 31.22 30.51 23.64 51.68 25.17 29.11 39.84 33.82 28.82 19.24 19.15 38.17 57.21 13.52

4.54 3.48 2.88 4.67 3.90 3.73 3.31 2.60 4.53 3.94 5.66 3.71 2.95 2.54 3.90 3.54 3.28 2.76 4.10 2.38 4.93 2.50 2.52 6.57 2.55 3.69 3.06 4.17 4.20 3.34 4.62 3.91 3.53 2.62 3.41 4.07 2.96 3.51 2.71 3.63 3.53 3.92 3.27 4.11 3.77 4.97 3.64 3.46

12.8 9.7 10.0 13.9 10.8 8.6 7.7 14.9 12.5 14.2 10.0 10.8 13.4 14.1 11.5 8.6 17.7 16.2 9.4 15.0 11.5 13.9 13.6 13.0 9.9 11.7 8.5 9.3 10.4 19.9 11.6 12.8 16.1 16.9 10.9 13.3 12.5 6.8 10.8 12.5 8.9 11.6 11.3 21.4 19.7 13.0 6.4 25.6

877 872 1088 947 861 602 615 1366 860 1115 265 920 1250 1352 932 682 1337 1377 596 1405 618 1351 1334 390 1168 1003 864 562 699 1382 724 1039 1252 1411 1015 1036 1213 364 1177 1075 723 939 1089 1326 1327 783 252 1454

30,602 34,837 22,163 17,968 19,026 24,424 66,102 10,707 23,834 13,576 20,595 23,006 9,759 4,652 45,524 51,964 4,014 18,538 27,127 14,386 16,527 5,964 15,070 10,259 10,548 9,425 12,102 9,490 6,527 1,478 8,745 4,705 3,112 2,683 5,301 3,481 3,763 12,468 7,170 8,907 15,634 7,505 5,263 1,447 2,660 6,357 9,156 4,654

9.67 10.09 7.60 9.02 10.03 13.21 12.82 4.22 9.91 7.19 18.97 9.22 5.18 4.25 9.27 12.25 4.22 4.00 13.46 3.70 12.65 4.17 4.44 15.18 6.56 8.66 9.97 12.98 11.57 4.10 11.96 8.34 5.37 3.64 8.49 8.39 6.05 17.34 6.56 7.92 11.88 9.46 7.82 4.63 4.65 11.25 20.61 3.13

1.56 1.44 1.03 1.74 1.57 1.76 1.42 0.84 1.69 1.36 3.13 1.34 0.95 0.77 1.42 1.67 1.01 0.91 1.83 0.70 2.20 0.76 0.83 2.88 0.89 1.35 1.22 1.86 1.66 1.05 1.98 1.57 1.16 0.83 1.29 1.63 1.12 1.86 0.96 1.33 1.52 1.53 1.19 1.41 1.19 1.98 2.29 1.08

3.66 3.92 2.81 3.37 3.83 5.37 5.12 1.48 3.76 2.63 8.25 3.44 1.76 1.46 3.52 4.92 1.42 1.37 5.52 1.26 5.08 1.41 1.53 6.10 2.38 3.31 3.80 5.10 4.52 1.47 4.93 3.21 1.90 1.28 3.26 3.25 2.22 7.70 2.43 3.03 4.86 3.69 3.00 1.64 1.65 4.57 9.62 1.09

0.72 0.73 0.47 0.79 0.79 0.93 0.72 0.37 0.79 0.63 1.82 0.61 0.40 0.32 0.67 0.90 0.43 0.39 0.96 0.29 1.15 0.33 0.36 1.46 0.41 0.65 0.60 0.96 0.81 0.47 1.07 0.79 0.52 0.37 0.63 0.81 0.55 1.09 0.43 0.64 0.79 0.76 0.58 0.64 0.52 1.00 1.45 0.47

Guimaras

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 99

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality DIMIAO DUERO GARCIA HERNANDEZ GUINDULMAN INABANGA JAGNA JETAFE LILA LOAY LOBOC LOON MABINI MARIBOJOC PANGLAO PILAR PRES. CARLOS P. GARCIA (PITOGO) SAGBAYAN (BORJA) SAN ISIDRO SAN MIGUEL SEVILLA SIERRA BULLONES SIKATUNA TAGBILARAN CITY (Capital) TALIBON TRINIDAD TUBIGON UBAY VALENCIA BIEN UNIDO Cebu ALCANTARA ALCOY ALEGRIA ALOGUINSAN ARGAO ASTURIAS BADIAN BALAMBAN BANTAYAN BARILI BOGO BOLJOON BORBON CARCAR CARMEN CATMON CEBU CITY (Capital) COMPOSTELA CONSOLACION CORDOBA Poverty Standard error Incidence (SE) 23.93 29.41 24.27 27.31 39.92 19.81 45.72 29.09 18.38 17.38 23.14 45.64 14.34 16.91 45.60 50.21 34.89 29.60 35.70 24.61 29.95 21.03 3.95 34.93 44.62 21.21 45.91 28.79 46.40 34.89 37.41 53.11 31.10 29.00 39.90 39.18 27.54 38.44 38.78 31.44 47.89 40.80 22.88 27.01 38.81 3.83 18.25 9.16 12.03 2.80 3.44 3.23 4.29 2.66 2.63 3.77 3.68 2.84 2.74 2.35 4.53 2.92 3.76 4.44 3.82 3.71 5.26 3.64 4.48 3.31 4.71 1.30 3.42 4.22 2.57 2.89 3.01 4.80 5.35 6.34 5.93 4.82 2.48 3.94 3.55 2.70 3.31 2.84 3.26 6.42 4.20 3.85 3.16 4.06 0.73 3.16 1.87 2.77 Coefficient of variation (CV) 11.7 11.7 13.3 15.7 6.7 13.3 8.2 12.7 15.5 15.8 10.2 9.9 20.4 22.2 9.7 7.6 10.6 17.8 10.2 18.2 11.1 22.4 32.9 9.8 9.5 12.1 6.3 10.5 10.3 15.3 16.9 11.2 15.5 8.6 9.9 9.1 9.8 8.6 7.3 10.4 13.4 10.3 16.8 11.7 10.5 19.1 17.3 20.4 23.0 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 1204 1066 1199 1127 719 1305 535 1077 1340 1368 1225 539 1438 1379 541 399 902 1060 873 1191 1050 1270 1586 897 567 1265 529 1090 514 903 808 336 1019 1082 720 744 1120 774 763 1007 474 694 1230 1139 759 1588 1346 1520 1477 3,252 4,805 4,716 8,421 16,360 5,792 11,587 3,095 2,871 2,805 9,774 12,129 2,565 4,048 11,308 12,690 6,212 2,675 7,248 2,751 7,761 1,270 3,231 19,102 11,495 8,893 28,340 7,656 10,276 4,314 5,058 11,286 7,680 17,261 15,476 13,146 17,354 26,601 22,120 20,736 6,961 12,705 21,505 10,518 10,017 28,591 6,649 7,246 4,915 6.10 8.04 6.28 7.24 12.03 4.90 14.62 7.75 4.43 4.11 5.85 14.70 3.25 4.10 14.20 16.38 9.97 7.87 10.46 6.42 8.17 5.14 0.83 10.32 14.28 5.35 14.76 7.75 15.08 10.10 11.09 18.14 8.59 8.20 12.38 12.06 7.97 11.70 11.61 9.10 15.66 12.44 5.93 7.38 12.11 0.80 4.61 2.08 2.70 SE 1.00 1.30 1.17 1.46 1.20 0.92 1.78 1.40 1.04 0.83 0.80 2.08 0.88 1.25 1.88 1.90 1.48 1.92 1.59 1.51 1.30 1.53 0.37 1.55 2.07 0.90 1.46 1.14 2.32 2.37 2.63 3.18 1.86 0.96 1.64 1.53 1.05 1.50 1.29 1.37 2.97 1.83 1.32 1.15 1.78 0.19 1.11 0.54 0.80 Severity of Poverty 2.22 3.10 2.34 2.71 4.97 1.75 6.31 2.93 1.57 1.44 2.12 6.38 1.11 1.47 6.00 7.16 3.97 2.97 4.22 2.40 3.16 1.79 0.28 4.22 6.18 1.96 6.38 2.93 6.57 4.04 4.53 8.16 3.35 3.24 5.24 5.08 3.24 4.88 4.78 3.69 6.84 5.19 2.22 2.85 5.15 0.26 1.70 0.71 0.91 SE 0.47 0.64 0.57 0.65 0.64 0.41 1.00 0.70 0.50 0.37 0.35 1.15 0.37 0.57 0.97 1.10 0.76 0.93 0.85 0.71 0.67 0.68 0.15 0.83 1.18 0.42 0.83 0.55 1.30 1.26 1.37 1.86 0.91 0.48 0.86 0.82 0.55 0.81 0.70 0.72 1.63 0.96 0.61 0.56 0.98 0.07 0.51 0.23 0.33

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 100

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality DAANBANTAYAN DALAGUETE DANAO CITY DUMANJUG GINATILAN LAPU-LAPU CITY (OPON) LILOAN MADRIDEJOS MALABUYOC MANDAUE CITY MEDELLIN MINGLANILLA MOALBOAL NAGA OSLOB PILAR PINAMUNGAHAN PORO RONDA SAMBOAN SAN FERNANDO SAN FRANCISCO SAN REMIGIO SANTA FE SANTANDER SIBONGA SOGOD TABOGON TABUELAN CITY OF TALISAY TOLEDO CITY TUBURAN TUDELA Negros Oriental AMLAN (AYUQUITAN) AYUNGON BACONG BAIS CITY BASAY CITY OF BAYAWAN (TULONG) BINDOY (PAYABON) CANLAON CITY DAUIN DUMAGUETE CITY (Capital) GUIHULNGAN JIMALALUD LA LIBERTAD MABINAY MANJUYOD PAMPLONA Poverty Standard error Incidence (SE) 39.38 32.68 15.89 43.79 49.46 5.63 9.91 41.42 54.90 5.38 32.79 9.13 29.92 19.56 44.16 35.81 31.37 38.87 34.95 43.19 22.78 36.81 42.47 33.88 32.95 29.21 40.01 47.90 47.41 8.51 16.24 51.16 42.15 24.85 60.66 27.64 37.56 63.45 58.25 59.74 38.62 36.94 8.13 54.76 65.67 64.82 54.58 48.21 43.71 4.05 3.32 1.88 3.48 4.90 1.27 2.48 4.67 4.64 1.25 3.99 1.74 3.60 2.54 3.77 4.29 3.37 4.52 3.77 5.00 2.77 4.12 3.34 5.03 4.22 2.79 3.92 3.86 5.08 1.89 2.19 3.16 5.65 5.22 3.68 3.70 3.43 5.57 3.78 5.32 4.51 3.50 1.74 3.07 3.32 3.63 4.54 3.80 4.15 Coefficient of variation (CV) 10.3 10.2 11.8 7.9 9.9 22.6 25.0 11.3 8.5 23.2 12.2 19.1 12.0 13.0 8.5 12.0 10.7 11.6 10.8 11.6 12.2 11.2 7.9 14.8 12.8 9.6 9.8 8.1 10.7 22.2 13.5 6.2 13.4 21.0 6.1 13.4 9.1 8.8 6.5 8.9 11.7 9.5 21.4 5.6 5.1 5.6 8.3 7.9 9.5 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 734 973 1402 597 420 1568 1513 667 292 1573 969 1521 1052 1318 583 868 1009 758 896 609 1236 832 633 937 963 1071 714 473 482 1528 1391 372 646 1184 187 1116 805 145 231 201 767 826 1533 295 115 128 300 459 599 26,746 18,962 16,177 18,250 6,485 14,567 8,244 12,052 9,048 16,117 14,100 8,385 7,706 17,023 9,509 4,244 15,974 8,053 5,710 7,458 11,779 15,368 19,228 8,586 4,755 11,187 11,098 14,846 9,677 13,656 22,677 26,736 4,695 5,340 24,393 7,133 26,881 14,176 59,739 21,127 18,127 8,192 8,651 48,919 17,438 23,538 35,080 17,867 14,553 12.18 9.29 4.12 13.51 16.48 1.21 2.22 12.65 18.75 1.11 9.50 2.04 8.55 4.94 13.91 10.51 8.88 11.77 10.36 13.89 5.89 10.76 13.23 9.85 9.59 8.21 12.47 15.52 15.53 1.85 4.04 17.26 13.07 6.48 21.63 7.55 11.31 23.28 20.64 21.04 11.58 11.19 1.79 19.03 24.28 23.57 18.54 15.51 13.64 SE 1.72 1.30 0.67 1.65 2.36 0.33 0.75 2.12 2.61 0.33 1.62 0.52 1.42 0.92 1.72 1.85 1.35 1.97 1.67 2.27 0.97 1.91 1.61 2.13 1.81 1.08 1.86 1.82 2.58 0.53 0.69 1.62 2.74 2.05 2.13 1.48 1.49 3.45 2.16 2.88 2.04 1.57 0.51 1.73 2.26 2.23 2.31 1.82 2.00 Severity of Poverty 5.16 3.69 1.55 5.67 7.30 0.40 0.76 5.28 8.43 0.35 3.82 0.69 3.42 1.80 5.94 4.26 3.54 4.89 4.24 6.04 2.19 4.36 5.61 3.98 3.86 3.23 5.30 6.74 6.81 0.62 1.47 7.72 5.51 2.42 10.01 2.91 4.69 10.98 9.49 9.65 4.76 4.64 0.60 8.67 11.47 11.01 8.30 6.69 5.79 SE 0.92 0.66 0.32 0.91 1.36 0.13 0.32 1.14 1.61 0.13 0.83 0.22 0.75 0.43 0.95 0.98 0.69 1.04 0.90 1.27 0.46 1.03 0.90 1.13 0.95 0.55 1.05 1.02 1.50 0.21 0.31 0.94 1.53 1.00 1.33 0.74 0.79 2.25 1.33 1.73 1.08 0.86 0.21 1.06 1.49 1.44 1.31 1.02 1.11

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 101

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality SAN JOSE SANTA CATALINA SIATON SIBULAN CITY OF TANJAY TAYASAN VALENCIA (LUZURRIAGA) VALLEHERMOSO ZAMBOANGUITA Siquijor ENRIQUE VILLANUEVA LARENA LAZI MARIA SAN JUAN SIQUIJOR (Capital) Region VIII Eastern Samar ARTECHE BALANGIGA BALANGKAYAN BORONGAN (Capital) CAN-AVID DOLORES GENERAL MACARTHUR GIPORLOS GUIUAN HERNANI JIPAPAD LAWAAN LLORENTE MASLOG MAYDOLONG MERCEDES ORAS QUINAPONDAN SALCEDO SAN JULIAN SAN POLICARPO SULAT TAFT Leyte ABUYOG ALANGALANG ALBUERA BABATNGON BARUGO BATO BAYBAY BURAUEN CALUBIAN CAPOOCAN CARIGARA Poverty Standard error Incidence (SE) 33.71 61.41 57.38 19.70 29.21 63.91 32.43 55.66 48.10 43.16 20.55 42.00 41.04 32.11 24.34 45.65 34.89 31.43 20.87 33.76 36.17 37.78 29.67 25.87 42.35 45.81 24.93 36.32 44.74 28.03 22.89 34.59 36.20 31.80 31.49 39.25 26.19 27.14 38.81 45.59 41.93 45.20 39.23 45.02 29.55 41.23 52.03 41.60 38.94 4.70 4.39 4.09 3.20 3.37 3.66 3.02 4.85 5.73 4.97 2.48 3.83 3.63 4.81 2.56 3.72 4.52 4.81 1.90 3.20 3.04 3.03 3.41 1.94 3.85 4.03 3.46 2.48 4.97 3.11 3.14 3.17 2.99 3.00 4.06 4.47 3.42 2.97 2.15 2.85 3.39 3.40 2.92 3.33 2.04 2.18 2.96 3.86 2.55 Coefficient of variation (CV) 13.9 7.1 7.1 16.2 11.5 5.7 9.3 8.7 11.9 11.5 12.1 9.1 8.8 15.0 10.5 8.1 13.0 15.3 9.1 9.5 8.4 8.0 11.5 7.5 9.1 8.8 13.9 6.8 11.1 11.1 13.7 9.2 8.3 9.4 12.9 11.4 13.1 10.9 5.5 6.3 8.1 7.5 7.4 7.4 6.9 5.3 5.7 9.3 6.5 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 943 176 246 1314 1072 137 981 276 463 611 1286 651 686 991 1197 538 904 1008 1275 942 859 797 1059 1161 639 531 1181 850 563 1107 1229 914 858 998 1004 739 1153 1132 760 542 652 553 741 554 1063 675 359 662 756 5,380 41,424 35,360 8,590 22,257 18,832 8,478 18,485 11,335 2,372 2,418 7,897 5,113 4,025 5,323 6,142 4,178 2,396 11,579 5,615 11,675 4,208 3,381 10,759 3,235 2,889 2,412 6,736 1,857 3,324 1,051 10,132 4,143 5,966 4,091 4,970 4,765 4,022 20,503 18,276 15,415 10,273 10,104 14,051 28,558 18,672 13,981 10,854 16,610 9.77 22.18 19.75 5.02 8.25 23.40 9.48 18.89 15.51 13.66 5.57 13.02 12.66 9.23 6.52 12.83 9.58 8.01 5.01 8.52 9.43 10.07 7.49 6.08 11.74 13.15 5.86 9.64 12.33 6.75 5.14 8.92 9.37 7.97 7.87 10.39 6.32 6.48 10.72 13.77 11.91 13.14 11.15 13.23 7.40 12.24 16.42 11.67 10.98 SE 1.78 2.58 2.13 1.12 1.46 2.25 1.29 2.51 2.96 2.21 0.92 1.61 1.72 1.90 0.91 1.61 1.80 1.75 0.62 1.10 1.17 1.20 1.15 0.64 1.73 1.61 1.11 1.03 1.90 1.01 0.97 1.08 1.16 1.09 1.42 1.65 1.09 0.95 0.82 1.28 1.42 1.41 1.27 1.47 0.70 1.00 1.44 1.54 0.98 Severity of Poverty 3.94 10.33 8.90 1.85 3.27 10.99 3.83 8.44 6.68 5.86 2.15 5.49 5.33 3.72 2.49 4.85 3.59 2.85 1.72 2.99 3.39 3.68 2.64 2.03 4.41 5.07 1.97 3.51 4.61 2.30 1.66 3.19 3.36 2.79 2.76 3.76 2.16 2.19 4.05 5.54 4.58 5.13 4.29 5.21 2.61 4.87 6.79 4.44 4.21 SE 0.87 1.58 1.27 0.51 0.77 1.42 0.69 1.44 1.74 1.20 0.45 0.84 0.94 0.97 0.44 0.81 0.87 0.77 0.27 0.48 0.54 0.58 0.49 0.27 0.88 0.79 0.46 0.50 0.92 0.43 0.41 0.48 0.54 0.47 0.63 0.73 0.46 0.40 0.38 0.66 0.71 0.69 0.64 0.74 0.30 0.52 0.78 0.73 0.47

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 102

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality DAGAMI DULAG HILONGOS HINDANG INOPACAN ISABEL JARO JAVIER (BUGHO) JULITA KANANGA LA PAZ LEYTE MACARTHUR MAHAPLAG MATAG-OB MATALOM MAYORGA MERIDA ORMOC CITY PALO PALOMPON PASTRANA SAN ISIDRO SAN MIGUEL SANTA FE TABANGO TABONTABON TACLOBAN CITY (Capital) TANAUAN TOLOSA TUNGA VILLABA Northern Samar ALLEN BIRI BOBON CAPUL CATARMAN (Capital) CATUBIG GAMAY LAOANG LAPINIG LAS NAVAS LAVEZARES MAPANAS MONDRAGON PALAPAG PAMBUJAN ROSARIO SAN ANTONIO SAN ISIDRO SAN JOSE Poverty Incidence 43.65 43.56 40.81 33.83 36.05 26.28 41.06 45.50 48.43 42.10 45.96 55.12 44.14 39.05 40.38 45.90 49.44 39.00 31.29 28.02 32.19 48.21 54.32 47.21 46.11 49.32 48.58 16.56 34.15 28.42 23.78 41.15 31.47 44.66 34.65 38.11 35.06 42.51 43.14 44.76 43.29 53.27 39.85 49.16 46.94 47.09 49.98 38.80 31.31 37.15 43.96 Standard error (SE) 2.24 2.80 2.38 3.08 3.65 2.76 2.66 3.74 3.58 3.76 3.34 3.54 3.70 3.67 3.98 2.59 3.79 3.16 1.97 2.05 2.15 3.25 3.89 3.90 3.29 4.58 4.06 1.43 2.44 3.68 3.59 2.88 3.61 6.17 3.52 4.84 2.48 3.13 4.12 3.28 4.45 3.16 3.21 4.83 4.01 3.16 3.89 4.17 4.72 3.93 4.55 Coefficient of variation (CV) 5.1 6.4 5.8 9.1 10.1 10.5 6.5 8.2 7.4 8.9 7.3 6.4 8.4 9.4 9.9 5.6 7.7 8.1 6.3 7.3 6.7 6.7 7.2 8.3 7.1 9.3 8.4 8.6 7.1 12.9 15.1 7.0 11.5 13.8 10.2 12.7 7.1 7.4 9.6 7.3 10.3 5.9 8.1 9.8 8.5 6.7 7.8 10.7 15.1 10.6 10.4 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 600 603 693 938 862 1151 685 545 454 647 527 286 585 749 702 530 422 753 1011 1108 986 460 306 489 521 429 448 1387 927 1097 1207 683 1006 566 911 784 894 632 614 561 606 330 722 435 499 494 405 761 1010 818 593 12,434 16,551 20,703 6,533 6,551 9,747 15,277 9,967 5,385 17,699 8,271 18,384 7,078 9,926 6,210 14,257 6,433 9,559 50,502 14,456 15,610 7,050 14,602 7,215 6,601 14,062 4,347 31,345 15,082 4,489 1,324 14,726 6,663 4,482 6,398 4,198 26,615 11,945 8,645 24,600 4,521 16,398 9,990 5,352 14,313 14,334 12,885 3,083 2,456 8,081 6,330 12.79 12.79 11.49 9.12 9.67 6.65 11.91 13.15 14.86 11.94 13.95 17.54 12.93 10.34 11.17 13.62 15.00 11.01 8.28 7.59 8.51 14.58 17.35 14.00 13.69 14.71 14.85 3.94 9.41 7.27 5.79 11.66 8.04 12.50 8.85 10.04 9.68 11.73 12.03 12.76 12.05 16.02 10.50 14.08 13.13 13.42 14.48 10.67 7.79 9.95 12.46 SE 1.04 1.22 0.93 1.07 1.36 0.94 1.10 1.54 1.63 1.49 1.59 1.65 1.60 1.34 1.44 1.24 1.77 1.23 0.74 0.82 0.81 1.42 1.88 1.73 1.44 1.99 1.91 0.44 0.86 1.32 1.24 1.10 1.34 2.41 1.21 1.94 1.02 1.23 1.62 1.41 1.84 1.50 1.19 2.19 1.78 1.40 1.67 1.59 1.81 1.53 1.94 Severity of Poverty 5.02 5.04 4.40 3.40 3.58 2.38 4.66 5.13 6.02 4.59 5.63 7.29 5.09 3.80 4.24 5.41 6.02 4.24 3.05 2.86 3.13 5.85 7.23 5.55 5.43 5.85 6.02 1.36 3.57 2.62 2.03 4.50 2.86 4.71 3.13 3.63 3.64 4.38 4.53 4.88 4.54 6.35 3.79 5.41 4.94 5.13 5.57 3.98 2.72 3.66 4.75 SE 0.55 0.62 0.45 0.47 0.62 0.41 0.55 0.76 0.86 0.70 0.83 0.89 0.78 0.62 0.66 0.66 0.93 0.60 0.34 0.41 0.38 0.71 1.02 0.87 0.74 1.00 1.02 0.19 0.41 0.59 0.57 0.51 0.61 1.15 0.53 0.91 0.49 0.58 0.76 0.70 0.88 0.78 0.54 1.10 0.88 0.72 0.83 0.76 0.83 0.72 0.95

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 103

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality SAN ROQUE SAN VICENTE SILVINO LOBOS VICTORIA LOPE DE VEGA Western Samar ALMAGRO BASEY CALBAYOG CITY CALBIGA CATBALOGAN (Capital) DARAM GANDARA HINABANGAN JIABONG MARABUT MATUGUINAO MOTIONG PINABACDAO SAN JOSE DE BUAN SAN SEBASTIAN SANTA MARGARITA SANTA RITA SANTO NIO TALALORA TARANGNAN VILLAREAL PARANAS (WRIGHT) ZUMARRAGA TAGAPUL-AN SAN JORGE PAGSANGHAN Southern Leyte ANAHAWAN BONTOC HINUNANGAN HINUNDAYAN LIBAGON LILOAN CITY OF MAASIN (Capital) MACROHON MALITBOG PADRE BURGOS PINTUYAN SAINT BERNARD SAN FRANCISCO SAN JUAN (CABALIAN) SAN RICARDO SILAGO SOGOD TOMAS OPPUS LIMASAWA Biliran ALMERIA BILIRAN CABUCGAYAN CAIBIRAN CULABA KAWAYAN MARIPIPI NAVAL (Capital) Poverty Incidence 48.45 41.64 52.08 37.52 46.36 64.76 67.10 66.48 68.73 51.69 77.96 72.91 62.89 69.10 68.54 81.35 73.24 74.34 81.91 73.97 70.54 76.49 73.39 71.42 77.99 71.22 66.38 80.11 74.05 68.61 68.80 26.02 35.83 28.89 29.14 33.43 32.74 26.59 28.00 32.58 26.48 36.60 36.30 32.14 27.08 34.93 28.70 28.50 35.20 34.76 34.53 34.86 41.38 40.19 41.87 39.37 36.68 35.28 Standard error (SE) 4.58 6.53 4.39 3.95 5.01 2.91 2.29 1.77 2.60 2.79 2.28 2.04 3.40 3.07 3.06 3.10 3.56 2.73 3.09 3.62 3.49 2.46 3.56 4.19 2.15 2.11 2.35 2.67 3.38 2.46 3.83 2.89 2.56 2.40 3.10 4.20 3.42 1.75 2.58 2.69 3.13 3.16 3.04 3.21 3.41 3.76 3.81 2.53 3.10 5.46 3.97 4.58 4.97 3.41 3.23 3.59 3.65 2.73 Coefficient of variation (CV) 9.5 15.7 8.4 10.5 10.8 4.5 3.4 2.7 3.8 5.4 2.9 2.8 5.4 4.4 4.5 3.8 4.9 3.7 3.8 4.9 4.9 3.2 4.9 5.9 2.8 3.0 3.5 3.3 4.6 3.6 5.6 11.1 7.1 8.3 10.6 12.6 10.4 6.6 9.2 8.3 11.8 8.6 8.4 10.0 12.6 10.8 13.3 8.9 8.8 15.7 11.5 13.1 12.0 8.5 7.7 9.1 10.0 7.7 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 453 658 358 807 515 129 102 108 89 363 23 52 157 82 93 15 50 40 13 45 69 30 49 63 22 65 110 17 42 91 87 1158 867 1143 1074 950 971 1143 1109 978 1147 841 851 989 1138 898 1093 1095 885 909 915 905 671 710 654 735 836 881 10,264 2,673 6,520 4,390 5,173 5,263 30,878 100,219 13,145 43,098 28,242 21,845 7,264 9,900 9,442 4,634 9,253 9,891 4,906 4,968 15,711 24,108 8,751 5,165 17,071 16,678 17,292 12,598 5,427 8,773 4,934 1,968 9,383 7,401 3,118 4,478 6,753 19,675 6,387 5,809 2,468 3,320 8,537 3,687 3,694 3,281 2,952 10,428 5,237 1,818 4,599 4,707 7,261 7,761 4,184 7,122 2,466 14,116 13.99 11.51 15.14 10.10 12.82 24.53 26.84 26.39 28.34 19.24 33.23 30.51 24.39 27.38 27.04 36.61 30.33 31.65 36.45 30.59 28.82 32.28 30.06 28.70 33.69 29.40 25.92 35.13 30.70 27.98 26.89 6.25 9.59 7.19 7.43 8.57 8.41 6.60 6.88 8.50 6.48 10.03 9.59 8.37 6.76 9.13 7.04 7.09 9.42 8.84 9.15 9.41 11.62 11.16 11.96 10.94 10.08 9.63 SE 2.18 2.52 1.84 1.50 2.00 1.70 1.51 1.13 1.76 1.37 1.78 1.47 1.81 1.92 2.26 2.29 2.18 1.97 2.65 2.75 2.10 1.87 2.62 2.59 1.82 1.60 1.37 2.37 2.49 1.61 2.31 0.98 0.97 0.85 1.15 1.53 1.20 0.63 0.83 0.98 1.08 1.17 1.13 1.14 1.16 1.35 1.20 0.79 1.21 1.98 1.49 1.62 1.89 1.39 1.34 1.41 1.39 1.05 Severity of Poverty 5.38 4.30 5.86 3.71 4.79 11.66 13.30 13.01 14.37 9.18 17.10 15.55 11.88 13.40 13.25 19.54 15.36 16.35 19.27 15.48 14.47 16.49 15.10 14.21 17.47 14.85 12.61 18.37 15.54 14.06 13.07 2.15 3.54 2.53 2.67 3.07 3.01 2.32 2.40 3.08 2.25 3.76 3.51 3.04 2.38 3.30 2.44 2.49 3.48 3.12 3.37 3.50 4.44 4.24 4.64 4.16 3.81 3.61 SE 1.09 1.16 0.89 0.70 0.94 1.09 1.00 0.74 1.17 0.79 1.27 1.02 1.15 1.22 1.51 1.63 1.39 1.37 1.93 1.89 1.31 1.31 1.76 1.69 1.37 1.11 0.87 1.74 1.71 1.08 1.48 0.43 0.45 0.38 0.54 0.69 0.53 0.28 0.36 0.44 0.50 0.54 0.53 0.51 0.51 0.62 0.51 0.34 0.56 0.88 0.70 0.72 0.88 0.67 0.66 0.68 0.67 0.49

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 104

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Region IX Province Zamboanga del Norte Municipality DAPITAN CITY DIPOLOG CITY (Capital) KATIPUNAN LA LIBERTAD LABASON LILOY MANUKAN MUTIA PIAN (NEW PIAN) POLANCO PRES. MANUEL A. ROXAS RIZAL SALUG SERGIO OSMEA SR. SIAYAN SIBUCO SIBUTAD SINDANGAN SIOCON SIRAWAI TAMPILISAN JOSE DALMAN (PONOT) GUTALAC BALIGUIAN GODOD BACUNGAN (Leon T. Postigo) KALAWIT Zamboanga del Sur AURORA BAYOG DIMATALING DINAS DUMALINAO DUMINGAG KUMALARANG LABANGAN LAPUYAN MAHAYAG MARGOSATUBIG MIDSALIP MOLAVE PAGADIAN CITY (Capital) RAMON MAGSAYSAY (LIARGO) SAN MIGUEL SAN PABLO TABINA TAMBULIG TUKURAN ZAMBOANGA CITY LAKEWOOD JOSEFINA PITOGO SOMINOT (DON MARIANO MARCOS) VINCENZO A. SAGUN Poverty Incidence 37.55 16.17 65.15 62.54 52.16 49.67 46.97 75.69 47.34 42.43 77.69 37.80 72.91 69.05 97.46 76.56 43.16 62.76 50.31 76.12 67.98 70.16 73.47 70.21 84.58 85.17 47.17 44.09 58.74 55.04 68.12 59.54 63.66 62.47 47.23 84.35 53.44 54.28 86.32 42.59 22.80 49.91 Standard error (SE) 3.17 3.03 4.67 5.95 5.19 4.44 4.55 5.77 3.73 3.87 3.48 6.58 4.02 4.14 1.38 3.59 6.74 3.04 4.19 4.95 4.14 4.27 5.10 5.98 4.31 4.32 5.96 3.34 5.39 4.10 3.13 4.47 3.26 5.23 3.89 3.73 5.37 5.95 3.12 3.54 2.48 4.10 Coefficient of variation (CV) 8.4 18.7 7.2 9.5 10.0 8.9 9.7 7.6 7.9 9.1 4.5 17.4 5.5 6.0 1.4 4.7 15.6 4.8 8.3 6.5 6.1 6.1 6.9 8.5 5.1 5.1 12.6 7.6 9.2 7.4 4.6 7.5 5.1 8.4 8.2 4.4 10.0 11.0 3.6 8.3 10.9 8.2 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 806 1395 122 163 357 410 497 34 485 636 26 796 53 84 1 29 612 160 395 32 98 74 48 72 9 7 492 588 224 288 97 206 141 165 488 10 327 308 5 630 1233 408 25,650 16,658 23,943 4,646 19,175 17,487 14,593 8,620 8,389 14,072 25,880 5,324 20,724 19,036 30,581 20,177 6,733 52,151 20,108 14,052 13,142 16,274 19,242 12,651 12,569 15,830 9,013 19,891 15,288 14,400 22,152 18,573 28,148 16,158 16,119 20,824 21,468 18,704 24,766 18,793 32,847 11,800 11.63 4.20 26.27 24.32 18.37 17.26 16.09 33.62 16.43 13.62 35.50 11.98 31.79 28.53 62.32 33.60 13.91 24.97 17.55 34.23 28.31 29.25 31.25 28.41 41.17 43.42 15.48 14.97 22.17 20.39 28.48 23.03 26.20 24.40 16.64 42.24 19.40 21.71 45.45 14.51 6.42 17.39 SE 1.42 1.05 3.26 3.53 2.78 2.08 2.21 4.22 1.88 1.79 2.85 3.08 3.02 3.03 3.76 2.60 3.18 2.01 2.20 4.23 2.69 2.91 3.86 4.21 4.09 4.08 2.89 1.55 2.90 2.13 2.22 2.43 1.90 3.01 1.89 3.19 2.77 2.62 3.29 1.57 0.84 1.96 Severity of Poverty 4.91 1.57 13.31 12.05 8.52 7.88 7.30 18.24 7.54 5.89 19.54 5.16 17.01 14.66 42.75 17.94 6.04 12.54 8.08 18.71 14.67 15.12 16.38 14.34 23.59 25.78 6.80 6.76 10.78 9.74 14.82 11.41 13.51 12.11 7.73 24.67 9.19 11.08 27.62 6.60 2.55 7.98 SE 0.77 0.48 2.22 2.19 1.64 1.13 1.27 2.94 1.09 0.97 2.12 1.68 2.15 2.06 4.00 1.82 1.73 1.36 1.32 3.11 1.80 1.94 2.68 2.82 3.17 3.26 1.61 0.87 1.72 1.26 1.55 1.51 1.28 1.85 1.10 2.39 1.61 1.52 2.72 0.89 0.38 1.09

61.32 76.85 72.17 59.29 57.05 20.08 68.58 47.35 56.95 87.54 75.80

5.95 3.72 4.54 3.60 6.32 2.26 6.65 7.05 8.34 4.12 4.38

9.7 4.8 6.3 6.1 11.1 11.3 9.7 14.9 14.6 4.7 5.8

178 28 59 212 257 1299 92 484 259 3 33

10,842 18,503 15,813 18,743 19,559 139,026 11,909 4,648 13,066 13,203 14,173

24.00 34.86 30.41 23.02 21.59 5.42 29.84 16.43 21.44 46.25 34.13

3.37 2.73 3.22 1.98 3.21 0.76 3.98 3.69 4.64 4.36 3.52

11.95 19.14 15.84 11.42 10.50 2.09 16.05 7.55 10.41 28.16 18.64

2.06 1.96 2.15 1.22 1.86 0.35 2.58 2.17 2.80 3.58 2.55

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 105

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality GUIPOS TIGBAO Zamboanga Sibugay ALICIA BUUG DIPLAHAN IMELDA IPIL KABASALAN MABUHAY MALANGAS NAGA OLUTANGA PAYAO ROSELLER LIM SIAY TALUSAN TITAY TUNGAWAN City of Isabela CITY OF ISABELA Region X Bukidnon BAUNGON DAMULOG DANGCAGAN DON CARLOS IMPASUG-ONG KADINGILAN KALILANGAN KIBAWE KITAOTAO LANTAPAN LIBONA CITY OF MALAYBALAY (Capital) MALITBOG MANOLO FORTICH MARAMAG PANGANTUCAN QUEZON SAN FERNANDO SUMILAO TALAKAG VALENCIA CABANGLASAN Camiguin CATARMAN GUINSILIBAN MAHINOG MAMBAJAO (Capital) SAGAY Lanao del Norte BACOLOD BALOI BAROY ILIGAN CITY KAPATAGAN Poverty Incidence 37.28 74.45 56.26 33.23 27.52 32.19 36.39 39.21 77.67 58.72 49.52 57.21 57.21 67.71 38.61 69.09 55.52 66.59 36.99 52.83 60.29 48.51 40.39 54.58 52.18 42.81 54.63 59.47 54.64 39.37 30.68 Standard error (SE) 7.38 4.33 3.90 3.98 5.38 4.24 3.62 3.97 3.86 4.86 4.83 6.11 5.48 4.93 5.60 5.59 4.21 4.88 3.44 6.12 5.44 6.93 5.01 6.74 5.76 5.49 4.21 4.32 6.20 5.04 3.54 Coefficient of variation (CV) 19.8 5.8 6.9 12.0 19.5 13.2 9.9 10.1 5.0 8.3 9.8 10.7 9.6 7.3 14.5 8.1 7.6 7.3 9.3 11.6 9.0 14.3 12.4 12.3 11.0 12.8 7.7 7.3 11.3 12.8 11.5 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 810 39 268 955 1121 987 848 742 27 225 418 253 254 99 768 83 280 106 823 340 192 450 701 301 355 621 299 209 298 736 1030 6,609 12,513 17,175 10,543 6,821 6,686 21,509 14,447 21,500 16,947 17,900 15,271 14,606 21,724 12,813 13,756 22,097 22,760 30,310 14,204 11,891 9,041 23,101 19,237 14,714 14,382 18,470 22,944 25,142 12,948 38,423 11.87 32.74 20.87 10.27 7.47 9.83 11.44 12.39 36.11 23.74 16.96 21.19 20.94 27.49 11.83 28.85 20.39 26.46 12.02 18.53 23.52 16.51 12.90 19.37 18.35 14.22 20.23 22.82 19.19 12.25 9.10 SE 3.05 3.00 2.16 1.54 1.82 1.73 1.50 1.72 3.38 2.53 2.34 3.27 3.08 3.39 2.34 3.89 2.25 3.25 1.55 3.02 3.11 3.24 2.22 3.63 2.83 2.50 2.35 2.48 3.23 2.18 1.51 Severity of Poverty 5.13 17.69 9.99 4.36 2.86 4.12 4.88 5.32 19.96 12.13 7.64 10.14 9.90 13.99 4.94 14.96 9.68 13.24 5.29 8.47 11.59 7.40 5.52 8.95 8.45 6.32 9.66 11.12 8.78 5.12 3.71 SE 1.55 2.12 1.31 0.78 0.80 0.92 0.77 0.90 2.53 1.58 1.31 1.94 1.88 2.28 1.17 2.68 1.33 2.10 0.85 1.72 1.96 1.81 1.17 2.20 1.64 1.37 1.51 1.57 1.89 1.13 0.77

60.88 32.10 36.55 53.21 44.45 58.65 42.82 62.86 36.38 58.13 32.19 34.96 37.75 23.57 37.95 54.66 63.27 54.88 28.78 62.42

7.11 4.94 4.30 4.75 4.36 5.62 8.06 4.92 4.56 5.76 5.28 6.88 6.12 4.76 6.88 5.63 5.63 4.11 2.88 3.85

11.7 15.4 11.8 8.9 9.8 9.6 18.8 7.8 12.5 9.9 16.4 19.7 16.2 20.2 18.1 10.3 8.9 7.5 10.0 6.2

185 992 842 332 572 227 620 158 849 233 988 895 799 1215 792 297 150 293 1092 166

12,486 23,618 27,831 23,253 38,473 23,383 8,160 30,555 54,064 17,400 4,984 1,763 4,744 7,809 4,262 10,314 25,710 10,941 79,999 28,608

23.19 9.57 11.34 19.05 14.50 22.06 13.46 24.69 11.16 21.51 9.57 10.68 11.88 6.41 11.92 20.66 25.63 21.21 8.83 25.73

4.31 2.18 1.79 2.57 1.89 2.93 3.52 2.88 1.94 3.32 2.09 2.87 2.56 1.68 2.83 3.24 3.29 2.36 1.19 2.51

11.28 3.92 4.75 8.88 6.34 10.62 5.72 12.24 4.67 10.22 3.91 4.45 5.05 2.46 5.09 10.05 13.10 10.46 3.75 13.26

2.88 1.15 0.96 1.56 1.07 1.77 1.91 1.84 1.03 2.08 1.05 1.51 1.36 0.76 1.48 2.08 2.11 1.51 0.63 1.74

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 106

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality SULTAN NAGA DIMAPORO (KAROMATAN) KAUSWAGAN KOLAMBUGAN LALA LINAMON MAGSAYSAY MAIGO MATUNGAO MUNAI NUNUNGAN PANTAO RAGAT POONA PIAGAPO SALVADOR SAPAD TAGOLOAN TANGCAL TUBOD (Capital) PANTAR Misamis Occidental ALORAN BALIANGAO BONIFACIO CALAMBA CLARIN CONCEPCION JIMENEZ LOPEZ JAENA OROQUIETA CITY (Capital) OZAMIS CITY PANAON PLARIDEL SAPANG DALAGA SINACABAN TANGUB CITY TUDELA DON VICTORIANO CHIONGBIAN (DON MARIANO MARCOS) Misamis Oriental ALUBIJID BALINGASAG BALINGOAN BINUANGAN CAGAYAN DE ORO CITY (Capital) CLAVERIA EL SALVADOR GINGOOG CITY GITAGUM Poverty Incidence 72.27 Standard error (SE) 3.87 Coefficient of variation (CV) 5.4 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 58 30,405 32.56 SE 2.74 Severity of Poverty 17.82 SE 1.99

54.09 55.21 59.79 46.95 75.06 53.77 74.04 72.00 74.27 74.03 81.68 73.67 72.42 77.89 86.72 52.72 67.20 49.45 60.51 64.09 48.06 46.41 72.36 38.05 58.96 37.59 37.06 41.56 50.02 56.10 50.83 57.15 53.18 71.99

5.76 4.12 4.37 7.53 3.43 5.90 4.81 4.79 4.42 5.39 4.26 5.04 5.42 7.00 4.83 5.08 5.49 3.99 5.55 4.21 4.93 3.85 4.47 4.60 4.86 3.38 3.00 4.99 4.52 5.37 5.36 3.33 3.95 6.21

10.6 7.5 7.3 16.0 4.6 11.0 6.5 6.7 6.0 7.3 5.2 6.8 7.5 9.0 5.6 9.6 8.2 8.1 9.2 6.6 10.3 8.3 6.2 12.1 8.2 9.0 8.1 12.0 9.0 9.6 10.5 5.8 7.4 8.6

311 283 200 498 36 322 43 61 41 44 14 46 56 24 4 342 101 421 190 136 465 512 57 788 220 802 821 663 403 269 379 255 333 62

12,016 13,450 32,224 7,244 9,089 9,480 6,779 13,687 9,507 13,690 15,379 16,374 11,667 6,976 7,730 21,537 9,580 11,334 9,065 17,711 9,200 14,805 5,084 9,146 12,784 23,475 42,859 3,860 16,238 8,678 8,533 31,335 12,397 6,808

20.33 21.56 23.82 16.59 35.07 20.29 34.31 30.75 33.45 34.46 39.83 34.07 32.18 35.21 46.55 19.68 29.88 17.72 23.83 26.26 17.42 16.26 31.20 12.59 22.88 12.45 12.07 13.83 18.18 21.24 18.41 21.98 20.03 30.81

3.26 2.31 2.53 3.57 3.02 3.14 4.08 3.08 3.26 4.72 4.05 3.83 3.63 5.68 5.90 2.74 3.99 2.18 3.39 2.84 2.55 2.02 3.42 2.14 3.12 1.50 1.38 2.35 2.42 2.90 3.01 2.09 2.18 3.98

9.84 10.76 12.01 7.69 19.74 9.88 19.25 16.21 18.30 19.34 23.08 19.01 17.43 19.25 28.78 9.49 16.30 8.30 11.86 13.48 8.24 7.51 16.49 5.58 11.29 5.55 5.29 6.14 8.58 10.30 8.65 10.79 9.71 16.25

2.02 1.47 1.59 2.03 2.43 1.90 3.25 2.06 2.35 3.59 3.24 2.83 2.54 4.17 5.13 1.69 2.86 1.30 2.21 1.91 1.53 1.20 2.48 1.21 2.04 0.83 0.77 1.32 1.44 1.73 1.85 1.37 1.36 2.62

50.69 49.21 46.07 42.42 15.50 50.38 41.64 47.26 44.68

5.46 3.98 7.05 7.14 2.35 4.77 5.56 2.60 6.43

10.8 8.1 15.3 16.8 15.2 9.5 13.4 5.5 14.4

381 433 523 637 1412 392 659 487 565

12,339 27,521 4,020 2,755 77,305 20,043 16,556 52,383 6,406

18.26 17.68 16.57 13.98 4.10 17.65 13.93 16.68 14.81

2.93 2.11 3.39 3.39 0.78 2.53 2.60 1.37 2.93

8.60 8.29 7.84 6.13 1.55 8.09 6.22 7.73 6.54

1.77 1.27 1.96 1.87 0.35 1.50 1.44 0.84 1.64

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 107

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality INITAO JASAAN KINOGUITAN LAGONGLONG LAGUINDINGAN LIBERTAD LUGAIT MAGSAYSAY (LINUGOS) MANTICAO MEDINA NAAWAN OPOL SALAY SUGBONGCOGON TAGOLOAN TALISAYAN VILLANUEVA Region XI Davao ASUNCION (SAUG) CARMEN KAPALONG NEW CORELLA PANABO ISLAND GARDEN CITY OF SAMAL SANTO TOMAS CITY OF TAGUM (Capital) TALAINGOD BRAULIO E. DUJALI Davao del Sur BANSALAN DAVAO CITY CITY OF DIGOS (Capital) HAGONOY JOSE ABAD SANTOS (TRINIDAD) KIBLAWAN MAGSAYSAY MALALAG MALITA MATANAO PADADA SANTA CRUZ SANTA MARIA SULOP SARANGANI DON MARCELINO Davao Oriental BAGANGA BANAYBANAY BOSTON Poverty Standard error Incidence (SE) 45.44 35.60 41.23 53.09 41.23 46.25 41.36 63.42 46.63 42.25 42.96 29.94 41.21 41.63 29.83 47.16 39.21 44.94 32.07 51.23 49.62 22.74 44.48 26.30 15.42 78.56 36.22 26.91 14.94 18.22 22.60 84.63 57.26 33.39 32.67 64.61 28.35 21.99 28.69 63.56 41.54 78.67 80.75 50.52 35.55 43.91 5.49 4.95 4.88 5.47 5.82 6.93 7.90 4.34 5.92 4.04 6.27 5.32 4.53 6.01 4.96 5.93 6.03 4.80 4.67 5.00 5.53 3.13 3.62 5.13 3.09 12.86 7.70 4.85 1.57 2.95 4.16 4.73 4.40 4.20 4.92 4.68 3.10 4.53 3.85 5.70 4.98 6.71 5.99 5.06 5.97 7.55 Coefficient of variation (CV) 12.1 13.9 11.8 10.3 14.1 15.0 19.1 6.8 12.7 9.6 14.6 17.8 11.0 14.4 16.6 12.6 15.4 10.7 14.6 9.8 11.1 13.8 8.1 19.5 20.0 16.4 21.3 18.0 10.5 16.2 18.4 5.6 7.7 12.6 15.1 7.2 10.9 20.6 13.4 9.0 12.0 8.5 7.4 10.0 16.8 17.2 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 547 875 676 337 677 519 673 148 505 642 617 1051 679 660 1056 493 743 557 994 370 414 1239 571 1150 1413 20 856 1140 1424 1347 1243 8 250 951 975 131 1099 1251 1094 143 665 19 16 388 876 595 13,444 15,471 4,678 9,414 8,109 4,994 6,787 17,926 11,593 11,847 7,619 13,350 9,229 3,289 15,299 9,421 10,763 21,947 17,808 31,234 20,951 31,396 38,115 22,939 29,784 13,884 8,083 14,500 187,100 24,689 10,121 51,816 23,094 14,783 11,018 67,189 13,638 5,424 21,207 29,746 11,918 15,345 26,990 23,397 11,787 4,704 15.65 11.06 13.64 19.45 13.48 15.77 13.63 25.38 16.21 14.38 14.38 9.43 13.59 13.87 8.85 16.58 12.51 13.08 8.29 16.21 15.20 5.54 13.42 7.22 3.60 30.30 10.04 7.11 3.59 4.53 5.37 38.93 19.74 9.24 8.60 23.27 7.43 5.36 7.97 22.46 11.90 31.61 34.10 15.80 9.70 12.58 SE 2.47 2.09 2.26 2.88 2.76 3.30 3.58 2.78 2.72 1.91 3.12 2.14 2.02 2.89 2.11 2.69 2.68 1.86 1.72 2.32 2.33 0.99 1.55 1.58 0.94 8.89 3.03 1.77 0.48 1.02 1.19 4.39 2.53 1.54 1.70 2.74 1.16 1.50 1.50 2.93 2.14 4.89 3.96 2.38 2.22 3.19 Severity of Poverty 7.10 4.68 6.05 9.22 5.89 7.09 6.04 12.74 7.45 6.51 6.40 4.05 5.99 6.18 3.63 7.67 5.41 5.22 3.06 6.89 6.30 1.96 5.53 2.84 1.25 14.57 3.93 2.73 1.26 1.64 1.87 21.24 8.92 3.58 3.22 10.73 2.79 1.91 3.17 10.35 4.70 15.51 17.47 6.64 3.75 4.98 SE 1.38 1.10 1.26 1.75 1.51 1.86 1.95 1.82 1.58 1.08 1.75 1.07 1.11 1.63 1.12 1.52 1.45 0.94 0.84 1.30 1.30 0.43 0.82 0.71 0.40 5.67 1.57 0.85 0.20 0.48 0.49 3.23 1.59 0.77 0.79 1.67 0.59 0.66 0.77 1.70 1.11 3.13 2.64 1.31 1.11 1.64

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 108

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality CARAGA CATEEL GOVERNOR GENEROSO LUPON MANAY MATI (Capital) SAN ISIDRO TARRAGONA Compostela Valley COMPOSTELA LAAK (SAN VICENTE) MABINI (DOA ALICIA) MACO MARAGUSAN (SAN MARIANO) MAWAB MONKAYO MONTEVISTA NABUNTURAN NEW BATAAN PANTUKAN Region XII Cotabato ALAMADA CARMEN KABACAN CITY OF KIDAPAWAN (Capital) LIBUNGAN MAGPET MAKILALA MATALAM MIDSAYAP M'LANG PIGKAWAYAN PIKIT PRESIDENT ROXAS TULUNAN ANTIPAS BANISILAN ALEOSAN ARAKAN South Cotabato BANGA GENERAL SANTOS CITY (DADIANGAS) CITY OF KORONADAL (Capital) NORALA POLOMOLOK SURALLAH TAMPAKAN TANTANGAN T'BOLI TUPI SANTO NIO LAKE SEBU Sarangani ALABEL (Capital) GLAN Poverty Incidence 57.31 39.32 45.92 37.76 63.43 32.14 44.57 62.30 40.98 69.62 41.02 36.24 50.33 30.48 25.27 42.04 29.88 48.81 44.06 40.78 39.99 30.95 12.46 Standard error (SE) 6.63 4.61 5.02 5.29 5.86 4.19 4.75 5.93 5.29 3.97 6.39 3.53 5.37 5.42 5.26 4.54 4.10 6.81 5.99 6.75 5.53 3.75 2.82 Coefficient of variation (CV) 11.6 11.7 10.9 14.0 9.2 13.0 10.7 9.5 12.9 5.7 15.6 9.7 10.7 17.8 20.8 10.8 13.7 14.0 13.6 16.6 13.8 12.1 22.6 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 248 737 528 798 147 990 568 167 688 79 687 854 394 1038 1174 650 1054 441 589 695 716 1023 1471 18,700 12,439 20,803 21,720 22,921 37,102 13,917 14,194 25,517 40,373 13,446 24,137 25,028 9,799 20,688 13,477 18,624 20,696 27,549 19,298 25,256 20,895 13,367 18.95 11.80 13.65 11.08 22.76 9.07 14.10 21.24 12.17 25.54 11.41 9.87 15.68 8.28 6.23 12.10 7.80 15.23 13.86 11.22 10.96 8.18 2.60 SE 3.27 1.98 2.16 2.11 3.37 1.49 2.20 3.02 2.17 2.38 2.46 1.35 2.32 1.90 1.65 1.86 1.45 3.15 2.73 2.62 2.11 1.29 0.71 Severity of Poverty 8.25 4.90 5.54 4.52 10.49 3.62 6.06 9.54 4.95 11.90 4.41 3.78 6.57 3.18 2.22 4.78 2.89 6.40 5.96 4.27 4.14 3.01 0.82 SE 1.84 1.08 1.17 1.07 2.01 0.71 1.25 1.78 1.16 1.49 1.23 0.66 1.25 0.91 0.69 0.99 0.69 1.71 1.52 1.22 0.97 0.59 0.26

36.22 48.41 27.17 41.21 29.88 28.34 39.46 47.64 48.84 37.59 44.14 52.58 43.99 50.67 39.03 13.98 16.18

5.20 5.21 4.29 4.53 3.25 4.13 4.34 4.49 4.76 4.59 6.97 5.58 6.28 5.18 4.92 3.31 3.17

14.4 10.8 15.8 11.0 10.9 14.6 11.0 9.4 9.7 12.2 15.8 10.6 14.3 10.2 12.6 23.7 19.6

857 456 1131 680 1055 1100 732 477 439 803 586 346 592 383 750 1445 1393

14,421 19,650 17,886 25,605 33,343 23,332 21,521 42,427 19,365 16,280 9,347 17,639 13,184 17,867 26,683 62,480 22,089

9.31 14.00 6.44 11.21 7.31 6.84 10.52 13.78 14.34 10.13 12.31 16.09 12.40 15.36 10.27 2.96 3.43

1.88 2.31 1.30 1.60 1.08 1.29 1.55 2.11 2.21 1.71 2.76 2.64 2.56 2.42 1.80 0.89 0.84

3.35 5.46 2.19 4.19 2.55 2.36 3.89 5.40 5.68 3.79 4.69 6.56 4.77 6.20 3.75 0.94 1.09

0.85 1.15 0.54 0.72 0.46 0.53 0.71 1.09 1.13 0.80 1.32 1.40 1.23 1.26 0.81 0.34 0.33

36.66 14.29 27.80 27.52 27.12 66.50 30.78 24.55 65.31 36.98 45.81

5.77 3.15 4.13 6.82 4.72 5.96 5.03 5.30 7.46 6.44 4.74

15.7 22.0 14.9 24.8 17.4 9.0 16.3 21.6 11.4 17.4 10.3

838 1439 1113 1122 1134 107 1027 1193 120 824 532

15,485 16,828 18,964 8,429 8,991 40,591 16,301 8,625 33,621 23,956 42,303

9.42 3.06 6.85 6.64 6.38 23.14 7.66 5.45 22.81 9.65 13.16

1.89 0.90 1.49 2.20 1.36 3.33 1.72 1.49 4.35 2.17 2.01

3.38 0.98 2.43 2.31 2.15 10.24 2.70 1.76 10.16 3.53 5.12

0.83 0.37 0.70 0.96 0.56 1.89 0.76 0.58 2.51 0.96 0.99

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 109

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality KIAMBA MAASIM MAITUM MALAPATAN MALUNGON Sultan Kudarat BAGUMBAYAN COLUMBIO ESPERANZA ISULAN (Capital) KALAMANSIG LEBAK LUTAYAN LAMBAYONG (MARIANO MARCOS) PALIMBANG PRESIDENT QUIRINO CITY OF TACURONG SEN. NINOY AQUINO COTABATO CITY BUENAVISTA BUTUAN CITY (Capital) CABADBARAN CARMEN JABONGA KITCHARAO LAS NIEVES MAGALLANES NASIPIT SANTIAGO TUBAY REMEDIOS T. ROMUALDEZ Agusal del Sur BAYUGAN BUNAWAN ESPERANZA LA PAZ LORETO PROSPERIDAD (Capital) ROSARIO SAN FRANCISCO SAN LUIS SANTA JOSEFA TALACOGON TRENTO VERUELA SIBAGAT Surigao del Norte ALEGRIA BACUAG BASILISA (RIZAL) BURGOS CAGDIANAO CLAVER DAPA DEL CARMEN DINAGAT Poverty Incidence 46.41 62.18 48.66 66.37 50.63 56.95 55.19 53.78 33.45 54.19 46.30 49.27 49.92 Standard error (SE) 5.47 6.14 5.69 6.42 4.55 5.50 6.45 6.61 5.22 5.36 4.35 7.54 5.63 Coefficient of variation (CV) 11.8 9.9 11.7 9.7 9.0 9.7 11.7 12.3 15.6 9.9 9.4 15.3 11.3 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 513 171 444 111 384 260 284 320 948 309 518 431 407 22,336 28,069 16,775 38,919 40,576 30,641 12,260 25,536 23,958 22,829 32,705 23,748 27,603 13.31 21.26 14.73 23.77 15.12 18.51 17.43 16.75 8.74 16.87 13.31 14.61 14.98 SE 2.07 3.22 2.54 3.83 2.04 2.64 2.91 2.98 1.72 2.52 1.89 3.40 2.68 Severity of Poverty 5.17 9.35 5.96 10.81 6.05 7.91 7.26 6.90 3.20 6.95 5.17 5.83 6.05 SE 0.98 1.80 1.29 2.28 1.05 1.40 1.50 1.52 0.76 1.35 0.92 1.74 1.39

61.13 46.23 15.89 63.63 41.42 50.61 29.20 38.94 48.64 63.19 51.06 65.93 34.25 30.14 59.05 60.60 53.16 54.16 61.63 78.40 79.69 77.71 63.71 63.40 48.46 83.06 59.23 66.26 55.84 70.58 70.12 59.16 53.77 69.40 59.01 74.50 63.24 63.21 67.24 64.76

4.46 4.25 3.68 5.27 3.80 3.54 2.03 3.05 5.09 4.20 6.37 3.87 4.93 3.10 5.41 4.47 4.57 3.11 4.54 2.77 4.54 3.60 2.91 4.24 2.95 3.29 3.47 4.61 4.55 3.53 3.69 4.57 5.53 3.73 7.00 3.98 3.61 2.55 2.86 3.36

7.3 9.2 23.2 8.3 9.2 7.0 7.0 7.8 10.5 6.6 12.5 5.9 14.4 10.3 9.2 7.4 8.6 5.7 7.4 3.5 5.7 4.6 4.6 6.7 6.1 4.0 5.9 7.0 8.1 5.0 5.3 7.7 10.3 5.4 11.9 5.3 5.7 4.0 4.3 5.2

182 520 1403 142 668 387 1073 757 446 154 373 113 921 1045 217 188 335 310 173 21 18 25 139 149 452 11 214 112 272 68 75 215 323 81 218 38 152 153 100 130

44,550 14,208 12,059 19,798 72,105 25,278 81,089 23,195 8,674 13,672 10,488 14,706 6,922 11,011 9,723 10,656 7,220 45,291 19,245 33,637 17,790 24,218 41,844 17,107 27,155 22,317 12,161 18,344 21,876 21,446 18,376 7,201 6,758 18,814 2,216 10,396 11,217 14,075 9,943 7,726

20.37 13.36 3.35 21.68 12.16 17.48 8.74 12.39 15.98 23.53 17.07 25.13 10.69 8.98 20.88 21.72 18.39 19.55 23.41 34.68 35.90 33.99 24.90 23.71 17.31 38.75 22.38 26.35 20.50 28.61 28.82 22.09 19.20 27.84 21.73 31.65 24.35 25.64 27.26 26.75

2.45 1.94 1.03 2.95 1.57 1.94 0.86 1.52 2.57 2.51 3.01 2.73 2.17 1.41 3.27 2.78 2.73 1.68 2.60 2.44 4.38 3.20 1.71 2.76 1.50 3.45 2.29 2.95 2.20 2.42 2.61 2.72 2.95 2.69 4.15 3.12 2.45 1.73 1.92 2.53

8.79 5.23 1.06 9.50 4.88 7.96 3.63 5.33 7.02 11.15 7.56 12.09 4.55 3.74 9.54 10.09 8.35 9.17 11.31 18.48 19.41 17.97 12.28 11.31 8.10 21.32 10.79 13.17 9.74 14.42 14.71 10.62 8.94 13.92 10.32 16.45 11.91 13.02 13.76 13.66

1.41 1.00 0.41 1.69 0.77 1.19 0.45 0.88 1.50 1.60 1.67 1.77 1.16 0.79 2.03 1.75 1.73 1.03 1.66 1.80 3.32 2.34 1.13 1.77 0.92 2.69 1.56 1.91 1.33 1.66 1.76 1.70 1.78 1.81 2.61 2.21 1.64 1.23 1.31 1.85

Region XIII

City of Cotabato Agusan del Norte

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 110

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality GENERAL LUNA GIGAQUIT LIBJO (ALBOR) LORETO MAINIT MALIMONO PILAR PLACER SAN BENITO SAN FRANCISCO (ANAO-AON) SAN ISIDRO SANTA MONICA (SAPAO) SISON SOCORRO SURIGAO CITY (Capital) TAGANA-AN TUBAJON TUBOD SAN JOSE Surigao del Sur BAROBO BAYABAS CITY OF BISLIG CAGWAIT CANTILAN CARMEN CARRASCAL CORTES HINATUAN LANUZA LIANGA LINGIG MADRID MARIHATAG SAN AGUSTIN SAN MIGUEL TAGBINA TAGO TANDAG (Capital) ARMM Basilan LAMITAN LANTAWAN MALUSO SUMISIP TIPO-TIPO TUBURAN Lanao del Sur BACOLOD-KALAWI (BACOLOD GRANDE) BALABAGAN BALINDONG (WATU) BAYANG BINIDAYAN BUBONG BUTIG GANASSI KAPAI LUMBA-BAYABAO (MAGUING) LUMBATAN MADALUM Poverty Incidence 68.19 70.21 69.75 49.82 56.88 69.03 72.64 45.52 68.36 52.32 75.45 57.67 55.36 64.26 37.27 65.44 62.98 39.09 60.00 54.36 56.29 33.11 52.67 43.34 50.43 53.85 57.78 63.27 63.45 47.92 70.48 46.44 59.68 59.66 69.73 59.82 59.50 36.83 24.87 39.97 39.90 43.29 44.54 39.94 37.96 Standard error (SE) 3.28 3.37 3.59 4.94 3.90 3.62 3.53 4.20 5.61 4.66 6.10 3.32 5.43 4.56 2.90 3.72 4.26 4.69 4.45 4.10 5.63 4.57 4.46 3.67 5.23 4.11 5.17 3.16 3.96 4.26 3.61 3.51 5.06 4.34 4.23 3.56 3.13 3.15 6.10 7.00 8.32 8.31 6.99 6.27 7.76 Coefficient of variation (CV) 4.8 4.8 5.1 9.9 6.9 5.2 4.9 9.2 8.2 8.9 8.1 5.8 9.8 7.1 7.8 5.7 6.8 12.0 7.4 7.5 10.0 13.8 8.5 8.5 10.4 7.6 8.9 5.0 6.2 8.9 5.1 7.6 8.5 7.3 6.1 6.0 5.3 8.6 24.5 17.5 20.9 19.2 15.7 15.7 20.4 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 96 73 77 409 262 85 54 544 95 353 35 243 282 133 812 117 156 747 195 305 267 960 345 605 391 317 239 151 146 472 71 510 202 203 78 199 208 831 1183 717 721 607 569 718 790 8,892 12,733 11,699 4,041 12,842 11,810 5,767 9,306 3,377 6,304 4,305 4,381 5,981 10,920 45,842 8,950 4,491 4,529 17,082 21,947 4,025 31,927 9,883 12,224 5,106 7,718 9,180 22,194 6,858 12,537 15,794 6,736 9,251 10,906 20,615 19,612 18,042 16,472 19,589 18,233 18,870 29,104 33,107 28,207 7,762 27.92 28.52 28.40 17.34 21.24 28.67 30.44 15.33 27.50 18.15 33.13 21.62 20.03 24.40 13.03 26.02 24.14 12.26 22.29 19.18 19.42 10.35 18.41 14.29 17.27 18.89 20.71 23.49 23.58 16.50 27.72 15.52 21.62 21.94 27.89 21.37 21.63 11.83 5.44 9.76 9.90 11.17 11.38 9.89 9.79 SE 2.34 2.61 2.63 2.77 2.41 2.70 2.74 2.04 4.20 2.56 4.93 2.05 3.03 2.92 1.22 2.63 2.78 2.34 2.62 2.12 3.36 1.77 2.47 1.88 2.67 2.28 2.90 2.05 2.70 2.11 2.42 1.72 3.04 2.75 2.90 2.15 1.72 1.26 1.70 2.59 2.94 3.05 2.54 2.16 2.79 Severity of Poverty 14.20 14.37 14.42 7.96 10.23 14.69 15.65 6.88 13.86 8.28 17.71 10.41 9.44 11.81 6.05 12.99 11.79 5.26 10.66 8.83 8.82 4.43 8.42 6.32 7.82 8.64 9.64 11.11 11.17 7.50 13.59 6.89 10.08 10.38 13.90 9.89 10.12 5.16 1.74 3.36 3.45 4.01 4.02 3.44 3.52 SE 1.63 1.86 1.86 1.66 1.54 1.85 1.99 1.15 2.85 1.53 3.48 1.34 1.85 1.89 0.69 1.80 1.85 1.36 1.65 1.25 2.12 0.89 1.55 1.11 1.60 1.37 1.76 1.35 1.79 1.25 1.61 1.01 1.89 1.77 1.93 1.35 1.10 0.68 0.66 1.13 1.30 1.38 1.12 0.96 1.22

54.91 41.41 38.71 51.34 30.95 55.09 51.32 60.22 35.21 56.80 58.13

6.34 7.52 6.37 5.97 7.70 9.01 6.70 7.34 8.15 6.47 5.41

11.5 18.2 16.5 11.6 24.9 16.4 13.1 12.2 23.1 11.4 9.3

291 669 764 367 1024 287 368 193 884 263 234

17,717 11,434 9,111 10,557 6,448 11,340 12,152 9,817 19,341 12,899 13,616

16.02 10.87 10.02 14.57 7.46 16.55 14.78 18.52 8.75 17.03 17.67

2.80 2.81 2.34 2.75 2.35 3.95 3.05 3.84 2.71 2.97 2.68

6.28 3.98 3.63 5.61 2.57 6.65 5.75 7.51 3.07 6.81 7.11

1.42 1.27 1.06 1.44 0.96 2.02 1.53 2.04 1.13 1.57 1.43

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 111

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality MADAMBA MALABANG MARANTAO MARAWI CITY (Capital) MASIU MULONDO PAGAYAWAN (TATARIKAN) PIAGAPO POONA BAYABAO (GATA) PUALAS DITSAAN-RAMAIN SAGUIARAN TAMPARAN TARAKA TUBARAN TUGAYA WAO MAROGONG CALANOGAS BUADIPOSOBUNTONG MAGUING SULTAN GUMANDER LUMBAYANAGUE BUMBARAN TAGOLOAN II KAPATAGAN SULTAN DUMALONDONG Maguindanao AMPATUAN BULDON BULUAN DATU PAGLAS DATU PIANG DATU ODIN SINSUAT (DINAIG) SHARIFF AGUAK (MAGANOY) (Capital) MATANOG PAGALUNGAN PARANG SULTAN KUDARAT (NULING) SULTAN SA BARONGIS (LAMBAYONG) KABUNTALAN (TUMBAO) UPI TALAYAN SOUTH UPI BARIRA GEN. S. K. PENDATUN MAMASAPANO TALITAY PAGAGAWAN Poverty Incidence 50.61 46.84 38.39 28.91 38.25 34.93 59.26 58.46 40.20 58.68 37.23 37.70 48.63 27.91 65.21 37.11 39.59 60.47 61.48 25.85 38.11 65.73 46.00 58.90 58.12 59.61 55.52 39.01 50.69 44.25 46.76 46.10 39.06 49.18 Standard error (SE) 6.28 5.32 7.03 7.21 7.11 8.19 8.39 6.00 7.93 6.79 8.21 8.15 6.05 9.65 7.55 9.41 6.62 7.46 6.91 9.39 8.81 7.28 8.76 8.71 7.43 8.02 13.22 7.47 8.09 8.63 7.21 6.02 5.53 7.43 Coefficient of variation (CV) 12.4 11.4 18.3 24.9 18.6 23.4 14.2 10.3 19.7 11.6 22.1 21.6 12.4 34.6 11.6 25.4 16.7 12.3 11.2 36.3 23.1 11.1 19.0 14.8 12.8 13.5 23.8 19.1 16.0 19.5 15.4 13.1 14.2 15.1 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 386 500 777 1085 781 899 213 229 707 226 814 800 447 1110 121 819 731 191 175 1163 785 114 525 221 235 205 281 751 382 578 502 522 748 434 9,422 18,058 11,213 38,355 10,508 5,702 10,300 18,661 8,680 10,112 9,402 8,655 12,733 7,428 12,770 8,498 15,100 11,366 10,963 4,572 10,973 14,300 9,527 6,898 6,071 10,684 8,723 12,247 16,995 14,204 12,876 22,092 36,882 33,944 14.19 13.11 9.93 7.11 9.84 8.80 18.07 17.59 10.45 17.82 9.58 9.65 13.50 6.64 21.10 9.56 10.17 18.79 18.85 6.02 9.70 21.22 12.77 17.89 17.41 18.21 16.54 9.84 14.40 11.91 12.75 12.52 9.86 13.59 SE 2.76 2.19 2.57 2.24 2.58 2.87 4.02 2.83 2.86 3.38 2.95 3.06 2.50 3.11 4.23 3.30 2.44 3.92 3.52 2.91 3.18 4.09 3.66 4.35 3.65 4.02 6.03 2.77 3.59 3.10 2.97 2.58 1.97 3.14 Severity of Poverty 5.39 5.00 3.60 2.50 3.55 3.12 7.31 6.99 3.78 7.17 3.46 3.47 5.11 2.29 8.89 3.47 3.66 7.70 7.62 2.03 3.48 8.90 4.85 7.17 6.94 7.35 6.60 3.51 5.56 4.40 4.77 4.67 3.48 5.13 SE 1.37 1.09 1.17 0.92 1.14 1.27 2.13 1.45 1.28 1.84 1.30 1.40 1.20 1.30 2.39 1.47 1.11 2.18 1.96 1.18 1.44 2.36 1.75 2.36 1.95 2.22 3.10 1.27 1.85 1.40 1.43 1.31 0.87 1.62

65.04 46.42 35.10 35.70 54.04

18.12 8.01 7.39 5.47 7.81

27.9 17.3 21.1 15.3 14.5

124 511 892 874 312

21,867 12,807 34,184 40,096 13,237

20.56 12.54 8.67 8.65 15.51

10.09 3.50 2.50 1.80 3.52

8.51 4.66 3.03 2.97 6.01

5.91 1.73 1.09 0.77 1.77

48.02 45.43 58.60 53.22 51.28 54.55 58.84 57.37 52.35

6.42 7.02 6.05 10.50 10.54 7.93 9.53 8.17 8.92

13.4 15.5 10.3 19.7 20.6 14.5 16.2 14.2 17.0

467 548 228 331 369 302 222 247 352

9,754 27,737 9,228 15,504 13,219 18,399 16,525 7,705 15,347

13.17 12.32 17.54 15.09 14.55 15.73 17.59 17.25 14.67

2.80 2.71 3.04 4.63 4.69 3.42 4.16 3.77 3.76

4.93 4.56 6.98 5.75 5.59 6.09 6.96 6.84 5.58

1.39 1.28 1.66 2.31 2.34 1.72 2.07 1.95 1.83

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 112

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Municipality MADAMBA MALABANG MARANTAO MARAWI CITY (Capital) MASIU MULONDO PAGAYAWAN (TATARIKAN) PIAGAPO POONA BAYABAO (GATA) PUALAS DITSAAN-RAMAIN SAGUIARAN TAMPARAN TARAKA TUBARAN TUGAYA WAO MAROGONG CALANOGAS BUADIPOSOBUNTONG MAGUING SULTAN GUMANDER LUMBAYANAGUE BUMBARAN TAGOLOAN II KAPATAGAN SULTAN DUMALONDONG Maguindanao AMPATUAN BULDON BULUAN DATU PAGLAS DATU PIANG DATU ODIN SINSUAT (DINAIG) SHARIFF AGUAK (MAGANOY) (Capital) MATANOG PAGALUNGAN PARANG SULTAN KUDARAT (NULING) SULTAN SA BARONGIS (LAMBAYONG) KABUNTALAN (TUMBAO) UPI TALAYAN SOUTH UPI BARIRA GEN. S. K. PENDATUN MAMASAPANO TALITAY PAGAGAWAN Poverty Incidence 50.61 46.84 38.39 28.91 38.25 34.93 59.26 58.46 40.20 58.68 37.23 37.70 48.63 27.91 65.21 37.11 39.59 60.47 61.48 25.85 38.11 65.73 46.00 58.90 58.12 59.61 55.52 39.01 50.69 44.25 46.76 46.10 39.06 49.18 Standard error (SE) 6.28 5.32 7.03 7.21 7.11 8.19 8.39 6.00 7.93 6.79 8.21 8.15 6.05 9.65 7.55 9.41 6.62 7.46 6.91 9.39 8.81 7.28 8.76 8.71 7.43 8.02 13.22 7.47 8.09 8.63 7.21 6.02 5.53 7.43 Coefficient of variation (CV) 12.4 11.4 18.3 24.9 18.6 23.4 14.2 10.3 19.7 11.6 22.1 21.6 12.4 34.6 11.6 25.4 16.7 12.3 11.2 36.3 23.1 11.1 19.0 14.8 12.8 13.5 23.8 19.1 16.0 19.5 15.4 13.1 14.2 15.1 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 386 500 777 1085 781 899 213 229 707 226 814 800 447 1110 121 819 731 191 175 1163 785 114 525 221 235 205 281 751 382 578 502 522 748 434 9,422 18,058 11,213 38,355 10,508 5,702 10,300 18,661 8,680 10,112 9,402 8,655 12,733 7,428 12,770 8,498 15,100 11,366 10,963 4,572 10,973 14,300 9,527 6,898 6,071 10,684 8,723 12,247 16,995 14,204 12,876 22,092 36,882 33,944 14.19 13.11 9.93 7.11 9.84 8.80 18.07 17.59 10.45 17.82 9.58 9.65 13.50 6.64 21.10 9.56 10.17 18.79 18.85 6.02 9.70 21.22 12.77 17.89 17.41 18.21 16.54 9.84 14.40 11.91 12.75 12.52 9.86 13.59 SE 2.76 2.19 2.57 2.24 2.58 2.87 4.02 2.83 2.86 3.38 2.95 3.06 2.50 3.11 4.23 3.30 2.44 3.92 3.52 2.91 3.18 4.09 3.66 4.35 3.65 4.02 6.03 2.77 3.59 3.10 2.97 2.58 1.97 3.14 Severity of Poverty 5.39 5.00 3.60 2.50 3.55 3.12 7.31 6.99 3.78 7.17 3.46 3.47 5.11 2.29 8.89 3.47 3.66 7.70 7.62 2.03 3.48 8.90 4.85 7.17 6.94 7.35 6.60 3.51 5.56 4.40 4.77 4.67 3.48 5.13 SE 1.37 1.09 1.17 0.92 1.14 1.27 2.13 1.45 1.28 1.84 1.30 1.40 1.20 1.30 2.39 1.47 1.11 2.18 1.96 1.18 1.44 2.36 1.75 2.36 1.95 2.22 3.10 1.27 1.85 1.40 1.43 1.31 0.87 1.62

65.04 46.42 35.10 35.70 54.04

18.12 8.01 7.39 5.47 7.81

27.9 17.3 21.1 15.3 14.5

124 511 892 874 312

21,867 12,807 34,184 40,096 13,237

20.56 12.54 8.67 8.65 15.51

10.09 3.50 2.50 1.80 3.52

8.51 4.66 3.03 2.97 6.01

5.91 1.73 1.09 0.77 1.77

48.02 45.43 58.60 53.22 51.28 54.55 58.84 57.37 52.35

6.42 7.02 6.05 10.50 10.54 7.93 9.53 8.17 8.92

13.4 15.5 10.3 19.7 20.6 14.5 16.2 14.2 17.0

467 548 228 331 369 302 222 247 352

9,754 27,737 9,228 15,504 13,219 18,399 16,525 7,705 15,347

13.17 12.32 17.54 15.09 14.55 15.73 17.59 17.25 14.67

2.80 2.71 3.04 4.63 4.69 3.42 4.16 3.77 3.76

4.93 4.56 6.98 5.75 5.59 6.09 6.96 6.84 5.58

1.39 1.28 1.66 2.31 2.34 1.72 2.07 1.95 1.83

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 113

City and Municipal-level Small Area Poverty Estimates, 2003


Region Province Sulu Municipality INDANAN JOLO (Capital) KALINGALAN CALUANG LUUK MAIMBUNG HADJI PANGLIMA TAHIL (MARUNGGAS) OLD PANAMAO PANGUTARAN PARANG PATA PATIKUL SIASI TALIPAO TAPUL TONGKIL PANGLIMA ESTINO (NEW PANAMAO) LUGUS PANDAMI Tawi-tawi PANGLIMA SUGALA (BALIMBING) (Capital) BONGAO MAPUN (CAGAYAN DE TAWI-TAWI) SIMUNUL SITANGKAI SOUTH UBIAN TANDUBAS TURTLE ISLANDS LANGUYAN SAPA-SAPA Poverty Incidence 50.13 39.14 64.99 65.40 58.79 62.83 Standard error (SE) 6.51 12.94 9.55 9.08 8.54 15.21 Coefficient of variation (CV) 13.0 33.1 14.7 13.9 14.5 24.2 Rank (Poorest=1) Magnitude of Poor Poverty Gap Population 401 745 125 119 223 159 41,443 53,807 18,293 21,389 20,773 3,815 14.47 10.58 20.95 21.18 17.85 19.92 SE 2.86 5.11 5.25 4.68 3.95 7.25 Severity of Poverty 5.65 3.99 8.75 8.84 7.13 8.27 SE 1.41 2.43 3.04 2.56 2.06 3.88

53.32 61.30 53.36 59.42 42.28 52.72 56.62 57.28 62.59 66.46 57.79 63.14 47.18

9.63 8.59 7.70 8.11 9.22 6.71 5.32 9.71 9.02 10.72 9.62 8.09 7.54

18.1 14.0 14.4 13.6 21.8 12.7 9.4 17.0 14.4 16.1 16.6 12.8 16.0

329 179 328 210 641 343 266 249 162 109 238 155 491

25,884 16,482 33,528 11,735 23,975 33,075 48,617 9,882 12,776 22,196 12,152 14,587 22,361

15.58 19.47 15.42 17.98 11.72 15.19 16.94 16.66 19.83 21.66 17.34 19.76 12.56

3.96 4.46 3.51 4.42 3.77 2.93 2.54 4.39 5.03 5.57 4.44 4.36 3.13

6.10 8.08 6.01 7.29 4.46 5.90 6.76 6.52 8.25 9.10 6.88 8.10 4.60

1.95 2.49 1.79 2.53 1.84 1.48 1.32 2.25 2.89 3.11 2.24 2.48 1.53

34.60 48.92 33.96 45.35 53.91 48.82 49.66 45.48 48.09

5.78 7.87 7.77 7.00 5.75 7.74 17.76 7.04 7.89

16.7 16.1 22.9 15.4 10.7 15.9 35.8 15.5 16.4

913 438 934 549 316 440 411 546 464

30,391 14,509 12,441 17,114 17,730 15,866 3,018 22,956 17,251

8.52 13.20 8.24 12.51 15.76 13.40 13.30 12.16 12.94

2.09 3.23 2.54 3.07 2.81 3.09 8.04 3.13 3.08

2.97 4.86 2.83 4.75 6.21 5.01 4.92 4.47 4.77

0.94 1.57 1.08 1.58 1.54 1.47 4.01 1.60 1.51

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 114

References Bedi, T., Coudouel, A. and Simler, K. (2007). More Than a Pretty Picture Using Poverty Maps to Design Better Policies and Interventions. Elbers, C., Lanjouw, J.O. and Lanjouw, P. (2002). Micro-Level Estimation of Welfare, Policy Research Working Paper, The World Bank. Elbers, C., Lanjouw, J.O. and Lanjouw, P. (2003). Micro-level estimation of poverty and inequality, Econometrica, 71, 355-364. Elbers, C., Lanjouw, J.O., Lanjouw, P. and Leite (2004). Poverty and Inequality in Brazil: New Estimates from Combined PPV-PNAD Data, unpublished manuscript, The World Bank. Elbers, C., Lanjouw, J.O., Lanjouw, P. and Leite (2007). Poverty and Inequality in Brazil: New Estimates from Combined PPV-PNAD Data, unpublished manuscript, The World Bank. NSCB (2005) Estimation of Local Poverty in the Philippines. National Statistical Coordination Board, Philippines. NSCB (____) Philippine Standard geographic Code. National Statistical Coordination Board, Philippines NSO (2007) 2007 Census of Population. National Statistics Office, Philippines.

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 115

NSCB Publications
A. Regular Publications Multi-Sectoral Philippine Statistical Yearbook The Philippine Countryside in Figures Compendium of Philippine Environment Statistics Statistical Indicators for Philippine Development Compendium of Philippine Social Statistics Economic National Accounts of the Philippines o Quarterly, Semestral and Annual NAP o Gross Regional Domestic Product o Gross Regional Domestic Expenditure o Input-Output Accounts Economic Indicators Quarterly Economic Indices Leading Economic Indicators Foreign Direct Investments Food Balance Sheet of the Philippines Philippine National Health Accounts National Education Expenditure Accounts Social Statistical Handbook on Women and Men in the Philippines Statistical Report on Children and Women Report on the Philippine Human Development Index Philippine Poverty Statistics Sub-national Statistics The Countryside in Figures (Selected Provinces) Regional Social and Economic Trends (RSET) (CAR, I , IVA, IVB, V, VI, VIII, IX ,X,XI,XII) Statistical Handbook on Women and Men (CAR, I, V, VI, VIII, IX, XI, XII) Information Sheets Press Releases Statistically Speaking StatWatch Factsheets MDG Watch Statistics Series Technical Papers
For orders and subscription, please contact us at: Phone: (632) 895-2767 E-mail: info@nscb.gov.ph URL: http://www.nscb.gov.ph/

Standard Classifications Philippine Standard Industrial Classification (PSIC) Philippine Standard Commodity Classification (PSCC) Philippine Standard Classification for Education (PSCEd) Philippine Standard Occupational Classification (PSOC) Philippine Central Product Classification (PCPC) Proceedings of Conventions National Convention on Statistics Asian Regional Section, International Conference on Statistical Computing Reference Materials Inventory of Airports Inventory of Ports Philippine Statistical Development Program Profile of Censuses and Surveys Directory of Statistical Services in the Philippines Catalogue of Philippine Statistical Publications Dictionary of Selected Statistical Terms Manual on the Preparation of Statistical Project Proposals A Guide to Statistics for Business Planning Framework for the Development of Environment Statistics Registry of Top Foreign Direct Investment Enterprises in the Philippines State of the Philippine Land and Soil Resources

2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 117

Other NSCB Products and Services Products 1. Statistical policies and measures to resolve specific issues and provide policy directions in the Philippine Statistical System (PSS) 2. The Philippine Statistical Development Program (PSDP) to serve as blueprint of priority programs and activities to be undertaken to improve the PSS in the Medium Term 3. National Accounts and related economic accounts to assess the economic performance of the country thru the following: National Accounts Regional Accounts Input-Output (I-O) Accounts 4. Other economic and social indicators Poverty statistics Environment statistics Food balance sheet Indicators on children and women Gender and development statistics Quarterly economic indices Foreign direct investments Leading economic indicators Human development index National Health Accounts National Education Accounts 5. Standards and classification systems to prescribe uniform standards in government statistics Philippine Standard Occupational Classification (PSOC) Philippine Standard Commodity Classification (PSCC) Philippine Standard Industrial Classification (PSIC) Philippine Standard Geographic Code (PSGC) Philippine Standard Classification of Education (PSCED) Philippine Classification of Commodities by Broad
2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Economic Categories (PCCBEC) Philippine Central Product Classification (PCPC) 6. Statistical publications to disseminate the most relevant information produced by the PSS and to make statistics more accessible to the public Services 1. Maintenance of a one-stop statistical information center 2. Monitoring of designated statistics 3. Coordination of subnational statistical system 4. Coordination of inter-agency concerns on statistics 5. Survey review and clearance 6. On-line statistical service through the internet (www.nscb.gov.ph) 7. Servicing data requests 8. Technical services 9. Advocacy for statistical awareness National Statistics Month National Convention on Statistics Government Statistics Accessibility Program Hosting of international conferences in statistics

Page 118

NSCB TECHNICAL STAFF*


ROMULO A. VIROLA Secretary General ESTRELLA V. DOMINGO Assistant Secretary PROGRAMS, POLICIES AND STANDARDS CANDIDO J. ASTROLOGO, JR. OIC-Director (Concurrent) FE VIDA N. DY-LIACCO Chief, Programs, Policies, and Advocacy Division SEVERA B. DE COSTO Chief, Standards and Classification Systems Division SOCIAL STATISTICS OFFICE CYNTHIA S. REGALADO OIC - Director REDENCION M. IGNACIO Chief, Population, Health and Nutrition, and Education Statistics Division JESSAMYN O. ENCARNACION Chief, Poverty, Labor, Human Development, and Gender Statistics Division

ECONOMIC STATISTICS OFFICE RAYMUNDO J. TALENTO Director MA. FE M. TALENTO OIC, Production Accounts Division VIVIAN R. ILARINA Chief, Expenditure Accounts NATIONAL STATISTICAL INFORMATION CENTER CANDIDO J. ASTROLOGO, JR. OIC - Director GLENITA V. AMORANTO OIC, Integrated Accounts Division REGINA S. REYES Chief, Economic Indicators and Satellite Accounts MANAGEMENT SERVICES LINA V. CASTRO Director (Concurrent) ROMEO M. NIMENO Chief, Administrative Services Division Affairs Division EMALYN P. PINEDA OIC, Human Resource and International Division SUBNATIONAL STATISTICS OFFICE LINA V. CASTRO Director

Director (Concurrent) * As of March 2009 2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates NSCB/WB Intercensal Updating of Small Area Poverty Estimates

Page 119

WB TFSCB/NSCB INTERCENSAL UPDATING OF SMALL AREA POVERTY ESTIMATES PROJECT STAFF NSCB Project Management Committee Chair
ROMULO A. VIROLA

Members
ESTRELLA V. DOMINGO RAYMUNDO J. TALENTO CYNTHIA S. REGALADO LINA V. CASTRO CANDIDO J. ASTROLOGO, JR. REDENCION M. IGNACIO

Project Manager
LINA V. CASTRO

Project Team Leader


JESSAMYN O. ENCARNACION

Lead Technical Staff


BERNADETTE B. BALAMBAN ARTURO M. MARTINEZ, JR. JOSEPH M. ADDAWE

Technical Staff
MILDRED B. ADDAWE PILAR C. DAYAG NOEL S. NEPOMUCENO MARYMELL A. MARTILLAN FLORANDE S. POLISTICO MARK REX S. ROMARAOG

Administrative Staff
AGNES V. CAPULE TERESITA M. ALMARINES CELESTE MAE C. ROLA ANDREA S. BAYLON MAGNOLIA C. SAN DIEGO JEFFREY E. ENRADO JOSE A. DAYOT

The World Bank


Task Managers
KARL KENDRICK CHUA CHORCHING GOH

Project Technical Adviser


DR. PETER LANJOUW

Foreign Consultant
DR. ROY VAN DER WEIDE

Local Consultant
DR. ZITA VJ. ALBACEA

The NSCB thanks Ms. Kristine Faith S. Agtarap, Ms. Ma. Concordia S. Alfonso, Ms. Glenita V. Amoranto, Ms. Ma. Kristina V. Manalo, Ms. Ma. 2003 City and Municipal Level Poverty Estimates Ivy T. Querubin, Mr. Raymond S. Perez and Mr. Page 120 Armyl S. Intercensal their assistance in this Poverty NSCB/WB Zaguirre for Updating of Small AreaProject. Estimates