 |
| PHOTO 📷 from the official Website of PSA, DOST-FNRI, and NEDA |
MANILA, Philippines - The Food and Nutrition Research Institute (FNRI) of the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) has clarified that it was not involved in determining the controversial poverty threshold set by the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA). The clarification came during a heated debate in the Senate on the proposed 2025 budget for the DOST, where Senator Minority Leader Koko Pimentel questioned the institute's involvement in the calculation of the poverty threshold figure.
READ MORE STORIES:
The controversy began after NEDA issued a statement claiming that an individual only needs to spend P64 per day on meals to avoid being classified as "food poor." This estimate, which has been widely discussed and criticized, has raised concerns among lawmakers and the public about the adequacy of this figure in addressing the nutritional needs of Filipinos living in poverty.
Senator Pimentel's Inquiry: A Point of Controversy
During the plenary debates on the DOST's 2025 budget, Senator Pimentel questioned whether the FNRI was responsible for providing the P64 daily food expenditure figure that NEDA had cited. In his inquiry, Pimentel asked, "Was FNRI the source of NEDA's estimated daily amount of around P64?"
This question arose in the context of NEDA's statement on food poverty, which suggested that an individual could meet their daily nutritional needs with just P64 a day. This figure, which many experts and lawmakers deemed too low, sparked debates on the sufficiency of this amount to address the nutritional needs of the poorest Filipinos.
Responding on behalf of the DOST as the agency’s budget sponsor, Senate President Juan Miguel Zubiri clarified that FNRI had no role in determining the actual amount. “It did not originate from them. They developed a formula based on the nutritional value of food items that can provide sufficient daily nutrition,” Zubiri explained, emphasizing the FNRI's role in nutritional science rather than in determining financial poverty thresholds.
The Role of FNRI: Nutritional Science, Not Poverty Calculation
Senator Zubiri's statement highlighted the distinct roles played by different government agencies in the determination of poverty thresholds. According to Zubiri, FNRI's primary responsibility is to develop formulas that assess the nutritional value of food that can provide the recommended daily allowance of calories and nutrients for individuals, based on their age, gender, and physical activity levels.
“It’s not about the specific amount,” Zubiri clarified. “The Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) is the agency responsible for determining the poverty threshold, including the monetary amount. The nutritional formula that informs this threshold is the work of FNRI,” he added.
Zubiri’s clarification sought to separate the roles of FNRI and NEDA in this process, acknowledging that while FNRI’s nutritional guidelines may inform broader discussions about poverty and food security, the actual calculation of the poverty threshold falls under the jurisdiction of the PSA and NEDA.
The controversy surrounding the P64-per-day figure stems from concerns that it may be an unrealistic estimate for individuals living in poverty. NEDA, which is responsible for setting the national poverty threshold, had previously defined the food poverty threshold—an amount required for an individual to meet their basic nutritional needs—as P55 per day in 2021. This figure was updated to P63 in 2023 and further adjusted to P64 in 2024.
The P64 estimate has raised several questions regarding its adequacy, with critics arguing that it fails to reflect the true costs of a nutritious diet, particularly in urban areas where the cost of living is higher. While some experts suggest that P64 may be enough to cover the basic caloric needs of an individual, others argue that this amount does not account for the variety of food groups needed for a balanced and healthy diet.
In response to Senator Pimentel's inquiry about whether other agencies had been consulted in determining the nutritional formula and composition used in calculating the poverty threshold, Zubiri confirmed that several agencies had indeed been involved. He explained that the FNRI’s nutritional formula is a product of collaboration with other government bodies, including the PSA and NEDA, to ensure that the threshold reflects not just nutritional needs, but also economic realities.
Senator Pimentel’s line of questioning indicated a concern about the transparency of the process, as well as the potential disconnect between the scientific formulation of nutrition standards and the practical realities of living on a low income. As Zubiri pointed out, the nutritional formula developed by FNRI is just one piece of the larger puzzle of determining the poverty threshold, which also involves economic factors like the cost of living, inflation, and regional price differences.
In addition to clarifying FNRI's role in the poverty threshold determination, Senator Grace Poe also revealed that an updated poverty threshold is expected to be released in May 2025. This update, she noted, will take into account changes in the cost of living and other economic factors that have evolved since the last update in 2023.
Arsenio Balisacan, the Secretary of NEDA, further disclosed that NEDA’s revised poverty threshold estimates were part of an ongoing effort to better reflect the changing dynamics of poverty in the country. He noted that while the food poverty threshold has been adjusted over the years—rising from P55 in 2021 to P63 in 2023 and now P64 in 2024—the updates remain focused on the basic nutritional needs of the population.
However, Balisacan also acknowledged that the government faces challenges in balancing the nutritional needs of individuals with the broader economic realities that affect food affordability. He indicated that the upcoming update to the poverty threshold will reflect not only the cost of food but also the broader socio-economic landscape, including the rising costs of other essential goods and services.
While the FNRI's clarification regarding its role in the poverty threshold calculation has addressed some concerns, the debate over what constitutes an adequate poverty threshold continues. Some lawmakers, economists, and advocacy groups argue that the government must take a more comprehensive approach to defining poverty in the country, one that goes beyond just food costs and considers other essential expenses such as housing, healthcare, education, and transportation.
Poverty thresholds, after all, are not just about determining how much money people need to survive; they are also about how society defines the minimum standard of living that should be guaranteed to its citizens. Many believe that setting the threshold too low could result in millions of Filipinos being excluded from essential government support programs and services.
As the Philippines grapples with rising inflation, increased food prices, and economic uncertainty, the question of how to accurately measure poverty becomes more urgent. For many experts, the P64 per day figure remains a contentious issue, and further discussions and revisions will likely be needed to ensure that the country’s poverty metrics reflect the real experiences of its most vulnerable citizens.
The FNRI’s clarification has provided some clarity on its role in the calculation of the poverty threshold, distancing the institute from the controversy surrounding the P64 figure. However, the ongoing debate underscores the complexities involved in measuring poverty and ensuring that government policies reflect the true needs of the population.
As the Philippines continues to develop and implement social safety nets and economic policies aimed at reducing poverty, the role of agencies like the FNRI and NEDA will remain central in shaping the country’s approach to poverty alleviation. Whether the P64 daily food threshold is adequate will continue to be a subject of public discussion, especially as new data emerges in the coming years.
Ultimately, the true challenge lies not just in determining a poverty threshold but in using it as a tool to drive effective policies that improve the well-being of the country’s most disadvantaged citizens. As the poverty threshold figure is adjusted and refined, it will be critical for lawmakers, experts, and the public to engage in transparent and informed debates to ensure that no one is left behind in the fight against poverty. - omnizers.com
Tags
News