Poverty, hunger and ‘Yolanda’

Super Typhoon “Yolanda” was so devastating that it raised Self-rated Poverty by three points, Self-rated Food Poverty also by three points, and Hunger by almost one point, according to the Social Weather Survey of Dec. 11-16, 2013.  Incidentally, it also raised President’s Aquino’s net satisfaction rating by one point.

The national proportion of households saying they were seriously harmed (nasalanta) by Yolanda was 13 percent—38 percent in the Visayas, 11 percent in the Balance of Luzon, 4 percent in Mindanao, and 3 percent in the National Capital Region.  For a single natural disaster, the proportion was quite high.  It was high enough for the conditions of the Yolanda victims to meaningfully affect the national average.  (See “13% of Filipino families were Yolanda victims; their net satisfaction rating for PNoy is +54,” www.sws.org.ph, 1/22/2014.)

Those effects of the supertyphoon were computed by comparing Yolanda victims with nonvictims in terms of their economic deprivation and their satisfaction with the performance of the President. (See the following reports of the Fourth Quarter 2013 Social Weather Survey: “Hunger at 18.1% of families; Moderate Hunger 15.4%, Severe Hunger 2.7%,” 1/22/2014, “Families rating themselves as Mahirap or Poor at 55%; Families who were Food Poor at 41%,” 1/15/2014, and “PNoy satisfaction rating steadies at Good net +49,” 12/28/2013, all on www.sws.org.ph.)

General poverty. In December 2013, the Self-rated Poverty of Yolanda victims was 72 percent.  It was fully 20 points higher than the 52 percent among nonvictims, which we take as the national situation if Yolanda had not occurred.  The 3-point excess of the national Self-rated Poverty percentage of 55 from the nonvictims’ 52 is the estimated effect of Yolanda.  From its 50 percent rate in September 2013, Self-rated Poverty would have risen by only two points in the quarter, instead of by five points.

Food poverty. In the same survey, the Self-rated Food Poverty of Yolanda victims was 58 percent, or 20 points higher than the 38 percent reported by nonvictims.  The 3-point excess of the national Self-rated Food Poverty percentage of 41 from the nonvictims’ 38 is the estimated effect of Yolanda.  From its 37 percent rate in September 2013, Self-rated Food Poverty would have risen by only one point in the quarter, instead of by four points.

Hunger. The SWS Hunger indicator refers to experiencing involuntary hunger, i.e., for lack of food, at least once in the last three months.  Being the experience of hunger-pain, it is different from Self-rated Food Poverty, which is about the quality of one’s food being poor, rather than experiencing hunger.

The December survey found that 19.8 percent of the Yolanda victims experienced hunger once or a few times, and 4.1 percent of them experienced it often or always, in the past three months, for a total of 23.9 percent, suffering either “moderate” or “severe” hunger.  Among nonvictims, on the other hand, moderate hunger was only 14.7 percent, and severe hunger was only 2.5 percent, for a total of 17.2 percent suffering either degree of hunger.  These we take as the hunger rates had Yolanda not occurred.

For the entire country, moderate hunger was 15.4 percent, and severe hunger was 2.7 percent, for a  total hunger rate of 18.1 percent.  Thus, Yolanda added 0.7 to the nonvictims’ moderate hunger rate and 0.2 to the nonvictims’ severe hunger rate.  Taken together, it added 0.9 to the total hunger rate.

From its 15.3 percent in September 2013, moderate hunger would have fallen by 0.6 point, instead of risen by 0.1 point.  From its earlier 2.6 percent in September 2013, severe hunger would have fallen by 0.1 point, instead of risen by 0.1 point.  All in all, from its 17.9 in September 2013, the hunger percent would have fallen by 0.7 in the quarter, instead of risen by 0.2.

Satisfaction with the President. Among Yolanda victims, 73 percent were satisfied, and 19 percent were dissatisfied, with P-Noy’s performance as president, or a net rating of +54.  (This is “very good,” because +50 is the border from “good.”)  Among nonvictims, 69 percent were satisfied and 21 percent were dissatisfied, or a net rating of +48. Thus, had Yolanda not occurred,  P-Noy’s net rating would have fallen by one point, from +49 in September to +48 in December, instead of being steady at +49.

It is not surprising for Yolanda victims to be highly satisfied with the President, or, for that matter, with the government in general.  “Assisting disaster victims” is a subject on which a national administration, regardless of who is president, has always gotten a high grade in past SWS postdisaster surveys.   I think the people recognize the sincerity with which government staff render their help, and understand the tight resource constraints within which they work.

The December 2013 survey also has data on other suffering aside from poverty and hunger, and on public opinion on specific relief efforts and assistance from various donors.  Watch for these details in future SWS reports.

All in all, the post-Yolanda survey shows the sensitivity of national wellbeing to a natural disaster.  The more that climate changes, and thereby increases the risk of great disasters, the more critical it is to have quick feedback from the people.

* * *

The SWS December 2013 survey had special support from The Asia Foundation to enable it to expand its Visayan sample size to 650 households, from the normal 300.  This sharpened the Visayan findings without giving them undue weight within the national population.

* * *

Contact SWS: or mahar.mangahas@sws.org.ph.