Based on preliminary results in 2023, the proportion of families in the Philippines with income below the poverty threshold was estimated at 10.9 percent, lower than the estimate for 2018. In that year, the average per capita food threshold reached 23,000 Philippine pesos.

Magnitude of Poor Families: Philippines data was reported at 3,746,513.000 Unit in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 4,214,921.000 Unit for 2012. Magnitude of Poor Families: Philippines data is updated yearly, averaging 4,091,789.000 Unit from Dec 1988 (Median) to 2015, with 10 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 4,531,170.000 Unit in 1994 and a record low of 3,293,096.000 Unit in 2003. Magnitude of Poor Families: Philippines data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.

Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Northern Mindanao data was reported at 30.300 % in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 32.800 % for 2012. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Northern Mindanao data is updated yearly, averaging 33.050 % from Dec 1988 (Median) to 2015, with 10 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 49.200 % in 1994 and a record low of 27.900 % in 2000. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Northern Mindanao data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.

Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Central Luzon data was reported at 8.900 % in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 10.100 % for 2012. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Central Luzon data is updated yearly, averaging 13.050 % from Dec 1988 (Median) to 2015, with 10 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 29.300 % in 1988 and a record low of 8.900 % in 2015. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Central Luzon data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.

Preliminary estimates for 2023 show that the region of Zamboanga Peninsula had the highest poverty incidence among families in the Philippines at 24.2 percent. In comparison, the National Capital Region (NCR) had the lowest poverty incidence among families during this period. Overall, the total poverty incidence of families in the Philippines was 10.9 percent.

In 2023, a family of five in the Philippines had a poverty threshold of a little 13,873 Philippine pesos per month. That was higher than the monthly poverty threshold in 2018, which amounted to around about 12,000 Philippine pesos.

Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: National Capital Region (NCR) data was reported at 2.700 % in 2015. This records an increase from the previous number of 2.600 % for 2012. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: National Capital Region (NCR) data is updated yearly, averaging 4.100 % from Dec 1988 (Median) to 2015, with 10 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 21.600 % in 1988 and a record low of 2.100 % in 2003. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: National Capital Region (NCR) data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.

The number of poor farmers in the Philippines was estimated at *** million in 2023, or those belonging to poor families with a per capita income of less than the per capita poverty threshold. This was significantly lower than the estimated number in 2015.

Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: CALABARZON data was reported at 6.700 % in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 8.300 % for 2012. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: CALABARZON data is updated yearly, averaging 8.800 % from Dec 1991 (Median) to 2015, with 7 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 19.100 % in 1991 and a record low of 6.700 % in 2015. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: CALABARZON data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.

This includes all measure of poverty among family and population at the regional level for the years 1991, 2006, 2009, 2012, and 2015. These are Poverty Incidence and Magnitude, Poverty and Food Thresholds, Poverty Gap, Income Gap, and Extent of Poverty. These data were derived from the result of Family Income and Expenditure Surveys and Labor Force Surveys.Map Displays at Scale: 1:12,000,000 to 1:147,000,000. Download detailed metadata about Philippine SDG 1.

Abstract

The 2008 Annual Poverty Indicators Survey (APIS) is conducted by the National Statistics Office (NSO) as a rider to the July 2008 Labor Force Survey (LFS). The 2008 APIS is the sixth in the series of annual poverty indicators surveys conducted nationwide. Since 1998, APIS has been conducted during the years when the Family Income and Expenditures Survey (FIES) is not conducted, except in 2001 and 2005 due to budgetary constraints.

The APIS is a nationwide survey designed to provide non-income indicators related to poverty at the national and regional levels. It is designed to gather data on the socio-economic profile of families and other information that are related to their living conditions. Specifically, it generates indicators which are correlated with poverty, such as indicators regarding the ownership or possession of house and lot, the types of the materials of the roofs and walls of their housing units, their access to safe water, the types of toilet facility they use in their homes, and presence of family members of specified characteristics such as children 6-12 years old enrolled in elementary, children 13-16 years old enrolled in high school, members 18 years old and over gainfully employed, working children 5-17 years old and family members with membership in any health, life and/or pre-need insurance system.

The APIS is being undertaken by the National Statistics Office as mandataed by Commonwealth Act 591 which authorizes the then Bureau of the Census and Statistics, now NSO, "to conduct by enumeration, sampling or other methods, for statistical purposes, studies of the social and economic situation of the country" and in consonance with the provision of Executive Order 121 which designated the office as the "major statistical agency responsible for generating general purpose statistics.

Geographic coverage

National Coverage Seventeen (17) Administrative Regions: National Capital Region (NCR) Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) I - Ilocos II - Cagayan Valley III - Central Luzon IVA - CALABARZON IVB - MIMAROPA V - Bicol VI - Western Visayas VII - Central Visayas VIII - Eastern Visayas IX - Zamboanga Peninsula X - Northern Mindanao XI - Davao XII - SOCCSKSARGEN XIII - Caraga Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM)

Analysis unit

Households

Universe

The survey covered all households.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The 2008 APIS is a sample survey designed to provide data representative of the country and its 17 administrative regions. The survey's sample design helps ensure this representativeness. The 2008 APIS used the 2003 master sample created for household surveys on the basis of the 2000 Census of Population and Housing (CPH) results. The survey used four replicates of the master sample. For each region (domain) and stratum, a three-stage sampling scheme was used: the selection of primary sampling units (PSUs) for the first stage, of sample enumeration areas (EAs) for the second stage, and of sample housing units for the third stage. PSUs within a region were stratified based on the proportion of households living in housing units made of strong materials, proportion of households in the barangay engaged in agricultural activities and per capita income of the city/municipality.

As earlier mentioned, a three-stage sampling design was used in each stratum within a region. In the first stage, primary sampling units (PSUs) were selected with probability proportional to the number of households in the 2000 Census. PSUs consisted of a barangay or a group of contiguous barangays. In the second stage, in each sampled PSU, EAs were selected with probability proportional to the number of households in the 2000 Census. An EA is defined as an area with discernable boundaries consisting of approximately 350 contiguous households. In the third stage, from each sampled EA, housing units were selected using systematic sampling. For operational considerations, at most 30 housing units were selected per sample EA. All households in sample housing units were interviewed except for sample housing units with more than three households. In such a housing unit, three households were randomly selected with equal probability.

The 2008 APIS was conducted simultaneously with the July 2008 Labor Force Survey (LFS). All sample households of the July 2008 LFS were interviewed for the 2008 APIS. Only household members related to the household head by blood, marriage or adoption were considered as members of the sample household in APIS. Family members of the household head who are working abroad were excluded.

Sampling deviation

NA

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Although questions on 'Changes in Welfare' were dropped and some items were modified for the 2008 APIS, most of the questions/items in the previous APISs were retained as requested by data users. Nine items were added in order to generate data that will be more useful in assessing the poverty situation in the country. The new questionnaire for the 2008 contains the abridged version of the module on entrepreneurial activities resulting to the reduction of the number of pages from 24 to 12. The decision to use the abridged version was based on the results of the study entitled “Redesigning APIS as a Poverty Monitoring Tool” undertaken by the Demographic and Social Statistics Division in 2006. The redesigned questionnaire produced results which are not statistically different from results based on the original design in 2004. The use of the redesigned questionnaire is also cost-efficient.

A round table discussion was held for the 2008 APIS before the conduct of the pretest. The redesigned APIS questionnaire based from the project's output was presented. It was agreed upon during this meeting to adopt the redesigned APIS for this round of APIS, with the addition of item on 'Hunger'.

Cleaning operations

Flow of Processing Activity

In order to implement a systematic flow of the processing activities and reduce the movement of questionnaires from one employee to another, the same processor performed the following specific activities for the same folio. 1. General screening; 2. Editing and coding of APIS questionnaires and computations of totals ; and 3. General review of edited APIS questionnaire.

Folioing

To facilitate handling during manual and machine processing, APIS questionnaires were folioed in the Provincial Office before the start of manual processing.

The APIS questionnaires for one sample barangay/EA contained in the folio was arranged consecutively according to the sample housing serial number (SHSN) from lowest to highest.

General Screening

General screening was done by going over the submitted accomplished questionnaires and checking for the completeness of the geographic identification and other information called for in the cover page.

General screening for APIS questionnaires was done to ensure that the geographic and household identification and the entire sample households are the same with the MS Form 6.

General Instructions on Manual Processing

The following instructions was observed in manual processing.

1. Prior to editing and coding of items, the questionnaires were checked if they were properly folioed. Folioing was done in the province. Regional Offices checked if folioing was done properly by the Provincial Offices.

2. All questionnaires for one folio was assigned to only one editor/coder, unless otherwise necessary (e.g., when the one who is processing a folio is absent for more than a day).

3. In general, the editors assumed that the original entries are correct. Editing was done only when an entry is obviously incorrect. A doubtful or inconsistent item was verified in the field.

Response rate

Of the 43,020 eligible sample households for the 2008 APIS, 40,613 were successfully interviewed. This translated to a response rate of 94.4 percent at the national level. Households which were not interviewed either refused to be interviewed or were not available or were away during the enumeration period.

Sampling error estimates

Sampling errors have been calculated for the following variables: 1) Percentage of Families with Own or Ownerlike Possession of House and Lot they Occupy 2) Percentage of Families Living in Houses with Roof Made of Strong Materials 3) Percentage of Families Living in Houses with Outer Walls Made of Strong Materials 4) Percentage of Families with Electricity in the Building/House They Reside in 5) Percentage of Families with Access to Safe Water Supply 6) Percentage of Families with Sanitary Toilet 7) Percentage of Families with Children 6-12 Years Old in Elementary Grades 8) Percentage of Families with Children 13-16 Years Old in High School 9) Percentage of Families with Members 18 Years Old and Over Gainfully Employed 10) Percentage of Families with Working Children 5-17 Years Old 11) Average Family Income 12) Average Family Expenditure

Data appraisal

A series of data quality tables were generated to review the quality of the data and include the following: - Age distribution of the household population - Highest grade completed versus current grade - Highest grade completed versus age - Current grade versus age - Reason for not attending school versus highest grade completed - Reason for not attending school versus current grade - Marital status versus age - Consistency of income vs. expenditure

Philippines Magnitude of Poor Families: MIMAROPA data was reported at 121,283.000 Unit in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 150,486.000 Unit for 2012. Philippines Magnitude of Poor Families: MIMAROPA data is updated yearly, averaging 150,486.000 Unit from Dec 1991 (Median) to 2015, with 7 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 176,282.000 Unit in 2006 and a record low of 121,283.000 Unit in 2015. Philippines Magnitude of Poor Families: MIMAROPA data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.

Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Southern Mindanao data was reported at 16.600 % in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 25.000 % for 2012. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Southern Mindanao data is updated yearly, averaging 29.800 % from Dec 1988 (Median) to 2015, with 10 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 43.100 % in 1988 and a record low of 16.600 % in 2015. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Southern Mindanao data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.

Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Eastern Visayas data was reported at 30.700 % in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 37.400 % for 2012. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Eastern Visayas data is updated yearly, averaging 37.650 % from Dec 1988 (Median) to 2015, with 10 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 48.900 % in 1988 and a record low of 30.200 % in 2003. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Eastern Visayas data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.

Poverty Incidence is the proportion of individuals with per capita income less than the poverty thresholds. Data on poverty is compiled by the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) which is made available every three (3) years. The main source of data used in coming out of the poverty estimates are the triennial Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES), quarterly Labour Force Survey (LFS) and Consumer Price Index (CPI), and the Annual Poverty Indicator Survey (APIS).

Abstract

The 2006 Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) had the following primary objectives:

1) to gather data on family income and family expenditure and related information affecting income and expenditure levels and patterns in the Philippines; 2) to determine the sources of income and income distribution, levels of living and spending patterns, and the degree of inequality among families; 3) to provide benchmark information to update weights for the estimation of consumer price index; and 4) to provide information for the estimation of the country's poverty threshold and incidence.

Geographic coverage

The 2003 Master Sample (MS) considers the country's 17 administrative regions as the sampling domains. A domain is referred to as a subdivision of the country for which estimates with adequate level of precision are generated. It must be noted that while there is demand for data at the provincial level (and to some extent municipal and barangay levels), the provinces were not treated as sampling domains because there are more than 80 provinces which would entail a large resource requirement.

Analysis unit

The unit of analysis is the family. A family consists of the household head, spouse, unmarried children, ever-married children, son-in-law/daughter-in-law, parents of the head/spouse and other relatives who are members of the household.

In households where there are two or more persons not related to each other by blood, marriage or adoption, only the income and expenditure of the member who is considered as the household head is included.

Institutional population is not within the scope of the survey.

Universe

All households and members of households nationwide

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The 2003 Master Sample (MS) considers the country's 17 administrative regions as defined in Executive Orders (EO) 36 and 131 as the sampling domains. A domain is referred to as a subdivision of the country for which estimates with adequate level of precision are generated. It must be noted that while there is demand for data at the provincial level (and to some extent municipal and barangay levels), the provinces were not treated as sampling domains because there are more than 80 provinces which would entail a large resource requirement.

As in most household surveys, the 2003 MS made use of an area sample design. For this purpose, the Enumeration Area Reference File (EARF) of the 2000 Census of Population and Housing (CPH) was utilized as sampling frame. The EARF contains the number of households by enumeration area (EA) in each barangay.

This frame was used to form the primary sampling units (PSUs). With consideration of the period for which the 2003 MS will be in use, the PSUs were formed/defined as a barangay or a combination of barangays with at least 500 households.

The 2003 MS considers the 17 regions of the country as the primary strata. Within each region, further stratification was performed using geographic groupings such as provinces, highly urbanized cities (HUCs), and independent component cities (ICCs). Within each of these substrata formed within regions, the PSUs were further stratified, to the extent possible, using the proportion of strong houses (PSTRONG), indicator of engagement in agriculture of the area (AGRI), and a measure of per capita income (PERCAPITA) as stratification factors.

The 2003 MS consists of a sample of 2,835 PSUs. The entire MS was divided into four sub-samples or independent replicates, such as a quarter sample contains one fourth of the total PSUs; a half sample contains one-half of the four sub-samples or equivalent to all PSUs in two replicates. The final number of sample PSUs for each domain was determined by first classifying PSUs as either selfrepresenting (SR) or non-self-representing (NSR). In addition, to facilitate the selection of sub-samples, the total number of NSR PSUs in each region was adjusted to make it a multiple of 4. SR PSUs refers to a very large PSU in the region/domain with a selection probability of approximately 1 or higher and is outright included in the MS; it is properly treated as a stratum; also known as certainty PSU. NSR PSUs refers to a regular too small sized PSU in a region/domain; also known as non certainty PSU. The 2003 MS consists of 330 certainty PSUs and 2,505 non-certainty PSUs. To have some control over the sub-sample size, the PSUs were selected with probability proportional to some estimated measure of size. The size measure refers to the total number of households from the 2000 CPH. Because of the wide variation in PSU sizes, PSUs with selection probabilities greater than 1 were identified and were included in the sample as certainty selections.

At the second stage, enumeration areas (EAs) were selected within sampled PSUs, and at the third stage, housing units were selected within sampled EAs. Generally, all households in sampled housing units were enumerated, except for few cases when the number of households in a housing unit exceeds three. In which case, a sample of three households in a sampled housing unit was selected at random with equal probability.

An EA is defined as an area with discernable boundaries within barangays consisting of about 150 contiguous households. These EAs were identified during the 2000 CPH. A housing unit, on the other hand, is a structurally separate and independent place of abode which, by the way it has been constructed, converted, or arranged, is intended for habitation by a household.

The 2006 FIES involved the interview of a national sample of about 51,000 sample households deemed sufficient to gather data on family income and family expenditure and related information affecting income and expenditure levels and patterns in the Philippines at the national and regional level. The sample households covered in the survey were the same households interviewed in the July 2006 and January 2007 round of the LFS.

Sampling deviation

The estimates from the 2006 FIES include results of the first FIES visit for the NCR based on questionnaires recovered from fire. The fire that hit the NCR’s Statistics Office on October 3, 2006 damaged 58 percent of the total questionnaires for the FIES first visit. Questionnaires that were encoded and processed cover around 42 percent of these questionnaires. In the preliminary results, values for the burned questionnaires were imputed using a ratio which requires data from the recovered questionnaires and data from corresponding questionnaires from the second visit. The ratio was computed by getting the sums of the total income and total expenditure in the recovered questionnaires from the first visit and the sums of the same data from corresponding second visit questionnaires and then by dividing the sums from the second visit by the sums from the first visit. The annual estimates on income and expenditure for NCR were computed by dividing the second visit values by the computed ratio. For the final results, the annual estimates for the NCR were computed by multiplying by 2 the second visit data. This imputation procedure was opted after it has been established that there was no significant difference between using the ratio and the multiplier ‘2’.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The 2006 FIES adopts a questionnaire design wherein separate questionnaire with the same sets of questions for both visits will be used. The sample household is interviewed in two separate operations each time using the half-year period preceding the interview as reference period. This scheme envisions to improve the quality of data gathered since it minimizes memory bias of respondents and at the same time captures the seasonality of income and expenditure patterns. The use of separate questionnaire with the same set of questions for both visits was used starting 2003 FIES. In previous FIES, the same set of questions for each semester (two enumeration periods) were contained in one questionnaire.

To further reduce memory bias, the concept of "average week" consumption for all food items shall be utilized for the 2006 FIES. Moreover, the reference period for Fuel, Light and Water, Transportation and Communication, Household Operations and Personal Care and Effects is limited to the past month and in some specified cases, the concept of average month consumption shall be used. For all other expenditure groups, the past six months shall be used as reference period.

The questionnaire has four main parts consisting of the following:

Part I. Identification and Other Information (page 1-3) (Geographic Identification, Other Information and Particulars about the Family)

Part II. Expenditures (page 4-45) Section A. Food, Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco Section B. Fuel, Light and Water, Transportation and Communication, and Household Operations Section C. Personal Care and Effects, Clothing Footwear and Other Wear Section D. Education, Recreation, and Medical Care Section E. Furnishings and Equipment Section F. Taxes Section G. Housing, House Maintenance and Minor Repairs Section H. Miscellaneous Expenditures Section I. Other Disbursements

Part III. Income (page 46-55) Section A. Salaries and Wages from Employment Section B. Net Share of Crops, Fruits and Vegetables Produced and/or Livestock and Poultry Raised by Other Households Section C. Other Sources of Income Section D. Other Receipts Section

Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Cagayan Valley data was reported at 11.700 % in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 17.000 % for 2012. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Cagayan Valley data is updated yearly, averaging 23.500 % from Dec 1988 (Median) to 2015, with 10 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 40.400 % in 1988 and a record low of 11.700 % in 2015. Philippines Incidence of Poor Families: Cagayan Valley data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.

Philippines Magnitude of Poor Families: Central Mindanao data was reported at 321,286.000 Unit in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 366,169.000 Unit for 2012. Philippines Magnitude of Poor Families: Central Mindanao data is updated yearly, averaging 237,363.000 Unit from Dec 1988 (Median) to 2015, with 10 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 366,169.000 Unit in 2012 and a record low of 177,807.000 Unit in 1988. Philippines Magnitude of Poor Families: Central Mindanao data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.

Philippines Magnitude of Poor Families: Western Visayas data was reported at 281,826.000 Unit in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 365,040.000 Unit for 2012. Philippines Magnitude of Poor Families: Western Visayas data is updated yearly, averaging 359,235.500 Unit from Dec 1988 (Median) to 2015, with 10 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 498,405.000 Unit in 1997 and a record low of 281,826.000 Unit in 2015. Philippines Magnitude of Poor Families: Western Visayas data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.

Philippines Magnitude of Poor Population: Eastern Visayas data was reported at 1,756,744.000 Person in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 1,882,934.000 Person for 2012. Philippines Magnitude of Poor Population: Eastern Visayas data is updated yearly, averaging 1,658,559.500 Person from Dec 1988 (Median) to 2015, with 10 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1,882,934.000 Person in 2012 and a record low of 1,416,548.000 Person in 2003. Philippines Magnitude of Poor Population: Eastern Visayas data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Philippine Statistics Authority. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Philippines – Table PH.H025: Family Income and Expenditure Survey: Poverty Statistics and Proportion of Poor Population: By Regions.