COVID-19 and aid distribution in the Philippines: a patron-clientelist explanation

Abstract

Republic Act (RA) 11469, also known as ‘The Bayanihan to Heal as One Act', and RA 11494 the ‘Bayanihan to Recover as One Act', or Bayanihan 2, were passed into law in the Philippines as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic. RA 11469 and RA 11494 were fundamentally flawed because they relied on data from Listahanan, the National Targeting System for Poverty Reduction (NHTS-PR). These data gave only partial coverage of those affected by the pandemic and was largely reliant on data gathered in 2009. To plug the gaps data beneficiary identification was devolved to Local Government Units (LGUs) and local government officials. We examine how a lack of state capacity and the technical weaknesses of RAs 11469 and 11494 were capitalised on by an underlying culture of patron-clientelism. This undermined the distribution of relief aid, or ‘ayuda' to urban poor communities in Metro Manila and adjacent provinces. We also identify instances where strategies were devised to circumnavigate such political failings, which offer hope for future good practice. We argue that robust data and enhanced state capacity are essential for the distribution of future relief aid in the Philippines as a means of promoting social equity and limiting political discretion. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Third World Quarterly is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)