Jump to content

Talk:Economy of the Philippines

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Attention

[edit]

I reckon that its about time this page be as updated as the other articles of the other countries. Its already 2005, and the 2004 numbers of the economic indicators are already out. I would want to update them myself, but there is just too many. Alot of the details in the article are also out of date, help anyone???-— Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.213.246.235 (talk) 09:43, 2 February 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was hoping that we can reorganize with ff. sections:

  • Background,
  • Agriculture and Fishing,
  • Commerce,
  • Communication,
  • Currency,
  • Energy,
  • Forestry,
  • Labor
  • Manufacturing,
  • Mining,
  • Transportation

Statistics already embedded in each section, uhm help?!?-— Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.213.246.235 (talk) 10:10, 2 February 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody with the information should add

Italic text-— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.230.57.135 (talk) 00:10, 3 April 2007 (UTC)==Comment== I think you put the wrong caption about the rice paddies. The Philippines is a rice importer. It imports rice from Vietnam. Yes, it used to be our biggest agricultural export but now, we don't have enough rice output to meet domestic demand. If I'm not mistaken, coconut products are the largest agricultural exports. Please check the National Statistical Coordination Board website at http://www.nscb.gov.ph[reply]

I suggest that you add a section for Tourism because it is making progress due to the agressive marketing campaign of the Department of Tourism. You may want to put photos of the majestic tourist destinations in the country.-— Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.87.151.226 (talk) 08:25, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The country actually has enough supply of rice for the year 2006. They are only importing to beef up their rice stocks in case of unusual weather phenomenon such as the El Nino.-— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mildrckfr (talk • contribs) 15:14, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

below the poverty line- the latest data of poverty line is 26% way year 2003. should you guys have data for 2006 or at least 2005?-— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.230.57.135 (talk) 00:07, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


This article fails to recognize the protectionist policies which the Philippine elites had imposed on the country. The Filipino elites especially the Nacionalista Party had ruined Philippine economy from the beginning. Even the Americans permitted these elites(illustrados) to dominate the economy during American colonial period. The 1987 Constitution is a restatement of Pinoy elites domination. The 1987 constitution specifies that majority of businesses should be 60% Filipino owned. Guess who will be those Filipinos-the elites? This is the main reason why the bulk of most foreign direct investments in Asian region have bypassed Philippines since the 1980's. Major foreign multinationals prefers to be majority owners especially when a large investment money is involved. Of course, Philippine govt can always make exception to the 60/40 rule for a fee. The end result is continued poverty where 1/3 of the population lives on less than $2.00 per day. Until Philippines ends it protectionist policies, Philippines would remain the Sick Man of Asia and purveyor of global workers.


See... http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1568/is_n2_v26/ai_15473461-The human costs of protectionism

http://countrystudies.us/philippines/17.htm, America failed to change the illustrados

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/FJ02Ae01.html 134 families that control Philippines-— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathanreyes (talk • contribs) 15:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, this article is so Pro-Philippines. It seems that it was written by a Philippine govt employee. There is no mention of poverty or corruption. The brain drain is not even addressed.-— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.93.73.207 (talk) 01:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chaos!

[edit]

The table below is probably not entirely accurate, due either to problems I've introduced in putting it together or to updated info at cited sources overtaking outdated info citing those sources. Even so, I think this is pretty close, and I think that it points up a real editorial problem.

Wikipedia articles have a lot of entropy, and it's necessary to wage a constant battle against increases in disorder. However, in this case it looks as if things have probably started out in a disordered state.

Would it be possible to come to some sort of consensus in the community of people interested in maintaining the wikipedia pages represented by the table columns about what figures from which sources should be used for this sort of thing and to put the consensus figure in the "to be used" column of this table? If so, a notice that this is being done could be placed in the affected pages (AFAIK, just two articles and one template), which could be updated with sync'd-up and cite-supported figures once this is finished. Also, once this is finished, that "to be used" list could be saved somewhere and used to re-synchronize pages which drift and to track what pages need updating when supporting source content is updated.

Comments? -- Boracay Bill (talk) 04:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Item Statistics section
of this page		 this page
infobox		 Philippines page
infobox		 To be used
(with cite)
GDP (PPP) $508.1 billion (2006 est.)[al] $453 billion (2006)[a42] $466.632 billion (2006)[bl]
GDP - real growth rate 6.9 % (2007 est.)[c1] 5.3% (2006)[d1]
{{failed verification}} 		19.1% (calculated from 2005 & 2006 figures: (117.562-98.718)/98.718)[b2]

(not shown, seems unreasonable)

GDP (PPP per capita) $5,700 (2006 est.)[a2] $4,923 (2006)[d2]
{{failed verification}} 		$5,365.287 (2006)[b3]
GDP composition by sector agriculture: 14.5%
industry: 32.3%
services: 53.2%
(2003 est.)[a3]
Household income or consumption by percentage share lowest 10%: 1.7%
highest 10%: 38.4%
(2000)[a4]
Population below poverty line 24.7% (2003)a
6.4% (2007)a5
Household income or consumption by percentage share lowest 10%: 1.7%
highest 10%: 38.4%
(2000)[a6]
Inflation rate (consumer prices) 2.7%(2007)[a7]
Labour force 35.79 million (2006)[a8]
41.93 million (2007)[a9] 		36.64 million (2006)[d3]
{{failed verification}}
Labour force by occupation agriculture 33%
industry 30%
services 37%
(2007 est.)[a10] 		services (48%)
agriculture (36%)
industry (16%)
(2004)[d4]
{{failed verification}}
Unemployment rate 10.4% (2003)[a11]
7.9% (2007)[a{12] 		8.4% (2006)
(2004)[d5]
{{failed verification}}
Gini 46.6 (undisplayed)[a34] 44.5 (2003)[d1]
Budget revenues: $19.53 billion

expenditures: $20.74 billion
(2006 est.)
[a13]

Revenues: $19.44 billion (2006)

Expenses: 21.38 billion (2006)
[a35]

Industrial production growth rate 0.1% (2003 est.)[a14]
Electricity
production 		45,210 GWh (2001)[a15]
Electricity
production by source 		fossil fuel: 70.12%
hydro: 10.75%
nuclear: 0%

geothermal: 19.13%
(1998)[a16]

Electricity consumption: 42,040 GWh
exports: 0 kWh
imports: 0 kWh
(2001)[a17]
Exports $47.2 billion (2006 est.)[a18] $44.2 billion (2006)[a37]
Exports
partners 		United States 20.1%, Japan 15.9%, Hong Kong 8.5%, Netherlands 8.1%, Taiwan 6.9%, Malaysia 6.8%, Singapore 6.7%, China 5.9% (2003)[a19] United States 18%
Japan 17.5%
China 9.9%
Netherlands 9.8%
Hong Kong 8.1%
Singapore 6.6%
Malaysia 6%
Taiwan 4.6% (2006)[a37]
Imports $51.6 billion (2006 est.)[a20]
Import
partners 		Japan 20.4%, US 19.8%, Singapore 6.8%, South Korea 6.4%, Taiwan 5%, China 4.8%, Hong Kong 4.3% (2003)[a21] United States 19.2%, Japan 17%, Singapore 7.9%, Taiwan 7.5%, China 6.3%, South Korea 4.8%, Saudi Arabia 4.6%, Hong Kong 4.1% (2006)[a39]
Debt - external $56.16 billion (2003)[a22] $316.65 billion (69.9% of GDP)[a40]
Economic aid - recipient ODA commitments, $1.2 billion (2002)[a23] ODA, $2.0 billion (2002)[a41]
Exchange rates
Philippine pesos (P) per US$1 		41.40 (2007)[a23],

49.28 (2006)[a24], 53.10 (2005)[a25], 56.052 (2004)[a26], 54.203 (2003)[a27], 40.427 (January 2000)[a28], 39.089 (1999)[a29], 40.893 (1998)[a30], 29.471 (1997)[a31], 26.216 (1996)[a32], 25.714 (1995)[a33]

a 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 41 42 No supporting source cited

b 1 2 3 Report for selected subjects (Philippines), International Monetary Fund, 2006, retrieved 2007-12-12 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)


c 1 Rosemarie Francisco, writing on Yahoo Business[unreliable source?]

d 1 2 3 4 5 CIA Factbook

Software section removed

[edit]

I've removed the Software subsection, which read as follows:

"====Software====
One of the software houses established in the country is Trend Micro, a small anti virus software maker with its main product PC-Cillin. The company develops its "cures" for viruses in Eastwood City, Libis, Quezon City." (citing Eastwood City Cyberpark Operating Firms, Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA), retrieved 2007-12-11 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)

This might or might not be link spam, but it's not a very notable bit of info in terms of the national economy. Also, the impression given that this is a Philippine company appears to be false. The Trend Micro article opens as follows:

"Trend Micro (TYO: 4704) is a global company, headquartered in Tokyo, that develops software to protect against computer viruses. Steve Chang, a Taiwanese, the founder and former CEO of the company, started the company in California in 1988. Its headquarters are in Tokyo. In 2004 Chang passed leadership to Eva Chen, co-founder of Trend Micro. She was CTO from 1996 to 2004. One of her best known developments is Trend Micro InterScan VirusWall."

That article goes on to say:

"... they have a global virus/worm response center, called TrendLabs. Its offices are located in Philippines, Taiwan, Japan, China, France, Germany, Ireland, USA, Dubai, Australia & New Zealand."

If foreign firms with offices and fsacilities in the Philippines are to be highlighted, there are probably many more notable cases. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 23:42, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Typo...

[edit]

I guess a major wank failure would result in less growth.-— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.217.58.145 (talk) 04:22, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Philippines Capitalist?

[edit]

Since when is the Philippines a Capitalist Economy or a Market Economy? Philippines is a mixed economy. Take the ownership of Meralco for example. It is basically both privately owned and government owned which is basically Fascism. Philippines has a lot of regulations so the "Market Economy" doesnt apply to the Philippines. Based on my opinion, Philippines is more of a Socialist country but with Private Property. Philippines also has a lot of protectionist policies which is basically Mercantile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.208.74.186 (talk) 16:20, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalist?

[edit]

"During this time, capitalism became highly prevalent in the nation, as major American corporations dominated local industry alongside a few local entrepreneurs."

What is this supposed to mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.88.239.130 (talk) 22:44, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

7.3% vs. 7.9%

[edit]

Re this reversion. I've taken another look at the cited supporting sources; it looks like I was editing too hastily in my edit which you reverted and misread something. Thanks for the correction. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:20, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. There seems to be a sneaky vandal that has developed an attachment to this article—that or someone expressing too much enthusiasm. Lambanog (talk) 03:27, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Monument To Immortality.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Monument To Immortality.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Monument To Immortality.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No section on agriculture

[edit]

There is no section on agriculture. There should be considering that this country is still largely rural and twice as many work in agriculture as in industry. The Philippines is defined in part by farms and plantations (think rice terraces, encomiendas, sugar plantations, Dole). Not only should there be a significant section here but there should be a separate article, a la Agriculture in Malaysia or Agriculture in Malawi. At the very least, this should be like Economy of France#agriculture. Unfortunately I am not an expert and will leave it to others --Bruce Hall (talk) 01:55, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Made several organization changes

[edit]

I've made several changes to the organization of this article and would welcome your thoughts. I moved the government budget section to the bottom since this is about the economy and not fiscal policy, though I was tempted to delete the section since it has nothing but the *proposed* budget allocations. I rename "private sector" to "composition of sectors" and added subsections to better reflect the standard division of GDP into agriculture, industry and services, with further subsections on specific sub-sectors. As part of this I changed "business process outsourcing" to the more general term "outsourcing". Not all outsourcing worldwide is business processes. BPO is just a subset of the O. Finally I added in a number of "see also" links since the economy of the Philippines is a topic too big to be adequately discussed in one article. This should be a general overview with links to more specific, targeted articles. Much, much work needs to be done. This article as it stands has far too many charts, graphs, and other details and very little explanation. Encyclopedias are not almanacs and should have less stats and more explanation, but I do have the knowledge to add such expert analysis. --Bruce Hall (talk) 04:14, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Economy of the Philippines

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Economy of the Philippines's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "imf1":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 15:23, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello everyone, I am working for the International Trade Centre (ITC), a UN/WTO agency that aims to promote sustainable economic development through trade promotion. I would like to propose the addition of an external link (http://www.macmap.org/QuickSearch/FindTariff/FindTariff.aspx?subsite=open_access&country=SCC608%7cPhilippines&source=1%7CITC) that leads directly to our online database of customs tariffs applied by the Philippines. Visitors can easily look up market access information for the Philippines by selecting the product and partner of their interest. I would like you to consider this link under the WP:ELYES #3 prescriptions. Moreover, the reliability and the pertinence of this link can be supported by the following facts 1) ITC is part of the United Nations, and aims to share trade and market access data on by country and product as a global public good 2) No registration is required to access this information 3) Market access data (Tariffs and non-tariff measures) are regularly updated

Thank you, Divoc (talk) 09:54, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Economy of the Philippines

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Economy of the Philippines's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "geo":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 22:12, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First Philippine Republic

[edit]

This edit caught my eye. When I looked at the edited section and saw "... newly independent country of the Philippines", my jaw dropped. This article is not the place to rewrite the political history of the Philippines, and I made this edit to correct some of that. The First Philippine Republic was not a sovereign national government. It was an unsuccessful rebellion, an insurgency, the continuation of the Philippine Revolution which grew out of the Katipunan movement, and which was ultimately unsuccessful militarily. Discussion of that in this article, though, would give undue weight to a particular politically charged bit of the country's political history when the topic of the article is the country's economy. Please discuss these political points on the talk pages of more topically appropriate articles such as History of the Philippines (1898-1946), First Philippine Republic, Taft Commission, etc. rather than here.

I've also removed an unsupported assertion that Spain left the Philippines in 1900. I have no idea where that might have come from, but please see the Treaty of Paris (1898) article.

On the topic of the country's economy during this period, I see that the text I have not edited makes some specifiic assertions and cites this Nationmaster page in support. I don't know where Nationmaster got their info, but my guess would be that it comes from reports of the Taft Commission (as background, see the first para at http://countrystudies.us/philippines/19.htm in Ronald E. Dolan, ed. Philippines: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1991.), and that the figures from that cited source have nothing whatever to do with the economy of the First Philippine Republic. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:15, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Economy of the Philippines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:22, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Economy of the Philippines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:45, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on Economy of the Philippines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:17, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Very Inaccurate "Historical and Future Annual GDP Growth Rates" Table UPDATE THIS! [RESOLVED]

[edit]


This table is on the very top and is easy to spot. Anyone reading the table will be greatly misinformed. The statistics for the official rate as far as I'm concerned are all wrong and I've cross referenced economic statistics for the official growth rate of the Philippines from 1960s to present and mostly the datas on the table didn't even come close especially the older ones. Worst of all of it is the statistics for the decade 1980-1989 @11% that should be 2.012% to 2.1% max.

Reliable and Updated Sources are in the links below.

[REMOVE SPACES TO OPEN LINKS]

theglobaleconomy. com/Philippines/Economic_growth/

tradingeconomics. com/philippines/gdp-growth-annual

business.inquirer. net/211773/economic-and-agriculture-scores-of-philippine-presidents

I already summarize this on an excel worksheet, but I can't edit this very inaccurate table. So anyone who has privilege to edit this, pls. update it with the official statistics. Would be better really if it is on a per yr basis too.
As for something that is the very first thing that is shown to readers, having this very inaccurate table even at the top of the wiki is a big NO NO.-— Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshua121595 (talk • contribs) 20:58, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE as of March 11, 2018 Finally updated the table, turns out I just didn't see the table when I first look at it. However statistics before 1960 has not been updated and still based on the old reference. I can't reference tradingeconomics. com though. But Was able to reference the statistics from theglobaleconomy. com-— Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshua121595 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Philippine contacts with the Ancient Greeks in 21 AD is questionable.

[edit]

We have no other proof that this is true apart from one source with no solid proof of the claim. The claim is speculative at most. The Philippine islands was the most parsley populated area in Southeast Asia that when the Spaniards went here in 16th century, the population of any Philippine "city" did not reach 1 million. This is the reason why the Philippines never had a pre-colonial empire like Japan or China. There were very little inhabitants in the Philippines even when Europe colonized it. Any historian who claims this is true probably has no concept of time, geography, and yes, world history. Ancient Greece in 21 AD was part of the Roman empire. And ancient Rome never really successfully reached colonized India before Alexander the Greay. Ancient Rome never knew that Southeast Asia exists. It is logistically impossible for a Greek seafarer to reach the Philippines neither by navigational expertise nor by shipwrecks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.230.109.35 (talk) 14:27, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:24, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:23, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2021

[edit]
103.125.150.138 (talk) 07:29, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
[reply]
Copy-Paste From Article
Historical growth of the Philippine economy from 1961–2015

The Philippine economy has been growing steadily over decades and the International Monetary Fund in 2014 reported it as the 39th largest economy in the world. However, its growth has been behind that of many of its Asian neighbors, the so-called Asian Tigers, and it is not a part of the Group of 20 nations. Instead, it is grouped in a second tier for emerging markets or newly industrialized countries. Depending on the analyst, this second tier can go by the name the Next Eleven or the Tiger Cub Economies.

In 2012 and 2013, the Philippines posted high GDP growth rates, reaching 6.8% in 2012 and 7.2% in 2013,[1][2][3] the highest GDP growth rates in Asia for the first two quarters of 2013, followed by China and Indonesia.[4]

A chart of selected statistics showing trends in the gross domestic product of the Philippines using data taken from the International Monetary Fund.[5][6]

  Indicates economic growth   Indicates contraction / recession

Year GDP growth[a] GDP
in PHP Billion
(current prices) 		GDP
in USD Billion
(current prices) 		GDP per capita
in USD
(current prices) 		GDP
in USD Billion
(PPP) 		GDP per capita
in USD
(PPP) 		Peso vs. Dollar
Exchange Rate
2021 6.50% Increase 3,646 Increase 9,247 Increase
2020* −7.30% Decrease Positive decrease 49.62
2019 6.00% Decrease Negative increase 51.79
2018 6.30% Decrease 16,545 Increase 330.9 Increase Negative increase 52.66
2017 6.70% Decrease 15,648.6 Increase 313.6 Increase Negative increase 49.90
2016 6.90% Increase 14,299.8 Increase 304.9 Increase Negative increase 46.90
2015[7] 5.80% Decrease 13,307.3 Increase 292.4 Increase 2,863 Increase 741.0 Increase 6,547 Decrease Negative increase 45.50
2014[7] 6.10% Decrease 12,645.3 Increase 284.8 Increase 2,844 Increase 642.8 Increase 6,924 Increase Negative increase 44.40
2013[8] 7.20% Increase 11,546.1 Increase 272.2 Increase 2,792 Increase 454.3 Increase 4,660 Increase Negative increase 42.45
2012[9] 6.80% Increase 10,564.9 Increase 250.2 Increase 2,611 Increase 419.6 Increase 4,380 Increase Positive decrease 42.23
2011 3.60% Decrease 9,706.3 Increase 224.1 Increase 2,379 Increase 386.1 Increase 4,098 Increase Positive decrease 43.31
2010 7.63% Increase 9,003.5 Increase 199.6 Increase 2,155 Increase 365.3 Increase 3,945 Increase Positive decrease 45.11
2009 1.15% Decrease 8,026.1 Increase 168.5 Decrease 1,851 Decrease 335.4 Increase 3,685 Increase Negative increase 47.64
2008 4.15% Decrease 7,720.9 Increase 173.6 Increase 1,919 Increase 329.0 Increase 3,636 Increase Positive decrease 44.47
2007 7.12% Increase 6,892.7 Increase 149.4 Increase 1,684 Increase 309.9 Increase 3,493 Increase Positive decrease 46.15
2006 5.24% Increase 6,271.2 Increase 122.2 Increase 1,405 Increase 283.5 Increase 3,255 Increase Positive decrease 51.31
2005 4.78% Decrease 5,677.8 Increase 103.1 Increase 1,209 Increase 261.0 Increase 3,061 Increase Positive decrease 55.09
2004 6.70% Increase 5,120.4 Increase 91.4 Increase 1,093 Increase 242.7 Increase 2,905 Increase Negative increase 56.04
2003 4.97% Increase 4,548.1 Increase 83.9 Increase 1,025 Increase 222.7 Increase 2,720 Increase Negative increase 54.20
2002 3.65% Increase 4,198.3 Increase 81.4 Increase 1,014 Increase 207.8 Increase 2,591 Increase Negative increase 51.60
2001 2.89% Decrease 3,888.8 Increase 76.3 Decrease 971 Decrease 197.3 Increase 2,511 Increase Negative increase 50.99
2000 4.41% Increase 3,580.7 Increase 81.0 Decrease 1,053 Decrease 187.5 Increase 2,437 Increase Negative increase 44.19
1999 3.08% Increase 3,244.2 Increase 83.0 Increase 1,110 Increase 175.8 Increase 2,352 Increase Positive decrease 39.09
1998 −0.58% Decrease 2,952.8 Increase 73.8 Decrease 1,009 Decrease 168.1 Increase 2,297 Decrease Negative increase 40.02
1997 5.19% Decrease 2,688.7 Increase 92.8 Decrease 1,297 Decrease 167.1 Increase 2,336 Increase Negative increase 28.98
1996 5.85% Increase 2,406.4 Increase 93.5 Increase 1,336 Increase 156.1 Increase 2,232 Increase Negative increase 26.22
1995 4.68% Increase 2,111.7 Increase 83.7 Increase 1,224 Increase 144.8 Increase 2,118 Increase Positive decrease 25.24
1994 4.39% Increase 1,875.7 Increase 71.0 Increase 1,052 Increase 135.5 Increase 2,007 Increase Positive decrease 26.42
1993 2.12% Increase 1,633.6 Increase 60.2 Increase 914 Increase 127.1 Increase 1,929 Increase Negative increase 27.12
1992 0.34% Increase 1,497.5 Increase 58.7 Increase 912 Increase 121.8 Increase 1,891 Increase Positive decrease 25.51
1991 −0.58% Decrease 1,379.9 Increase 50.2 Increase 797 Increase 118.6 Increase 1,882 Increase Negative increase 27.48
1990 3.04% Decrease 1,190.5 Increase 48.9 Increase 796 Increase 115.2 Increase 1,873 Increase Negative increase 24.33
1989 6.21% Decrease 1,025.3 Increase 47.3 Increase 786 Increase 107.6 Increase 1,791 Increase Negative increase 21.70
1988 6.75% Increase 885.5 Increase 42.0 Increase 715 Increase 97.6 Increase 1,663 Increase Negative increase 21.09
1987 4.31% Increase 756.5 Increase 36.8 Increase 641 Increase 88.4 Increase 1,540 Increase Negative increase 20.57
1986 3.42% Increase 674.6 Increase 33.1 Decrease 591 Decrease 82.4 Increase 1,471 Increase Negative increase 20.39
1985 −7.31% Increase 633.6 Increase 34.1 Decrease 623 Decrease 77.9 Decrease 1,426 Decrease Negative increase 18.61
1984 −7.32% Decrease 581.1 Increase 34.8 Decrease 652 Decrease 81.6 Decrease 1,530 Decrease Negative increase 16.70
1983 1.88% Decrease 408.9 Increase 36.8 Decrease 707 Decrease 84.9 Increase 1,630 Increase Negative increase 11.11
1982 3.62% Increase 351.4 Increase 41.1 Increase 810 Increase 80.1 Increase 1,578 Increase Negative increase 8.54
1981 3.42% Decrease 312.0 Increase 39.5 Increase 797 Increase 72.9 Increase 1,471 Increase Negative increase 7.90
1980 5.15% Decrease 270.1 Increase 35.9 Increase 744 Increase 64.4 Increase 1,334 Increase Negative increase 7.51
1979 5.60% Increase
1978 5.20% Decrease
1977 5.60% Decrease
1976 8.00% Increase
1975 6.40% Increase
1974 5.00% Decrease
1973 9.20% Increase
1972 4.80% Decrease
1971 4.90% Increase
1970 4.60% Increase
  1. ^ GDP growth at constant 1985 prices in Philippine pesos:[5][10][11]
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —Sirdog (talk) 07:39, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

History section is excessively long

[edit]

The History section is excessively long and largely duplicates the scope of Economic history of the Philippines. I trimmed the subsection Fifth Philippine Republic (1986–present) (which had duplicate content from Economic history of the Philippines); but the entire History section needs severe condensing and rewriting. Perhaps other editors can help in fixing that section. Sanglahi86 (talk) 00:44, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of a mess. Economic history of the Philippines was originally a Marcos I era-article, but saw a merge of later events in 2016. Then, in 2018, Economic history of the Philippines (1965–1986) was created covering Marcos I again. Some picking through the two articles regarding the Marcos period, and the information on this page, will be needed.
An easier situation for pre-Marcos text on this page. I suggest moving it all to Economic history of the Philippines (keeping that page there as the main page seems the simplest option whatever happens to the Marcos text). The Post-Marcos text here should also be moved, it looks like most of it will be able to just be copied over. There is a small amount of overlap with the Post-EDSA macroeconomics section, but that section is a mess that needs sorting out anyway. CMD (talk) 01:50, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't think the situation was even worse than I had thought it is. I will see what I can do about it. Thank you for the information and suggestions. Sanglahi86 (talk) 02:06, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics section is redundant (Fixed)

[edit]

Statistics section is just a duplicate from main even though it acts like a repository it doesnt serve its purpose at all I think it should be removed or replaced. Maoylord (talk) 15:04, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it is redundant. I think it can be safely removed if the data it contains already appears in other parts of the article. Sanglahi86 (talk) 03:55, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I will try to summarize it all using a table to retain it somehow. If the tone is not satisying i will give up on it. Maoylord (talk) 09:04, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for expanding/updating the statistics section. However, this is too much detail for the page; I think it would be better for it to stand as a separate article Economic statistics of the Philippines (like Economic statistics of Singapore). Other detailed statistics may also be moved to that proposed page. Sanglahi86 (talk) 11:19, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Im ok with that, remove this section also if there is a new page for this. Also i intentionally make cells without lines over wikitable i was trying to emulate from lead section you can improve it more if you have free time. Maoylord (talk) 11:34, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ "Philippine Economy Grew by 7.2 percent in 2013". National Statistical Coordination Board. Archived from the original on March 12, 2014. Retrieved March 12, 2014.
  2. ^ "Philippine economy grows a stunning 7.8%". Asia News Network. Archived from the original on December 4, 2013. Retrieved June 6, 2013.
  3. ^ "2012 PH GDP growth revised to 6.8 pct". ABS-CBN News. Retrieved June 10, 2013.
  4. ^ "Philippines is fastest growing Asian country for first quarter of 2013". Inquirer News. Retrieved June 10, 2013.
  5. ^ a b International Monetary Fund. (April 2012). World Economic Outlook Data, By Country – Philippines: [selected annual data for 1980–2017]. Retrieved 2012-06-23 from the World Economic Outlook Database.
  6. ^ International Monetary Fund. (April 2010). "World Economic Outlook (WEO) Database April 2010 – Report for Selected Countries and Subjects – Philippines and United States".
  7. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference NSCBgdpgni was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  8. ^ "Report for Selected Countries and Subjects". Retrieved March 3, 2015.
  9. ^ "Report for Selected Countries and Subjects". Imf.org. April 16, 2013. Retrieved April 19, 2013.
  10. ^ International Monetary Fund. (October 2010). The Philippine Stock Exchange, It is one of the oldest stock exchanges in Southeast Asia, having been in continuous operation since its inception in 1927. It currently maintains two trading floors, one at the Ayala Tower One in the Makati Central Business District, and one at its headquarters in Pasig. The PSE is composed of a 15-man Board of Directors, chaired by Jose T. Pardo. World Economic Outlook Data, By Country – Philippines: [selected annual data for 1980–2015]. Retrieved 2011-01-31 from the World Economic Outlook Database.
  11. ^ International Monetary Fund. (April 2002). "The World Economic Outlook (WEO) Database April 2002 – Real Gross Domestic Product (annual percent change) – All countries".
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Economy_of_the_Philippines&oldid=1221501672"