Lessons from Europe - Part II

In last week's edition of this column (Aug. 8) I tried to quantify the earnings France makes from tourism. I was surprised by the figures that ran into billions of dollars and over a trillion, repeat - trillion pesos I made the erroneous computation that the earnings were 1,200 times the budget of the Government of the Republic of the Philippines. It should have been 1.2 not 1,200.

Sorry for that. The point, however, remains that tourism can indeed be a major revenue source. And European countries are literally "cashing in" on this phenomena.

Today, two socio-economic indicators will be compared. Namely: per capita GNP and population density. I will compare with the Philippines the three (3) countries I visited recently: Germany, Netherlands (or Holland), and France.

These indicators of development verify what is obvious from what I saw - their buildings, roads, and railway system.

Per capita GNP measures the value of economic production per member of the population. Population density indicates the number of persons per square kilometer of land. With a per capita GNP of 27,000 US dollars, Germany has the best economic situation. Netherlands with P 26,900 US dollars is next, then France at 26,000 US dollars.

The Philippines has a per capita GNP of only 1,000 US dollars, way, way below those of the three countries I mentioned.

This kind of statistic that can make us sad. The question is - in Tagalog - Kailan pa tayo aasenso? Bakit naman ganoon? May pag-asa pa ba tayong umahon sa kahirapan?

In search for an answer, I remembered one glaring observation our delegation made during our ten-day information tour to Germany. While going around in a touring van, we noticed there were only a few workers on the farms and rarely did we see people in their front lawns or on the streets of the towns in southern Germany. We then realized that Germany has a low population density. Meaning, they have a low population per land area particularly in what they consider as rural areas. Indirectly, this means their agricultural sector is very productive and equipment - intensive that they need fewer workers in the farm to produce more output than Filipinos do.

While we think of these countries as industrialized nations, most of their lands are still agricultural. Their efficiency in agriculture is propping up their economies. Is this the case in the Philippines?

That's where the answer to the questions posed earlier lies.
Another lesson from Europe. Some more lessons next week when I mention "labor productivity".