Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Development scholars, heavily informed by the cases of the four Asian Tigers, have attributed success in development to education and domestic political institutions. Although the Philippines looked even more promising than the Asian Tigers before they began developing, the country has not become a development success. On the education dimension, by the 1970s the Philippines was comparable to most developed countries with its adult literacy rate of 83% and high enrollment rates in all levels of schools. In terms of political institutions, the Philippines was Asia’s first democracy after declaring independence from Spanish rule in 1898. Instead of furthering development, educational and political advances in the Philippines have led to an enormous exodus of labor. Failing to utilize its highly educated labor force in the domestic economy, the state focused its attention on exporting its workers by creating a set of elaborate institutions to facilitate overseas employment. Why did the Philippine government develop institutions for exporting labor rather than focus its energy on building the domestic economy? This puzzle can be understood in terms of the intimate connection between the capacity of the state to control the educational system, labor export and economic development. This paper argues that one of the major reasons why the Philippine state had to take an active role in exporting its surplus labor is because of the high autonomy given to the private market for higher education that was producing a large educated but unemployable population.

Supporting Publications:
Supporting Document