tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-148587682024-03-08T01:39:30.736+08:00Rational ChoiceEconomic development, without the fancy stuff.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.comBlogger219125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-24284548322832956332020-10-10T10:08:00.005+08:002020-10-10T10:08:35.342+08:00<p> The latest version of AMPLE CGE with microsimulation is in the public domain. Click to download: </p><p><br /></p><p>https://bit.ly/36KHZzQ </p><p><br /></p><p>To run it you must have a licensed copy of GAMS. </p>Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-73078822248183865692008-09-12T11:06:00.003+08:002008-09-12T11:15:16.446+08:00Thanks to my commentators and pop quizHi folks, it's been a while. While I reserve the right to post as I please, and you the right to avoid reading this, sheer courtesy obliges me to be timely in moderating comments. Actually I would have wanted to turn the moderation option off, except that spammers have a field day. So I have now dealt with the commentary backlog, and thanks for paying attention. And since you are, I have a pop quiz (and perhaps this should be standard interview question for financial analysts): the newspaper today reports that the debt of the Republic of the Philippines stands at Php 3.964 trillion, of which 2.303 trillion is local and the rest is domestic. Averaging over the number of Filipinos, every citizen owes Php43,805.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Estimate the net present value of the average debt burden of each individual today. </span>List all the assumptions and calculations.<br /><br />Hint: it is is certainly less than 43,805!Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-44070936307829378822008-02-10T19:22:00.000+08:002008-02-10T21:26:19.671+08:00The protection racketThe Philippine Government is now tightening the screws on direct hiring of Filipino overseas workers (i.e. not hired through licensed recruitment agencies). Read the details <a href="http://blogs.inquirer.net/voxpopuli/2008/02/09/worse-than-malu-fernandez-controversy/">here </a>and in the links referred.<br /><br />The bureaucracy was slow in catching on - after severe repression of the formal labor market domestically, it realized its ineffectiveness in policing foreign markets. But the consistent boom in remittances introduced the government to a cash cow there for the m(b)ilking.<br /><br />You'd wonder why the "beneficiaries" of protection are so enraged by these new regulations. Remember the saying? "Never attribute to malice what can be equally due to stupidity." Well in this case I think it's both.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-88412426514718910442008-01-28T18:44:00.001+08:002008-01-30T16:52:02.747+08:00Please pass the PALTEconomists have been dreaming it for years: land reform by Progressive Agricultural Land Tax. The current land reform scheme in the Philippines (whose funding is running out in mid-2008) requires the State to acquire farm land from landowners until their properties are no larger than 5 ha, the legal retention limit. Acquisition requires "just compensation". Experience over the last 20 years of implementation has shown the colossal problems with this scheme. First, land ownership needs to be properly documented to determine whose guilty of breaking the law (on excess landholdings) and ensure legal transfer of property. Second, value of land needs to be set, opening a litigation abyss.<br /><br />The beauty of the PALT is that it entails the same documentary requirement (done anyway under the second scheme) but avoiding the second set of problems associated with land valuation. Farm lands above the 5 ha retention limit are subject to an additional tax, which can be graduated by size class (say, 5.0 - 24.0, 24.0 - 50.0, above 50.0). The objection by Skinner (1991) that the PALT is administratively impractical is moot.<br /><br />The tax rate can be made sufficiently punitive as to induce land fragmentation (say, 5, 10, and 20 times the regular real property tax assessment). The PALT is effectively a fine imposed on landowners who violate the law (RA 6657) on maximum farm land holdings.<br /><br />Administration is simple: one need only to enact a national PALT, which is assessed on top of the local government real property taxes. Collection of the PALT can be done by a separate national government Bureau reporting to the Department of Finance. (Staffing can be done initially with personnel from the Department of Agrarian Reform.) Land sales can be facilitated by the Land Bank of the Philippines, who stands ready to acquire lands (at manageable prices) using money from the Agrarian Reform Fund (which is the current set-up). The land can then be resold to deserving farmers or landless farm workers (who amortize their lands under the usual discipline of formal mortgage contracts).<br /><br />The PALT can even do away with some documentary requirements. It will not require remediation of land titles where these are defective - it can use the same documentation as the real property tax. Of course safeguards would need to be introduced: the PALT Bureau can institute its independent documentation of landholdings (in cases where local assessors are incompetent, ignorant, or corrupt); it can introduce a tax on idle lands and conversion from agriculture to nonagriculture (to prevent landowners from evading the tax); revenues can be shared between local and national government (the latter earmarked for infrastructure spending to benefit Agrarian Reform Communities); and so on.<br /><br />What have I gotten wrong? Let me know. Otherwise Congress should pay heed as the debate on extension of the agrarian reform heats up.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-17309724702790391302008-01-17T16:56:00.000+08:002008-01-30T16:53:02.352+08:00JPEPA in the bag<div></div>While surfing for JPEPA (Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement) updates, I came across the <a href="http://miriamdefensorsantiago.blogspot.com/2008/01/16-january-2008-miriam-seeks-jpepa.html">blog </a>of Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago. Entries are almost certainly written by her staff, but presumably with her <span style="font-style: italic;">imprimatur</span>. Would it be premature to say that JPEPA is in the bag?<br /><br />Opponents continue to trot out tired arguments. These are the same prophets of doom, who predicted economic disaster after trade liberalization started in 1986, after the 1994 WTO agreement, after the AFTA-CEPT, after the APEC, etc. Their record of success: exactly zero.<br /><br />Listening to them, it would seem that the Philippines would be neck deep in hazardous waste after the JPEPA is ratified. Given their prophetic accuracy, excuse me if I ho-hum.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-69729173795809540962008-01-05T11:55:00.000+08:002008-01-30T16:54:49.579+08:00What if we could live forever?The pious believer already believes this. But what if secular science could indefinitely extend this present life? <a href="http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10423439">This Economist article </a>talks about a few who think breakthroughs are within sight. Moreover it presents the intriguing concept of the longevity escape velocity - if you could live long enough to benefit from life extension innovations, and these innovations come about more rapidly in the future, then conceivably some people alive today may experience hitherto unknown lifespans (over 150 years).<br /><br />I wonder what the social and economic implications would be if life expectancy could say achieve early Genesis scale (a millenium). My biggest concern is to contain population growth. At such prolonged lifespans, I think the environmental carrying capacity requires very low annual fertility rates. With very little reproductive selection going on, genetic erosion in <em>homo sapiens</em> may accelerate. This may render us vulnerable to population shocks - pathogens, climate shift, asteroid collision, whatever. (Technological optimists would think that a fix may be possible for this.)<br /><br />And think about it - a world where children are as rare as, say, 2 m tall people are today. What would the quality of life be in such a world?Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-40858827227467777772007-12-27T16:59:00.000+08:002007-12-27T18:01:37.019+08:00Economy year enderUnlike in politics or even business, it is difficult to identify distinct "events" in an economy and say, "that's important, should be in the list of top ten stories." The economy after all is a system of billions of interacting parts, with each transaction in itself trivial, but adding up to an incomprehensible whole. Hence, for instance, GDP going up is not literally a single "event". But for convenience I'll just point to some top "developments" in the economy and business, which I think will have a widespread and lasting impact on the economic system. Three are external, and the rest internal; some are distinct political events which I think are portents of deep economic change.<br /><br /><ol><li><strong>Collapse of the Doha round</strong> - again: The Doha development round stalls, over as usual over OECD farm subsidies and market access. The US, EU, India, and Brazil remain at loggerheads. But I betcha the rest are just hiding behind the behemoths , waiting to throw up dust again whenever a settlement approaches. </li><li><strong>Climate change and what the world is doing about it</strong> - the UN IFCC confirms a scientific consensus linking global warming to greenhouse gash emissions and, with Al Gore, wins a Nobel Prize; the world gathers in Bali to talk about solutions, as the Kyoto protocol approaches its end in 2012. </li><li><strong>The US economy flounders on the subprime crisis</strong> - the exposure of bad debts in the subprime mortgage sector and the related drop in housing prices was financial debacle, eventually sending the US dollar reeling worldwide. The US economy itself teeters on the edge of fiscal and current account imbalances; and Greenspan talks of even odds of recession. </li><li><strong>The Philippine peso surges</strong> - in a spectacular run, the peso gains 19% against the dollar, making it unusually strong even in a year of the declining dollar. Some gainers, some losers; I think mostly losers. </li><li><strong>Favorable macro figures sustained</strong> - inflation remains low, even unemployment drops, and GDP surges to dragon territory at 7.1%, continuing its steady rise from 2000. Is the boom-bust over? Let's see. Oh, and the fiscal balance was kept (as foreign debt payments dropped, thanks to #4); the Bangko Sentral continues monetary easing over the year. Not bad, not bad at all, <a href="http://business.inquirer.net/money/columns/view_article.php?article_id=108504">but not all good</a>. </li><li><strong>The country joins the biofuels bandwagon</strong> - on January 12, the government legislated the Biofuels Act, which requires mandatory blending of gasoline and diesel with biofuels and incentives for biofuels investment. All without the superfluous luxuries of a feasibility study. Meanwhile to dig a hole in the ground you need an Environmental Impact Assessment. Go figure. </li><li><strong>The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program enters its last year</strong> - after the Sumilao drama, hope we don't forget, the CARP is about to end. (Or rather, the mandatory appropriation from the Agrarian Reform Fund is. But let's not split hairs.) Already lawmakers are filing their bills , consultants are submitting their studies, and buzzards are circling their prey. </li><li><strong>Decentralization at the forefront in Pampanga </strong>- the historic upset win of priest-on-leave Ed Panilio is heartening; his political will to finally collect resource rent (in this case, the quarry fees) sets a precedent for a cowardly national government; and his loud whistle blowing against venal politics is rousing. Hip hip! </li><li><strong>The ODA scams -</strong> ah yes, corruption. Anomalous deals taint the NBN, the CyberEd, even the World Bank roads project. I elevate this above the others, because of its international scope - it can't be just the Filipinos who are being flip with the law. Remember the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant? Expect tightening up of accountability on both sides after this. </li><li><strong>Estrada pardon</strong> - institutions are now entering empirical analysis of economic growth. The Estrada pardon (after a 7 year plunder trial and conviction) !!! is one remarkable approach to the rule of law. You don't need a storm to tear down a house - letting the termites in will do the job equally well. </li></ol><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-28945081682625087042007-12-20T10:06:00.000+08:002007-12-20T10:59:27.055+08:00Koreans opt for the 747<a href="http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-31048420071219">In their just-concluded election</a>, Koreans went for the gut, rather than abstract issues of engagement with the North, and all that. Korea has the world's eleventh biggest economy, but its ascent to new economic heights has been stymied in part by sclerotic policies. The new president promises to change all that.<br /><br />A business executive background has burnished President-elect Lee's market-friendly persona. I just hope that being "business-friendly" does not translate to being friendly to "some business" - the mistake of booty capitalism. A real pro-market policy is friendly to "any business", even of businesses that do not yet exist. (That's my neoclassical-rationalist koan for you, grasshopper.)<br /><br /><a href="http://english.mbplaza.net/default/main/">Here</a> is the President-elect's English language homepage, containing his platform and bio. The bio was especially interesting, covering his famous rags to riches story (but more of the rags, actually). I could say that this suggests the following hypothesis: <em>inculcating values among juveniles conducive to respect for property rights, desirability of commercial exchange, and low valuation of leisure time creates an intergenerational pathway out of poverty.</em> Anecdotal evidence:<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-family:courier new;">The beggar family had a son of my age, and I became friend with him. I envied him so much. Although my parents worked hard at the market every day, I and my brothers and sisters often had to skip meals. Often, we would drink from the water pump to fight the hunger. However, my friend had somewhat different life. Every morning, after his beggar parents make a tour all around the town, Then his family would sit together and eat rice. It was not a corn soup. It was not a dreg, it was rice. How much I envied him as I watched through the open doors! I thought ‘Ah, my family is not even better than a beggar.’ </span><br /><span style="font-family:courier new;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:courier new;">I came across this friend after decades have passed since then. One day, when I was serving my country as a member of the assembly, I visited Los Angeles of United States. ‘Hey, Myung Bak!’ Somebody called my name after I finished a ceremony. It was that beggar friend next door. I was totally surprised. Living in LA, he came to visit me as soon as he knew I came here. For all night long, we talked; sometimes with tears, sometimes with laughs. It is then he told me his history. ‘When we were still kids, I thought my family was better off because we had rice every day.’ Then he said he found out later That his parents raised their children not by working but by begging. Eventually, all his brothers and sisters lead poor lives now, And only he has managed to fly over to the States and barely make living. He told me ‘Now I have all grown up, I realized why your parents always worked hard and never sought others’ property.’ I felt ashamed for myself, who envied the ‘Meals of my beggar friend’.</span><br /><br /><br />This is the set of values that Koreans have voted for. See you on the runway.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-5935153361906987422007-12-06T10:52:00.000+08:002007-12-06T11:01:07.251+08:00Too much fancy stuff on Rational ChoiceAccording to <a href="http://www.criticsrant.com/bb/reading_level.aspx">this meter</a>, I am being too fancy, contrary to my motto. (Hat tip: New Economist). Since you are a genius, tell me how I can improve. I want to dumb it down without treating you like an idiot.<br /><br />Surely there is an optimum somewhere - where I transmit the gist of an idea or finding, subject to a constraint on readability and my time-effort for writing this blog. (Or given that set-up, maybe I am already at it? Heheh.) Look, if <em>this</em> post requires a genius, then I'm still faithful to my motto.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-62296833190115279322007-12-04T17:39:00.000+08:002007-12-04T17:49:29.849+08:00Women with higher salaries do less housework (duh)<a href="http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2007.00373.x?prevSearch=allfield%3A%28gupta%29">This</a> paper published in the Journal of Marriage and Family has been drawing a lot of attention lately (see this Yahoo <a href="http://www.yahoo.com/s/751539">video</a>). Like it's a big discovery. <br /><br />Hmmm. Higher wage = higher opportunity cost of time (spent in housework) = economize on housework. To an economist this is <em>soooo </em>obvious. Note that this prediction works even if the household makes choices like a single decision-maker (i.e. women and men are not autonomous, but make choices <em>as if</em> a single mind). Of course empirical work like this on quantifying the size of the predicted effect is welcome. Still, the real mystery to me is why this and not some other (more surprising) study made the rounds in the press. <br /><br /><br />Disclaimer: have only read the abstract and some media reports. But I doubt if I'll change my mind if I ever get to read the whole thing.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-89299827058711698702007-12-04T09:13:00.001+08:002007-12-04T09:23:33.029+08:00How best to reduce greenhouse gases in the airA <a href="http://unfccc.int/2860.php">big round of talks </a>are on in Bali right now on climate change. Kyoto is set to expire by 2012 and a new treaty is in the making - or is it? I think the discussion about the link between GHG emissions and global warming is over, at least in direction. (More GHG = warmer earth.)<br /><br />No consensus exists on:<br /><br /><ul><li>How much global warming is expected</li><li>What are the costs of global warming</li><li>What kinds of carbon reduction efforts should be implemented and</li><li>How much to invest in these efforts. </li></ul><p>Env-econ has an interesting <a href="http://www.env-econ.net/2007/12/a-nobel-respons.html">post</a> on the role of forests in carbon reduction. Basically forests act as a carbon store (for protected areas) or a carbon sink (for managed areas being routinely harvested). The latter is a bit complicated: timber needs to be harvested, but if the tree is valued also for its ability to take carbon out of the air, then (if there are carbon reduction payments) forest managers would have to take this into account in timing their harvest and replanting. One interesting point: it would take about $200/ton carbon price for managers to cease harvesting - way beyond realistic estimates of maybe $20-30/ton. </p>Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-7603399636306881002007-12-01T14:10:00.000+08:002007-12-04T07:54:59.811+08:00Papers I have written or coauthored<a href="http://www.esnips.com/web/roehlbriones-Papers">Webpage</a> containing copies of some of my papers, and URLs to others. Copyrighted material available only in working paper version. Updates <a href="http://roehlanobriones.tripod.com/papers/papers.htm">this page</a>.<br /><br />PUBLICATIONS IN REFEREED JOURNALS<br /><br />Briones, R. 2007. “Eating for a Lifetime: Filling the Policy Gaps in Philippine Fisheries.” Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development 4(1):25-40. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/832e6cd8-bfe6-4f40-921e-6abdd4381827/eatingforalifetime">Esnips download</a>. <a href="http://web.searca.org/elibrary/asian%20journal%20of%20agriculture%20and%20development%20(vol4no1)/briones.pdf">Link to download</a>.<br /><br />Briones, R. 2006. ”Projecting Future Fish Supplies Using Stock Dynamics and Demand.” Fish and Fisheries 7(4):303-315. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/a04232d6-8b2d-4e42-9118-bcf5b0fae153/Projecting_Future_Fish_Supplies_15sep06">Esnips download</a>. <a href="http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-2979.2006.00228.x">Abstract</a>.<br /><br />Briones, R. 2006. “Employment Generation for the Rural Poor in Asia: Perspectives, Patterns, and Policies.” Asian Development Review 23(1):89-118. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/062878cb-1db1-4554-9d08-ad9f409bf913/adr23_1_Briones">Esnips download</a>. <a href="http://www.adb.org/documents/periodicals/adr/pdf/BRIONES.pdf">Esnips download</a>.<a href="http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/beech/rev/2005/00000014/00000003/art00004;jsessionid=17kro57cjbwxl.henrietta">Abstract</a>; <a href="http://docserver.ingentaconnect.com/deliver/connect/beech/09582029/v14n3/s4.pdf?expires=1196493273&id=40998992&titleid=897&accname=Guest+User&checksum=622974FBC88F34A06BD0A5918B6DB2A7">Free download</a>.<br /><br />Dey, M., R. Briones, and M. Ahmed. 2005. “Disaggregated Analysis of Fish Supply, Demand, and Trade in Asia: Baseline Model and Estimation Strategy.” Aquaculture Economics and Management 9(1/2):113-139. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/8b091444-6548-4465-90cb-8fe7540f99f4/AEM-article">Esnips download</a>. <a href="http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a725757668~db=all">Esnips download</a>.<a href="http://www.worldfishcenter.org/Naga/naga27-3n4/pdf/article09.pdf">Free download</a>.<br /><br />Briones, R., M. Dey, M. Ahmed, I. Stobutzki, M. Prein, and B. Acosta. 2004. “Impact Pathway Analysis for Research Planning: the Case of Aquatic Resources Research in the WorldFish Center.” NAGA – The WorldFish Center Quarterly 27(3/4):48-50. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/96cbfda5-d445-4c42-a24a-37bea4b415dc/article10-naga">Esnips download</a>. <a href="http://www.worldfishcenter.org/Naga/naga27-3n4/pdf/article10.pdf.">Esnips download</a>.<br /><br />Briones, R. 2002. “Interlinked Credit, Relational Contracting, and the Spread of Rural-Based Manufacturing: the Case of Garment and Metalcraft Industries in the Philippines.” Philippine Review of Economics 39(1):103-120. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/0b0859cf-095a-4310-a4f3-13785c617be8/interlinked-credit">Esnips download</a>. <a href="http://www.econ.upd.edu.ph/respub/pre/display.php?id=524">Abstract</a>.<br /><br />Rodriguez, U-P, and R. Briones. 2002. “The Ateneo Macroeconomic Forecasting Model.” Philippine Review of Economics 39(1):142-178. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/0ce7fd18-4242-45ab-b793-16e5dab93748/amfm">Esnips download</a>. <a href="http://www.econ.upd.edu.ph/respub/pre/display.php?id=526">Abstract</a>.<br /><br />Briones, R. 1996. “Calorie Intake Responses to Macroeconomic Adjustment.” Philippine Review of Economics and Business 33(2): 319-344. <a href="http://www.econ.upd.edu.ph/respub/pre/display.php?id=70">Abstract</a>.<br /><br />OTHER PUBLICATIONS<br /><br />Briones, R., Tran Thi Huyen Trang, Nguyen Cong Dan, Nguyen Huu Ninh, Pham Van Khanh, Nguyen Hien Thi, Don Griffiths and Trinh Quoc Trong. 2007. “The Business Approach to Operating National Broodstock Centres: An Innovative Strategy for Developing the Freshwater Aquaculture Seed Industry in Viet Nam.” NACA Aquaculture Asia12(4): 18 – 21. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/42473458-8ad9-4062-b158-246bd80796c0/aa-oct-dec-07-broodstock">Esnips download</a>. <a href="http://library.enaca.org/AquacultureAsia/Articles/Oct-Dec-2007/aa-oct-dec-07-broodstock.pdf">Free download</a>.<br /><br />Fawcett, C., R. Briones, and A. Tafgar. “Jobs for the 21st Century: Synthesis Paper”. EDC, Newton, MA. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/a3562848-b9a0-4a4b-a947-138a25ccbbf2/USAID_SnthsisPaper_NEW3">Esnips download</a>. <a href="https://secure.edc.org/publications/prodview.asp?1825">Abstract</a>.<br /><br />Boardman, G., R. Briones, C. Fawcett, A. Hamid, and Y. Rostiawati. “Jobs for the 21st Century: Indonesia Assessment”. EDC, Newton, MA. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/566706e4-b88b-4f1a-bf78-c1cb7c79f3db/indonesia">Esnips download</a>. <a href="https://secure.edc.org/">Abstract</a>.<br /><br />Briones, R., and A. Garcia, eds. Poverty Reduction through Sustainable Fisheries: Emerging Policy and Governance Issues in Southeast Asia. SEARCA, College, Laguna, Philippines (Forthcoming book).<br /><br />Briones, R., and A. Garcia, “Introduction and Synthesis.” In: Briones, R., and A. Garcia, eds. Poverty Reduction through Sustainable Fisheries: Emerging Policy and Governance Issues in Southeast Asia. SEARCA, College, Laguna, Philippines (Forthcoming book).<br /><br />Briones, R., R. Gerpacio, and M. Ahmed. “Regional Cooperation.” In: Briones, R., and A. Garcia, eds. Poverty Reduction through Sustainable Fisheries: Emerging Policy and Governance Issues in Southeast Asia. SEARCA, College, Laguna, Philippines (Forthcoming book).<br /><br />Briones, R., 2007. “Projections of Supply and Demand for the Trade in Live-Reef Fish for Food.” Economics and Market Analysis of the Live Reef-fish Trade in the Asia–Pacific Region. Brian Johnson, ed. ACIAR Working Paper No. 63. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/1962fdf0-9a81-4117-96d2-f45522e0e1d0/aciarwp63v2">Esnips download</a>. <a href="http://www.aciar.gov.au/publication/WP63">Free download</a>.<br /><br />Briones, R., L. Garces, and M. Ahmed (2006). “Climate Change and Small Pelagic Fisheries in Developing Asia: the Economic Impact on Fish Producers and Consumers.” Climate Change and the Economics of the World’s Fisheries: Examples of Small Pelagic Stocks. R. Hannesson, M. Barange, S. Herrick Jr., eds. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/a7bca59e-f81d-42de-b6ba-ce50d2f80ae3/Brionnes20Ch08_fin_spacc">Esnips download</a>. <a href="http://www.e-elgar-environment.com/Bookentry_contents.lasso?id=3888">View product</a>.<br /><br />Briones, R., 2005. “Public Works Employment and Rural Poverty Alleviation in the Philippines.” Reducing Rural Poverty in Asia: Challenges and Opportunities for Microenterprises and Public Employment Schemes. Nurul Islam, ed. Haworth Press, Binghamton NJ. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/12d47055-b208-49e8-98a0-c77d200fc7a1/public_works_employment">Esnips download</a>. <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Reducing-Rural-Poverty-Nurul-Islam/dp/1560223014">View product</a>.<br /><br />Briones, R. 2005. “Property Rights Reform in Philippine Agriculture: Framework and Review Of Experience.” Special Issues in Agriculture, Eliseo Ponce, ed PIDS, Makati.<br /><br />Dey, M., U-P.Rodriguez, R. Briones, O. Chen, M. Haque, L. Li, P. Kumar, S. Koeshendrajana, S.Y. Tai, A. Senaratne, A. Nissapa, N. T. Khiem, M. Ahmed (2004). Disaggregated projections on supply, demand, and trade for developing Asia: preliminary results from the AsiaFish Model. 2004 Proceedings of the Biennial Conference of the IIFET. IIFET, Corvallis, Oregon. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/55504f66-f602-466b-8045-4979c1f0f3d8/preliminary-fish-supply-demand">Esnips download</a>.<br /><br />Dey, M., R. Briones, and M. Ahmed. 2004. “Global trade and the poor: impact of product standards in major importing countries.” 2004 Proceedings of the Biennial Conference of the IIFET. IIFET, Corvallis, Oregon. <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/4447d2b4-d2a2-4cd5-90d2-b7b49861d769/trade_poor">Esnips download</a>.<br /><br />Habito, C., R. Briones, and E. Paterno. 2003. Investments, Productivity, and Land Market Impacts of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). CARP Impact Assessment Studies vol. 4. Department of Agrarian Reform, Quezon City.<br /><br />Dey, M., R. Briones, and M. Ahmed. 2002. “Modeling the Asian fish sector: issues, framework, and method.” 2002 Proceedings of the Biennial Conference of the IIFET. IIFET, Corvallis, Oregon.<br /><br />Briones, R., et al. 1999. “Food security: household perspective.” In Food Security in the Philippines. L. Cabanilla and M. Paunlagui, eds. Institute of Strategic Planning and Policy Studies – UP CIDS, Quezon City.<br /><br />Briones, R. et al. 1994. “An integrated analysis of past and existing programs and policies directed towards poverty alleviation and improving income distribution.” Understanding Poverty and Inequality. P.S. Intal, ed. National Economic and Development Authority and United Nations Development Program, Manila.<br /><br />SELECTED UNPUBLISHED PAPERS<br /><br />Briones, R., M. Dey, M. Ahmed, M. Prein, I. Stobutzki. “Priorities for international research on aquatic resources.” <a href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/1c344c9e-9cc4-4f1e-be78-0974de1389fc/priorities2007096">Esnips download</a>.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-9994411465445845592007-11-25T17:18:00.000+08:002007-11-25T19:29:12.995+08:00Shut up and eat your genetically modified cornIn conventional breeding, the biologist promotes good genes (genes that express physical traits that make the organism economically more valuable) through natural reproduction. The breeder though gets to choose who mates whom. The end product is a genetically modified organism. <br /><br />In genetic engineering, the biologist shortcuts the reproductive process. She isolates the gene of interest, and inserts it (I'm an economist, don't ask me how) into the DNA of a subject organism. The end product is a genetically modified organism. <br /><br />So should you eat your genetically modified corn? Your already are! <br /><br />Now a mad scientist could set up an experiment where, by conventional breeding, he develops a really tough termite that resists the usual pesticides. Or he could try to do the same thing using genetic engneering. If he has access to facilities and personnel, the latter would probably be faster. But the end productive is the same - an unusually destructive termite that could inflict billions of dollars of untold damage. <br /><br />Now suppose our biologist grows a conscience and instead chooses to develop a type of corn that resists pests. Similarly the latter would probably get her there faster, but with similar results. <br /><br />But wait! Isn't genetic engineering dangerous? Might as well ask: is conventional plant breeding dangerous? <br /><br />Actually, YES - the products of conventional breeding have inflicted great costs on the environment. Monocrop agriculture is the global norm, with the resulting erosion of genetic variability, intensification of chemical application, etc. Not good. But yields are up, way up. Not bad. We take the bad with the good. That's why even environmentalists don't paddle a canoe to attend their global confabs. <br /><br />And genetic engineering? A faster way to get the benefits - and costs - of conventional genetic modification. <br /><br />Don't believe me? This <a href="http://www.reason.com/news/show/119530.html">Reason page </a>has plenty of links to get you started on the science of GMOs. Happy enlightening!Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-91707941911437416402007-11-24T20:23:00.000+08:002007-11-24T22:17:28.863+08:00Jaw-dropping JPEPA analysisBrowsing through Inquirer I saw <a href="http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/nation/view_article.php?article_id=102896">this</a>. So would the proposed free trade agreement with Japan lead to free entry of Japanese fleets into Philippine waters? I'd never heard of this argument. Intrigued, I downloaded the full text <a href="http://www.pcij.org/blog/?p=1264">here </a>(care of PCIJ). I even went to the <a href="http://junkjpepa.blogspot.com">Junk JPEPA blog</a> to see where I could find fishing access anywhere in the Agreement. The claim is bodacious: <br /><br />"JPEPA through Articles 28 and 29 of Chapter 3 allows unhampered access Japanese fishing industry to Philippine EEZ." <br /><br />In reality, Chapter 3 is about defining "rules of origin", i.e. how does a product get to be classified as "made in the Philippines" or "made in Japan" and get free trade treatment. (Given that a lot of foreign inputs may be used, the classification is not trivial). Article 29 says we can classify goods like fish as Filipino-made, even though they were caught outside our territorial waters, as long as a Filipino fleet owns them. It adds furthermore: "Nothing in this sub-paragraph shall affect the rights and obligations of the Parties under International Law, including under the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea." Absolutely, the Philippines retains its rights to the Exclusive Economic Zone under the UNCLOS. <br /><br />So why the qualification? Simple: when we import a fish from Japan caught in say Chinese waters, and give it duty-free status because it was caught by a Japanese ship, we don't want to be entangled with legal problems with China who could dispute the legality of Japan's incursion into Chinese waters. We don't accept the fish was caught legally, but under the treaty we would still give it duty-free status. <br /><br />What is behind this staggering falsehood of natural resource plunder by Japanese fleets? I don't know. I just hope the debates in the Senate are not conducted at this level of analysis. If this is the norm, we're done for.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-89923753353476929322007-11-20T17:52:00.000+08:002007-11-20T17:59:18.842+08:00If the Pilgrims couldn't handle commun(al)ism, who could?<a href="http://econoclectic.powerblogs.com/posts/1195336737.shtml">Thanks to Eclectecon</a>, I am now a fan of Carolyn Baum. Another <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=a7EYUi6cMEnc&refer=columnist_baum">sample</a>.<br /><br />Love ko 'to!Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-22604805702846375792007-11-18T23:20:00.000+08:002007-11-19T08:03:11.129+08:00The bankruptcy of the "alternative development" paradigm: an outlineI've always wanted to write a definitive essay refuting the "alternative" development paradigm adopted by leftwing intellectuals and pseudo-economists. But I seldom write long essays for fun, mainly because they aren't. And this kind of paper cannot possibly have an original bone in its body. So I haven't gone beyond the outlining stage, as follows:<br /><br /><ul><li>Thesis</li></ul><p>The axis of evil: fascism, feudalism, capitalism. Global capitalism as imperialism. The faces of domestic oligarchy. Alternatives: protection, nationalization, expropriation, industrialization. <br /><br /><ul><li>Antithesis</li></ul><p>The critical dichotomy: exchange relations and property relations. Booty capitalism and transformative capitalism. Pitfalls of the alternative strategy. <ul><li>Synthesis</li></ul><p>Transformative capitalism. Equity as a necessity. Conclusion: the grave irony.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-52038025240950707972007-11-18T00:22:00.000+08:002007-11-19T08:02:26.144+08:00Pragmatic considerations regarding the death penaltyOne of the reasons for opposing the death penalty is the probability of executing an innocent person. Suppose our policy choice regarding the death penalty has the objective of minimizing wrongful deaths, which is the sum of private murders and mistaken executions (which is tantamount to murder). A numerical example will help fix ideas: consider a population of 10 million identical persons. Over a given period, the probability of any one committing murder is = 0.00002; then the expected number of murders is 200. With a death penalty, the probability of comitting a murder drops, say to 0.00001; then the expected number of murders is 100. Suppose the probability of obtaining a conviction is 0.5, for which the probability of a mistaken execution is a high 0.1. Then without the death penalty, the expected number of wrongful deaths is 200 + 0 = 200; with the death penalty, the expected number of wrongful deaths is 100 + (100 * 0.5*0.1) = 105. The deterrent effect would have to be really small, i.e. a difference of 0.0000009 in the probability of committing murder, for the expected avoidable deaths to be equal between the with- and the without-death penalty scenarios. In short, wrongful execution requires an actual murder and a conviction, hence this will be a very small number relative to the population, and a small number even relative to the expected number of murders.<br /><br />Put in another way: by <strong>not</strong> imposing the death penalty, the State is allowing 95 more wrongful deaths, but itself inflicting none. State without a death penalty would seem to be one in which the weight of a publicly-sanctioned wrongful death is much, much greater than the weight of a privately-committed wrongful death. Is there a good justification for such a weight?Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-58890563007701494132007-11-16T23:03:00.000+08:002007-11-16T23:40:52.291+08:00Thoughts of a young economist<em>Written just after the contentious period of debate on approval of the Uruguay Round. These days the term "booty capitalism" is more common. Otherwise, still my thoughts on the matter. <br /><br />Oh yes, if you know the joke, this means that <strong>I have no heart</strong>. </em><br /><br />With the issue of the GATT, the fragmented Philippine left found reason to unite. A common theme in their arguments against ratification was the specter of global capitalism tightening its hold on less developed economies with their integration into the world trading system. Instead of integration, they advocate a return to the "nationalist" strategy based on extensive State intervention, emphasizing controls on imports and foreign investments, selective and generous incentives for heavy industries (steel is a special favorite), cheap foreign exchange, and similar measures. <br /><br />Unfortunately, their critique of global capitalism and their program of State-sponsored industrialization suffer from a complete misunderstanding of the foundations and dynamics of capitalism. The recent approval fo the GATT is thus regarded as a betrayal of "the people", rather than what it truly is: an opportunity for economic advancement. <br /><br />Capitalism operates on the dynamic of exchange or market relations made possible by stable property relations. These exchange relations, as they are voluntary, are to the mutual benefit of the transacting parties. If I buy imported sugar, it is beneficial to me, as well as to the foreign sugar grower (but probably not to the domestic sugar planter). Naturally, the process of exchange organizes and improves production. For example, with free trade resources devoted to import-competing sugar may be reallocated export crops, which are sold in more lucrative foreign markets. <br /><br />However, to teh extent that the State engages in market restrictions, there is an opportunity to accumulate wealth, not by innovating a superior organization of production, but by appropriate the coercive power of the State. For example, domestic sugar planeters may lobby to restrict the entry of cheap foreign sugar; Filipino consumers are coerced into accepting less beneficial trades with these planters. Capitalism, in its free exchange form, organizes and advances production and is therefore a benevolent force. (It's distribution of society's output is, however, only as equitable as the existing property relations.) On the other hand, capitalism which employs State coercion is the foe of economic progress; it is the backbone of a backward conservatism. <br /><br />It is this reactionary conservatism of a protected few which is most interested in rejecting agreements which restrain State coercion, as the GATT. Ironically, this conservatism is precisely what radicals unanimously advocate, whatever their differences on other issues. All this in the name of "the people."<br /><br />I do not question the sincerity of the radicals; what they suffer from is a mistaken identification of capitalism in the Philippines as a manifestation of exchange capitalism, rather than what it truly is - coercive capitalism. Mass poverty and underdevelopment are blamed on exchange capitalism, rather than coercive capitalism and unjust property distribution (the heritage of a feudal and colonial past). <br /><br />In a world where central planning has been totally abandoned, trade barriers are falling and exchange capitalism is replacing structures of coercion, perhaps it is not only the veteran ideologues who are victims of this tragic irony. Unfortunately, the youth and studentry by and large remain captivated by an obsolete mode of analysis (one needs only read many of the other column pieces appearing in this space. If instead the energies of these idealists were directed toward opposing coercive capitalism, as well as toward advocating justice in property relations (such as redistributive land reform), they might yet live up to their vehement profession of being "pro-people." <br /><br />- <em>Philippine Daily Inquirer, Youngblood, 27 December 1994, p.7; byline corrected December 28, p. 8. <br /><br />Much later I had another column in Business World, August 20, 2002. But that one <a href="http://www.aer.ph/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=198">has an electronic copy</a>. I've had a few other columns, but the rest are crap. </em>Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-44518019121441927542007-11-14T09:52:00.000+08:002007-11-19T08:01:35.119+08:00The price of oil is telling us somethingThe record levels that oil price has recently hit is surprising; the fact that oil price has been rising over time, is not. Way back in 1931, the economist Harold Hotelling argued that prices of exhaustible resources should be rising over time. His fundamental equation (in modified form) states that: <br /><br />Growth rate of net resource price = discount rate. <br /><br />The net resource price is simply the market price of the resource, less the marginal cost of extraction. The discount rate is the "rate of time preference". It is the amount by which the subjective value of one peso falls if it is received next period, rather than now. This can be proxied by the interest rate. An alternative way to express this is: <br /><br />Net resource price now = (1 + discount rate) x (Net resource price last period). <br /><br />Extracting one unit of the resource now rather than a while ago, requires that the net price now exceed the previous net price by the rate of time preference. If the marginal cost of extraction is constant, then the net price will rise only if the market price rises. <br /><br />Short-run price increases can be explained by rising demand, or rising marginal costs of extraction, or both. Because of this, the oil market appears to have undergone a permanent upward shift in the trend line. Speculative forces also introduce short-term volatility in oil prices. Nevertheless, Hotelling's equation supposedly captures the slope of that long term trend line. <br /><br />The story however does not end there. Rising prices signal to consumers (and producers) to adjust their activities by searching for relatively cheaper substitutes. Hence the search for renewable energy sources to replace oil, at least at the margin. The price signal - and consequent behavior adjustment - is precisely what averts a "collapse" in consumption as the resource is finally exhausted. <br /><br />Unfortunately our baser instincts drive us to interfere with this economic process. Through our government, we want those greedy oil companies to profit less. We also accept interventions to impose "energy conservation", like banning this or that "frivolous" use of energy (Christmas lights, driving at the speed limit, etc.) This is a lot of wasted energy (pun intended). And taxing away those profits tells oil companies to shy away from risky ventures like oil exploration - precisely the set of activities needed to keep price growth in check. Ultimately some want the government to own all the oil companies - yeah, like that's gonna work. <br /><br />I'm not saying that all intervention is bad. Market failures may justify some interventions, say in research and development, setting up infant renewable resource industries, imposing a tax on carbon emissions, and so on. But the distinction between bad and good intervention is subtle. Too often it vanishes in the scramble to appear to do something, anything, against $100 oil. Folks, let that $100 sign tell you what to do.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-38807243541373972162007-11-07T18:50:00.000+08:002007-11-08T08:08:31.420+08:00The scarcity of oil runneth overOnce energy was cheap - cheap enough that the idea of growing plants for their energy seemed absurd. Obviously, plants are grown mostly for food. For thousands of years thus it has been, so shall it ever be. <br /><br />But now energy is dear - dear enough that some plants in some places can be profitably grown for energy, creating biofuels. This takes space and other resources away from growing plants for food. The old conventions are being abolished. The agricultural landscape has been permanently altered. <br /><br />Much to the discomfort of many. The idea of farming to feed cars is somehow deplorable compared to farming to put food on the table. But this is knee-jerk alarmism. Consider: <br /><br />1. If the criterion is getting the most quantity of food out of given farmland, then even now we are not doing it. The reason? We eat animals. And animals need to be fed. Either with plant feed - which often takes away land for growing food for direct consumption - or worse, other animals, which themselves need to eat plants. And the feed conversion ratio is (aside from poultry) is much higher than 1 (reaching up to 8 in the case of ruminants). Anybody complaining about the corn we feed to hogs rather than directly to people? <br /><br />Come to think of it, everytime we set up a shopping mall, a parking lot, a school, a laboratory, we are taking away land that could be used for farming. Bad for "food security". Tsk, tsk. <br /><br />2. There are a lot of distortions introduced by policies. Particularly notorious are the biofuels incentives in the US, which artificially makes it profitable for some US farmers to plant for energy rather than food. Take away these incentives and we'll see a lot less of this diversion from food to fuel. Rather other options may be explored, such as growing energy crops on marginal lands. (There is some promise from crops such as sweet sorghum and Jatropha plant for such options.)<br /><br />3. Food will get more expensive. Bad for consumers. But this is good for farmers. Without deeper analysis, we can't tell whether the net effect is anti-poor.<br /><br />My best guess is, biofuels will play a role in the overall energy mix, but not a major one (at least within the energy sector). However within the food sector the emergence of biofuels will have long term implications for the trend in future food prices. The era of cheaper and cheaper food is over, as well.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-62136807236865703822007-10-27T23:39:00.000+08:002007-10-28T00:48:02.285+08:00"Mechanism design" is not about making clocksI was waiting for the Economist to put in its <a href="http://economist.com/finance/economicsfocus/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9988840&CFID=24386614&CFTOKEN=32133088">obligatory piece</a> on the latest Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics. (The qualifier "Memorial" is there to pay tribute to the hardcore sciences of physiology, chemistry, and physics, which are the original Nobel Prizes.) At last I have something to free-ride on. <br /><br />In my line of work "incentive compatibility" crops up frequently - it means that we should expect an agent to behave consistent with her incentives. Incentive compatibility is one of the keystones of mechanism design. It may sound trivial, but responses to incentives are naively ignored, say, in government policy. If for instance government is so distressed by rampant smuggling, perhaps in ought to wonder whether all those import restrictions actually spawned incentives for evasion (i.e. by creating a premium of the domestic price over the world price). Or that tax exemptions on dependents is not going to help curb the fertility rate. Examples can be multiplied. And don't get me started over the <a href="http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view_article.php?article_id=97018">pardon</a> of former President Estrada.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-10456085534276487042007-10-20T17:04:00.000+08:002007-11-08T15:08:34.569+08:00TraumaMany in Manila consider <a href="http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/nation/view_article.php?article_id=95675">Glorietta </a>one of their favorite haunts. Years pass without incident, and soon, like our own home, such places acquire an aura of impenetrability. That is gone now. Horror has pierced clean through. You go down an escalator, ponder over the items you've seen on sale, match the colors and parties in your mind, blink, and the blast changes everything. On one end your life is taken - and so it was for nine people. On the other, you flee for your life at the crumbling debris. In between is a spectrum of injury. Some of you will need only stitches. Others will lose an arm, a leg, an eye, a face. <br /><br />But whoever you are, you are a victim - unless you played a part in this, you lowlife piece of shit. For the rest of us there is only sadness, rage at evil men who did this, and fear. Fear that comes with the violation of sanctuaries, and with the swift deadliness of strangers. <br /><br />The only cure is ordinary life. Malls that bustle, trains that run, crowds that mill; even an economy that continues to gallop with nary a pause, as I expect it would. Our routines are the most fitting rite of remembrance for this day of infamy.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-3903207175099722432007-10-11T15:15:00.000+08:002007-10-11T16:08:13.396+08:00In praise of the cheap pesoThe peso is getting more and more expensive relative to the dollar. Since about this day in 2005 to the present, the peso's value in dollar terms has risen by about 27% (from P56 to P46.23 per $). <br /><br />This is to a big extent due to the overall weakness of the dollar, causing it to become cheaper against all currencies. Aside from this though is specific high demand for Philippine pesos from dollar-denominated funds, basically from foreign remittances and portfolio investment. The timing though is beyond explanation - for all we know this is the result of forces set into motion months or even years back. <br /><br />The era of the cheap peso arrived after the Asian crisis, as hot money blew cold on emerging markets, and the Central Bank shifted more credibly away from exchange rate targeting to inflation targeting. Filipinos have since gone global, working overseas in droves, seeking foreign customers (both inside and outside the country) to earn suddenly valuable foreign currency. <br /><br />So is the dearer peso a market-driven correction? Partly. I don't believe in a return to a P56 per dollar regime. But the current trend is disturbing, to say the least. At least one prominent economist is taking up the cudgels for a cheap peso, and a major businesss daily (Business Mirror) is <a href="http://www.businessmirror.com.ph/10112007/opinion01.html">backing him up</a>. <br /><br />Bringing back the cheap peso makes eminent sense. (Coming from Professor Fabella, we can expect no less.) No, capital controls and exchange rate caps are nowhere near the table. The target is policy choices that may be artificially propping up the peso. Government should now shift towards dollar-denominated options (borrowing, investment, debt pre-payments), in line with the cheaper dollar. <a href="http://www.inquirer.net/specialreports/nbndeal/">(But no bilateral deals in the dark, please.) </a><br /><br />But if I may be too malice-minded, perhaps our policymakers are relucant to return to the cheap peso. Their rhetoric of a strong peso being the sign of good macrofundamentals is particularly off-putting. Let's hope they keep an open mind about the concerns of our dollar-earners.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-47405692069899963502007-06-28T06:55:00.000+08:002007-06-28T08:37:18.046+08:00More evidence for a downward sloping demand curveWhen I was teaching I often heard the canard, "Gas is so essential it doesn't have downward sloping demand." <br /><br /><a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ago119E4cisjXbRdkhz.EbYVxgt.?qid=20070627113553AAr4KvE">Here is evidence to the contrary.</a> Not in any way rigorous, but fairly convincing to a college sophomore!Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14858768.post-51716328022625706282007-06-19T19:24:00.000+08:002007-06-20T09:48:25.618+08:00The breast of intentionsAnother controversy with strong implications for economic freedom: the breast milk advertising controversy. (See this <a href="http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/nation/view_article.php?article_id=72125">news item</a>.) The Philippine government wants to fully implement the National Milk Code (full text <br /><a href="http://www.doh.gov.ph/executive_order/eo51">here</a>.) <br /><br />The Code is well-intentioned. Yes, breast milk is really best for babies. As with tobacco products, I agree that mandatory labeling can help balance the subtle cues inherent in product advertising. <br /><br />But extremists advocate an outright advertising ban. That is going too far. <br /><br />I have a better approach: tax it. The analogy with tobacco (and alcohol) is very precise. And don't call it "sin" tax or some such pejorative term: call it a "health tax". Set it at an ad valorem rate say equal to or even double the VAT (now at 12%). Watch the money roll in and the breastfeeding rates go up! Earmark the money for maternal and child health services of the LGUs (Local Government Units). LGUs would be happy. Maybe they'd even pressure the Congress to approve of it.Roehlanohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04018109135738021378noreply@blogger.com0