Are Filipino Attitudes to the Role of Government Different?

A Cross National Analysis Across Time Paper presented to the Second International Conference on Public Opinion Polls, Public Opinion Polls in a Changing Society, Cairo, Egypt, 8-9 November 2009 By Linda Luz Guerrero (guerrero@sws.org.ph) Vice-President, Social Weather Stations, Philippines

Abstract In 1984, the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP, www.issp.org) was established by five nations. Each of the now 45 member-countries administer an identical survey to a random sample of their population. The survey institutes themselves meet every year to develop and design survey questions on topics that are relevant and meaningful to them. In 1990, the Philippines joined the ISSP survey consortium and has since then annually implemented all the agreed upon survey modules. In 1996 together with 22 other member countries, the Philippines implemented the Role of Government survey to obtain data on attitudes toward government responsibilities and government spending, state intervention in the economy, civil liberties, political interest, trust and efficacy. Two thirds of the items in the 1996 survey were replicated in 2006 by 21 member countries. This paper compares attitudes of Filipinos with that of the citizens of the other participating ISSP countries towards the role of government in terms of (a) helping the economy grow; (b) providing a job for everyone who wants one; (c) keeping prices under control; (d) providing health care for the sick; (e) providing a decent standard of living for the old; (e) providing industry with the help it needs to grow; (f) providing s decent standard of living for the unemployed; and (g) reducing income differences between the rich and the poor. The paper also discusses how government in these ISSP countries is rated on how successful it is in providing health care for the sick, providing a decent standard of living of the old, dealing with threats to security, controlling crime, fighting unemployment and protecting the environment.

AUTHOR: Ms. LINDA LUZ B. GUERRERO Vice-President Social Weather Stations 52 Malingap Street, Sikatuna Village Quezon City 1101, PHILIPPINES Tel No. +632 924 4465 Fax No. +632 921 0181 Email: guerrero@sws.org.ph

Are Filipino Attitudes to the Role of Government Different? A Cross National Analysis Across Time

1 Background and Objectives The International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) is an international consortium of survey institutes. It was established in 1984 and presently has 46 member-countries. Each year ISSP members develop survey questions on a topic of common interest and agree to conduct a survey containing these common questions for the sake of cross- country comparison. Each participating survey-institute-member funds all of its survey and non-survey costs. Social Weather Stations (SWS) which represents the Philippines in ISSP became a member in 1990 and implemented its first survey in 1991. Since 1984 there have been four national survey rounds on the role of government implemented by the ISSP members. The first time the module was implemented was in 1985 with then only 6 countries; then replicated in 1990 with 9 countries. Since SWS was not yet a member during the 1985 and 1990 survey rounds, this paper will use the 1996 and 2006 data which still allows one to track changes, if any, in Filipino attitudes towards the role of government and at the same time compare itself with other countries. In 1996 there were 22 other member countries who gathered data on attitudes toward government responsibilities and government spending, state intervention in the economy, civil liberties, political interest, trust and efficacy. Two thirds of the items in the 1996 survey were replicated in 2006 by 21 member countries. This paper focuses on a major area of concern in the survey module: the role of government in terms of (a) helping the economy grow; (b) providing a job for everyone who wants one; (c) keeping prices under control; (d) providing health care for the sick; (e) providing a decent standard of living for the old; (e) providing industry with the help it needs to grow; (f) providing s decent standard of living for the unemployed; and (g) reducing income differences between the rich and the poor. The paper also discusses how government in these ISSP countries is rated on how successful it is in providing health care for the sick, providing a decent standard of living of the old, dealing with threats to security, controlling crime, fighting unemployment and protecting the environment.

2 The changing role of government Then the fundamental purpose of government was to secure the rights and freedoms of individual citizens and maintain public order. Now its role has expanded and can be categorized into direct and indirect roles. Direct roles include the provision and management of social services. Indirect roles include policy-making, enforcing and upholding the law, monitoring and regulating markets, and enabling and contracting private and other sectoral independent service providers. The role of government has expanded to include development in general and service delivery in particular. Further with globalization, views on the role of government continue to change and expand. And over the last two decades, in many countries there has been an emphasis on reducing the role of government and on reforming public management by building alliances with the private sector and other change constituencies. The changing views of the role of government and the changing approaches to public sector management has created strains in its capacity to perform new roles (Batley and Larbi, 2004). 3 Helping the economy grow What roles do citizens want their governments to take considering that the role of government is determined by the level of economic and institutional development? Many governments have had to balance their role in helping the economy to grow. Many complain that government regulation of the economy is too little, preferring that it should control and regulate, for example wages and prices. Others feel that it should instead take on a passive role and let market forces prevail. Looking at the ISSP data over 10 years from 1996 to 2006, high favorable support for government intervention in the financing of projects to create jobs has been stable. On average for each of the two years, 82% are in favor. But if creating more jobs is done via reducing the working week then attitudes towards government using this strategy to develop the economy are relatively less favorable, and in fact support has slightly decreased from an average of 46% in 1996 to 40% in 2006. There is some favorable view as to government supporting declining industries to protect jobs: 61% in 1996 and 62% in 2006.

There is still substantial support for having government cut on its spending to help the economy develop. This support though has decreased on average, from 76% in 1996 to 67% in 2006. Government support for industry to develop new products and technology has continued to be highly favored, 84% in both 1996 and 2006 . But in the same breath, slight majorities favor government to regulate business: 52% in 1996 and 51% in 2006.

3.1 Cuts in government spending The more efficient government is in carrying out its functions, the lower the level of public spending needed. Stability should be maintained at a level of government expenditure that best allows the government to pursue its essential or core functions (Tanzi, 1998). In general there have been declines in supporting cuts in government spending as something government might do for the economy. Declines in support are seen more in Australia (from 68% in 1996 to 44% in 2006), Ireland (from 74% in 1996 to 43% in 2006), Russia (69% in 1996 to 40% in 2006) and Switzerland (78% in 1996 to 44% in 2006). Support has increased in the Czech Republic (55% in 1996 to 60% in 2006), Latvia ( 92% in 1996 to 95% in 2006) and especially in Poland (70% in 1996 to 87% in 2006). In 2006, although there have been erosions in support, still very high majority support is shown by France (88%), Hungary (87%), and Poland (87%) and especially Latvia (95%) (Table 1). The Philippines has unwavered. Three fourths of respondents in the Philippines since 1996 (76%) to 2006 (75%), favor government cutting on its spending as a way of helping the economy. Table 1. Here are some things the government might do for the economy. Please show which actions you are in favor of and which are against. Cuts in Government Spending, % In Favor 1996 2006 Change (A) (B) (B-A) Australia 68 44 -24 Canada 81 69 -12 Czech Republic 55 60 5 France 93 88 -5 Germany-East 82 75 -7 Germany-West 85 77 -8 Great Britain 45 38 -7 Hungary 90 87 -3 Ireland 74 43 -31 Israel-Arabs 79 74 -5 Israel-Jews 89 79 -10

Japan Latvia New Zealand Norway Philippines Poland Russia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland United States Average

78 92 71 66 76 70 69 85 85 58 78 83 76

80 95 63 61 75 87 40 81 56 56 44 63 67

2 3 -8 -5 -1 17 -29 -4 -29 -2 -34 -20 -9

But attitudes can change depending on the situation. More recently, GlobeScans and PIPAs BBC World Service Poll (September 2009) across 20 countries showed support for increased government spending to stimulate the economy. Increased government role in the regulation and oversight of the national economy was also preferred to contain the current financial crises. 3.2 Financing of projects to create new jobs Among the roles, one of the three most popular roles government is favored to take is the financing of projects to create new jobs. As mentioned earlier an average of 82% in both 1996 and 2006 favor this role for government (Table 2). In 2006, very high above average majorities who support this role for government is shown by Hungary (95%), Ireland (93%), Israel (the Arab side, 95%), Latvia (95%), Poland (95%) and Spain (96%). Comparing 1996 and 2006, a surge of support is shown by Israel (Arabs side, 82% in 1996 to 95% in 2006) and New Zealand (54% in 1996 to 75% in 2006). There have been relatively big declines in support for this action in Germany (West, 79% in 1996 to 65% in 2006; and East, 86% in 1996 to 73% in 2006), and Japan (71% in 1996 to 61% in 2006). Lowest support in 2006 is shown by Japan. In the Philippines, although still high, there was a decrease in support, from 86% in 1996 to 80% in 2006, the latter not within the average range of 82%. Table 2 Here are some things the government might do for the economy. Please show which actions you are in favor of and which are against. Government financing of projects to create new jobs, % In Favor 1996 2006 Change (A) (B) (B-A) Australia 84 86 2 Canada 72 72 0

Czech Republic France Germany-East Germany-West Great Britain Hungary Ireland Israel-Arabs Israel-Jews Japan Latvia New Zealand Norway Philippines Poland Russia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland United States Average

74 80 86 79 86 93 92 82 89 71 96 54 86 86 92 85 87 95 69 77 74 82

78 78 73 65 75 95 93 95 85 61 95 75 86 80 95 86 88 96 68 76 85 82

4 -2 -13 -14 -11 2 1 13 -4 -10 -1 21 0 -6 3 1 1 1 -1 -1 11 0

3.3 Less regulation of business When governments put more faith in free markets, it provides an environment conducive to healthy competition and thus industrial success. With liberalization, governments role is to provide a stable macro-economy with clear rules of the game, and to level the playing field. Government is expected to give a lead role to private enterprise and furnish essential public goods like basic human capital and infrastructure. If deviations occur these cannot not be remedied by government (Lall, 2003). When unable to collect taxes efficiently, governments of developing countries in particular tend to pursue their objectives through regulations, thus distorting the role of government (Tanzi, 1998). Of the countries, the highest support for less government intervention in business is Germany (East, 77% and West, 71%) particularly in 2006. Czech Republic (60%), France (62%), New Zealand (60%) Poland (59%), and Slovenia (64%) also show above average favorable views on government having less intervention in business (Table 3). Russia (39% in 1996 to 28% in 2006), and Spain ( 43% in 1996 and 35% in 2006) and Sweden (44% in 1996 and 47% in 2006) show the least favorable opinions on government regulating business, i.e they would prefer more government role. Israel (Arabs side) declined much in its support for this government role (70% in 1996 to 35% in 2006). The Philippines is slightly above average in its support for having less government regulation of

business: 54% in both 1996 and 2006.

Table 3. Here are some things the government might do for the economy. Please show which actions you are in favor of and which are against. Less government regulation of business, % In Favor 1996 2006 Change (A) (B) (B-A) Australia 59 49 -10 Canada 49 53 4 Czech Republic 46 60 14 France 66 62 -4 Germany-East 49 77 28 Germany-West 53 71 18 Great Britain 42 47 5 Hungary 51 51 0 Ireland 56 53 -3 Israel-Arabs 70 35 -35 Israel-Jews 60 45 -15 Japan 51 40 -11 Latvia 47 52 5 New Zealand 57 60 3 Norway 46 44 -2 Philippines 54 54 0 Poland 47 59 12 Russia 39 28 -11 Slovenia 60 64 4 Spain 43 35 -8 Sweden 44 47 3 Switzerland 53 46 -7 United States 50 52 2 Average 52 51 -1

3.4 Support for industry to develop new products and technology This is a good example of the market-enhancing view where instead of viewing government and the market as mutually exclusive, government policy is directed at encouraging private sector partnerships (Aoki eds, 1997). Another role that countries would want government to take on is to support industry to develop new products and technology. As mentioned earlier, a very positive average of 84% is obtained for this role. In 2006, Australia (93%), Ireland (96%), Israel (Arabs, 93%, Latvia (91%), New Zealand (93%), Norway (90%) and Slovenia (91%) stand out in this regard (Table 4).

There are some countries though that fall way below average in their support, although still relatively substantial. In 2006, these include the Czech Republic (66%), Sweden (70%) and Switzerland (69%).

Support of the Philippines for this role that government could play dipped from 79% in 1996 to 71% in 2006. These proportions though are relatively still high but below the average. Table 4. Here are some things the government might do for the economy. Please show which actions you are in favor of and which are against. Support for industry to develop new products and technology, % In Favor 1996 2006 Change (A) (B) (B-A) Australia 95 93 -2 Canada 83 82 -1 Czech Republic 83 66 -17 France 78 83 5 Germany-East 80 78 -2 Germany-West 81 82 1 Great Britain 88 85 -3 Hungary 88 86 -2 Ireland 94 96 2 Israel-Arabs 81 93 12 Israel-Jews 90 81 -9 Japan 84 81 -3 Latvia 95 91 -4 New Zealand 90 93 3 Norway 85 90 5 Philippines 79 71 -8 Poland 84 91 7 Russia 83 88 5 Slovenia 90 91 1 Spain 88 88 0 Sweden 66 70 4 Switzerland 76 69 -7 United States 78 86 8 Average 84 84 0

3.5 Providing industry with the help it needs to grow Given the above, it is not surprising that government should be positively viewed as providing industry with the help it needs to grow. In 1996, an average of 83% thought it should be governments responsibility to provide industry with the help it needs to grow. It slightly dipped in 2006 at 81% but this proportion is still very

much showing high majorities (Table 5). In 2006, high above average support is observed in Australia (85%), France (83%), Great Britain (88%), Hungary (90%), Ireland (95%), Israel (Arabs, 95%), Israel (Jews, 89%), Latvia (93%), New Zealand (87%), Poland (93%), Russia (2%), Slovenia (94%) and Spain (93%). The Philippines is slightly above average: 85% in 1996 and 83% in 2006. Table 5 On the whole, do you think it should or should not be the government's responsibility to Provide industry with the help it needs to grow, % Should 1996 2006 Change (A) (B) (B-A) Australia 87 85 -2 Canada 74 76 2 Czech Republic 82 77 -5 France 82 83 1 Germany East 73 62 -11 Germany West 64 58 -6 Great Britain 93 88 -5 Hungry 89 90 1 Ireland 94 95 1 Israel Arabs 89 95 6 Israel Jews 91 89 -2 Japan 75 67 -8 Latvia 96 93 -3 New Zealand 85 87 2 Norway 80 78 -2 Philippines 85 83 -2 Poland 91 93 2 Russia 92 92 0 Slovenia 93 94 1 Spain 96 93 -3 Sweden 80 77 -3 Switzerland 52 45 -7 USA 66 74 8 Average 83 81 -2

3.6 Support for declining industries to protect jobs On average as mentioned earlier, government role in supporting declining industries to protect jobs has remained stable: 61% in 1996 and 62% in 2006 (Table 6). A very positive change is shown by Israel (Arabs, from 80% in 1996 to 94% in 2006). Above average increases in support is shown by Hungary (63% in 1996 to 72% in 2006), Ireland (72% in 1996 to 76% in 2006), Poland ( 66% in 1996 to 72% in 2006), and the United States (49% in 1996

to 68% in 2006). Over the 10 year period from 1996 to 2006, visibly below average support is shown in Australia (45% in 1996 and 51% in 2006), Canada (37% in 1996 and 42% in 2006), Czech Republic ( 39% in 1996 and 38% in 2006), Latvia ( 47% in 1996 and 55% in 2006), New Zealand (45% in 1996 and 42% in 2006), Norway (58% in 1996 and 56% in 2006), Russia (49% in both 1996 and 2006), and Sweden (52% in 1996 and 51% in 2006). The Philippines shows favorable, although decreasing, attitudes for government to have a role in supporting declining industries to protect jobs: 75% in 1996 and 68% in 2006. Table 6. Here are some things the government might do for the economy. Please show which actions you are in favor of and which are against. Support for declining industries to protect jobs, % In Favor 1996 2006 Change (A) (B) (B-A) Australia 45 51 6 Canada 37 42 5 Czech Republic 39 38 -1 France 69 66 -3 Germany-East 77 63 -14 Germany-West 65 57 -8 Great Britain 64 62 -2 Hungary 63 72 9 Ireland 72 76 4 Israel-Arabs 80 94 14 Israel-Jews 79 78 -1 Japan 68 57 -11 Latvia 47 55 8 New Zealand 45 42 -3 Norway 58 56 -2 Philippines 75 68 -7 Poland 66 72 6 Russia 49 49 0 Slovenia 70 70 0 Spain 83 82 -1 Sweden 52 51 -1 Switzerland 60 57 -3 United States 49 68 19 Average 61 62 1

3.7 Reducing the working week to create more jobs Among the different roles tested, reducing the working week to create more jobs is the least favored role that government might do for the economy, and in fact has had a decrease in support on average: 46% in 1996 to 40% in 2006 (Table 7).

Visibly below average support is shown by Australia (30% in 1996 to 23% in 2006), Czech Republic (23% in 1996 and 30% in 2006), New Zealand (24% in 1996 and 26% in 2006), and the United States (27% in 1996 and 36% in 2006). There have been increases in support and are above the average in Poland (41% in 1996 to 49% in 2006) and Spain ( 53% in 1996 to 60% in 2006). In the Philippines there has been a decrease in support but is still above the average: 57% in 1996 to 44% in 2006. Table 7. Here are some things the government might do for the economy. Please show which actions you are in favor of and which are against. Reducing the working week to create more jobs, % In Favor 1996 2006 Change (A) (B) (B-A) Australia 30 23 -7 Canada 48 45 -3 Czech Republic 23 30 7 France 59 28 -31 Germany-East 68 53 -15 Germany-West 45 38 -7 Great Britain 38 33 -5 Hungary 39 39 0 Ireland 52 32 -20 Israel-Arabs 72 69 -3 Israel-Jews 59 45 -14 Japan 53 39 -14 Latvia 29 39 10 New Zealand 24 26 2 Norway 45 29 -16 Philippines 57 44 -13 Poland 41 49 8 Russia 28 30 2 Slovenia 58 54 -4 Spain 53 60 7 Sweden 61 52 -9 Switzerland 55 35 -20 United States 27 36 9 Average 46 40 -6

3.8 Keeping prices under control As reduction in the rate of inflation is often an important contributor to the growth of the income especially to those at the bottom of the income distribution (Tanzi, 1998), the data gathered show strong support that it should be governments responsibility to keep prices

under control. On average, 84% showed support for this government role (Table 8). Even higher above the average support is shown by Australia (81% in 1996 and 84% in 2006), Germany East (87% in 1996 and 86% in 2006), Great Britain (86% in 1996 and 85% in 2006), Hungary (88% in 1996 and 87% in 2006), Ireland (92% in 1996 and 93% in 2006), Israel Arabs (95% in 1996 and 93% in 2006), Israel Jews (88% in 1996 and 86% in 2006), Japan (96 in 1996 and 92% in 2006), Norway ( 990% in 1996 and 89% in 2006), Russia (95% in 1996 and 98% in 2006), Slovenia (90% in 1996 and 86% in 2006), and Spain (91% both in 1996 and 2006). In the Philippines, there is much support that government has this role of keeping the prices under control: 93% in 1996 and 96% in 2006.

Table 8 On the whole, do you think it should or should not be the government's responsibility to Keep Prices under control, % Should 1996 2006 (A) (B) Australia 81 87 Canada 64 70 Czech Republic 82 67 France 76 83 Germany East 87 86 Germany West 71 75 Great Britain 86 85 Hungry 88 87 Ireland 92 93 Israel Arabs 95 93 Israel Jews 88 86 Japan 96 92 Latvia 80 84 New Zealand 74 77 Norway 90 89 Philippines 93 96 Poland 84 78 Russia 95 98 Slovenia 90 86 Spain 91 91 Sweden 86 82 Switzerland 78 77 USA 69 77 Average 84 84

Change (B-A) 6 6 -15 7 -1 4 -1 -1 1 -2 -2 -4 4 3 -1 3 -6 3 -4 0 -4 -1 8 0

4 Delivery of social services Direct roles of government to provide basic social services is very much appreciated . Among the responsibilities tested, providing health care for the sick (average of 95% in 1996 and 96% in 2006) and providing a decent standard of living for the old (average of 95% for both 1996 and 2006) are considered must roles for government. Another must role is governments responsibility with regard reducing income differences between the rich and the poor (average 70% in 1996 and an increase in 2006 to 74%). Coming next although there have been declines are providing a decent standard of living for the unemployed (average 76% in 1996 and 69% in 2006), and providing a job for everyone who wants one (average 74% in 1996 and 69% in 2006).

4.1 Reducing income differences between the rich and the poor Over time from 1996 to 2006 in general there have been strong preference that government should reduce income differences between the rich and the poor. Big increases are shown in Australia (52% in 1996 to 61% in 2006), Canada (51% in 1996 to 68% in 2006), Latvia (72% in 1996 to 83% in 2006) and Switzerland (60% in 1996 to 69% in 2006) (Table 9). In the Philippines, a big increase in support for this government role is also seen: 63% in 1996 to 73% in 2006. Table 9 On the whole, do you think it should or should not be the government's responsibility to Reduce income differences between the rich and the poor, % Should 1996 2006 Change (A) (B) (B-A) Australia 52 61 9 Canada 51 68 17 Czech Republic 62 55 -7 France 74 78 4 Germany East 84 83 -1 Germany West 63 67 4 Great Britain 68 69 1 Hungry 79 86 7

Ireland Israel Arabs Israel Jews Japan Latvia New Zealand Norway Philippines Poland Russia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland USA Average

78 87 81 64 72 47 73 63 84 81 85 90 71 60 48 70

80 94 83 66 83 50 74 73 88 86 91 86 68 69 52 74

2 7 2 2 11 3 1 10 4 5 6 -4 -3 9 4 4

4.2 Providing health care for the sick Providing services for health is a universal need. All the countries feel that this should be a responsibility of government (Table 10). In the Philippines, practically all say that it should be governments responsibility to provide health care for the sick: 96% in 1996 and 95% in 2006. Table 10 On the whole, do you think it should or should not be the government's responsibility to Provide health care for the sick, % Should 1996 2006 (A) (B) Australia 94 98 Canada 94 96 Czech Republic 97 96 France 89 92 Germany East 99 97 Germany West 97 96 Great Britain 99 99 Hungary 99 100 Ireland 99 99 Israel Arabs 88 96 Israel Jews 96 96 Japan 90 87 Latvia 99 96 New Zealand 97 98 Norway 99 99 Philippines 96 95 Poland 98 99 Russia 98 98 Slovenia 97 98

Change (B-A) 4 2 -1 3 -2 -1 0 1 0 8 0 -3 -3 1 0 -1 1 0 1

Spain Sweden Switzerland USA Average

99 96 90 85 95

98 94 88 90 96

-1 -2 -2 5 1

4.3 Providing a job for everyone who wants one There have been declines from 1996 to 2006 in the support for the direct role of government to provide jobs for those who want one is observed in. Biggest declines are observed in Germany East (92% in 1996 to 80% in 2006), Germany West (75% in 1996 to 62% in 2006), Great Britain (69% in 1996 to 56% in 2006), Japan (63% in 1996 to 52% in 2006), New Zealand (55% in 1996 to 37% in 2006) and Spain (91% in 1996 to 82% in 2006) (Table 11). Relative to other countries, Australia (44% in 1996 and 43% in 2006), Canada (36% in 1996 and 35% in 2006), and the United States show low support for this direct role of government to provide jobs for those who want one. Above the average high support in 2006 is shown in Hungary (91%), Israel Arabs (94%), Poland (89%), Russia (93%) , and Slovenia (88%). The Philippines continued to show high above the average support for the role: 91% in 1996 and 92% in 2006. Table 11 On the whole, do you think it should or should not be the government's responsibility to Provide a job for everyone who wants one, % Should 1996 2006 (A) (B) Australia 44 43 Canada 36 35 Czech Republic 76 79 France 69 62 Germany East 92 80 Germany West 75 62 Great Britain 69 56 Hungary 87 91 Ireland 70 65 Israel Arabs 97 94 Israel Jews 75 76 Japan 63 52 Latvia 90 83 New Zealand 55 37 Norway 81 79 Philippines 91 92

Change (B-A) -1 -1 3 -7 -12 -13 -13 4 -5 -3 1 -11 -7 -18 -2 1

Poland Russia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland USA Average

90 93 89 91 65 56 39 74

89 93 88 82 59 50 40 69

-1 0 -1 -9 -6 -6 1 -5

4.4 Providing a decent standard of living for the unemployed In general there have been declines in support for the government role of providing a decent standard of living for the unemployed. The biggest declines are observed in France (81% in 1996 to 70% in 2006), Germany East ( 92% in 1996 to 80% in 2006), Germany West (80% in 1996 to 67% in 2006), Great Britain (79% in 1996 to 57% in 2006), Israel Arabs (85% in 1996 to 60%in 2006), Japan (73% in 1996 to 56% in 2006), Latvia (83% in 1996 to 65% in 2006), New Zealand (63% in 1996 to 49% in 2006), and Russia (81% in 1996 to 68% in 2006) (Table 12). In the Philippines support for this government role has in fact increased: 72% in 1996 to 79% in 2006. Table 12 On the whole, do you think it should or should not be the government's responsibility to Provide a decent standard of living for the unemployed, % Should 1996 2006 Change (A) (B) (B-A) Australia 65 57 -8 Canada 65 63 -2 Czech Republic 45 48 3 France 81 70 -11 Germany East 92 80 -12 Germany West 80 67 -13 Great Britain 79 57 -22 Hungary 63 69 6 Ireland 91 82 -9 Israel Arabs 85 60 -25 Israel Jews 62 65 3 Japan 73 56 -17 Latvia 83 65 -18 New Zealand 63 49 -14 Norway 93 88 -5 Philippines 72 79 7 Poland 81 82 1 Russia 81 68 -13 Slovenia 86 83 -3

Spain Sweden Switzerland USA Average

94 90 72 48 76

93 83 67 52 69

-1 -7 -5 4 -7

4.5 Providing a decent standard of living for the old The elderly is a sector much valued by all the countries. The proportions wanting that government should provide a decent standard of living for the old are so high and this has not changed over time from 1996 to 2006 (Table 13). In the Philippines support has been high and unchanged : 90% in 1996 and 91% in 2006. Table 13 On the whole, do you think it should or should not be the government's responsibility to Provide a decent standard of living for the old, % Should 1996 2006 (A) (B) Australia 94 95 Canada 90 95 Czech Republic 97 95 France 92 94 Germany East 98 96 Germany West 96 93 Great Britain 98 97 Hungary 98 99 Ireland 99 100 Israel Arabs 89 97 Israel Jews 95 95 Japan 91 89 Latvia 100 98 New Zealand 94 95 Norway 99 99 Philippines 90 91 Poland 99 99 Russia 99 99 Slovenia 96 96 Spain 99 99 Sweden 98 97 Switzerland 90 90 USA 87 90 Average 95 95

Change (B-A) 1 5 -2 2 -2 -3 -1 1 1 8 0 -2 -2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 -1 0 3 0

5 Government performance ratings

On average, countries are stringent with their ratings of the performance of government in providing social services. In 2006, with more countries participating in the survey, only 23% to 43% would rate as successful governments provision of welfare services. A plurality rated as successful governments role in dealing with threats to security (average 43%) (Table 14). The next government role better rated to be successful is providing healthcare for the sick with an average of 36%. A third on average felt that the government was successful in protecting the environment (31%) and providing a decent standard of living for the old (30%). A fourth rated government as successful in controlling crime (25%) and fighting unemployment.

5.1 Success in providing health care for the sick In 2006 (as these items were not run in 1996), the highest rater was Switzerland, with 75% saying that its government has been successful in providing health care for the sick. There were 15 countries giving ratings below the average successful rating of 36%. The least happy include Latvia (13%), Russia (14%) , Poland (14%), Croatia (14%), Portugal (15%) and Hungary (17%). Almost half (49%) in the Philippines rated as successful its government in providing health care for the sick. 5.2 Success in providing a decent standard of living of the old Switzerland was the highest rater, with 69% saying that its government was successful in providing a decent standard of living of the old. There were 16 countries giving ratings below the average successful rating of 30%. Countries where only a few thought that their respective government was successful in providing a decent standard of living of the elderly include Latvia (7%), Russia (8%), Croatia (9%), and Portugal (9%). Almost 2 out of 5 (37%) in the Philippines rated as successful its government in providing a decent standard of living of the elderly. 5.3 Success in dealing with threats to security Finland was the highest rater of its government, with 76% saying that it was successful in dealing with threats to security. Switzerland (67%) and Germany East (66%) followed next. Other good raters were Denmark (64%), Germany West (62%), and Australia (62%). The least happy were South Korea (17%) and Japan (19%). The Philippines had 41% saying that its government was successful in dealing with threats to security.

5.4 Success in controlling crime Government success in controlling crime is not so well rated. In 2006, on average only 25% rated government as successful in controlling crime. The highest raters were Germany West (54%) and Switzerland (53%). Chile (9%), Croatia (10%), Israel-Jews (11%), Russia (12%) and Sweden (12%) had the fewest constituents rating government as successful in controlling crime. About 2 in 5 (38%) in the Philippines rated its government as successful in controlling crime . 5.5 Success in fighting unemployment Governments on average are rated poorly in fighting unemployment. Visibly poor ratings are observed in Croatia (5%), Germany East (6%), South Korea (6%), Hungary (6%), Germany West (7%), Portugal (8%), Japan (9%), and Sweden (9%). 5.6 Success in protecting the environment As earlier mentioned, on average only 31% rate government as successful in protecting the environment. The poorest rater was Russia (9%) and the highest was Switzerland (52%) and New Zealand (51%) and Uruguay (50%). In the Philippines 38% thought that its government was successful in protecting the environment.

Australia Canada Chile Croatia Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Finland France Germany-East Germany-West Great Britain Hungary Ireland Israel-Arabs Israel-Jews Japan Latvia Netherlands New Zealand Norway Philippines Poland Portugal Russia Slovenia South Africa South Korea Spain Sweden Switzerland Taiwan United States Uruguay Venezuela Average

Table 14. Government Success in Providing Welfare Services, 2006 % Successful Health Care Decent Standard Threats to Controlling Fighting for the Sick of Living for the old Security Crime Unemployment 38 35 62 33 53 49 37 37 33 35 23 18 33 9 13 14 9 36 10 5 36 28 50 18 14 48 43 64 30 65 33 24 49 29 13 49 34 76 43 22 40 26 53 29 15 39 38 66 45 6 42 35 62 54 7 51 30 42 22 30 17 15 46 17 6 20 40 41 22 65 45 50 55 18 14 27 19 30 11 12 28 23 19 18 9 13 7 45 20 13 35 30 37 18 21 37 40 50 26 51 34 28 51 18 53 49 37 41 38 27 14 10 38 30 20 15 9 23 18 8 14 8 37 12 10 37 33 40 20 15 51 45 40 14 10 34 20 17 17 6 53 36 31 32 34 45 32 38 12 9 75 69 67 53 51 47 33 23 22 12 25 23 47 35 30 38 29 34 26 37 58 56 28 16 26 36 30 43 25 23

Protecting the Environment 25 24 18 19 30 43 30 44 16 49 44 20 17 42 45 15 18 25 31 51 35 38 30 15 9 26 35 17 29 41 52 30 34 50 41 31

6 Concluding Remarks There are already many roles ascribed to government. Many other roles are evolving. The data for the Philippines show that it is not an outlier. It did not have any extreme values on any of the question items. Through time from 1996 to 2006, the Philippines has maintained its position on what government can do for the economy, in particular in having cuts in government spending and regulation of business. It has decreased its dependence on government to undertake many of its indirect responsibilities, i.e. financing of projects to create new jobs, supporting industry to develop new products and technology, supporting declining industries to protect jobs, providing industry with the help it needs to grow and reducing the work week to create more jobs. It has however increased its support for government to keep prices under control. It has maintained and even increased its preference that government take on its direct role of providing basic social services. Big proportions still say that government should provide jobs for those who want one; provide health care for the sick and provide a decent standard of living for the old. It has increased its desire for government to provide a decent standard of living for the unemployed and reduce income differences between the rich and the poor. In general, the Philippines has given better above the average ratings than many countries as to the success of its government in providing welfare services.

References Aoki, Masahiko, Kim, Hyung-Ki and Fujiwara, Masahiro Okuno (eds) (1997). The Role of Government in East Asian Economic Development: Comparative Institutional Analysis, Oxford: Clarendon Press. Batley, Richard and Larbi, George (2004). The Changing Role of Government: The Reform of Public Services in Developing Countries. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. GlobeScan and the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland (2009). Global Poll Shows Support for Increased Government Spending and Regulation, Press Release for the BBC World Service Poll Bechert, Insa and Quandt, Markus (2009). ISSP Data Report: Attitudes Towards the Role of Government. GESIS Arbeitsberichte Nr. 7, Bonn.

Lall, Sanjaya (2003). Reinventing Industrial Strategy: The Role of Government Policy in Building Industrial Competitiveness, Paper for the Intergovernmental Group on Monetary Affairs and Development (G-24), University of Oxford. Tanzi, Vito (1998). Fundamental Determinants of Inequality and the Role of Government, Working Paper of the International Monetary Fund 98/178.