Population Research and Policy Review

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 141–164 | Cite as

The Migratory Response of Labor to Special Economic Zones in the Philippines, 1995–2005

  • Scott R. Sanders
  • David L. Brown


In the mid 1990s the Filipino government adopted a new export-led development policy in an attempt to attract new investments and lower the unemployment rates throughout the country. The central idea was to provide foreign investors more access to Filipino markets and labor by giving them investor tax breaks and lowering trade tariffs. In return, the government hoped that investors would bring large amounts of capital into designated areas thereby creating new jobs and stimulating the domestic economy. The Filipino created the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA) and Base Conversion Development Authority (BCDA) to manage the operation of the Special Economic Zones (SEZ) throughout the country. Between 1995 and 2005 PEZA and BCDA approved over 200 new SEZ that have created over four million jobs throughout the country. However, these jobs are concentrated in a small number of regions. This research uses a modified Harris-Todaro model and GIS techniques to examine the inter-regional migration response to the PEZA and BCDA programs’ geographically targeted investments. We show that areas with the highest job growth have high rates of in-migration while regions with low SEZ related investments have become migration-sending areas. In addition, our analysis shows that in-migration to SEZ affected areas has tended to surpass available jobs resulting in high unemployment. We show how the Harris-Todaro model in combination with GIS might be used to identify locations for future PEZA and BCDA investments that are less likely to result in regional population loss or growth in unemployment.


Philippines Labor migration Special economic zones Rural–urban migration GIS 


  1. Bases Conversion Development Authority. (2001). Annual report 2000. Google Scholar
  2. Bases Conversion Development Authority. (2006a). About the BCDA. Retrieved March, 19, 2006, from
  3. Bases Conversion Development Authority. (2006b). Annual report 2005. Google Scholar
  4. Bell, C. (1991). Regional heterogeneity, migration, and shadow prices. Journal of Public Economics, 46(1), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. ESRI. (2007). Understanding different kriging models. Retrieved September 6, 2007, from
  6. Fields, G. S. (1975). Rural-urban migration, urban unemployment and underemployment, and job-search activity in LDCs. Journal of Development Economics, 2(2), 165–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Guillermo, V. (1996). Checking out employment strategies. Manila: Press Foundation of Asia.Google Scholar
  8. Harris, J. R., & Todaro, M. P. (1970). Migration, unemployment and development: A two-sector analysis. The American Economic Review, 60(1), 126–142.Google Scholar
  9. Issah, I., Khan, T. Y., & Sasaki, K. (2005). Do migrants react to infrastructure difference between urban and rural areas? Development of an extended Harris-Todaro model. Review of Urban and Regional Development Studies, 17(1), 68–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Makabenta, M. P. (2002). FDI location and special economic zones in the Philippines. Review of Urban and Regional Development Studies, 14(1), 59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Massey, D. S. (1990). Social structure, household strategies, and the cumulative causation of migration. Population Index, 56(1), 3–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Massey, D. S. (1999). Why does immigration occur? In C. Hirschman, P. Kasinitz, & J. DeWind (Eds.), The handbook of international migration: The American experience (pp. 34–52). New York: New Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  13. National Statistical Coordination Board. (2001). 2000 Philippines statistical yearbook. Manila: National Statistical Coordination Board.Google Scholar
  14. Philippines Congressional Planning and Budget Department. (2003). Economic and employment status report. Google Scholar
  15. Philippines Economic Zone Authority. (2006a). About PEZA. Retrieved April, 23, 2006, from
  16. Philippines Economic Zone Authority. (2006b). Philippines special economic zones. Retrieved April 23, 2006, from
  17. Philippines Economic Zone Authority.(2006c). SEZ employment totals. Unpublished report.Google Scholar
  18. Philippines National Census. (1997). Provincial profile: National capital region. Manila: National Statistical Board.Google Scholar
  19. Philippines National Census. (1998a). PopCens 95. Manila: National Statistical Board.Google Scholar
  20. Philippines National Census. (1998b). Socio-economic and demographic characteristics, 1995. Manila: National Statistical Board.Google Scholar
  21. Philippines National Statistics Office. (2002). Philippines statistical yearbook, 2001. Manila: Bureau of the Census and Statistics.Google Scholar
  22. Philippines National Census. (2005). Socio-economic and demographic characteristics, 2000. Manila: Bureau of the Census and Statistics.Google Scholar
  23. Philippines National Census. (2006). Socio-economic and demographic characteristics, 2000. Manila: National Statistical Board.Google Scholar
  24. Ringuet, D. J., & Estrada, E. (2003). Understanding the Philippines’ economy and politics since the return of democracy in 1986. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 25(2), 233.Google Scholar
  25. Stiglitz, J. E. (1974). Alternative theories of wage determination and unemployment in LDC’s: The labor turnover model. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 88(2), 194–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tolentino, M. P. (1994). Developing agriculture toward sustainable industrialization. Economics and business in the Philippines (pp. 57–68). San Francisco: The Asia Foundation.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Development SociologyCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Development Sociology Cornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations