2020 was a year of great uncertainty for the Philippines.  Covid-19 reached the Philippine shores and caused the death of tens of thousands and isolation of hundreds of thousands.  It was unprecedented in recent Philippine history.  There were no clear formulas to effectively contain the pandemic.  The national government response was to create an inter-agency task force.  This was national government driven and the Department of Health took the lead.  As the President often repeated, lives matter more than anything else.  Hence, the priority was to keep people safe and free from infection. 

​

To keep people safe, border controls were put in place.  Travel to the Philippines was subject to strict protocols.  And within the country, movement of people from one region to another including movement from province to province and city to city was monitored closely.  Check points were set up and travelers were required to present documents that would show that there was a compelling reason for them to be outside of their residences.  People usually allowed passage were either reporting for work or were authorized persons to buy household daily necessities.  Schools were closed. Offices were closed. Many business establishments ceased to operate.

​

This crisis was threatening the survival of humankind and no clear solutions existed. In the Philippines, intensive care units for those who developed serious illness and available hospital beds for those not requiring intensive care were in short supply.  And worse, there was no agreement among medical practitioners as to what constituted effective treatment.  The Philippines relied on the World Health Organization for directives.  This was a time when decision-making was under conditions of partial knowledge.  To come up with what could be an effective response, the inter-agency task force acted based on aggregate data by region in the case of the National Capital Region and the country as a whole for nationwide safety protocols.  It was a shotgun approach with an unknown enemy presence and the hope that one of the pellets will hit and arrest the movement of the enemy. 

​

While survival was being addressed through widespread movement restrictions and border controls, an unintended consequence became apparent.  Many households lost their income.  Many were without jobs and income for household expenditures vanished. Supply of often purchased food items in supermarkets, groceries, and wet markets tightened. 

​

Border controls choked the food supply chain.   And social distancing requirements in the workplace limited the number of people who could report for work in food manufacturing companies thus leading to declines in production volumes.

​

Could the pandemic have been better addressed? There are no clear-cut answers but there are learnings that we can highlight so that the country can be better prepared for another pandemic should it occur. 

​

First, a multidisciplinary pandemic management team needs to be organized and one that is ground zero data-driven.  A multidisciplinary approach will provide a diverse perspective on how to contain a pandemic.   Health care is one issue. 

 

Income is another issue.  Availability of household daily necessities is also another issue.   The national government will have to collaborate with local governments and the private sector with strong representation from the business community including the medium, small, and micro enterprise sector.   They have the ground zero data needed for timely and effective decision-making.

​

Secondly, the health system needs to be strengthened.  More hospitals and health centers need to be constructed.  The government has limited capabilities.  The private sector is not as enthusiastic with putting up hospitals given the high cost of business entry and regulation.  It may be time for the government to come up with incentives to attract investments in this area.  While incentives from a national income perspective is seen as an income-leak, this view has to be reexamined. 

 

Construction of hospitals and health centers need to be included in the infrastructure development program.

​

Thirdly, the supply chain needs to be kept open. Food supplies including raw materials need to have free movement across borders.  This has to be included in the national and local disaster risk reduction management agenda.  Personnel manning check points must be made aware that food supplies and raw materials should move through borders with a minimum of interference.

​

The Department of Trade and Industry chairs the National Price Coordinating Council.  Prices of prime and basic commodities are monitored.  Prices however are only a manifestation of cost conditions.  It is the supply chain variables that determine costs and eventually retail prices.  It is time to have a National Food Supply Chain Coordinating Council co-chaired by the Department of Trade and Industry and the Department of Agriculture.  This will cover production, logistics, market integration, and order and payment fulfillment.   

​

Finally, there must be openness to varying approaches to arrest a pandemic.  Allow medical practitioners to try solutions that deviate from the dictates of the World Health Organization and local health authorities. These solutions can be administered to those who are open to such possible remedy.  Hence, rather than promoting a single protocol, the pandemic management team has to team up with those who have alternative protocols, fast track clinical trials, and monitor the progress of each in containing the pandemic.

​

The inter-agency task force functioned based on what was set as priority – lives matter more than the economy.  But is such always the choice with a pandemic? From hindsight, both can be prioritized.  While saving lives, jobs can also be saved and those with limited income will not have to suffer unnecessary hardships such as food deprivation and mental health imbalance.  A ground zero data-driven response is key.

​

​