Physical Capital

Housing and Amenities

On average, households were composed of 6members. Given the limited number of rooms in the dwelling, the crowding index (number of people per room) in the study area averaged 3.9. Two-thirds (63%) of the households had a crowding index of 3 or more, and 30 percent had a crowding index of 5 or more. The crowding index was highest in Lanao del Sur (5.0). Crowding was also associated with the settlement status. Displaced households had an average crowding index of 4.9, compared to 4.6 among those returned home, 4.4 among those resettled elsewhere, and 3.5 among those never displaced.

Households most frequently had a floor made out of rudimentary materials (wood planks, bamboo, palm – 47%) but better materials for the roof (galvanized iron, tiles, shingles, cement – 43%). Displaced households and those returned home relied more frequently on basic materials for the roof (53% and 35% respectively used no roofing, thatch, palm leaf, grass or other basic materials) compared to households resettled elsewhere (15%) or those never displaced (28%).They were less likely to use advanced materials such as tiles or cement for their floors.

A minority of households ranked the quality of their housing as bad (18%) or very bad (1%), but the proportion was highest among displaced households (56% ranked their housing as bad, and 5% as very bad), compared to less than one in four households elsewhere. Twenty-eight percent of the displaced households said that they owned their dwelling compared to over half the households in other settlement groups. Rather, most displaced households had access to free housing, perhaps provided by the host community. Geographically, housing conditions were ranked most negatively in Maguindanao (44% bad or very bad). According to respondents, home ownership averaged 70% but was more frequent in North Cotabato (91%). Elsewhere, 25 percent to 38 percent of the households accessed housing for free, but did not own it.

Figure 21: Home ownership

The main sources of lighting in the household were electricity (69%) and oil or gas lamps (23%). Households in Maguindanao had least frequent use of electricity (33%) and most frequently relied on oil or gas lamps (46%). With regards to settlement status, displaced households were less likely to rely on electricity (36%) and more likely to rely on oil or gas lamps (46%) compared to other households. Households returned home had the second lowest use of electricity (55% of the households, compared to 75% or more among those resettled elsewhere or never displaced). With 89 percent of households using wood or charcoal as their main fuel for cooking (98% in Maguindanao), the cutting of wood for charcoal and directly for their stove may be contributing to the deforestation of hillsides, a factor behind increased flooding in the area.

Water and Sanitation

Three out of four households (73%) used protected sources of water as their main source of drinking water, most frequently a protected well (25%), an in-house tap (22%), or a public tap (16%). Other households used unprotected sources(27%), most frequently getting their water from open water bodies such as lakes and rivers (12%), open wells (8%), and unprotected springs (6%).

The use of unprotected sources of water was especially high in Lanao del Sur, where 60 percent of the households relied on unprotected sources, including 40 percent who relied on open bodies of water, and 13 percent on an open dug well. In Maguindanao, 40 percent of the households relied on public tap, while 17 percent relied on an open dug well and 7 percent on unprotected springs. Almost four times as many Muslims than Christians used unprotected sources for their water supply (41% vs. 11%) and twice as many had to travel for 10 minutes or more to get water (33% vs. 16%). Five times as many used a drop/overhang toilet or no toilet at all (15% vs. 3%, 28% vs. 5%).

Figure 22: Sources of water

Most households had access to water within 250 meters of their dwelling, which may explain why few households ranked their access to water as bad (13%) or very bad (1%). Only in Maguindanao did a large percentage of the population rank their access negatively (40% compared to less than 20% elsewhere). By settlement status, displaced households were most likely to rank their access to water negatively (45%). With regards to sanitation, the proportion of households using no facilities was highest in Maguindanao (40%) and Lanao del Sur (28%) compared to an average of 18 percent for the whole population in the study area. Nearly half of the displaced households (45%) and 31 percent of those returned home used no toilet facilities

Asset Wealth

Using a list of 13 non-productive items, households were asked about the assets they had. Chairs (86%), tables (84%), and beds (81%) were the most frequently owned. The information on ownership was used to compute a household wealth index as a proxy measure of wealth, with a score ranging from 0 to 13 (summative scale). To facilitate the interpretation of the score, five comparative wealth quintiles were computed, ranging from very poor to very rich.[1]

The proportion of households in the poorest wealth quintile was found in Maguindanao (30%), compared to 15 percent or less elsewhere. Two out of three households in Maguindanao belonged to the two poorest quintiles (66%), compared to 36 percent or less elsewhere.

Figure 23: Distribution of the two poorest wealth quintile

The household settlement status was strongly associated with its asset wealth status. Households that were never displaced owned an average of 6.2 types of assets, compared to 5.8 among households who resettled elsewhere, 4.4 for those who returned home, and 3.4 for those who were displaced at the time of study. The differences between groups were statistically significant (F=89.89, 4 d.f., p<0.001). One in three household displaced at the time of the study belonged to the poorest quintile, and 74 percent belonged to the two poorest quintiles. Over half the households that returned home belonged to the two poorest quintiles (53%).

Figure 24: Asset wealth by displacement status

In addition to differences in wealth by settlement status, several variables were found to have statistically significant differences (p<0.05) with regards to asset wealth.

Figure 25: Variables associated with asset wealth

• The proportion of female-headed households was higher among households in the poorest wealth quintiles compared to others. Similarly, the proportion of single-headed households was highest among households in the poorest wealth quintile.
• Education level of the head of the households improved with wealth, both in terms of reported literacy and level of education attained.
• The dependency ratio(ratio of the number ofhousehold members below 15 years old or above 59 years old over the number of active adults aged 15 to 59 years old), and crowding factor(number of individuals per room) both decreased with wealth.[2]
• In addition to basic household demographics, housing conditions were poorer among households in the poorest quintiles, with increased use of basic materials for both the floor and roof.
• Access to services ranked significantly worse among poorer households: 29 percent of the households in the poorest quintile ranked their access to water a bad or very bad, compared to 5 percent in the richest quintile. The proportion that ranked poorly access to education ranged from 8 percent among the richest quintile to 47 percent among the poorest quintile. For access to health care, the proportions ranged from 13 percent to 62 percent.
• The survey further shows that the use of unprotected sources of water is most frequent among poorest households, with 52 percent of the households in the poorest wealth quintile relying on unprotected sources of water, compared to 9 percent among the richest quintile.
• Households in the poorest wealth quintile had the lowest average total expenditures (2,350 PhP/months) compared to 4,400 PhP among the households in the richest wealth quintile.
• Two thirds (69%) of the households in the poorest wealth quintile ranked their access to credit positively compared to 89 percent of those in the richest quintile. 10 percent of the households in the poorest wealth quintile indicated having no access to credit at all, even from family/relatives.

[1] Results may differ from other measures of poverty in Mindanao. The wealth index is used to compare groups (i.e. by settlement status) but do not provide an estimate of prevalence of poverty.

[2]The dependency ratio ranged from 0.89 among the richest quintile to 1.25 among those in the richest quintile. The quintile ratio ranged from 2.9 to 5.0 between the richest and poorest quintiles.