Petropolitik, Sapian and China - Third in a Continuing Series

Sapian National High School (SNHS) is perched over a ridge terminating to a hill called Garrison. We were told that there was a Japanese garrison on the hill’s summit presiding on a mile long Dalit ambush area. Strategically located, it could literally shut down Poblacion from westerly traffic. In the mid-80s, Garrison peacefully ruled over the northwest side of Poblacion. It gave a good view of Sapian Bay and beyond it, Sibuyan Sea. On a nice weather, silhouette of Sibuyan Island could be seen on a horizon that stretches to approximately 180 degrees.

For SNHS students, that was a sprawling view of the world. Exhilarating but still tangible. It should have been enough world-view for us in high school. But our economics teacher, now Professor Norma J. Flores, insisted that there’s more world to see. Our Marcos-type classrooms have corrugated steel roof riddled with holes, both from corrosion and rocks hurled by students who want to leave their mark. On a rainy day, we would joke that classes are suspended because the chalk is wet. On sunny school days, streaks of light from the holes move about the floor as the sun progressed through the day. As our teachers belabored to school us, the streaks of sunlight, slowly moving on the roughly finished pavement and through rough, dismembered chairs, have been good digression. Sometimes, they would even tell exactly how soon the next change period would be. But Miss Flores, on one warm late morning, showed us two streaks of light into world-views hitherto limited as the horizon seen from Garrison. She explained to us the concepts of geopolitics and laissez-faire. Then, she talked about agrarian reform, money velocity, inflation rate, taxation as a regulating economic mechanism, and so on. As we delve into China’s unquenchable demand for petroleum, its transformation to the league of G-8 nations, and its implications for Sapian, the economic principles that Ms. Flores taught us three decades ago are still the same.

In fairness to China, we in Sapian also benefit from its abbreviated economic transformation. It brought us cheaper goods and commodities. A decade ago, many products would have been expensive to acquire and difficult to own. But because China produces them strike-free, with depressed wages, less stringent environmental regulations, government subsidies, centrally planned production system, input distribution network, and in such very large quantities, it is now easier to acquire them in Sapian. Nike made in the U.S. could have been prohibitive than the Nike made in China today, considering that raw materials and manufacturing process are essentially the same. The lowered cost of consumer goods allowed us to enjoy conveniences we do not have today if commodities are still being manufactured in Western nations. Take the example of cheaper electronic components. Cheap ICs, memory chips and flash memories allowed manufacture of cheaper cell phones, among hundreds of electronic goods and consumer durables. My former employer, a Sunnyvale-based Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., invested billions of dollars for a wafer fab in China. A classmate in Manila who manufactures household plastic products complained that Chinese imports are killing their family company. Better quality products are being imported into the Philippines from China with less than half the price if they are made in the Philippines. In fact, their raw materials, polyethylene (PE) and polypropelene (PP), are imported from napha-crackers in China. Such that, after costs for import duties, middlemen and transport, plastic products manufactured in Manila cannot stand a chance against those from China. On the plus side, this situation benefits consumers in Sapian. But the minus on domestic industries will be taken up on a future post.

China, even with its vast capital, cheap labor, controlled industrial system, and subsidized industries, would not be where it is today without laissez-faire. Ms. Flores told us that it is French concept by an early English economist, Adam Smith, that means “produce what you want, when you want, and sell where you want, at a price you want.”

In one holistic worldview, and a little dose of contemporary history, there was a geopolitical movement soon after the downfall of the former Soviet Union to disarm China of its age-old antagonism against the West, enlist its stable and centrally-planned economy as the factory of the world, harness it cheap and educated labor force, and enter its 1.3 billion people market. After the Cold War, it was learned that when you starve an enemy nation, it gets more ruthless to its citizens and connive more against you. But if you trade more with them, laissez-faire economic forces would materially reward their participation, creating a new middle class, and hasten economic liberalization that, in the end, will democratize key socio-political institutions. A facility to do this was the decades-old General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), an economic club meant to remove trade barriers (i.e., tariffs, import taxes) among Western nations and their junior leagues. By mid-1990s, it was expanded into a new and improved GATT/World Trade Organization (GATT/WTO).

It was designed not only to counterbalance the growing influence of European Community, but also to enlist new nations, especially China. I did not have the opportunity to tell Miss Flores how her economics effortlessly replayed on my mind as I sat few paces from former presidents Cory Aquino and Fidel Ramos in Malacanang’s State Dining Room for the frequent Cabinet deliberations on GATT/WTO and petroleum deregulation.

Petropolitik, Sapian and China

The recent upsurge in world petroleum prices brought uncertainty to the global economy and brought stark reminders of the oil crisis of the 70s. In 1981, Ms. Ligaya Ofalla-Oro gave me an oratorical piece at a Sapian National High School contest. The topic was on oil crisis. It was surreal for me; all I had was a bicycle. Sapian then, while closely entwined with global petropolitik, did not have strong demand for gasoline.

In any event, it is worth to revisit. The oil crisis three decades ago was a showdown between the cartelized Western transnational oil companies and oil producing autocracies united under the then newly formed Organization of Oil Producing Countries (OPEC). OPEC, including the former USSR, brandished its newfound power at the height of Cold War, primarily against the United States, the largest petroleum trader and consumer. The induced shortage due to lowered supply was to assert OPEC power - a purely political theme.

At that time, impact on Sapian was muted. The highway system was in sad state so very few invested on vehicles even in Poblacion. Traffic of public transport plying Bilao-Damayan-Roxas City was probably less than one every hour. As such, per capital petroleum consumption, diesel at that, had been negligible. So no one really cared much about oil prices more than whines from commuters. Capiz Electric Cooperative (CAPELCO) had only installed power transmission lines so consumers did not really have any historical sense of increasing prices. The first flicker of incandescent was enough consolation. Probably, the worst impact may have been upon fisherfolks using motorzied boats, but gas burden may have quickly dissipated in upstream pricing of their abundant catch. In fact, it was the early start of the future boom on fishery export to Iloilo and Manila. At the whole, Sapian was isolated from the petroleum crisis, so I mumbled my oil crisis piece with pure detachment from the issue.

Thirty years hence, oil crisis came back with a vengeance. This time, it is the same assertion by OPEC autocracies, but it comes with genuine economic supply-demand dimension - the enormous demand by China. In this sense, crisis has metamorphosed from a basically artificial political pressure in the ’70s to one that’s a real economic pressure to supply and demand. China is a cash economy, in fact, a debt-free, highly liquid economy, with the state having infinite power over economic fundamentals. For all practical purposes, China is able and willing to pay any cost to sustain its industrial transformation. Naturally, oil producers and traders, even with the best of their intentions, would have to give in. In short, all pipelines now lead to China.

Sapian, 30 years later, has a gas demand of its own. The improved road system has encouraged ownership of vehicles. Although impact on mobility could be cushioned off by readily available public transport network, transportation costs would have to take its toll. Power connections to the farthest households in the Municipality integrate most Sapianons to bunker fuel demand. Cost of production would markedly increase in agriculture and fisheries, including aqua culture, because practically all input are imported. Increases to our prices to offset the cost of production make our products less competitive than, say, Thailand or Vietnam. The Philippines does not have any control over oil supply and production and the government has very little macroeconomic control mechanisms (e.g., interest rates, taxes, etc.) - so much underground economy. Since buying power in Sapian can only stretch so far, the immediate observable result would be cuts in non-essentials, diminished general local demand, and reduced production, and net a economic slowdown.

Thirty years hence, Mrs. Ligaya Oro’s piece is more relevant than ever. In fact, it is a stark reminder at the onset of what could be a greater economic challenge for Sapian and the world for years to come. So, next, we will discuss more about the challenges and opportunities for Sapian in the midst of the brewing oil shortage and the industrializing China.