#90

I really believe that the Philippine Institute for Developmental Studies (PIDS) is an underrated government entity (technically a state-run nonprofit). As someone who likes to see things from both sides (e.g., I like some of Leni's promises, I like some of BBM's actual policies), I always rely on science whenever things get confusing. Although indeed soft science can be manipulated (and even hard science, just look at how stupid one doctor can be by saying vaccines cause autism), as methods can be faulty and results can be editorialized, it is still a reliable step to seek answers for hard-hitting questions such as "How do we stop poverty?", "How do we manage corruption?" or "How do we make a better country?" Well, PIDS have been trying to answer these kind of problems - and recommending what actual steps to take - since its inception in 1977.

I've been reading PIDS articles and journals since 2021 and I've learned a lot about varied topics such as free trade agreements, oil industry deregulation, value chain financing, energy regulation, and local housing boards. Although most studies delve on health, education, and agriculture, PIDS sometimes have articles on emerging technologies (such as net neutrality laws, taxation of digital services, and smart cities) which are a boon to read as a tech enthusiast.

As an example why I love PIDS, I can ask socioeconomic questions such as "Is there need to amend the Constitution, or are these politicians pushing for charter change willfully ignoring the dangers of foreign intervention into national affairs?" and search the PIDS website for answers. For this particular example, PIDS released a paper called "Insights into Economic Charter Change and the Case for Services Reform" by Dr. Ramonette Serafica, who argued that there is a pressing need to amend the Constitution, particularly ending the legislative franchise system, liberalizing mass media, and allowing simple law rather than the Constitution to determine foreign ownership restrictions. Although the study lacks further analysis on the dangers of foreign intervention and overreliance on foreign investment, it does make me realize that there is a need to amend some of the economic provisions in the Constitution (but not all, and certainly not full liberalization). By agreeing to this one point, I can now move forward to the next topic such as what to change and how.

Although PIDS already has webinars, infographics, monthly newsletters and regular news, I believe there is more to be done on public relations and boost its reach to the people (although it begs the question, is the intended audience the masses or fellow researchers and policymakers alone?). Embarassingly, I known of PIDS only lately when a friend worked there.

First, reading the journal entries and research papers are quite hard, and even harder to comprehend. I know I can just read the abstract, but using that alone sacrifices too much of the discussion as well as analysis used. I hope there is some middle ground in summarizing these materials - more than bite-sized news and infographics but less than full-blown academic text - for consumption of the general public.

Second, the mobile browser experience of the PIDS website can be better.

Third, asking what I am going to use the material for every time I try to download something is annoying. Please place a browser cookie to remember my choice.

Fourth, PIDS releases a lot of materials, which is good, but the variety is suffocating. There are the newsletters, the journals, the research papers, the policy notes, discussion materials, and annual reports. It's very hard to get updated or search for relevant tags or topics. I hope there is some way to consolidate some of these.

Fifth, I hope they will release their webinars on demand, rather than forcing interested audience to watch them live.

PIDS, and all thinktanks like it, are very beneficial to the running of the nation. I hope we do not ignore these researchers and policy recommendations, lest we not learn from our past and be lost, ignoring data already in front of us. On the other side of the coin, we should always also be critical of all research, open to having our minds changed but never automatically, challenging their arguments and our own thoughts, always a little more learned after all the scuffle.

Thank you PIDS!