State of Competitiveness
Report
GUILLERMO M. LUZGUILLERMO M. LUZGUILLERMO M. LUZGUILLERMO M. LUZ
Private Sector Co-Chairman
National Competitiveness CouncilNational Competitiveness CouncilNational Competitiveness CouncilNational Competitiveness Council
Our Vision
� To develop more competitive Philippines
� To instill a Culture of Excellence in Governance
� To use Public-Private Sector Partnerships as a
development enginedevelopment engine
Mandate : Executive Order 44
� Advise the President on policy matters affecting competitiveness of the country
� Promote and develop competitiveness strategies and push for the implementation of an action agenda for competitiveness and link it to the Philippine Development Plan the Philippine Development Plan
� Provide inputs to the Philippine Development Plan, Investment Priorities Plan, Export Development Plan
� Recommend to Congress proposed legislation regarding country competitiveness
� Strategize and execute steps to improve Philippine competitiveness rankings
NCC
EDUCATION & HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
(HRD)
Grace Mirasol
INFRASTRUCTURE
Elmer Lucero
TRANSACTION COST & FLOWS
BUSINESS PERMIT & LICENSING
SYSTEM (BPLS)
PERFORMANCE GOVERNANCE
SYSTEM(PGS)
Malou Gesilva
IMPROVED BUDGET
TRANSPARENCY
Sarah Lope
POWER & ENERGY
A. Barbero
ANTI-CORRUPTION
Angie Tayona
JUDICIARY
Elmer Lucero
NATIONALIT GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK
Malou Gesilva
AGRI-BUSINESS
Jonathan Cabaltera
SECRETARIAT
COUNTRY BRAND
(BPLS)
Kim Barquilla
NATIONAL
SINGLE
WINDOW
(NSW)
PHILIPPINE
BUSINESS
REGISTRY
(PBR)
Dir. Ernani Dionisio
NAIA & MACTAN-CEBU
PEP School feeding
Working Group Date Time
1. Education & HR Development Every 2nd Thursday of the month 10:00 AM
2. Infrastructure Every 2nd Friday of the month 10:00 AM
3. BPLS Every 2nd Monday of the month 02:30 PM
4. PGS Every 2nd Wednesday of the month 02:30 PM
5. Anti-Corruption Every 3rd Thursday of the month 02:30 PM
6. Judiciary Every 4th Friday of the month 02:30 PM
7. Improved Budget Transparency Every 2nd Tuesday of the month 01:00 PM
8. National IT Governance Framework
9. Agribusiness
10. PBR
Schedule of monthly meeting per Working Group
Our Mission
To build up long-term competitiveness of the
Philippines through –
opolicy reforms
project implementationoproject implementation
o institution-building
operformance monitoring
ogoal-setting
Work Program
� Benchmark against key global competitiveness indices
� Map each indicator to the agency responsible
� Focus on lowest-ranking indicators� Focus on lowest-ranking indicators
� Track city competitiveness and key indicators
� Working Groups concentrate on specific projects
� Link Competitiveness Plan to Philippine Development Plan, National Budget, LEDAC, Cabinet Agenda
2011 Performance
World Economic Forum GCI +10
IFC Ease of Doing Business - 2(following a +14 re-rating due to methodology change)
IMD World Competitiveness Report - 2IMD World Competitiveness Report - 2
Transparency International +5
Millennium Challenge Account Pass
Country Brand Index -13
Where we are today
� WEF Global Competitiveness Report : No. 75 / 142 (2011)No. 7 of 8 in ASEAN
� IFC Doing Business Survey : No. 136 / 183 (2011)No. 7 of 8 in ASEANNo. 7 of 8 in ASEAN
� IMD World Competitiveness Report : No. 43/59 (2012)No. 5 of 5 in ASEAN
� FutureBrand’s Country Brand Index : No. 78 / 113 (2012)No. 15 of 20 in Asia Pacific
Our target
• WEF Global Competitiveness Report
No. 30 or higher by 2016
• IFC Doing Business Survey
No. 50 or higher by 2016 No. 50 or higher by 2016
• IMD World Competitiveness Report
No. 20 or higher by 2016
• FutureBrand’s Country Brand Index
No. 30 or higher by 2016
• No. 2 or 3 in ASEAN in all rankings
Impact : Inclusive Growth
o Higher FDI (new investments of 3-4% of GDP), from US$1.7
billion in 2010
o Double export growth to US$120 billion by 2016 with new
products and services to account for 30% of exports
o GDP Growth of 7-8% per yearo GDP Growth of 7-8% per year
o Job Growth / Lower Unemployment
o Lower Poverty Incidence : 26.5% in 2009 to 16.6% by 2015
o Growing C socioeconomic class(currently 8.6%); shrinking DE
class (currently 91%)
Sources: NSCB (Breakdown: 2010 Baseline- US$ 51.39 (goods) US$ 12.27(services) , 2016 Target- US$ 91.5 B (goods) & US$ 28.9 B
(services),
Chapter 3 Phil Development Plan (Competitive Industry Sector ), NEDA Targets; Phil. Labor and Employment Plan 2011-2016
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
GDP per capita (US$)
Why does it matter?Why does it matter?
Cambodia
China
Indonesia
Philippines
Vietnam
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
Source: IMF 2011
Why does it matter?Why does it matter?
Indonesia
MalaysiaViet Nam8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
FDI inflows (US$ million)
Source: UN 2011
Philippines
-2,000
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
OUR CHALLENGEWhere we stand in international metrics
OUR CHALLENGE
World Economic Forum
Global Competitiveness Rankings
2011 2010 2009 20082011 2010 2009 2008
PHILIPPINES 75 85 87 71
WEF - Global competitiveness index
PHILIPPINES vs ASEAN
Over-all rankings
COUNTRIES 2011 2010 2009 2008
SINGAPORE 2 3 3 5
MALAYSIA 21 26 24 21
BRUNEI DARUSSALAM 28 28 32 39
THAILAND 39 38 36 34
INDONESIA 46 44 54 55
VIETNAM 65 59 75 70
PHILIPPINES 75 85 87 71
CAMBODIA 97 109 110 109
� Other ASEAN Countries not included in the Survey: Laos & Myanmar
ASEAN Competitiveness RankingsASEAN Competitiveness RankingsASEAN Competitiveness RankingsASEAN Competitiveness Rankings
80th
60th
90th
70th
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
India
China
Indonesia
Malaysia
Singapore
Thailand
Global Competitiveness Index
Perc
entil
e
Bottom
60th
20th
10th
40th
30th
Median
India
Cambodia
Philippines
VietnamTop 53%
Key Drivers
Macroeconomic Management * +14
Technological Readiness +12
FDI and Technology Transfer +22
Internet Users +24Internet Users +24
Internet Bandwidth +25
Market Efficiency for Goods + 9
Institutions (Governance) * + 8
Key Constraints
Institutions (Governance) * + 8
Infrastructure * - 1
Air Transport Infrastructure - 3
Quality of Electricity Supply - 3
Innovation + 2
Labor Market Efficiency - 2Labor Market Efficiency - 2
Education *
Higher education & training + 2
Science & Math education quality - 2
Quality of primary education -11
24.4
18.3
16.5
7.9
5.7
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Corruption
Inefficient government bureaucracy
Inadequate supply of infrastructure
Policy instability
Tax rates
Percent of responses (weighted totals)
The most problematic factors for
doing business in the Philippines in 2011
5.6
5.6
4.6
2.5
2.2
2.0
1.9
1.9
0.5
0.5
Crime and theft
Tax regulations
Restrictive labor regulations
Inadequately educated workforce
Access to financing
Inflation
Government instability/coups
Poor work ethic in national labor …
Foreign currency regulations
Poor public health
INDICATORS RANKING (2010) RANKING (2011) change
OVER-ALL RANKING 85/139 75/142 + 101st pillar: INSTITUTIONS 125 117 + 81.01 Property rights 99 105 - 6
PHILIPPINE COMPETITIVENESS RANKING
WEF GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS REPORT 2010 & 2011
2010 2010 2011 2011RED – bottom 20% (111 th – 139th) 25 indicators (113 th – 142nd) 21 indicators
PURPLE – bottom 40-21% (83 rd – 110th) 37 indicators (85 th – 112th) 36 indicators
ORANGE – bottom 50 – 41% (69 th – 82nd) 20 indicators (71 st– 84th) 17 indicators
BLACK (1 st – 68th) 29 indicators (1st – 70th) 37 indicators111 indicators 111 indicators
1.01 Property rights 99 105 - 61.02 Intellectual property protection 103 102 + 11.03 Diversion of public funds 135 127 + 81.04 Public trust of politicians 134 128 + 61.05 Irregular payments and bribes 128 119 + 91.06 Judicial independence 111 102 + 91.07 Favoritism in decisions of government officials 131 118 +13
1.08 Wastefulness of government spending 118 109 + 9
1.09 Burden of government regulation 126 126 01.10 Efficiency of legal framework in settling disputes 122 115 + 7
INDICATORS RANKING (2010) RANKING (2011) change
1.11 Efficiency of legal framework in challenging
regulations 116 118 - 2
1.12 Transparency of government policymaking 123 120 + 3
1.13 Business costs of terrorism 126 130 - 4
1.14 Business costs of crime and violence 104 112 - 8
1.15 Organized crime 106 102 + 4
1.16 Reliability of police services 105 112 - 7
1.17 Ethical behavior of firms 129 118 + 11
1.18 Strength of auditing and reporting standards 75 62 + 13
1.19 Efficacy of corporate boards 56 52 + 4
1.20 Protection of minority shareholders’ interests 80 84 - 4
1.21 Strength of investor protection* 109 111 - 2
INDICATORS RANKING (2010) RANKING (2011) change
2nd pillar: INFRASTRUCTURE 104 105 - 12.01 Quality of overall infrastructure 113 113 02.02 Quality of roads 114 100 + 142.03 Quality of railroad infrastructure 97 101 - 42.04 Quality of port infrastructure 131 123 + 82.05 Quality of air transport infrastructure 112 115 - 32.06 Available airline seat kilometers* 28 28 02.07 Quality of electricity supply 101 104 - 32.08 Fixed telephone lines* 106 103 + 32.09 Mobile telephone subscriptions* 88 92 - 4
3rd pillar: MACROECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 68 54 + 14
3.01 Government budget balance* 62 71 - 93.02 National savings rate* 74 70 + 43.03 Inflation* 73 69 + 43.04 Interest rate spread* 75 50 + 253.05 Government debt* 102 89 + 133.06 Country credit rating* 75 63 + 12
4
7
Philippines ASEAN (excl. PHL)GCI score
Philippines on the 12 pillars of the GCIPhilippines on the 12 pillars of the GCIPhilippines on the 12 pillars of the GCIPhilippines on the 12 pillars of the GCI
3.2 3.1 5.0 5.4 4.1 4.1 3.9 4.0 3.5 4.6 4.1 2.81
117 105 54 92 71 88 113 71 83 36 57 108Philippines
pillar rank
Priority Areas based on WEF Survey - 2012INDICATORS RANKING AGENCIES CONCERNED
1st pillar: Institutions
1.03 Diversion of public funds 127 DBM, Ombudsman, COA
1.04 Public trust of politicians 128 Ombudsman, Multisectoral
Anti-Corruption Council,
Congress, Senate, LGUs
1.05 Irregular payments and bribes 119 Ombudsman, COA
1.06 Judicial independence 102 DOJ, Courts, Supreme Court
1.07 Favoritism in decisions of government officials 118 Cabinet1.07 Favoritism in decisions of government officials 118 Cabinet
1.08 Wastefulness of government spending 109 DBM, COA, NEDA, OP
1.09 Burden of government regulation 126 DBM, NEDA, OP
1.10 Efficiency of legal framework in settling
disputes
115 DOJ, Courts, Supreme Courts,
Ombudsman, Sandiganbayan
1.11 Efficiency of legal framework in
challenging regulations
118 DOJ, Courts, Supreme Court
1.12 Transparency of government policymaking 120 Cabinet, NEDA
1.13 Business costs of terrorism 130 DND, DILG, PNP
1.17 Ethical behavior of firms 118 DOLE, DTI, SEC, PEZA, BOI,
Private Sector
INDICATORS RANKING AGENCIES CONCERNED
2nd pillar: Infrastructure
2.01 Quality of overall infrastructure 113 DPWH, DOTC
2.02 Quality of roads 100 DPWH
2.04 Quality of port infrastructure 123 DPWH, DOTC, PPA
2.05 Quality of air transport infrastructure 115 DOTC
2.07 Quality of electricity supply 104 DOE
2.08 Fixed telephone lines 103 NTC
Priority Areas based on WEF Survey
4th pillar: Health and primary education
4.04 Tuberculosis incidence* 119 DOH
4.09 Quality of primary education 110 DepEd
5th pillar: Higher education and training
5.04 Quality of math and science education 115 DepED, DOST, private sector
6th pillar: Market efficiency
6.06 Number of procedures required to
start a business*
134 SEC, DTI, BIR, SSS, Pag-Ibig,
PhilHealth, LGUs
6.07 Time required to start a business* 112 SEC, DTI, BIR, SSS, Pag-Ibig,
PhilHealth, LGUs
6.13 Burden of customs procedures 128 DOF, BOC
INDICATORS RANKING AGENCIES CONCERNED
7th pillar: Labor market efficiency
7.04 Hiring and firing practices 113 DOLE
7.05 Redundancy costs* 118 DOLE-NWPC
12th pillar : Innovation
12.01 Capacity for innovation 95 DOST
12.02 Quality of scientific research institutions 106 DOST, CHED
Priority Areas based on WEF Survey
12.02 Quality of scientific research institutions 106 DOST, CHED
12.03 Corporate R & D 85 Private Sector
12.04 University-Industry Collaboration 83 Academe, Private Sector
12.05 Govt procurement of advanced tech 126 DOST
12.06 Availability of scientists and engineers 97 CHED, Academe
WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM – GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS INDEX
Quality of Education, ranking (2010)
PH BR CAM IND MAL SIN THAI VIET
Primary
Education 99 23 111 55 30 3 73 78
Education
System69 31 82 40 23 1 66 61
Science 112 27 111 46 31 1 57 51Science
and Math 112 27 111 46 31 1 57 51
Internet
access76 38 110 50 36 5 43 49
Source : WEF
WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM – GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS INDEX
Technological readiness, ranking
(2010)PH BR CAM IND MAL SIN THAI VIET
Availability
of latest
tech
62 58 103 77 35 20 64 102
Firm-level
absorption59 71 93 65 30 15 66 60
FDI and tech
transfer88 87 38 54 16 3 34 31
Internet
users112 13 137 107 39 16 86 83
Broadband
subs84 69 107 99 62 22 88 77
WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM – GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS INDEX
Innovation, ranking (2010)PH BR CAM IND MAL SIN THAI VIET
Capacity for
innovation80 83 101 30 25 17 56 32
Quality of sci
research inst108 91 106 44 32 11 59 63
Company R&D 85 80 82 26 16 8 48 33
University-
Industry R&D85 60 115 38 22 6 42 62
G procurement
of advanced
tech products
129 33 65 30 8 2 59 18
Availability of
scientists and
engineers
96 39 90 89 29 11 65 87
Patents per
million pop’n71 39 90 89 29 11 65 87
COUNTRIES 2012 2011 2010 2009
SINGAPORE 1 1 1 1
THAILAND 17 16 12 13
MALAYSIA 18 23 23 20
VIETNAM 98 90 93 92
Doing Business Survey: IFC Ease of Doing Business ReportPhilippines vs ASEAN
VIETNAM 98 90 93 92
BRUNEI DARUSSALAM 83 86 96 88
INDONESIA 129 126 122 129
PHILIPPINES 136 134 144 140CAMBODIA 138 138 145 135
IFC Ease of Doing Business Report , 2009 – 2012Philippine Global Ranking
Indicators
2012
(183
economies)
2011
(183
economies)
2010
(183
economies)
2009
(181
economies)
Over-all ranking 136 134 144 140
Starting a business 158 155 162 155
Dealing w/ construction
permits
102 98 111 105
Getting electricity 54 57 - -Getting electricity 54 57 - -
Employing Workers - - 115 126
Registering Property 117 109 102 97
Getting Credit 126 116 127 123
Protecting Investors 133 131 132 126
Paying Taxes 136 127 135 129
Trading across borders 51 54 68 58
Enforcing contracts 112 114 118 114
Resolving Insolvency 163 161 153 151
IMD World Competitiveness Report
2012
OVERALL RANKING
Country 2012 ranking 2011 ranking change
SINGAPORE 4 3 -1
MALAYSIA 14 16 + 2
THAILAND 30 27 -3
INDONESIA 42 37 -5
PHILIPPINES 43 41 -2
IMD World Competitiveness Report
20122012 RANKING 2011 RANKING CHANGE
Econ Performance
SINGAPORE 9 5 -4
MALAYSIA 10 7 -3
THAILAND 15 10 -5
INDONESIA 32 32 0INDONESIA 32 32 0
PHILIPPINES 42 29 -13
Gov’t Efficiency
SINGAPORE 2 2 0
MALAYSIA 13 17 +4
THAILAND 26 23 -3
INDONESIA 28 25 -3
PHILIPPINES 32 37 +5
Millenium
Challenge Account
The Philippines is monitored by MCA on 20 key performance indicators
The performance bar or threshold is set against a country’s economic classification
In 2011, the Philippines was classified a Low Income Country. In 2012, the classification was raised to Lower classification was raised to Lower Middle Income Country, reflecting higher GNI per capita. Thus, the bar has been set higher.
The Philippines must pass one-half of all indicators, including Rule of Law and Control of Corruption.
The country is constantly working on ways to improve its performance on these and other competitiveness indicators.
2012 Plan
o Continuous tracking of global reports
o Regional / Local Competitiveness Councils
o Industry Roadmaps
o National Competitiveness Assessment and Plan
Continuous tracking and improvements in …
WEF – Global Index
Governance and Bureaucracy
Infrastructure
IFC Doing Business Report
Starting a Business
Construction PermitsInfrastructure
Macroeconomic management
Education
Labor Market
Technological Readiness
Innovation
Construction Permits
Credit information
Enforcing Contracts
Resolving Insolvency
Regional Competitiveness Committees
o Create regional / local competitiveness councils composed
of public and private sectors
o Build template of indicators so regions can track their
competitiveness for comparison with national andcompetitiveness for comparison with national and
international regions
o Involve universities in data-collection and analysis
o Build pipeline for technical training and capacity-building
o 12 committees being set up as of 6/2012
Industry Roadmaps
• As competitive environment is created, industry and individual firms are drivers of growth and wealth creation.
• DTI will invite industries to prepare 5 - 10 year industry roadmaps
• Roadmaps should describe –• Roadmaps should describe –– State of industry today
– Other country competitors
– Potential of industry for value and employment growth
– Projected investments by industry players
– Policy environment required by industry (e.g., regulatory, infrastructure, human resources, financial, etc.)
National Competitiveness Assessment and Plan
o Annual assessment of performance indicators
o Global performance indicators linked to 6-year Philippine
Development Plan
o Creation of Long-Term Strategic Plano Creation of Long-Term Strategic Plan
o Preparation of Annual Operating Plans
o Emphasis on execution and delivery
o Creation of special unit within OP or expansion of PMS
mandate
Building Blocks
National Competitiveness
Plan
Working GroupsIndustry
Roadmaps
Regional Competitiveness
Committees
COUNTRIES WITH COMPETITIVENESS COUNCILS/COMMITTEES
We are not alone• Australia
• Argentina
• Bahrain
• Brazil
• Canada
• Chile
• Korea
• Mexico
• New Zealand
• Panama
• Philippines
• Russia• Chile
• Colombia
• Croatia
• Dominican Republic
• Egypt
• India
• Ireland
• Japan
• Russia
• Saudi Arabia
• Singapore
• Sweden
• United Kingdom
• United Arab Emirates
• United States
STATUS : 10 committees already set up as of July 2 012
NCC
Reg. 4 A
CALABARRegion
4B
MIMAROPA
Reg. 5 Bicol
Reg. 6
Western
Reg. 12
Soccksarge
CAR
(Baguio)
Reg. 3 Central Luzon
Pampanga
NCCWestern Visayas
Iloilo, Bacolod
Reg. 7
C. Visayas
CebuReg. 8
E. Visayas
Tacloban
Reg. 10
Northern Mindanao
CDO
Reg. 11
Southern Mindanao
Davao
Soccksargen
Gen. San
Region 9Zamboanga
Proposed Organizational Set-up / Activities
Regional Competitiveness Committee( 50%Public and 50% Private sector reps and academe)
Regional Development Council/Business Chambers
Executive Director/Project Director
Data Collection on
Competitiveness Indicators
Capability Building and
Training
Monitoring and Evaluation
•Annual Enterprise survey
•Customer Satisfaction Survey
• Field M & E• BPLS Baseline Data
Validation
Executive Director/Project Director
MONITORING & EVALUATION
1) Annual Enterprise Surveys
� Large-scale public opinion surveys conducted through face-to-face interviews
� Can be run among businessmen in Metro Manila and selected cities where there is a high concentration of business activity such as NCR (350 respondents), CALABA (75), Cebu (100), CDO/Iligan (75), Davao (100), Iloilo (100), Angeles (100) for a total of 900. (100), Angeles (100) for a total of 900.
� A series of FGDs conducted in these areas, in April –May in order to finalize survey agenda, sampling methodology and draft questions.
� Actual survey period should start in May (June at the latest) in time for the September 14 Integrity Summit presentation.
MONITORING & EVALUATION
• Customer Satisfaction Feedback Surveys
Quick-response, self-administered surveys covering one specific topic at a
time. First survey covered BPLS and was conducted from Jan 10 – Feb 10.
• Field Monitoring & Evaluation
In-depth field monitoring of specific Local Government Units engaged in the
Business Permits and Licensing System project (BPLS). The visits will review Business Permits and Licensing System project (BPLS). The visits will review and validate processes and forms being used as well as conduct interviews with LGU officials in charge of the process and with businessmen who have used the process. Twenty field visits will be conducted over the course of the year.
• Baseline Data CollectionCollection of basic data before and after programs are conducted in order to measure progress over time
CAPACITY BUILDING AND TRAINING
Customer Service Excellence for the LGUs/ BPLOs (c/o CIC) Aims to enhance LGUs/BPLO’s technical knowledge, professional
attitude, and customer-orientation
Local Investment Promotion (c/o BOI)Appreciation seminar for local executives, line-agencies and private
sector organization representatives on their roles in investmentsector organization representatives on their roles in investment
promotion. It highlights the different investment promotion tools
and strategies that can be used by the different localities to
promote their area as an investment destination
Urban PlanningWith populations growing and resources limited, it is important for
LGUs and regions to properly undertake urban planning for optimal
resource management
Bicol Competitiveness Committee
Functions:
a� To monitor the LGUs on selected competitiveness
indicators�
b� To assess productivity enhancing programs of various agencies�
c� To advocate the enrolment of LGUs and key line c� To advocate the enrolment of LGUs and key line
agencies on different competitiveness systems� and
d� To propose policy and administrative reforms to improve local
competitiveness
P
R
O
P
O
Chairperson
• DTI Director
Co-Chairperson
• Private Sector
DTI shall act as the
Secretariat to the Committee
Sample - Regional Competitiveness Committee Structur e
O
S
A
L
Secretariat to the Committee
Membership
• AROs
• Academe
• Private Sector
* Executive Director/Project Director, overseer
PROPOSED INDICATORS
Assessing Local Economic Development/ Competitiveness
Broad Indicators I: Dynamism of local economy
II: Responsiveness of LGU to business needs
III: Infrastructure & Risk Assessment
IV: Quality of life
V: Cost of doing business
VI: Human resources and training
RDC - University Partner ( data collection)
RCC Dialogue
Convened 10 RCCs on June 25-26, 2012, Quest Hotel, Cebu City
• 64 participants from Regions 3, 4A, 4B, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11 and 12, (RDC chair, co-chair, sectoral committee chairs, business chambers heads, academe presidents, DTI, NEDA, DILG and other relevant government agencies Regional Directors, development partners included USAID, INVEST, GIZ, LGSP-LED)
• Discussion/brainstorming/agreements:
- RCC organizational structure, functions and membership composition;
- Proposed framework for data gathering of Competitiveness
Indicators;- Possible areas of partnership among NCC, RCC and development
funders.
• Moving forward activities/assignments:
1. Framework on competitiveness indicators c/o Ms. Ofie Templo ofINVEST
2. list of RCC members (50% from public and 50% private sectors and academe) chair, co-chair, Exec. Director/Project Director
3. RDC Resolution papers or equivalent documents for the 3. RDC Resolution papers or equivalent documents for the creation/adoption of RCC
• NCC to conduct RCC orientation meetings in CAR, Region 4B (MIMAROPA) and other interested regions to join
• Next RCC Dialogue by 2nd week of September 2012
6/F, 361 Sen. Gil Puyat Avenue, Makati City
Telefax No. 890-4861/751-3404
Thank you !!!
email address: [email protected]
www.competitive.org.ph
www.governance.org.ph
facebook.com/Compete.Philippines
twitter.com/ncc_philippines