HOW IS THE HOMELESS RATE MEASURED IN THE PHILIPPINES?

HOW IS THE HOMELESS RATE MEASURED IN THE PHILIPPINES?

When one reads that there are 4.5 million homeless individuals in the Philippines, the question immediately arises: Measured how? That figure, widely circulated and quoted, is built on shifting sands. Before we can even talk about remedies or policies, we must pause and examine the foundations.

The slippery definition problem

First, what do we mean by “homeless”? In everyday parlance, it might mean “people without a house.” But in social science, in policy, and in comparative studies, the term is more nuanced. Globally, a person is often considered homeless if they lack a decent place to sleep at night, including those in temporary shelters or unfit dwellings. Under that broad definition, those living in barong-barong (makeshift shanties) or informal settlements might well be counted. That has profound implications for the size of the “homeless” population.

In the Philippines, the lack of a uniform, official definition means that estimates vary wildly. Sometimes “homeless” is restricted to those sleeping in parks, sidewalks, or other public spaces. In other surveys or reports, it is broadened to include informal settlers, squatters, or even households living in inadequate housing forms. The Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) technical notes say that “homeless refers to individuals or households living in the streets or public … spaces.” But that narrow definition excludes many precarious households who are often grouped under “informal settlers,” “slum dwellers,” or “urban poor.” In the 2020 Census, the PSA said that those living in streets or public spaces “who have no usual place of residence … should be listed where they are found.”

Thus, even before counting, we confront definitional ambiguity. And the ambiguity is meaningful: adopting the broader definition would “balloon” the numbers, as you noted.

Complicating matters is the notion of a housing backlog—a frequently used term in Philippine housing policy. The backlog is often defined as the number of housing units needed to meet demand (for those who can afford them). It is not equivalent to homelessness; many people in the housing backlog are simply inadequately housed (crowded residences, informal structures) rather than totally homeless. Yet in policy discourse, the two sometimes become conflated.

How the state (tries to) measure homelessness

Given the definitional murk, what empirical methods does the Philippine government (and allied organizations) use?

  1. Census inclusion / enumeration of institutional populations
     The PSA’s Census of Population and Housing (CPH) collects data about housing types, tenure status, and living arrangements. In principle, this can flag households without formal housing. The PSA also collects data on “institutional populations”—those in shelters, dormitories, and other non-household living quarters.

     In practice, the 2024 Census (Community-Based Monitoring System, or POPCEN-CBMS) explicitly included a “midnight survey” of homeless individuals in Bacolod City, counting 127 persons living on sidewalks.

That shows that enumeration of the homeless is possible if done intentionally.

  1. Administrative and social welfare records
     The Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) tracks clients served, including “homeless street families” under its programs. But these are service-based counts—only those who interact with or are reached by the government or NGOs. Many homeless people never register for or access formal services, so they remain “invisible” in the records.

  2. Proxies and estimates from civil society / international bodies
     Non-government organizations, universities, and international agencies often make projections or estimates (e.g. 4.5 million homeless, or 250,000 children in street situations). The OHCHR, in a joint submission, cites that estimate, noting that two-thirds of them may be in Metro Manila. But those are approximations, often based on extrapolating from small studies.

  3. Relocation and shelter statistics
     The PSA also reports on relocated populations, and on households living in relocation areas or in rent-free houses without the consent of owners. In the 2020 census, for example, 57,281 persons were living in relocation areas, while only 12,615 were counted as homeless (i.e. in streets or public spaces).

     That gap hints at a mismatch: many people live in conditions arguably akin to homelessness (relocation areas, informal shelters), but are not counted under the narrow “homeless” label.

What the numbers suggest (and hide)

  • The oft-quoted 4.5 million homeless is widely repeated in media and civil society. Some sources state that about 250,000 children are “in street situations,” though that may be a severe underestimate (others suggest up to 1 million).

  • One study claims that of the 4.5 million, two-thirds (≈ 3 million) live in Metro Manila. 

  • Yet the PSA’s 2020 census counted only 12,615 persons explicitly as homeless (living in streets/public spaces) across the country. That is orders of magnitude lower than the 4.5 million claim.

  • Furthermore, in the 2020 census, tens of thousands of households were recorded as “rent-free houses and lots without the consent of an owner” (59,826 households)

These discrepancies illustrate the tension between narrow enumeration and broad estimates. The narrow count (streets/public spaces) yields a small number; the broader, more inclusive definition leads to millions.

My reflections, questions, suggestions

  1. Definition must come first
     Before we talk about “homeless rate,” we must agree: is homelessness only those with no shelter whatsoever (roofless), or does it include those in makeshift dwellings, unstable tenure, or substandard housing? Without consensus, any number is contestable.

  2. Separate homelessness from housing backlog
     The housing backlog is a useful metric for supply and demand in housing, but it is not equivalent to homelessness. We must avoid conflating “people without decent housing” with “people without any housing,” lest both numbers become meaningless.

  3. Local enumeration by LGUs
     Yes, as you suggest, tasking local government units (LGUs) to conduct street counts, midnight surveys, or periodic mapping of informal settlements would yield richer, more grounded data. LGU data—if standardized—can be aggregated upward.

  4. Standardize methodology nationally
     The national government, through PSA, DSWD, and HUD/settlements agencies, must produce a standard protocol: a mix of point-in-time counts, service records, and household surveys. Such a protocol would define categories (roofless, sheltered, precariously housed) and count methods (surveys, mapping, administrative data).

  5. Use technology and geospatial tools
     Innovations like satellite imagery, drone mapping, or geotagged passenger footfall can help detect informal settlement growth and slum densification. Some development researchers already apply machine learning to infer poverty from imagery. These tools could supplement ground enumeration.

  6. Transparency and public access
     Whatever data is collected should be made publicly available (subject to privacy safeguards). Civil society, academia, journalists—all should be able to audit, verify, challenge, and build upon the data.

  7. Policy must follow fact, not vice versa
     The risk is that homelessness policy becomes guided by the politically convenient numbers rather than hard realities. If we undercount, we under-invest; if we overcount, resources may be diluted. The definition and numbers must serve policy, not the other way around.

The phrase “4.5 million homeless Filipinos” has become a rhetorical touchstone. But behind it lies ambiguity: Who counts as homeless? What method was used? What is included and what is excluded? Until we settle those questions, any “homeless rate” is more guess than measurement.

If I were to propose a starting path: define categories (roofless, sheltered, precarious), pilot enumeration in several cities (e.g. Manila, Cebu, Davao), compare LGU data with national protocols, and gradually scale upward. Only then can we speak of a “homeless rate” with confidence—and then design policies proportionate to the true scale of the problem.

Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres

iseneres@yahoo.com, senseneres.blogspot.com

02-01-2026

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

HOW IS THE CRIME RATE COMPUTED IN THE PHILIPPINES?

HOW IS THE CRIME RATE COMPUTED IN THE PHILIPPINES? When we talk about the crime rate in the Philippines, we often assume that the figures we see are accurate reflections of reality. But have we ever paused to ask—how exactly is the crime rate computed? Where does this data come from, and how reliable is it? The computation of the crime rate in the Philippines is officially handled by the Philippine National Police (PNP). The formula itself is straightforward: Crime Rate = (Total Reported Crimes / Total Population) x 100,000 This simple equation gives us the number of crimes per 100,000 people, allowing for fair comparison across regions and time periods. However, the reality behind these numbers is more complex than it appears. Data from the Ground The foundation of our national crime rate is empirical data collected at the grassroots level—from individual police stations scattered across the country. Every reported crime is logged in local police blotters, forming the buil...
Read more

GREY AREAS IN GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS

GREY AREAS IN GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS Dear Mr. President: May I ask who is going to be the arbiter or referee whenever there are overlaps in functions between two or more government agencies? I imagine that there would be no problem if these agencies would just cooperate and collaborate with each other, but what if they are unable to settle their differences and they would just end up throwing blame at each other or finger pointing at each other? Allow me to cite some examples. Who is supposed to take the lead in waste to energy projects? Is it supposed to be the DENR that is supposed to handle waste? Or is it supposed to be the DOE that is supposed to handle energy generation? Or is it supposed to be the DILG since it is the one that could direct or influence the waste to energy projects of LGUs? Who is supposed to take the lead in producing and promoting the use of biofuels? Is it supposed to be the DA, since the production of biofuels is supposed to be all about planting biofuel ...
Read more

LOCALIZED FREE AMBULANCE SERVICES

LOCALIZED FREE AMBULANCE SERVICES As it is supposed to be, anyone in the Philippines should be able to dial 911, and a telephone operator should be able to dispatch fire, rescue, ambulance and police (FRAP) units as soon as possible, based on acceptable response times. I invented the FRAP acronym for easy recall, and I hope it sticks, if there is no other alternative. Unfortunately, due to a mixture of technical and political reasons, the Philippines has not adopted 911 as a national number, because some LGUs would rather use their own three-digit numbers such as 117 and 168. I actually proposed a technical solution to that problem, but it was not adopted either. For whatever it is worth, my solution is to install a call forwarding system that could route all calls to a central operator, regardless of what number is dialed. It is very sad for me to know that up to now, even if our country is already over one hundred years old, there are still many LGUs that do not have fire trucks. it ...
Read more