Desiderata for the Philippines: Piercing the upper limit

As the nation crossed into 2026, the annual ritual of New Year’s resolutions once again crowded our public discourse. The Philippine Government announces yet another reform agenda, our political leaders issue promises of change, and citizens renew long-held hopes. Yet experience, both personal and collective, instructs us that most resolutions do not endure. Studies show that only a small fraction of these intentions are ever fulfilled. The rest dissolve under the weight of vague goals, weak accountability, and the unwillingness to confront difficult structural constraints. They are more crucified on paper, rather than converted.

What is true of individuals is true of nations.

More than a decade ago, Gay Hendricks, in The Big Leap, described what he called the “upper limit problem”: the self-imposed barriers that prevent people and institutions from realizing their full potential. Progress, he argued, requires first acknowledging these limits and then deliberately transcending them, moving from incompetence, to competence, to excellence, and finally to what he termed the “zone of genius,” where purpose, capability, and responsibility converge.

The Philippines today is trapped below its potential not because of a lack of talent, resources, or opportunity, but because it has failed, repeatedly, to break through its governance upper limit. There is great space for getting its act together.

As we must speak plainly, public policy in the Philippines continues to underperform relative to our neighbors not by accident, but by design. We elect legislators without the competence and preparation required for lawmaking. We reward loyalty over merit in public appointments. We tolerate patronage politics and weak institutions, then wonder why execution fails. In doing so, we normalize mediocrity and excuse injustice. That’s how we designed our political and economic system.

The consequences are now evident. Following the conclusion of the Article IV consultation with the Philippines this month, the International Monetary Fund has warned that the balance of risks to the country’s growth is tilted to the downside, explicitly citing corruption allegations, particularly in flood control projects, alongside climate shocks and global trade uncertainty. The Fund has called for stronger governance, firmer adherence to the rule of law, and decisive action against corruption vulnerabilities.

The World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and the ASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Research Office have echoed these concerns, pointing to eroding public trust as a drag on growth. Even where credit outlooks remain stable, confidence is increasingly fragile.

This is not merely an economic problem. It is a crisis of institutions, leadership, and moral direction.

It is therefore imperative to ask, not rhetorically but seriously, what do we, as a people and as a polity, truly desire for the Philippines? What are our non-negotiable desiderata?

Our answer draws from some years of civic and political engagement with 1Sambayan, particularly since the 2022 national elections. At its heart, 1Sambayan is not a traditional political organization but a reform coalition grounded in shared values. Its People’s Agenda: Nine Principles of Unity and Commitment opens with a reminder from Pope Francis: “Rivers do not drink their own water; trees do not eat their own fruits; the sun does not shine on itself; nor do flowers spread their fragrance for themselves.” Power exists for service. Leadership exists for others.

This moral clarity is precisely what our politics lacks — and precisely what our country needs.

Thus, our desiderata for the Philippines, addressed directly to policymakers and the Filipino people, are clear.

First, elections must be genuinely free, fair, and honest. The right of suffrage is sacred because it determines who governs and how power is exercised. Electoral integrity is not a procedural issue; it is the foundation of legitimate authority.

Second, the nation must unite against corruption — not selectively, not rhetorically, but decisively. Corruption is not a victimless crime; it steals from the poor, weakens institutions, and robs future generations.

Third, the rule of law must be upheld without exception, and human rights must be respected as a matter of policy and principle. Laws lose meaning when enforcement is arbitrary, and development becomes hollow when dignity is denied.

Fourth, the Philippines must safeguard its sovereignty and territorial integrity with clarity and resolve. A nation that cannot defend its rights cannot inspire confidence among its citizens or its business partners.

Fifth, public health must be treated as a core investment, not a residual expense. A healthy population is a productive population, and access to healthcare — especially for the marginalized — is both a moral and economic imperative. What happened to the PhilHealth funds should be a cautionary tale.

Sixth, the economy must be comprehensively restructured to achieve inclusive, self-sustaining, and resilient growth. Growth that benefits only a few is not progress; it is instability deferred.

Seventh, education, civic values, and cultural integrity must be strengthened. Nation-building depends not only on skills, but on character, responsibility, and a shared sense of purpose.

Eighth, social justice and peace must be actively pursued, particularly in communities long excluded from opportunity and voice. Peace without justice is temporary; justice without peace is incomplete.

Ninth, communities must be empowered to become resilient, especially in the face of climate change. Citizens must have both the capacity and the agency to influence policies that affect their security and livelihoods.

These principles are not aspirational slogans. They are policy imperatives.

As former congressman Joey Salceda has observed, fiscal space is not the same as progress. The Philippines has not failed because of weak growth or uncontrolled inflation. It has stalled because institutions have not kept pace with economic change, and politics has failed to serve the common good. Our plateau is institutional, not technical.

This is where 1Sambayan’s thrust is most urgent. Making the system work requires placing the right people in the right positions through credible elections. It requires mobilizing civil society and the business community to demand transparency and accountability. It requires recognizing that investors, like citizens, value predictability, justice, and the rule of law more than short-term gains.

Human capital — health, education, and the capacity to adapt to technological change — must be the enduring foundation of innovation-led growth. No country has prospered sustainably by neglecting the well-being and capabilities of its people. Public health and quality education are not social add-ons; they are strategic investments that determine productivity, resilience, and national competitiveness.

At the same time, long-delayed structural reforms can no longer be deferred. As the Foundation for Economic Freedom has time and again advanced, constitutional, legal, and regulatory frameworks must be updated to reflect present realities rather than outdated fears. An economic system that entrenches exclusion, limits opportunity, and privileges a narrow few cannot generate dignity, social cohesion, or peace. Reform is not ideological — it is practical, moral, and urgent.

Our ultimate desideratum is for the Philippines to finally pierce its self-imposed upper limit. That we dismantle an unjust political and economic order that restrains the many for the benefit of the few, and replace it with institutions that are fair, competent, and accountable. This demands courage and integrity from policymakers who must govern not for the next election but for the next generation. It demands vigilance and participation from citizens, who must insist that public office is a public trust.

The choice before us is stark and clear: to continue managing decline through cosmetic reforms, or to make the decisive leap toward a good system that works — for the people, by the people, and in service of the common good. Only by choosing the latter can 2026 mark not another year of abandoned resolutions, but the beginning of a sustained national transformation toward a just, sovereign, and inclusive Philippines.

God bless the Philippines!

Diwa C. Guinigundo is the former deputy governor for the Monetary and Economics Sector, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP). He served the BSP for 41 years. In 2001-2003, he was alternate executive director at the International Monetary Fund in Washington, DC. He is the senior pastor of the Fullness of Christ International Ministries in Mandaluyong.