The decision on what kind of growth a country should pursue, balanced or biased, has been the subject of heated debates among academicians and government officials for over a century. While some argue that a balanced growth is more beneficial for a country, there are those who advocate a biased growth and encourage the government to play an active part in determining how the country's resources will be allocated.
             Philippine economic history tells us that the conflict between the agricultural and industrial sectors came to full swing at the turn of the 20th century. Economic policies implemented in the 50s and 60s, most notably the policies regarding import substitution, have been pointed out to favor development within the industrial sector over the agricultural sector. Studies commissioned by the Department of Agriculture reveal that the effective protection received by industrial products is higher than that received by agricultural products despite the tariff reforms initiated in the 80s.
             From a purely economic standpoint, several reasons can be given as to why many economies around the world advocate and even push for industrialization. First, as economies grow, it is the industrial sector that primarily replaces the agricultural sector. Second, the demand for industrial products is usually more elastic relative to agricultural products such that the composition of aggregate demand, for the most part, follows the changes in production structures, which in the first place are geared towards industrialization. Third, the agricultural sector cannot absorb the ever-growing labor force considering the fact that the area of arable land never changes in the face of a growing population. Eventually, there will come a time when the land-labor ration will be very small to support employment in the agricultural sector. Fourth, the industrial sector offers more employment opportunities because a
             ...