Political dynasties are a reality in countries around the world, but perhaps nowhere are they more entrenched than the Philippines. The Philippines Daily Inquirer reported that 83 percent of current senators and 76 percent of house members belong to political dynasties. The phenomenon extends down to local government as well. According to the Philippines House of Representatives’ internal policy and budget research department, 9,852 out of 17,983 local elective posts, accounting for 54 percent of the total, are held by dynasts. Some of the largest and most powerful Philippines political families currently have several members serving in the current congress, including the Tulfos, Villars, and the Marcos-Romualdez clan which is also related to President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.
The pervasiveness of political dynasties in the Philippines has frequently been cited as a major cause of corruption, legislative inaction, rent-seeking and other disadvantages to investors and the business community. Academic research has documented the various ways political dynasties in the Philippines undermine the private sector. Mendoza et al. (2022) argue that the private sector is impacted differently based on region and the nature of local industry. They find that dynasties exacerbate poverty most severely in resource-rich provinces outside Luzon, where politicians and economic elites tend to collude rather than compete and block outside investment, stifle competition, and capture extractive industries like mining, agriculture, and forestry for personal gain. In Luzon, where a more competitive and independent business sector exists, dynasties are somewhat constrained in their predatory tendencies because the marginal benefits of encouraging economic growth outweigh pure extraction. Yet even there, the investment climate is burdened by dynastic politicians insulated from accountability who own businesses and are incentivized to use regulatory powers to crowd out competitors and ensure economic gains flow to a narrow circle of powerful families rather than the broader population.
Dynasties also actively corrode the institutional environment for business in subtler but equally damaging ways. Villanueva (2025) documents how dynastic politicians treat public office as a “family franchise,” using state powers to manipulate procurement processes, award contracts to allied firms, and shield members from anti-corruption prosecution. This legal impunity emboldens rent-seeking behavior across the entire political system and raises effective transaction costs for any investor that lacks connections to the right political families. Dynastic officials are routinely confronted with a fundamental conflict of interest between maximizing benefit for their family and maximizing benefit for the public, and in practice, family interest consistently wins. The result is a business environment distorted by favoritism, opaque contracting, and the systematic exclusion of non-aligned competitors — conditions that deter both domestic entrepreneurship and foreign investment.
Continue reading for free at The Diplomat’s new companion publication, The Investor.
