The Philippines is Regulating AI Too Fast and Upgrading Too Slow

The Philippines is having the wrong conversation about artificial intelligence.

That was the quiet but unmistakable conclusion of our recent NegoShow interview with Doc Ligot, one of the country’s most persistent voices on AI literacy, data ethics, and technology policy.

“AI is not the real threat,” says Doc Ligot. “The real risk is refusing to adapt.” [Photo: Doc Ligot]

While public debate continues to revolve around fears of job losses and calls for tighter controls, Ligot argues that the deeper risk lies elsewhere.

The country is treating AI primarily as a threat to be managed, rather than a capability to be built.

“AI is changing everything, both good and bad,” Ligot said early in the conversation. “But the problem is not that AI exists. The problem is that our systems were never designed for this level of speed.”

Artificial intelligence is not simply another digital tool layered onto existing processes. It is a productivity shock that compresses weeks of work into hours and exposes how outdated many institutional assumptions have become.

For a country that has repeatedly arrived late to major economic shifts, AI represents both an opportunity and a warning.

Ligot’s position is not alarmist. It is strategic. The Philippines can still compete in the AI era, but only if it shifts its focus from containment to capacity building.

Education is the first stress test

Education sits at the center of the AI debate because it defines what society values as learning and competence. Ligot pointed out that once AI systems began passing professional and postgraduate written exams, the limitations of exam-driven education became impossible to ignore.

“As of 2025, we already have AI models passing board exams and even PhD-level exams on paper,” he said. “So clearly, something has changed very, very fast.”

This does not mean AI undermines learning. Ligot is careful to push back against that assumption. In fact, he argues the opposite. Used properly, AI can strengthen critical thinking by freeing students from rote tasks and allowing them to focus on analysis and judgment.

“There’s this idea that AI kills critical thinking,” he said. “That’s something I want to debunk. If you use it properly, you actually free up time for students to analyze the information they get.”

The real issue, Ligot stressed, is guidance. Students are already using AI. The danger lies in letting them do so without instruction.

“Someone has to teach students how to ask the right questions,” he said. “Prompting is really just asking good questions. Asking follow-up questions. Having a conversation with the AI.”

He prefers the term context engineering, emphasizing that outputs improve when users provide clearer intent, specificity, and constraints. This skill, he argues, is becoming as fundamental as reading comprehension.

The stakes are higher because classrooms are already under strain. Ligot highlighted the reality of teacher-to-student ratios that make individualized instruction nearly impossible.

AI is already passing board exams. The Philippine education system is still debating whether to allow it. That gap may define the next generation.

“In some places in NCR, you’re already looking at ratios like 60 to one,” he said. “In the provinces, it can be 300 to one, even 500 to one. That’s the real crisis.”

In that context, AI-assisted lesson planning, paperwork automation, and even front-facing virtual assistants are not luxuries. They are force multipliers. But they only work if teachers themselves are trained.

“We need to mass-produce AI-enabled teachers,” Ligot said. “That’s the first step.”

Jobs will change before they disappear

Fear of job displacement dominates AI discussions, but Ligot urges a more precise way of thinking. Instead of asking whether jobs will vanish, he suggests examining how tasks within jobs are reorganized.

He cited a recent IMF study that measured both AI exposure and task complementarity.

Clerical work, repetitive office processes, and routine administrative roles are clearly vulnerable. These are tasks AI can already perform efficiently without human involvement.

By contrast, jobs that require judgment, synthesis, or physical labor remain more resilient.

In this NegoShow interview, Doc Ligot breaks down how AI is reshaping education, BPOs, and entrepreneurship—and what policymakers and business leaders must do next.

“Just because a job is exposed to AI doesn’t mean it disappears,” Ligot explained. “What happens is that the job gets restructured into an AI-enabled job.”

One of the more surprising findings, he noted, is education itself. Teaching ranks among the most AI-exposed sectors, yet it is also highly complementary.

“I found that surprising too,” Ligot said. “Education is very exposed to AI, but it’s also very complementary. That means teachers who learn AI actually become more valuable, not less.”

The bigger threat, he argued, is not automation but resistance. “I think the biggest threat to the workforce is cultural resistance,” Ligot said. “This is just technophobia. We’ve seen this pattern before.”

In his view, AI adoption follows the same historical arc as earlier technological shifts. Early adopters gain leverage. Late adopters struggle to catch up.

BPOs face a choice, not an extinction

No AI discussion in the Philippines is complete without addressing the BPO sector. Ligot approaches the topic without euphemism. “Anything clerical, anything repetitive, those tasks are at the top of the list,” he said. “AI can do those without you.”

Script-based customer service and routine back-office work are clearly vulnerable as AI agents become more capable. But Ligot rejects the idea that the industry is doomed.

“That doesn’t mean the jobs completely disappear,” he said. “They transform.”

The opportunity lies in moving up the value chain. AI still needs supervision, escalation, and validation. Human workers remain essential for handling complexity, empathy, and accountability.

“If we position ourselves correctly, we move into AI-enabled services,” Ligot said. “Not just cheap labor, but higher-value work.”

This transition, however, requires serious investment in upskilling and a willingness to redesign roles. It also requires recognizing AI literacy as economic infrastructure, not optional training.

Regulation is moving in the wrong direction

Ligot’s sharpest critique is reserved for policy. In his view, the Philippines is moving quickly to regulate AI, but often in ways that miss the point.

“We’re moving too fast in regulating the wrong things,” he said. “Most of the laws are about slowing AI down.”

Much of the current legislative effort focuses on ethics frameworks and registration requirements, often copied from European models without sufficient adaptation.

“Let’s be honest, a lot of legislation is copy-paste,” Ligot said.

Meanwhile, the fundamentals that make AI usable remain underdeveloped. High power costs, expensive internet, and limited data infrastructure directly affect adoption.

“Why are we charging Singapore prices for power when we’re in the Philippines?” he asked. “That alone affects everything.”

Ligot argues that the country already has foundational laws that can be strengthened in an AI context, including data privacy, cybercrime, labor, and intellectual property.

“If we fix the basics, we already create a very conducive environment for AI,” he said.

What is missing is ambition on enablement. Other countries have invested aggressively in national training programs.

“Finland trained one percent of their population in AI before GPT,” Ligot noted. “Dubai said they would train one million prompt engineers. That’s the kind of thinking we need.”

Entrepreneurs already know where the value is

For entrepreneurs, AI’s benefits are immediate and practical. Ligot pointed to digital marketing, research, and operations as areas where returns are already visible.

“The easiest money-making opportunity is digital marketing,” he said. “Better ads, better offers, better hooks.”

One tactic he highlighted involves analyzing customer comments. “Those comments are hidden gems,” Ligot said. “That’s your market telling you what they like. AI can group those into advertising hooks in minutes.”

Tasks that once required researchers, copywriters, or administrative staff can now be handled by small teams with the right workflows.

“What used to take me a weekend now takes me four hours,” he said. “And that’s end-to-end.”

The key distinction is intent. Entrepreneurs who use AI as a thinking assistant rather than a writing shortcut gain speed without sacrificing judgment.

“The lazy way is to let AI do everything,” Ligot said. “The smarter way is to use it to sharpen your thinking.”

A familiar national crossroads

Ligot returned repeatedly to a broader concern. The Philippines has missed several major economic waves, from advanced manufacturing to semiconductors, often relying instead on labor export.

“We can’t keep exporting Filipinos and breaking up families,” he said. “That’s the real cost.”

AI represents another inflection point. The country can choose to invest in people, infrastructure, and capability, or it can regulate from the sidelines while others move ahead.

“If we miss this boat again, we miss another generation,” Ligot warns.

His central message was simple and unmistakable. The technology itself is neutral. The outcome depends on how quickly and deliberately our country’s institutions adapt.

--

ABOUT AUTHOR