Filipinos emerged “unconcerned” whether the product they buy illicit or not for as long as they are in need of such items, according to a new survey. A recent study from an Economist Impact report, “Illicit Trade: Scale, Scope and Flows”, compiled 1,600 individual sentiments, from 16 countries, on illicit trade and counterfeit production, showed that 53 percent of respondents in the Philippines said it is acceptable to buy products that serve a person’s needs, regardless of whether they are licit or illicit. “This is by far the largest share when compared to other countries. The issue of identifying illicit goods is also problematic, with more than 77 percent of survey respondents struggling to distinguish between genuine and counterfeit products,” the survey said on survey results from Filipino respondents. “The majority of Filipino respondents declared that illicit trade is acceptable when a buyer is in need,” the survey noted. The survey results, and the implications for the future of illicit trade activity globally and across Asia, which will be presented at the Global Anti-Illicit Trade Summit South-East Asia on Thursday, May 18 in Taguig, further noted that illicit trade could be curbed if consumers were able to better identify illicit goods. According to the study, lack of awareness of the impacts is not the only driver of illicit goods consumption, but the fact that the product is not immediately apparent it is counterfeited, pirated or prohibited. This is problematic since the study showed that three quarters of respondents (74.1%) feel that many consumers struggle to distinguish between licit and illicit goods. Often, illicit goods are designed to appear genuine, the study added. Similarly, some consumers only realize that they have bought an illicit good after the fact. Seven-in-ten respondents (73.4%) agree with this notion, suggesting that a large portion of consumer demand for illicit goods is instances of accidental consumption. This asymmetry of information has the potential to weigh on productivity, reduce trust in vendors of licit goods and put consumers’ health at risk. Its survey data suggests that this is a significantly larger issue in Africa and Asia, particularly in Algeria and Thailand. In Algeria, the ability to deceive consumers into purchasing illicit goods is likely to be enabled by the country’s porous borders and sub-optimal governance standards. Thailand, meanwhile, has struggled to implement and enforce sufficient intellectual property legislation, which could leave gaps for illicit traders to exploit.