by: Byron Filog Allatog
No Philippine president after the 1986 People Power Revolution had focused on the agricultural sector as its top administration’s political agenda. No administration had crafted solid and straightforward policy reforms to develop the country into a humongous agricultural industry in Asia. Such a gap in strategy could be accounted for the country’s generally high level of income inequality, with Gini coefficient estimates averaging 0.45 in the last 15 years alone [1].
The country is primarily comprised of 41.7% of farming lands from the 30 million hectares of its land area [2]. This is a national economic asset if taken into productivity. Meanwhile, the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) accounts for 10.2 million Filipinos working in the agricultural sector in 2018 [3]. This paper argues that agriculture is more than farming; it is a system that covers food security, job opportunities, and rural development that needs priority policy reforms to alleviate poverty in the country. Breunig and Majeed (2019) determined that in developing countries such as the Philippines, reducing poverty is beneficial to economic growth because as poverty increases, the economic growth of a country is impacted negatively [4].
Gini Coefficient is the standard measurement of economic inequality across society, and a higher Gini index indicates a higher economic imbalance. Comparatively, Asian Development Bank (ADB) statistics (2017) showed that the country had the second highest Gini index next to Malaysia among all Southeast Asian nations from 1996-2016 [5]. Likewise, from 2008-2018, the agriculture sector’s contribution to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) declined continuously from 13% to 9%, while the other contributory share of services increased [6]. This happened during the administration of three former presidents-Arroyo, Aquino and Duterte. In 2020, Philippine agriculture contributed 10.18% to the total GDP while the industrial sector contributed 28.4 %. The remaining 61.42% came from the service sector[7]. The agricultural sector is far yet performing as a critical player in the economic equilibrium compared to the “Service sector,” which accounted for the vast shares of overseas workers’ cash remittances with a hooping USD 31.4 billion in 2021 [8]. The Philippine political spectrum changed lately with Ferdinand “BongBong” R. Marcos Jr (BBM) winning the presidency and congruently taking the helm of the Department of Agriculture as its Secretary. Now, is the country on the road to agricultural reforms to treat the underlying causes of poverty by employing the country’s assets―the land and people?
In the succeeding paragraphs, this paper will show empirical studies, literature, and other data to support the relevance of agricultural reform policies as critical factors in improving poverty levels and some experiences that depict the contrary. The importance of the whole paper will also be summarized.
Poverty is high in rural areas in most developing countries, and agriculture is the main livelihood and critical source of income in these states [9]. Like in the Philippines, farmers, fisherfolks, and individuals inhabiting the rural areas recorded the highest poverty incidences in 2018 [10]. Taking these into perspective to community survival and poverty alleviation, the Philippine government needs to put a premium on policies shifting its focus on the agricultural sector to address these domestic concerns on poverty and to play with the regional and global trends in addressing economic inequality. Some countries in Asia and Latin America have made breakthroughs in addressing economic inequality through agricultural policy reforms, and similar European countries incorporated it into their long-term development goals. In an Asian environment, Warr and Suphannachart (2021) presented compelling empirical evidence that Thailand’s shift in increasing agricultural productivity growth has contributed to significant rural poverty reduction [11]. Similarly, a study by Arias et al. (2017) showed Brazil’s agriculture productivity grew by 105.7% from 2000-2013, outweighing growth from the manufacturing sector at -5.5% and service by 11.7%, because Brazil’s two focus high-impact policies implemented were on agricultural investment of innovation and trade liberalization [12]. This was supported by a study conducted earlier by Leão and Maluf (2012) indicating that Brazil’s success in fighting hunger and poverty was attributed to the government’s adoption of the national food and nutrition security policy “Zero Hunger Project” in 2003, a legal instrument that ensured the sustainability of the policies and programs [13].
However, one agricultural reform in India was not suitable for farmers. All laws passed in 2020 targeting a unified marketing system to eliminate brokers and connect agri-food supply chain actors directly to farmers were not ‘farmer eccentric’―laws were focused purely to supply chain actors or the big players in the hope that these actors would bring benefits to the farmers. Still, the government says that the laws offer more benefits to farmers like an extent of flexibility in farming from what varieties to plant and sell. This, in turn, helps attracts private investment in the growers [14]. Both parties have good points but an excellent dialogue will give an appropriate future direction to the community’s agricultural market system, considering the three laws were enacted in 2020.
Meanwhile, with no clear agricultural policy reforms in the Philippines, the CPP-NPA-NDF or the communist terrorist group (CTG) has long embarked on weaponizing inequality issues (poverty and agrarian reforms) to advance their cause. Inequality issues have been the fuel of the insurgency and have significantly hampered rural development [15]. Progressive groups or front organizations under the CTG systematically infiltrated universities, workplaces, and disadvantaged communities, exploiting the minds of the youth, labor, farmers, and indigenous people in the pretense of inequality issues to readily recruit and employ them as armed fighters and urban warriors against the government. Front organizations for decades are critical for recruitment providing and channeling funds to the armed fighters making it a more complex problem [16].
Supplementing Thailand and Brazil’s success stories, ADB has integrated Asia’s growth and development over the past 50 years to outline the factors contributing to the region’s overall performance. Modern agriculture and rural development are crucial contributors. Japan infuse technology in “getting agriculture moving,”―a strategic priority in Asia in the late 19th century. Taipei followed through a land reform where significant investment was made in irrigation and rural infrastructure development, which increased domestic agricultural production by 4.4% annually from 1954-1967. All these experiences, including the green revolution or modern farming practices, contribute to Asian growth and development success [17]. Likewise, a similar policy plan called “The new common agricultural policy (CAP) 2023-2027” is in play across Europe. It is a modernized policy in securing sustainable agriculture and forestry and a vital tool in reaching the EU’s ambition of the “farm to fork” and biodiversity strategies [18].
This paper concludes that countries in Asia and Latin America had made breakthroughs in agricultural policy reforms that contributed to the overall economic growth. Poverty incidences were minimized because of solid and robust agrarian productivity. Similarly, findings from the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank all confirm the success stories of these countries in their Asian report findings. Forward-looking on these breakthroughs, advanced countries like Europe have introduced “The new common agricultural policy: 2023-2027” as an EU’s strategic plan containing several policy reforms to support the transition towards sustainable agriculture and forestry. Thus, agricultural strategy policy reforms implemented in other countries and empirical studies form an excellent reference for developing countries in alleviating poverty incidences and uplifting economic development. The Philippines’ new president, BBM, is undoubtedly keen on leading its agriculture department as he sees the untapped potential of the country’s agriculture as ready to grow again. This perspective will be seen in one of his priority reform policies- the Masagana 150 and 200, a blueprint based on the Masagana 99, an agricultural reform launched in 1973 by the late President Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. to achieve rice self-sufficiency in the Philippines.
References
[1] M. R. Valenzuela, W.-K. Wong, and Z. Zhen Zhen, “Income and Consumption Inequality in the Philippines: A Stochastic Dominance Analysis of Household Unit Records,” Feb. 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.adb.org/publications/income-consumption-inequality-philippines
[2] World Bank, “Agricultural land (% of land area)- Philippines,” World Bank, Washington, DC, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.AGRI.K2?end=2018&locations=PH&start=1961&view=chart
[3] PSA, “Population and labor force,” Philippine Statistics Authority, 2019–8, Nov. 2019. [Online]. Available: https://tinyurl.com/34ukc64c
[4] R. Breunig and O. Majeed, “Inequality, poverty and economic growth,”. Journal article, 2019. Print
[5] Asian Development Bank, “Gini index-Philippines,” Nov. 2017. [Online]. Available: https://data.adb.org/dataset/gini-coefficient-asia-and-pacific
[6] World Bank, “Transforming Philippine Agriculture : During COVID-19 and Beyond,” Jun. 2020. [Online]. Available: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/34012
[7] Statista, “Philippines: Share of economic sectors in the gross domestic product (GDP) from 2010 to 2020,” Dec. 2021. [Online]. Available: https://tinyurl.com/muka6kza
[8] Nikkei Asia, “Philippines ‘modern-day heroes’ sent record remittances last year,” Feb. 15, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://tinyurl.com/ywsx6ey8
[9] E. Krivonos, “The Role of Agricultural Trade in Reducing Inequality,” Policy Analysis, Mar. 02, 2022. https://tinyurl.com/3z7wes69
[10] PSA, “Farmers, Fisherfolks, Individuals Residing in Rural Areas and Children posted the highest poverty incidences among the basic sectors in 2018,” Philippine Statistics Authority, Jun. 2020. [Online]. Available: https://psa.gov.ph/poverty-press-releases/nid/162541
[11] P. Warr and W. Suphannachart, “Agricultural Productivity Growth and Poverty Reduction: Evidence from Thailand,” Journal of agricultural economics, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 525–546, 2021, doi: 10.1111/1477-9552.12412.
[12] D. Arias, P. A. Vieira, E. Contini, B. Farinelli, and M. Morris, “Agriculture Productivity Growth in Brazil : Recent Trends and Future Prospects,” World Bank, Washington, DC, 2683–5152, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://go.exlibris.link/7CyJDDBl
[13] M. Leão and R. Maluf, “Effective public policies and active citizenship: Brazil´s experience of building a Food and Nutrition Security System,” Abrandh and Oxfam, 2012, 2012, [Online]. Available: https://tinyurl.com/225y49zv
[14] P. Chatterjee, “Agricultural reform in India: Farmers versus the State,” vol. 5, no. 4, pp. e187–e189, Apr. 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00060-7.
[15] I. C. Group, The Communist Insurgency in the Philippines: Tactics and Talks. 2011. [Online]. Available: https://tinyurl.com/4m4cp7w9
[16] Manila Standard, “Makabayan bloc members top CPP officials,” Feb. 07, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://tinyurl.com/3uh4297c
[17] Asian Development Bank, Asia’s Journey to Prosperity: Policy, Market, and Technology over 50 years. Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.adb.org/publications/asias-journey-to-prosperity
[18] European Commission, “The new common agricultural policy: 2023-27,” Government Website, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://tinyurl.com/2t87wey9
___________________________________________________
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this article are those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the position of the Philippine National Police, the Armed Forces of the Philippines, or the Philippine Government.
CSOP101 is a professional learning site for community policing advocates, practitioners, and supporters in changing the policing landscape. It is likewise an issue-based, related to or addressing nation-building. The views expressed within individual blog posts (police blog and academic) are those of the author and do not reflect any official position or that of the author’s employers. Any concerns regarding this blog post or resources should be directed in the first instance to byron.allatog012@gmail.com.
