harnessing the tools of agri-biotechnology wwell as banana, makapuno and potato, thereby helping to...

Vol. XVIII No. 3 May - June 2000 ISSN 0115-9097

to page 2

6 Creating opportunitiesthrough agri-biotechnology

7 Points of View:Agri-biotechand the government

8 Introducing the GIS:A new instrumentin analyzing and presentingsocioeconomic data

* Based on the highlights of the presentationsgiven during the PIDS-BAR Forum on Agri-cultural Biotechnology, 26 June 2000, PIDS,Makati City. The presentors include Dr. Will-iam Padolina, Dr. Randy Hautea, Dr.Catherine Ives and Dr. Leo Sebastian. This ar-ticle was also culled from “Defining the Agri-cultural Biotechnology Policy of the Philip-pines” (Policy Notes 2000-06) and “Agricul-tural Biotechnology Research and Develop-ment in the Philippines: The Need for a Stra-tegic Research” (Discussion Paper 2000-17),both written by Dr. Saturnina Halos, and “Ag-ricultural Biotechnology: Opportunities andChallenges for the Philippines" by Dr. Will-iam Padolina (Discussion Paper 2000-27).

W ith the burgeoning human population in the

developing countries, the pressure faced by the agriculture

sector to produce more food becomes harder than ever.

The Philippine population, for instance, has already

reached 70 million and is projected to peak at 120 million by 2020. As such,

higher land productivity and cropping intensity are needed to meet the growing

demand for food. Moreover, urbanization and industrialization are rapidly tak-

ing away the areas for agriculture and making water less available. The world’s

aquatic resources are also being severely depleted at an alarming rate. All of

these make the challenge to produce more food on limited land and less water

even greater.

Harnessing the toolsof agri-biotechnology *

Food security is indeed an enor-mous task today and tomorrow for theagricultural sector—a task that it mustcarry out amidst the host of biological,economic, environmental and culturalproblems that continue to impinge onits productivity. In this regard, scienceonce again provides the possible an-swer as it offers a critical solution tosolving the problems of increasing foodsupply and improving agricultural pro-ductivity through biotechnology.

Biotechnology definedBiotechnology is any technique

that uses living organisms or substancesfrom such organisms to make or modifya product, improve plants or animals,or develop microorganisms for specificuses (Persley and Doyle 1999 as citedin PIDS Policy Notes 2000-06). It involvesthe traditional techniques of fermen-tation, and tissue and cell culture aswell as the modern techniques such asgenomics, bio-informatics, transforma-

What's Inside Editor's Notes

to page 14

“Necessity,” as the saying goes, “is themother of all inventions.” For centuries, that isthe way it has often been. And in modern times,the same principle seems to apply.

Thus, when the world is faced with a bur-geoning population that somehow stokes fearof a possible food shortage in some areas wherethe land could no longer produce enough to feedthe overgrown population, science and its won-

DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH NEWS May - June 20002

Biotech...From page 1

Local tissue culture research hasenabled the rapid mass propagation ofornamental plants such as orchids aswell as banana, makapuno and potato,thereby helping to boost the plant in-dustry. Animal and plant diseases cannow be detected at an early stage us-ing biotechnology-derived diagnostickits. Vitamin and iron-enriched rice,corn and legumes with increasedamino acids are likewise possible. Theiravailability will be a great help in alle-viating the twin problems of povertyand malnutrition.

produce higher quality food crops andproducts at a lower production cost.

Philippine situationThe Philippines is one of the first

Asian countries to establish a biotech-nology research and development(R&D) program. This was through theNational Institute of Biotechnology andApplied Microbiology (BIOTECH) es-tablished in 1980 at the University ofthe Philippines-Los Baños (UPLB).BIOTECH is mandated to “developcost-effective technologies for the pro-duction of goods and services that arecheaper alternatives to conventionalproducts but which are safe to the en-vironment and make use of locallyavailable materials.” Other institutesthat conduct biotechnology researchare UPLB’s Department of Horticul-ture, Institute of Biological Sciences(IBS) and Institute of Plant Breeding(IPB), and the Philippine Rice Re-search Institute (PhilRice) based in theNueva Ecija province.

Dr. William Padolina, former sec-retary of the Philippines' Departmentof Science and Technology (DOST)and current deputy director-general ofthe International Rice Research Insti-tute (IRRI) at Los Baños, noted thatnotwithstanding the fact that it had es-tablished a biotechnology R&D pro-gram much earlier than other Asiancountries, the Philippines has been veryslow in harnessing the tools of biotech-nology in the past two decades. Mostof the activities conducted under thebiotechnology R&D program were inthe traditional techniques of biotech-nology. Thus, until now, the major tech-nology-based industries developed arethose that are based on traditional fer-mentation technologies such as alcoholand winemaking, vinegar-making andmonosodium glutamate production.

"The bottomline is that we don’t have people who knowthe works of biochemical engineering. We need to re-tool our chemical engineers so that they will have someexpertise." --Dr. William Padolina

tion, marker-assisted breeding, diag-nostics, and vaccine technology.

Meanwhile, advanced countrieshave successfully developed transgeniccrops with superior qualities such ascorn requiring less pesticide, herbicide-resistant soybean, carnation withlonger shelf life, virus-protected potato,and tomato with better processingproperties. Their adoption has been re-ported to bring higher incomes for thefarmers because of better yields, bothin terms of quality and quantity, andbecause of reduced cost of labor, fer-tilizer and pesticides. Translated intothe macro level, this spells higher pro-ductivity and global competitiveness forthe agricultural sector as it is able to

In addition, studies show that,during the period 1979-1997, 75 per-cent of the 263 agricultural biotechnol-ogy projects conducted were on the

Much has been said aboutthe benefits derived by agricul-ture from biotechnology and its prod-ucts. Improved rice varieties possess-ing greater resistance to pests and dis-eases and tolerance to biotic and abi-otic stresses as well as better qualityproduce, for instance, are just some ofthe outputs of biotechnology whichhave brought significant economicbenefits to the farmers because of thereduced use of chemical pesticides andof less crop damages. Bio-organic fer-tilizers, biopesticides and biocontrolagents, which are products of tradi-tional biotechnology, serve as economi-cal and ecologically sound alternativesto chemical fertilizers.

Modern biotechnology,however, involves the modifica-tion or reconstruction of thegenes of microorganisms,plants and animals, or what isknown as recombinant deoxy-ribonucleic acid (DNA) tech-nology or genetic engineering.Compared to traditional bio-technology, the modern pro-cess is knowledge-intensive andbased on the science of molecu-lar biology.

Biotechnology is actually not anew concept as man has already beenpracticing traditional biotechnologyfor a long time. Alcoholic beveragessuch as beer and other fermentedfoods have been produced through thetraditional modes of biotech-nology. Other products result-ing from biotechnology are an-tibiotics, vitamins, organic ac-ids, amino acids and industrialenzymes.


production of biocontrol agents, soilinoculants, food and beverages, andthe development of tissue culturemethods; 15 percent on other appli-cations of microbial systems (feed ad-ditives, enzymes, farm waste manage-ment and vaccines); and only 10 per-cent on modern biotechnology(monoclonal antibodies, molecularmarkers and RDNA) (Table 1).

ConstraintsUntil the early 1990s, few activi-

ties have been undertaken in molecu-lar biology and genetic engineering inthe Philippines. This is quite ironic, asearlier noted, considering that thePhilippines has been among the firstcountries in Asia to recognize the im-portance of biotechnology in nationaldevelopment.

Why is this so?

The answer lies in the examina-tion of the factors affecting the direc-tion of biotechnology research. Dr.Saturnina Halos of the National Re-search Institute, University of the Phil-ippines in Diliman, observed that thedirection of biotechnology research isdetermined by how the research systemdefines the scope of biotechnology, theprevailing economic policies during agiven period and the available re-sources. Biotechnology is very broad interms of scope. It covers traditional fer-mentation technologies at one end andmodern biotechnology that includesRDNA and genetic engineering at theother.

veloping technologies for import sub-stitution. This is clearly reflected in thetype of technologies developed byBIOTECH such as soil inoculants andbio-insecticides to substitute for costlychemical fertilizers and protein-en-riched root crops or banana peelingsto substitute for imported soybean andfishmeal.

In terms of available resources,there is the perennial problem of lim-ited funding for biotechnology re-search. Only a meager allowance isgiven for R&D, that is, less than 0.21percent of the gross national productper annum—a reflection of the lack ofpolitical will to push the program for-ward. Local scientists are thus having adifficult time in accessing new tech-nologies as well as conducting studies

to page 4

In terms of economic policies, thereduction of imports was the emphasisin the early 80s when the BIOTECH wascreated. The country’s biotechnologyprogram was thus directed toward de-

Source: Compendium: Biotechnology Research in the Philippines, 1997 as cited in Halos, S. 2000. Agricultural Biotechnol-ogy Research in the Philippines: The Need for Strategic Approach. PIDS Discussion Paper 2000-17.

1Includes 9 additional projects (mango, coconut, rice, carabao, microbes, zooxanthellae, tuna) done at IPB, Philippine Coco-nut Authority, Philrice, Microbiology and Biotechnology Institute, Marine Science Institute and BIOTECH) not listed above.

Biocontrol agents 55 20.9 Fermentation

Soil amendments (inoculant, compost) 44 16.7 FermentationFood/beverage 43 16.3 FermentationTissue culture methods

(micropropagation, plant breeding, cell culture) 52 19.8 Tissue cultureFeed component

(enzyme, antibiotic, improved material) 20 7.6 FermentationEnzyme/cells of agriprocessing 16 6.1 FermentationDiagnostics 7 2.7 Monoclonal antibody,

DNA markersFarm waste management 4 1.5 FermentationMolecular marker techniques1 12 4.6 MolecularVaccine antibody, conventional methods 3 1.1 Monoclonal

Animal reproductive technologies 3 1.1 Cell manipulationsGenetically modified organisms 7 2.7 RDNA

Total 263

Table 1. Product target and techniques used in Philippine biotechnology research, 1979-1997

Product Number Percent Techniquesof projects to total commonly used



Moreover, not enough incentivesand opportunities are given to localresearchers and scientists. For onething, government researchers are re-ceiving low salaries and poor benefits.Thus, students are discouraged fromconsidering careers in the scientificfield.

that use modern biotechnology tech-niques such as genetic engineeringwhich, by nature, are costly to imple-ment. Dr. Halos said that research us-ing microbial and plant tissue culturetechniques are several times cheapercompared with the reagents needed forDNA manipulation. This could explainwhy most studies conducted in the pasttwo decades mostly focus on those thatuse fermentation and tissue culturetechniques. Dr. Leo Sebastian ofPhilRice also cited the expensive costof supplies and equipment, and theinadequate facilities and infrastructuresupport as factors that contribute to theslow pace of biotechnology develop-ment in the country.

Despite these difficulties, how-ever, the productivity of the agriculturalbiotechnology community in the pasttwo decades may still be considered asnoteworthy. Local research institutionshave successfully developed a numberof biotechnology products in the faceof limited funding, poor infrastructuresupport and inadequate facilities.

For instance, BIOTECH has de-veloped 14 technologies for commer-

In terms of human resources,there is the problem of the lack of acritical mass of highly trained and up-dated researchers. Majority of the lo-cal researchers do not have the neces-sary expertise in molecular biology,which is the foundation of modern bio-technology.

cialization. These include, among oth-ers, biofertilizers for legumes, rice andcorn; bio-insecticides (one effectiveagainst mosquitoes and the otheragainst corn borer and diamondbackmoth in cabbage); plant growth hor-mones; feed additives; and improvedyeast strains for higher alcohol produc-tion. Nine technologies were awardedpatents and seven more have patentspending (Halos 2000).

The IPB, on the other hand, suc-cessfully developed the first Philippine-bred hybrid papaya that is resistant tothe papaya ringspot virus. The IPB iscurrently developing by genetic engi-neering other crop varieties such asthose for banana and corn that havebetter resistance against major pests orviruses.

Developments in western countriesCompared to the Philippines

where modern biotechnology has yetto take off, products of genetic engi-neering—known as transgenic crops orgenetically modified foodstuffs—arenow widely cultivated and consumed inwestern countries such as the UnitedStates.

In her paper “State of Agricul-tural Biotechnology: Developments inWestern Countries” which she pre-sented during the PIDS-BAR forum, Dr.Catherine L. Ives, director of the Agri-cultural Biotechnology SupportProject, Institute of International Ag-riculture at Michigan State University,noted that the global acreage oftransgenic crops has more than tripledin the past three years, increasing to42 percent between 1998 and 1999alone.

The Institute of Plant Breeding was able to successfully develop the first Philippine-bred hybrid papaya that is resistant to the papaya ringspot virus.

The total commercial acresplanted with transgenic crops world-wide totaled 98.6 million in 1999 andthese are mostly in the US, Argentina,Canada and China. These figures indi-cate that the adoption rate of thesecrops by the farmers has been high—in fact, at a rate greater than any othertechnology in the history of agriculture(Langridge 1999 as cited by Halos2000). Farmers who have plantedtransgenic crops reported an overall in-creased profitability resulting from themultiple benefits of these crops.Among the benefits reported frompest-protected crops include (a) in-creased yields, (b) decreased use and


to page 6

population of nontarget, benefi-cial organisms.

Given these biological,health and environmental issues,a number of environmental andconsumer groups are calling for aglobal moratorium on GM foodproducts. This anti-GMO cam-paign is very strong in Europe es-pecially since the outbreak of themad cow disease in late 1999, kill-ing many people. Reports say thatthe epidemic was caused by an ag-ricultural innovation, which isfeeding dead cows to live cows.The disease was determined to betransmissible through such feed.

As for consumers, Dr. Ivesobserved that in the US, there isrelatively little public outcry re-garding the use of modern bio-technology. In a survey conducted,two-thirds of US consumers indi-cated willingness to purchase foodcrops developed through biotech-nology while a few were aware ofthe technology and only a thirdsaid that they have heard about it.The use of transgenic crops, ac-cording to Dr. Ives, has becomethe norm in the US and its accep-tance is not an issue.

Is the situation the same inother countries like the Philippines? Isbiosafety an issue here? What are someof the issues being raised against theproducts of modern biotechnology?

IssuesBiosafetyJust like in any other cutting edge

technology, the issue of geneticallymodified organisms (GMOs), especiallythe genetically modified food crops,has raised controversy and sparked ani-mated debates among certain groups.

Dr. Catherine Ives presents the status of geneticallymodified products in the United States and Europe whilenoting that the global acreage of transgenic crops hastripled in the past three years.

plants often contain a gene or DNA se-quence from nonfood organisms. Thisforeign gene produces a protein thatcould be toxic or allergenic to humans.

2. Creation of superweeds – GMplants may transfer their foreign geneto weed species conferring resistanceto the weed thus making it more diffi-cult to eradicate.

3. Creation of new human, cropplants, and animal pathogens – A GMplant containing an antibiotic resis-tance gene may transfer this gene to amicrobe in the wild and eventually intohuman pathogens.

4. Possible creation of Bt resistantinsects – Bt crops (crops modified withgenes from Baccillus thuringiensis to pro-duce toxins for resistance to insectpests) may promote the selection ofinsects resistant to Bt that can no longerbe controlled by insecticides.

5. Possible deleterious effects ofpesticide on nontarget, beneficial or-ganisms – Bt crops may wipe out the

Critics, for instance, note thatgenetically modified food crops aresaid to be potentially dangerous to hu-mans, animals and the environment.Scientists warning about their poten-tial risks say that genetic modificationis crude, inexact and unpredictable,and therefore, inherently dangerous.

Their widespread use, accordingto this group, could cause the follow-ing adverse effects:

1. Possible allergenecity and tox-icity – Genetically modified (GM)

dependency on pesticides,thereby resulting in lower produc-tion cost, (c) avoidance of risksfrom pesticide use for farmers andconsumers, and (d) reduced en-vironmental pollution.

Amidst this controversy,there is heightened public aware-ness in the Philippines about thesafety of genetically engineered

plant crops for human consumption es-pecially with the surge in the marketof imported frozen meat, fresh veg-etables and fruits that are reported tobe transgenic. The rising cases ofdeath, poisoning, cancer and other dis-eases reported in some parts of theworld that were believed to be a resultof consuming transgenic crops hasmade the public re-think about thesafety of genetically engineered crops.

There was a foreign-fundedgroup, for instance, that tried to blockthe field-testing of Bt corn in GeneralSantos City. The safety of Bt rice, whichis currently being tested by IRRI, is alsobeing questioned.

In view of these and to give assur-ance to the public, it is therefore im-perative to map out a set of regulatorymeasures regarding the use, produc-tion and importation of products de-rived from transgenic crops as well aslabeling requirements and scientificprotocol. This is to ensure that


transgenic crops and all other biotech-nology products containing GMOs aresafe to humans and the environment.

The government should likewiseconsider adopting mandatory labelingof food products, as consumers wouldfeel safer if they are informed whichcontain transgenic ingredients. Thiswould also arrest the public fear aboutGMOs.

To ensure that foodstuffs contain-ing GMOs that enter the country aresafe for human consumption, pre-mar-ket safety testing could be imple-mented. Dr. Padolina pointed out thatthese materials should be tested first forthe presence of harmful substances ororganisms before they are sold to con-sumers. As the old saying goes, “anounce of prevention is better than apound of cure”. There are many toolsthrough biotechnology that will enablerapid, sensitive and accurate tests onthese materials to determine theirsafety.


I am the Chairman of the SenateCommittees on National Defenseand Security and on Urban Plan-

ning, Housing and Resettlement. I amalso the Vice-Chair of the CongressionalOversight Committee on Agricultureand Fisheries Modernization. So, whyam I here?

In 1975, I took up a course onamphibious warfare in the UnitedStates. Aside from studying the effectsof nuclear weapons and military tactics,the course also focused on the effectsof conflicts all over the world through-out history. In one of the group discus-sions on the effects of conflicts andpopulation explosion, we discussedwhat could be done through genetic en-gineering.

Genetic engineering was newthen, an offspring of biotechnology. Atthat time, we were considering ricegrain the size of a fist, chicken the sizeof an ostrich, pig the size of a rhino orcow the size of an elephant. The sol-diers present in that discussion werelooking at food or the lack of it as thesource of conflict.

Being chairman of the Commit-tee on Urban Planning, Housing and

Resettlement in the Senate, I try to lookinto the sources or the reasons whythere is a burgeoning population in thecities. Thirty-five years ago, with apopulation of only 35 million, onlyabout 30 percent of the Filipinos livedin the cities. Today, there are about 56percent of the population who stay inthe urban areas.

Thirty-five years ago, too, the av-erage size of a farm available to a sub-sistence family ranged from 3.2 to 3.3hectares. Today with 79 million Filipi-nos, we have 1.1 to 1.2 hectares of farmsize available to a subsistence familyof six. If a family continues to adopttraditional farming methods, that 1.1hectare of land cannot support the fam-ily. Thus, there is no option for saidfamily but to migrate to urban areas.

In Metro Manila and inCalabarzon, the registered populationgrowth is 3.4 to 3.6 percent while thenational average is only 2.3 percent.In Negros Oriental, the populationgrowth is registered at 1.8 percent,making the land there too small to sup-port a farmer family. Shrinking land anddiminishing water sources are affect-ing the farmers, making them eithervulnerable to rebel movement or en-ticing them to move to Metro Manila,Calabarzon or other urbanized areaswhich are already overcrowded.

This being the case, biotechnol-ogy or genetic engineering had posed

Creating opportunitiesthrough agri-biotechnology*

by Senator Rodolfo G. Biazon**

* Opening remarks delivered during thePIDS-BAR forum on Agricultural Biotech-nology, 26 June 2000, Makati City** Senator, 11th Congress, Republic of thePhilippines. to page 15

Intellectual property rightsThe development of new prod-

ucts and processes through biotechnol-ogy is an intellectual endeavor andtherefore subject to intellectual prop-erty rights (IPR). Forms of traditionalIPR systems used to protect biotechproducts include patents, plantbreeder’s rights, trade secrets andtrademarks. Owners of proprietary ma-terials or processes have imposed re-strictions on their use. Researchers andscientists should thus have a clearknowledge of the legal conditions re-garding the use of their intellectual en-deavors. Dr. Halos noted that it is nec-essary for research centers to developa system that ensures the fulfillment oftheir obligations in accordance withthe materials transfer agreement


(MTA) and to see to the proper dis-semination of information to the staff.

Another issue is the access to pro-prietary research materials and pro-cesses by developing countries. In mostcases, advanced countries hold thepatent or license to these materials. Assuch, they are considered private prop-erties. IPR has been criticized as not rec-ognizing the previous contributions offarmers to crop development. Farmersof developing countries developedmany of the world’s crops through cen-turies of selection. Similarly, thesecountries do not share in either themedicinal benefits or the corporateprofits that stem from their biologicalresources.

International agreements such asthe Convention of Biological Diversity(CBD), which was entered into forcein 1993, are trying to address these is-sues. CBD is the first, comprehensiveglobal agreement among countries topromote sustainable development. Itsobjectives are “the conservation of bio-logical diversity, the sustainable use ofits components and the fair and equi-table sharing of the benefits arising outof the utilization of genetic resources.”Under the CBD, genetic resources areowned by sovereign nations while de-veloping countries are entitled to sharein the benefits derived from their ge-netic resources. The Philippines is oneof the signatories of the CBD.

Private sector participationMany developing countries are

still ambivalent in forging collaborativeties with multinational corporations(MNCs) to undertake biotechnologyresearch. The prevailing image ofMNCs as instruments of exploitation isstill present. This is much expected con-sidering that these are profit-orientedcompanies and may just be using sci-ence to monopolize the global market

According to Dr. William Padolina:jj There should be an improve-

ment in agriculture and chemical engi-neering courses such that their curriculashall have more biotechnology content.The bottomline is that we don’t havepeople who know the works of biochemi-cal engineering. We need to retool ourchemical engineers so that they will havesome expertise.

jj There is a sense of uncertaintybrought about by very vocal oppositiongroups against the products of agri-bio-technology which makes potential inves-tors a little afraid. If you are an investor,you would think twice: Why should I getinto this kind of market when I have otheralternatives? At one time or another, wealso see a proposed resolution banningthe practice of biotechnology, as thoughscience is a criminal activity in the Phil-ippines. In fact, one Senate bill proposeda penalty on whoever will practice bio-technology. I’m glad, though, that morereasonable minds intervened and the billhas not progressed to the Senate floor.

jj Very often, I feel that when itcomes to development deficiency, tech-nology has been and is being used as ascapegoat. In other words, wheneverthere is a deficiency in rice production,one blames technology. When there is adeficiency in corn production, again, oneblames technology. But actually, there

Agri-biotechnologyand the government

to page 15to page 13

According to Sen. Rodolfo Biazon:jj What is the present global use

of biotechnology? Is this being used as apolitical tool by developed countries tothe detriment of underdeveloped farm-ers? How come it is cheaper for us tobuy corn from Australia or Texas than useour corn grown in Cotabato? There areso many reasons, of course, like accessto credit, infrastructure, transportation,and others. But I am looking at the ques-tion of competitiveness. I think that theproduct of R&D biotechnology shouldbe made available to everyone. Perhapswhat should be left alone is how wemanage inputs and the means to produc-tion but biotechnological productsshould be made free to everyone.

jj Because countries have to com-pete in terms of R&D with other devel-oped countries, is the Philippine govern-ment addressing this issue properly?

In this regard, there are questions:How much is the Department of Scienceand Technology (DOST) budget andwhere is it spent? Is 85 percent for per-sonnel salary? Is 4 percent dedicated toR&D? Is the R&D product put into main-stream or is it allowed to sleep some-where? How much cooperative effort isthere between the DOST and the Depart-ment of Agriculture (DA)? Who deter-mines which direction should the efforton R&D go? Is it the DOST or the DA?

to page 15

Points of view


Communication experts notethat visual, rather than tex-tual and vocal, informationtend to be absorbed better

by and to register longer in the humanmind.

For instance, the statistics revealthat during the delivery of a presenta-tion or briefing, about 55 percent ofthe visual information/data shown,such as charts and illustrations, are ab-sorbed by the brain while only about 7percent of the textual information as-sociated with words and 38percent of vocal informationassociated with sounds are as-similated. More so, in termsof recall by methods of pre-sentation, it is shown that acombination of “telling andshowing” registers longer ina person’s mind with a reten-tion rate of 65 percent evenafter 3 days as compared toonly 10 percent for the “tell-ing alone” method and 20

percent for the “showing alone”method. 1

Based on this knowledge andprodded by the increasing demand bynational and local decisionmakers fordata and information having a spatialdimension, the PIDS has recentlyadopted the use of the Geographic In-formation Systems (GIS) in doing andpresenting socioeconomic analyses atthe national, regional, provincial andvery soon, municipal/barangay levelsin the country.

The GIS is an au-tomated, internet-basedand user-friendly data-base system that pro-vides a unique way ofviewing and analyzingspatial data by present-ing them in a geographi-cal format. Full colormaps based on corre-sponding color codesare used to reveal pat-terns and relationships,thereby allowing users ofdata to view informationin a new perspective.

Through the years, the Institutehas compiled a database on selected so-cioeconomic indicators for various gov-erning levels in the Philippines. Withthe use of the GIS’ color-coded maps,it is able to present these indicators(Box 1) in a manner that immediatelyshows how regions and provinces arefaring in terms of their socioeconomicstatus. Likewise, the maps provide aneasy way of comparing and analyzingthe socioeconomic performance ofthese units, thereby serving as inputsin determining the needs of the re-

gions and provincesand the responses re-quired to address saidneeds.

1From the handouts on presenta-tion skills distributed by GuthrieJensen Consultants.

Introducing the GIS:A new instrument

in analyzing and presentingsocioeconomic data

GIS-based presentations easily catch the interest and attention of the audi-ence because of the innovative features they offer.

Color guide toperformance

What makes thismethod of analysis andpresentation easily ap-preciated is its use ofcolor guides to showrelative levels of perfor-mance of regions/prov-inces vis-à-vis one an-other as shown in Box2. The color green, forinstance, is used to showa good performance asdetermined by a ratio/statistic that is equiva-


to page 10

Box 1. List of indicators and sources of basic data

1. Gross Regional Domestic Product (GRDP) GRDP 1997-1999 Economics and Social Statistics Office,Per Capita (1999) National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB)

2. Unemployment Rate (2000) Labor Force Survey, Income and Employment Statistics Division (IESD),Household Statistics Department, National Statistics Office (NSO)

3. Visible Underemployment Rate (2000) Labor Force Survey, IESD, Household Statistics Department, NSO4. Population (2000) Preliminary Results of the 2000 Census of Population and Housing, NSO5. Population Density (2000) Preliminary Results of the 2000 Census of Population and Housing, NSO6. Poverty Incidence (1997) Family Income and Expenditures Survey (FIES) 1997, NSO7. Magnitude of Poor Families (1997) FIES 1997, NSO8. Subsistence Incidence (1997) FIES 1997, NSO9. Proportion of Families

with Access to Electricity (1997) FIES 1997, NSO10.Proportion of Families

with Access to Potable Water (1997) FIES 1997, NSO11.Proportion of Families

with Access to Sanitary Toilet Facilities (1997) FIES 1997, NSO12.Proportion of Families

with Makeshift Housing Materials (1997) FIES 1997, NSO13. Infant Mortality Rate (1998) 1998 National Demographic Survey, NSO14.Prevalence of Malnutrition

among 0-5 yr old Children (1998) Food Consumption Survey, FNRI, DOST15. Functional Literacy (1994) 1994 Functional Literacy, Education and Mass Media Survey, DECS-NSO16. NEAT Performance (1998-1999) National Educational Training and Research Center (NETRC),

Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS)17.NSAT Performance (1997-1998) NETRC, DECS18.Cohort Survival Rate

Elementary Level (SY 1997-1998) Research and Statistics Division, Office of Planning Service, DECSSecondary Level (SY1997-1998) Research and Statistics Division, Office of Planning Service, DECS

19.Drop-Out Rate (1999-2000) Research and Statistics Division, Office of Planning Service, DECS20.Participation Rate (1999-2000) Research and Statistics Division, Office of Planning Service, DECS21.Paved Road Density(1999) Research Division, Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH)22.Total Road Density (1999) Research Division, DPWH23. Internal Revenue Allotment Per Capita (2000) Regional Operations and Coordination Services (ROCS),

Department of Budget and Management (DBM)24.Classification of Province by Income Class

(As of July 1, 1996) Department of Finance (DOF)25.Average Monthly Crime Rate (2000) Directorate for Investigation and Detective Management,

Philippine National Police (PNP)26.Soil Erosion Rate (1991) Crop Development and Soils Conservation Framework,

Agricultural Land Management and Evaluation Division (ALMED),Bureau of Soils and Water Management

27.Number of Persons Per Financial Institution (1999) Supervisory Reports and Studies Office,Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP)

28.Number of Persons Per Bank (1999) Supervisory Reports and Studies Office, BSP29.Number of Persons Per Commercial Bank (1999) Supervisory Reports and Studies Office, BSP30.Number of Persons Per Thrift Bank (1999) Supervisory Reports and Studies Office, BSP31.Number of Persons Per Rural Bank (1999) Supervisory Reports and Studies Office, BSP

Indicators Sources of basic data


Box 2. Color guide vis-à-vis performance

Note: Numbers in parentheses are national averages.* Total number of poor families** No figure for Philippines

1. GRDP Per Capita, 1999 (11,948) 20,136 and higher 11,949-20,135 7,971-11,948 0-7,9702. Unemployment Rate, 2000 (11.10) 0.01-6.70 6.80-11.10 11.20-19.50 19.60-27.903. Underemployment Rate, 2000 (10.20) 0.01-5.40 5.50-10.20 10.30-20.00 20.10-29.804. Population, 2000 (75.3 million)5. Population Density, 2000 (251.4)6. Poverty Incidence, 1997 (31.8) 0.01-16.95 16.96-31.80 31.81-50.50 50.51-100.007. Magnitude of Poor Families, 1997 (4,511,151)* 0-12,936 12,937-33,483 33,484-62,248 62,249-500,0008. Subsistence Incidence, 1997 (16.20) 0.01-8.25 8.26-16.20 16.21-31.95 31.96-100.009. Proportion of Families with Access

to Electricity, 1997 (70.36) 85.19-100.00 70.37-85.18 43.33-70.36 0.01-43.3210. Proportion of Families with Access

to Potable Water, 1997 (76.88) 88.25-100.00 76.89-88.24 43.41-76.88 0.01-43.4011. Proportion of Families with Access

to Sanitary Toilet Facilities, 1997 (76.32) 88.17-100.00 76.33-88.16 42.21-76.32 0.01-42.2012. Proportion of Families with Makeshift

Housing Materials, 1997 (1.52) 0.01-0.81 0.82-1.52 1.53-5.78 5.79-20.0013. Infant Mortality Rate, 1998 (36.00) 0-29.8 29.90-36.00 36.10-48.40 48.50-60.8014. Prevalence of Malnutrition

among 0-5 year-old Children, 1998 (9.20) 0.01-5.35 5.36-9.20 9.21-13.90 13.91-20.0015. Functional Literacy Rate, 1994 (83.79) 90.06-100.00 83.80-90.05 65.95-83.79 0.01-65.9416. NEAT Performance, 1998-1999 (50.8) 59.97-100.00 49.19-59.96 43.70-49.18 0.01-43.6917. NSAT Performance, 1997-1998 (46.12) 52.65-100.00 46.13-52.64 40.18-46.12 0.01-40.1718. Cohort Survival Rate, SY 1997-1998

Elementary Level (68.92) 84.53-200.00 68.93-84.52 48.04-68.92 0.01-48.03Secondary Level (71.36) 84.23-200.00 71.37-84.22 58.95-71.36 0.01-58.94

20. Drop-Out Rate, 1999-2000Elementary Level (9.38) 0-6.96 6.97-9.40 9.41-16.52 16.53-23.70Secondary Level (13.02) 0-10.83 10.84-13.00 13.01-18.27 18.28-100.00

21. Participation Rate, 1999-2000Elementary Level (97.0) 98.6-100.00 97.1-98.5 94.7-97.0 0-94.6Secondary Level (65.4) 72.9-100.00 65.5-72.8 48.7-65.4 0-48.6

22. Paved Road Density, 1999 (0.10) 1.614-5.000 0.101-1.613 0.053-0.100 0.01-0.05223. Total Road Density, 1999 (0.666) 5.126-10.000 0.666-5.125 0.418-0.665 0.01-0.41724. Internal Revenue Allotment

Per Capita, 2000 (1,556.2) 5,537.08-9,656.65 1,417.50-5,537.07 916.91-1,417.49 0.01-916.9025. Classification of Provinces

by Income Class, 1996** 1st 2nd-3rd 4th-5th 6th26. Average Monthly

Crime Rate, 2000 (9.51) 0.01-5.62 5.63-9.51 9.52-35.96 35.97-62.4127. Soil Erosion Rate, 1991 (76.24) 0.01-62.80 62.81-76.24 76.25-84.56 84.57-100.0028. Number of Persons

Per Financial Institution, 1999 (3,947.03) 0.01-2,814.76 2,814.77-3,947.03 3,947.04-10,667.96 10,667.97-17,388.8929. Number of Persons Per Bank, 1999 (9,864.98) 0.01-6880.50 6,880.51-9,864.98 9,864.99-29,830.22 29,830.23-49,795.4530. Number of Persons

Per Commercial Bank, 1999 (19,525.4) 0.01-12,424.29 12,424.30-19,525.40 19,525.41-64,537.70 64,537.71-109,550.0031. Number of Persons

Per Rural Bank, 1999 (42,679.32) 0.01-2,7762.45 2,7762.46-42,679.32 42,679.33-184,339.66 184,339.67-326,000.0032. Number of Persons

Per Thrift Bank, 1999 (50,932.39) 0.01-34,834.05 34,834.06-50,932.39 50,932.40-573,216.20 573,216.21-1,095,500.00

Indicators Dark green Green Light red Red


lent to or better than the national av-erage. The color red, on the otherhand, is used to denote a performancethat is worse than the national average.Moreover, a darker shade is used to in-dicate a relatively better (dark green)or relatively worse (dark red) perfor-mance of the regions/provinces con-cerned.

September 1999, the GIS-based socio-economic profile of the Philippines wasthen presented before policymakers inboth houses of Congress in January andFebruary 2000. At the Lower House,the presentation elicited a number ofappreciative responses from the con-gressmen in attendance who immedi-ately reacted to the socioeconomic situ-ations in their respective districts asshown in the color-coded mapping.Thereupon, the representatives sug-gested that more indicators could be

added in the analysis which would bevery helpful during budget delibera-tions of various government imple-menting agencies. The same reactionswere drawn from the technical staffs inthe Senate who likewise suggested theaddition of other variables that couldhelp in doing further analysis.

In response, the Institute’s re-source presentor and Senior Research

to page 12

Briefings for policymakersFirst introduced to the public

during the Institute’s Research Fair in

Figure 1. Poverty incidence, Philippines, 1997


figure 2

Fellow in charge of the GIS project, Dr.Celia Reyes, assured the legislators andtheir staffs that the Institute is currentlystill building up its database and there-fore welcomes suggestions on variablesthat may be added. At the same time,she expressed her optimism that theproject team will soon be able to alsoinclude disaggregated data for the vari-ous indicators at the municipal andbarangay levels.

Consultations at the local levelThe Institute also launched a se-

ries of regional visits to present beforevarious groups and validate the data forthe GIS-based socioeconomic indica-tors. The first in the series was held inBaguio City in early May 2000 in col-laboration with the Cordillera Admin-istrative Region (CAR) office of the Na-tional Economic and Development Au-thority (NEDA). Another one is beingplanned for the second half of the yearin Iloilo City in Region 6.

During the seminar-discussionheld with representatives of various

government agencies, local govern-ment units (LGUs), nongovernmentorganizations, research institutions andprivate business sector in the CAR, aGIS-based profile of the Philippines interms of selected socioeconomic indi-cators with special emphasis on the situ-ation in various provinces of the CAR,was presented. Some of the indicatorspresented were on poverty incidencefor the entire Philippines (Figure 1)and for the different provinces of theCAR (Figure 2) which showed, respec-tively, that the CAR (in red as a whole)

GIS...From page 11

to page 14

Figure 2. Poverty incidence, CAR, 1997



for seeds, foods and medical products.Moreover, given the biosafety issuesraised against genetically engineeredsubstances and plant crops, some ofwhich were “invented” by multinationalcorporations, some sectors claim thatthere is reason to doubt their sincerityin eliminating hunger, curing diseasesand improving public health.

Dr. Randy Hautea, Director of theInternational Service for the Acquisi-tion of Agri-biotech Applications-Southeast Asia Center (ISAAA SEAsiaCenter), pointed out, however, thatgovernments should see the advantagesin public and private sector collabora-tion. In particular, he cites the benefitsin sharing new and superior, often pro-prietary, technologies from the privatesector in developed countries to thepublic sector in developing countries.

He added that a key factor to thesuccess of industrial countries in agri-cultural research is their welcoming ofinvestments in research from both thepublic and private sectors. In contrast,developing countries have only reliedon public sector support, its collabora-tion with international organizations,and the support from national govern-ments. In recent years, however, par-ticularly from 1989 to 1997, the officialdevelopment assistance (ODA) to ag-riculture has declined by as much as50 percent and national governmentshave provided less support to agricul-ture in developing countries. There-upon, the traditional sources of sup-port for R&D had even diminished

ment. However, the task of image cor-rection must be undertaken mainly bythe private sector itself, especially themultinationals. To do this, it must betransparent in addressing public con-cerns in its research works.

Prospects of modern biotechnologyModern biotechnology, accord-

ing to Dr. Padolina, must not be viewedas a silver bullet that will provide themiracle solution to all the problems inPhilippine agriculture. Rather, it mustbe viewed as an array of tools that hasto be used in combination with othertime-tested techniques in agriculturalresearch. As a tool, it must thereforebe mainstreamed with the major direc-tions of the country’s research programand developed in harmony with themajor needs for agricultural develop-ment.

Thus, biotechnology has a spe-cific role to play in the following areas:

1. Varietal improvement. Successeshave been achieved in creating im-proved plant varieties through geneticmanipulation. For the Philippines,however, there is a need to draw up apriority list of Philippine crops that maybe improved using genetic manipula-tion. The country cannot simply affordto produce transgenic lines for all cropsas the costs will be prohibitive.

2. Diagnostics and prevention ofplant and animal diseases. There are atpresent new tools based on molecularbiology which are more sensitive andspecific in diagnosing certain diseasesand controlling certain pests. New,cheaper and more effective vacines foranimal diseases have been produceddue to progress in immunology.

3. Biomass and waste processing. Tomake use of agricultural wastes, bio-

In a related note, the need to cor-rect the public image of private sectoras an instrument of exploitation wasemphasized by Dr. Padolina. The pri-vate sector should be regarded as botha resource and a partner in develop-

to page 16

Three bright minds meet: Prof. Solita Monsod (University of the Philippines School of Econom-ics), Dr. William Padolina (International Rice Research Institute), and Dr. Eliseo Ponce (Bureauof Agricultural Research) discuss some salient points on agri-biotechnology during a break in theforum.


GIS...From page 12

Editor's...From page 1

The full texts of recentDevelopment Research News (DRN)

issues may be accessed at:http://www.pids.gov.ph/publica-

tions/index.html

ing problems may be made. And two isin doing the lead role of maintainingkey indicators/variables on a macrolevel while at the same time providinglinks to more specific indicators to bemaintained by other agencies and in-stitutions. For this to succeed, though,there is a need to set national standardsfor base maps. It was mentioned thatan association of agencies/institutionswas previously set up to look into thisconcern but such association has beeninactive for sometime now. The Insti-tute may perhaps help in the reactiva-tion of such association.

Finally, the visit to CAR also pro-vided an opportunity for the PIDS teamto touchbase with various LGUs andagencies that may have disaggregateddata in the municipal/barangay levelsfor certain variables like municipal in-frastructure. At the same time, meet-ings with regional offices of agencieslike the Department of Education, Cul-ture and Sports (DECS) enabled theInstitute to validate some of its provin-cial data regarding the National En-trance Admission Test (NEAT) and Na-tional Secondary Admission Test(NSAT) scores.

had a worse incidence of poverty (42.5percent) vis-à-vis the national averageof 31.8 percent and that the CAR prov-inces of Abra, Ifugao and MountainProvince were among the worst as theycompare badly with the national aver-age.

It was also learned during theopen forum that there were other gov-ernment agencies, research and edu-cational institutions, and LGUs in theregion which have launched GIS ini-tiatives in the past, albeit focusing ondifferent sets of variables such as physi-cal/natural resource characteristics,environmental indicators and others.

ders come into the scene as new technologiesand discoveries promising to bring aboutgreater agricultural productivity and productdiversity are made and presented. The recentbreakthroughs in modern agricultural biotech-nology field, specially in terms of geneticallymodified organisms (GMO) like corn requiringless pesticide, or virus-protected potato or to-mato with better processing properties, aresuch examples.

A number of countries have alreadyadopted these modern technologies and areusing their outputs. Still, though, there are sen-sitive issues attached to the use of modern bio-technology and its products that make otherswary of their application. Our main feature inthis DRN issue outlines some of them.

The article likewise looks into the Philip-pine situation and notes the fact that despitethe country’s being one of the first Asian na-tions to establish a biotechnology research anddevelopment (R&D) program, it has been quiteslow in harnessing the tools of biotechnology,especially in the area of varietal improvement.Why this is so often becomes a bone of con-tention among policymakers and researchers.Former Philippine Science and TechnologySecretary Dr. William Padolina laments the factthat "…technology has been used as a scape-goat for development deficiency.” That whensomething has not been achieved, the lack and/or inadequacy of technology is blamed.

We all know, of course, that there aremany other reasons but fingerpointing will notand never let us get anywhere. The importantthing is for all the sectors concerned to puttheir acts together and "whip into shape" ourS&T program. Hopefully, in the end, the prod-ucts of such program will not only be born outof sheer necessity but also out of vision andenlightened direction.

In later discussions with represen-tatives from these agencies concerned,a consensus was formed wherein theseagencies suggested that the Instituteshould actively involve itself in two ar-eas. One is in taking the lead in spon-soring and coordinating a nationwidegathering of all agencies and institu-tions with past and present GIS initia-tives and see what problems exist in theimplementation and maintenance ofGIS initiatives. In this regard, the iden-tification and designation of agencieswhich could be assigned to handle spe-cific tasks to address some of the exist-

Building the infrastructure forresearch

On the whole, what the GIS pro-vides is a more enhanced way of ana-lyzing and presenting data and infor-mation. It facilitates a grasp of the im-plications of figures and statistics andthe understanding of patterns and re-lationships through clear and simplecolor-coded visuals.

The Institute’s use of the GIS inestablishing an automated and onlinedatabase system for research is in linewith its mandate to assist in the func-tions of planning and policymaking. Inmany ways, it serves as one of theInstitute’s contributions to the build-ing up of the infrastructure for re-search in the Philippines. JPTL

Unfortunately, most of these ini-tiatives were not able to be sustaineddue to lack of funding or institutionalproblems. In particular, some initiativessimply stopped upon termination ofcertain projects which provided fund-ing for these initiatives. Moreover, mostof these GIS projects were not able todo overlays of indicators for the pur-pose of providing a broader picture ofthe situation in certain areas since thecoordinates being used by the variousprojects were not consistent with oneanother.

DRN


Opportunities...From page 6

Views...From page 7

a hope and, at the same time, some chal-lenges. These are in the improvement ofthe farmers’ yield and in the provision ofmore affordable and nutritious food cropsfor the poor. These developments, how-ever, should overcome the restrictive ef-fects of commercialization and monopolyso that the products of biotechnology re-search and development (R&D) can ben-efit all of mankind.

Farmers from the poor and under-developed countries do not only have todeal with comparatively higher cost of

Vol. XVIII No. 3 May - June 2000

Editorial Board

Dr. Mario B. LambertePresident

Mr. Mario C. FeranilActing Vice-President

and Director for Project Servicesand Development

Ms. Jennifer P.T. LigutonDirector for Research Information

Ms. Andrea S. AgcaoiliDirector for Operations and Finance

Atty. Roque A. SoriosoLegal Consultant

Staff

Jennifer P.T. LigutonEditor-in-Chief

Genna J. EstrabonIssue Editor

Sheila V. Siar, Liza P. SonicoJane C. Alcantara and Edwin S. Martin

Contributing Editors

Valentina V. Tolentinoand Rossana P. Cleofas

Exchange

Delia S. Romero, Galicano A. Godes,Necita Z. Aquino and Federico D. Ulzame

Circulation and Subscription

Genna J. EstrabonLayout and Design

means and inputs to production but arealso deprived of access to biotechnologi-cal tools that are already available to richerand more developed countries, institutionsand business sectors.

What should then be the role of thegovernment in biotechnology? It must takethe role of spreading the benefits of theproducts of R&D and should not stifle pri-vate initiatives. It must not allow mo-nopoly of biotechnology R&D by makingsure that the outputs of such initiatives areaccessible to more people. Thus, the gov-ernment should adopt policies that wouldallow access to the tools and products ofbiotechnology R&D. And with the ad-vancements in biotechnology, opportuni-ties for a better life may be created.

A number of people would like tochange society through the housing com-mittee in the senate. There are many rea-sons why families are being driven out oftheir farms. But one major reason is be-cause their little farms can no longer sup-port the family. Through R&D biotechnol-ogy, we can hopefully coax more food outof that piece of land so that they may notreplace the farm with the poverty of thecities.

Or is it the Department of Trade and In-dustry (DTI)?

jj With the little resource availableto us, the government must decide on thedirection of where that scarce resourceshould be placed. If it is food, then let itbe food. But we have to be properly struc-tured so as to determine priorities in theuse of our little resources.

are 10,000 other elements in the equa-tion which do not work. For example, wehave always been told that many Thais gettheir graduate degrees from UP Los Baños.They then use the same technology weteach them in their country and it worksfor them. Thus, it is clear that there aresome elements in the equation where wedo not invest in or where attention is not

properly put in. As such, no matter howhard we push for technology, it’s not justgoing to work. Technology is necessarybut it is not sufficient. Without credit andinfrastructure, among other things, noth-ing is going to happen.

jj In the case of agricultural re-search, at least when I was still at theDepartment of Science and Technology(DOST), only 10 percent of the funds foragricultural research was in my office. The90 percent was somewhere else. Becauseof this, it is not fair to blame "failure" aloneto the 10 percent within the control of theDOST. There is really a problem in gover-nance but we are optimistic that with thenew structure that is being put in place,we will be able to bring in the requiredconvergence and coordination.

jj Lastly, inspite of the Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan(MTPDP) and our department's resources,we did not know where to put the prior-ity. Why? Because the policy was to al-low the market forces to determine the pri-ority of our development. The governmentleft it to the private sector and the marketforces to determine the priority areas andselect niches and directions.

j j j j jj j j j j

(Continuation) Dr. Padolina:

(Continuation) Sen. Biazon:

DRN

DRN


technology could be used to transformand process them into food, feed, en-ergy, and chemicals, thereby addingvalue to these byproducts.

4. Biosecurity. It is necessary forthe government to ensure that allconsumables entering the country,whether fresh, frozen or processedfood products, are safe for human con-sumption. There are biotechnologytools that can enable the rapid, sensi-tive and accurate testing of these foodmaterials to determine their safety.

5. Product standards. With the es-tablishment of the World Trade Orga-nization (WTO) and the eliminationof trade barriers, the setting up of prod-uct standards becomes crucial for thePhilippines to promote and maintainthe competitiveness of its exportablegoods. The scientific basis for monitor-ing compliance with product standardsinvolves procedures for laboratoryanalysis to assess, with precision and ac-curacy, the quality and safety of theproducts. A number of highly accurateand precise analytical procedures arenow available and used in many coun-tries for assessing product quality andmonitoring compliance with globalstandards.


sector must be viewed as a partner ofthe public sector in national develop-ment. Collaborative undertakings be-tween government research institu-tions and private research companiescould prove beneficial. Of course,mechanisms should be put in place toensure that the public good will not besacrificed.

In addition, a deeper under-standing of intellectual propertyrights should be promoted among re-searchers to ensure that they are notviolating any laws regarding the useof any biotechnology material or pro-cess. Lack of information will leavethem in the dark in terms of their le-gal responsibilities, both to the ownerof the technology and to their fellowresearchers.

Lastly, there is a need to pro-mote an awareness and appreciation ofmodern biotechnology and its prod-ucts among the public. This will notonly hasten the adoption of new tech-nologies derived from biotechnologybut also encourage people participa-tion in technology development. SVS

ies particularly in scientific fields. Theyshould be encouraged to select, fortheir thesis, research problems that arehighly relevant to the needs and pri-orities of the agriculture sector.

Dr. Padolina also noted that com-petent legal and regulatory systemsmust be installed without delay. Thesewill not only assist the researchers in

their work but also enhance public con-fidence in biotechnology including ge-netic engineering.

The government should also beopen to private sector participation inbiotechnology research. The private

One of these requisites, as em-phasized by Dr. Padolina, is the criticalmass of highly trained human re-sources in the natural and social sci-ences that will undertake R&D activi-ties. To do this, a massive program mustbe established for bright, young Filipi-nos who want to pursue advanced stud-

Meanwhile, aside from increasedinvestments, certain requisites must bepresent to accelerate the biotechnologyR&D program in the country.

DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH NEWS is a bimonthly publication of the PHILIPPINE INSTITUTEFOR DEVELOPMENT STUDIES (PIDS). It highlights the findings and recommendations of PIDSresearch projects and important policy issues discussed during PIDS seminars.

PIDS is a nonstock, nonprofit government research institution engaged in long-term, policy-orientedresearch. This publication is part of the Institute's program to disseminate information to promote the useof research findings.

The views and opinions expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those ofthe Institute. Inquiries regarding any of the studies contained in this publication, or any of the PIDS papers,as well as suggestions or comments are welcome. Please address all correspondence and inquiries to:

Research Information StaffPhilippine Institute for Development Studies

Room 304, NEDA sa Makati Building,106 Amorsolo Street, Legaspi Village,

1229 Makati City, PhilippinesTelephone numbers 892-4059 and 893-5705

Telefax numbers (632) 893-9589 and 816-1091E-mail address: [email protected]

Reentered as second class mail at the Makati Central Post Office on April 27, 1987. Annual subscriptionrates are: P200.00 for local subscribers; and US$20.00 for foreign subscribers. All rates are inclusive ofmailing and handling costs. Prices may change without prior notice.

...There is a need to promotean awareness and apprecia-tion of modern biotechnol-ogy and its products amongthe public.

harnessing the tools of agri-biotechnology wwell as banana, makapuno and potato, thereby helping to...

Documents