re-envisioning local agricultural development - a guide for development managers

AGRICULTUREWriterGerry de AsisEditorChay Florentino-HofileñaProject ManagementAmihan PerezAteneo Center for Social Policy and Public Affairs (ACSPPA)Technical and Editorial TeamRene “Bong” Garrucho, LGSPMags Maglana, LGSPMyn Garcia, LGSPPatrick BelisarioCarmela Marie SantosAsian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC)Art Direction, Cover Design & Layout Jet HermidaPhotographyRyan Anson

A GUIDE FOR DEVELOPMENT MANAGERS

Re-envisioning Local Agricultural Development:

Re-envisioning Local Agricultural Development: A Guide forDevelopment ManagersService Delivery with Impact: Resource Books for Local Government

Copyright @2003 Philippines-Canada Local Government SupportProgram (LGSP)

All rights reserved

The Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program encouragesthe use, translation, adaptation and copying of this material for non-commercial use, with appropriate credit given to LGSP.

Although reasonable care has been taken in the preparation of this book,the publisher and/or contributor and/or editor can not accept anyliability for any consequence arising from the use thereof or from anyinformation contained herein.

ISBN 971-8597-12-3

Printed and bound in Manila, Philippines

Published by:

Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP) Unit 1507 Jollibee PlazaEmerald Ave., 1600 Pasig City, PhilippinesTel. Nos. (632) 637-3511 to 13www.lgsp.org.ph

Ateneo Center for Social Policy and Public Affairs (ACSPPA)ACSPPA, Fr. Arrupe Road, Social Development ComplexAteneo de Manila University, Loyola Heights, 1108 Quezon City

This project was undertaken with the financial support of theGovernment of Canada provided through the Canadian InternationalDevelopment Agency (CIDA).

A JOINT PROJECT OF

IMPLEMENTED BY

Department of the Interiorand Local Government (DILG)

National Economic andDevelopment Authority (NEDA)

Canadian InternationalDevelopment Agency

Federation of CanadianMunicipalities (FCM)

www.fcm.ca

Agriteam Canadawww.agriteam.ca

CONTENTS

FOREWORD

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

PREFACE

ACRONYMS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW OF THE AGRICULTURE SECTOR

Philippine Agriculture in Crisis: A Troubling Scenario

Hope for the Farmers: Gaining a New Perspective

Localizing Agricultural Development

CHAPTER 2: LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANDATES ON AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT

The 1991 Local Government Code: Opportunities from Devolution and Localization

Preparing for the 21st Century: The Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act (AFMA)

Monitoring Food Security Programs: Executive Order 86

CHAPTER 3: ISSUES, CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

On Agricultural Leadership and Governance

Management and Structural Problems

Other Devolution/Localization Concerns

Recommendations

CHAPTER 4: SMALL STEPS TO LARGE GAINS: GOOD PRACTICES IN LOCAL AGRICULTURAL

DEVELOPMENT

LGU Efforts in Agriculture Service Delivery

Civil Society and Private Sector Promotion of Sustainable Agriculture Strategies

i

iii

v

vii

xi

1

3

5

13

17

21

23

26

30

31

33

34

34

36

45

49

57

S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

CHAPTER 5: REFERENCES AND TOOLS

Recommended Sites for Study Tours

Contact Details for Organic, Herbal and Natural Products Development

Reference Materials and Practical Tools

ENDNOTES

ANNEXES

References to LGUs in the Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act of 1997 (RA 8435)

CONTENTS


65

67

69

71

77

79

79

The Department of the Interior and Local Government is pleased to acknowledge the latestpublication of the Philippines Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP), ServiceDelivery with Impact: Resource Books for Local Government; a series of books on eight (8)

service delivery areas, which include Shelter, Water and Sanitation, Health, Agriculture, Local EconomicDevelopment, Solid Waste Management, Watershed and Coastal Resource Management.

One of the biggest challenges in promoting responsive and efficient local governance is to be able tomeaningfully deliver quality public services to communities as mandated in the Local Government Code.Faced with continued high incidence of poverty, it is imperative to strengthen the role of LGUs in servicedelivery as they explore new approaches for improving their performance.

Strategies and mechanisms for effective service delivery must take into consideration issues of povertyreduction, people’s participation, the promotion of gender equality, environmental sustainability andeconomic and social equity for more long- term results. There is also a need to acquire knowledge, createnew structures, and undertake innovative programs that are more responsive to the needs of thecommunities and develop linkages and partnerships within and between communities as part of anintegrated approach to providing relevant and sustainable services to their constituencies.

Service Delivery with Impact: Resource Books for Local Government offer local government units andtheir partners easy-to-use, comprehensive resource material with which to take up this challenge. Byproviding LGUs with practical technologies, tested models and replicable exemplary practices, ServiceDelivery with Impact encourages LGUs to be innovative, proactive and creative in addressing the realproblems and issues in providing and enhancing services, taking into account increased communityparticipation and strategic private sector/civil society organizational partnerships. We hope that in usingthese resource books, LGUs will be better equipped with new ideas, tools and inspiration to make a

iS E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

FOREWORD

difference by expanding their knowledge and selection of replicable choices in delivering basic serviceswith increased impact.

The DILG, therefore, congratulates the Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP)for this milestone in its continuing efforts to promote efficient, responsive, transparent and accountablegovernance.

HON. JOSE D. LINA, JR.SecretaryDepartment of the Interior and Local Government

FOREWORD

ii S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

This publication is the result of the collaboration of the following individuals and institutions thatsupport the promotion of agricultural development by local governments in their localities.

The Local Government Support Program led by Alix Yule, Marion Maceda Villanueva and Rene "Bong"Garrucho for providing the necessary direction and support

Patrick Belisario and Carmela Marie Santos; the Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and RuralDevelopment (ANGOC), particularly Nathaniel Don Marquez and Lyn Galang; and the PhilippineDevelopment Assistance Programme, Inc. (PDAP), in particular Jerry Pacturan for undertaking theresearch, co-organizing the roundtable discussion and workshop, and preparing the technical reportswhich were the main references for this resource book; and for assisting in the review of the manuscript

Participants to the Roundtable Discussion on Agricultural Services held on August 8, 2002 in Davao Cityand the Workshop on Localizing Agricultural Development held on July 14, 2003 in Quezon City. Theirexpertise and the animated exchange of opinions helped shape the technical report on which thispublication is based:

Mayor Isoceles Otero of Sta. Josefa; Melanie Tolentino of Kalibo; Roberto Lazarito Sr. of Damulog;Rosita Macas of Compostela; and Anna Bella Amud of Nabunturan

Helmie Halim of DA-ARMM; Efraim Nicolas and Virginia Rivera of DA-ATI; Richard Rubis of ATI-RTC; andMarivic Natividad of NEDA XI

iiiS E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Bernadette Dailisan of DAP sa Mindanao; Elvira Hingpit of IPHC-DMSF; Mel Villacin of Quedan Kaisahan;Agustin Zerrudo of PDAP; Neil Abejuela and Alfonso Batucan Jr. of MKAVI; and Shen Maglinte of SIBAT

LGSP Managers Ma. Paz Christi Moneva and Abe de la Calzada; Program Officers Rizal Barandino andCecille Isubal

Jun Ayensa and Amie Agbayani for providing feedback that helped ensure that the resource book offersinformation that is practical and applicable to LGU needs and requirements

Amihan Perez and the Ateneo Center for Social Policy and Public Affairs for their efficient coordinationand management of the project

Chay Florentino-Hofileña for excellent editorial work

Gerry de Asis for effectively rendering the technical report into user-friendly material

Mags Z. Maglana for providing overall content supervision and coordination with the technical writers

Myn Garcia for providing technical and creative direction and overall supervision of the design, layoutand production

Sef Carandang, Russell Fariñas, Gigi Barazon and the rest of the LGSP administrative staff for providingsupport.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

iv S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

Service Delivery with Impact: Resource Books for Local Government are the product of a seriesof roundtable discussions, critical review of tested models and technologies, and case analysesof replicable exemplary practices in the Philippines conducted by the Philippines-Canada Local

Government Support Program (LGSP) in eight (8) service sectors that local government units (LGUs) aremandated to deliver. These include Shelter, Water and Sanitation, Health, Agriculture, Local EconomicDevelopment, Solid Waste Management, Watershed and Coastal Resource Management.

The devolution of powers as mandated in the Local Government Code has been a core pillar ofdecentralization in the Philippines. Yet despite opportunities for LGUs to make a meaningful differencein the lives of the people by maximizing these devolved powers, issues related to poverty persist andimprovements in effective and efficient service delivery remain a challenge.

With LGSP’s work in support of over 200 LGUs for the past several years came the recognition of the needto enhance capacities in service delivery, specifically to clarify the understanding and optimize the roleof local government units in providing improved services. This gap presented the motivation for LGSPto develop these resource books for LGUs.

Not a “how to manual,” Service Delivery with Impact features strategies and a myriad of provenapproaches designed to offer innovative ways for local governments to increase their capacities to betterdeliver quality services to their constituencies.

Each resource book focuses on highlighting the important areas of skills and knowledge that contributeto improved services. Service Delivery with Impact provides practical insights on how LGUs can applyguiding principles, tested and appropriate technology, and lessons learned from exemplary cases to theirorganization and in partnership with their communities.

vS E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

PREFACE

This series of resource books hopes to serve as a helpful and comprehensive reference to inspire andenable LGUs to significantly contribute to improving the quality of life of their constituency throughresponsive and efficient governance.

Philippines-Canada Local Government Support Program (LGSP)

PREFACE

vi S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ACRONYMS

AFCOM Agriculture and Fishery CommitteeAFMA Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization ActAIDF Alternative Indigenous Development Foundation, Inc.ANGOC Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development ARC Agrarian Reform CommunityBBP Better Banana ProjectCALF Comprehensive Agricultural Loan FundCARP Comprehensive Agrarian Reform ProgramCLOA Certificate of Land Ownership AwardsDA Department of AgricultureEO Executive OrderFX Farmer-Trainer/ExtensionistGDP Gross Domestic ProductGMA Ginintuang Masaganang AniGVA Gross Value AddedIDC Irrigation Development CouncilIRA Internal Revenue AllotmentIRR Implementing Rules and RegulationsLGC Local Government CodeLGU Local Government UnitMAO Municipal Agriculture Office/OfficerMARC Municipal Agrarian Reform CouncilMKAVI Mt. Kitanglad Agri-Ventures, Inc.MTADP Medium Term Agricultural Development PlanNFA National Food Authority

viiS E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

ACRONYMS

viii S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

NGO Non-Government OrganizationNIA National Irrigation AuthorityNIN National Information NetworkOFS On-Farm School SystemsPAKISAMA Pambansang Kilusan ng mga Samahang MagsasakaPAO Provincial Agriculture OfficePO People's OrganizationRA Republic ActSAFDZ Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries Development ZoneSEARCA Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in AgricultureSIBAT Sibol ng Agham at TeknolohiyaWTO World Trade Organization

PHILIPPINE AGRICULTURE IN CRISIS

Agriculture plays a significant role in the Philippine economy. With the direct involvement of about fortypercent (40%) of Filipino workers, it contributes an average of twenty percent (20%) to the GrossDomestic Product. This output comes mainly from agribusiness (70% of the total agricultural output).

The general trends in the last two decades present a dim picture of the agriculture sector. Significantdecrease in productivity, neglect of irrigated lands, high production costs, and low government supportto the sector, among other things, have led to the crisis situation of Philippine agriculture.

A ROUGH ROAD TO TRUDGE

The poor performance of agriculture brings to the fore some major problems in the sector that straddlethe issues of national control and relationships with local governments.

National leadership and management vis-à-vis agriculture have been too politicized (i.e., the practiceof rehashing and re-branding national programs), they have led to poor planning and sporadic,sometimes, unsystematic implementation of projects at the local level. Agricultural programs are notsustained and decision-making (e.g., allocation of funds to sites) is sometimes too discretionary.

The devolution of responsibility over agricultural services to the local government has not beensupported in terms of resources and technical assistance. Formal coordinating mechanisms fromregional to provincial levels are not in place, while local plans are not synchronized with budgetallocations.

ixS E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Enabling policies such as the Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act (AFMA) remain underutilizedas budget constraints limit its full implementation.

It is in this context that innovations serve as one of the keys to the development of agriculture at thelocal level.

RAYS OF HOPE

Two major policies define the roles of local governments in agricultural development: the 1991 LocalGovernment Code (RA 7160) and the 1997 Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act (RA 8435). Theformer identifies key entities as well as opportunities instrumental in spearheading local initiatives (e.g.,local special bodies, the local development plan) that have bearing and impact on agriculture, whilethe latter challenges LGUs to take the lead in agricultural development programs such as pilot-testing,management of irrigations, and capacity-building.

Some local government units have shown that political will and a serious commitment to agriculturaldevelopment in their communities can help overcome obstacles. Local leadership infused with multi-sectoral and participatory strategies, along with creativity, have helped address food security concerns(in Negros Occidental province), facilitated land distribution (in the municipality of Irosin, Sorsogon),and increased agricultural productivity (in Davao del Norte province).

Civil society and private organizations offer alternative models in agricultural development andsustainability. Some work on building farmers’capabilities through interventions that upgrade and boosttheir knowledge, attitude and skills (e.g., sustainable agricultural programs by SIBAT, MKAVI, andPAKISAMA). Others focus on agricultural infrastructure development (e.g., irrigation pump by AIDF).

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

x S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

OVERCOMING HURDLES

From the analysis of the agricultural sector and the cases in this Resource Book, some recommendationspoint LGUs to effective measures in agricultural development.

a) Political will, focus, and effective management of local agricultural development. The StrategicAgriculture and Fisheries Development Zone (SAFDZ) can be a point of convergence among variousstakeholders to optimize resources, facilities, and infrastructure-sharing.

b) Creative local accessing of resources and support programs. Windows of resources that provideassistance to local initiatives in the development and management of agriculture are numerous. LGUsare encouraged to continuously seek out and initiate avenues (e.g., summits and roadshows) to accessagricultural resources and support.

c) Development of LGU agricultural programs and services. Local agricultural extension services canbe beefed up by partnering with civil society groups and educational institutions. In this manner,innovations in service delivery, technological development, and infrastructure building can befacilitated.

d) Effective coordination and institutional arrangements between central agencies and localoffices. Coordinative and integrative strategies and activities (e.g., regular meetings, manual ofprocedure) among the different government entities (national and local) involved in the sector areimportant in order to unify programs and projects and ensure their smooth implementation.

xiS E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

e) Being attuned to the market. National agencies must assist agricultural communities in theirefforts to participate in the mainstream markets, international trade and export included.

These measures, however, are premised on a fundamental shift in the mindset of those who manageagriculture and provide oversight support to it. For agriculture to truly develop at the local level, theimpetus for it must primarily spring from local vision, capabilities and resources, and the benefits fromit must profit local communities. Central institutions play only a supporting and enabling role. Theresponsibility to manage local agriculture has already been devolved to local governments by the law.It is high time that resources go with the mandate.

More importantly, this shift is premised on a broader and, perhaps, more relevant understanding of thenature of local agricultural development. Agricultural development cannot but relate to povertyreduction, other social development ends, and environmental protection; and hence needs to encompassthe enhancement of social relationships and structures, socio-economic progress, and environmentaldevelopment. Local agricultural development, therefore, refers to the total progress of agriculturalsystems, relationships, and structures that prioritize the development of local communities andstakeholders.

This Resource Book can be a useful guide for local leaders in spearheading agricultural development.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

xii S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

SETTING THE TEMPO

Local leaders manage many things—from local political dynamics to the local bureaucracy, fromformulating the local development plan and preparing the local budget to addressing the demands oflocal constituents.

Innovative management is needed. Many local executives have handled local agricultural problemsituations with political will and have applied inventive management and leadership. They haveinspired the mobilization of resources and other stakeholders. All these show that win-win situationscan be created in different ways.

In this Resource Book, some local chief executives showcase ways of innovatively managing agriculturaldevelopment. In addressing their own agricultural concerns such as food scarcity and land distribution,they mapped out various strategies. And deliver, they did.

EXPANDING THE SCOPE

Agricultural development is not just about farming and taking care of the land. Chapter 1 provides anoverview of the realities in agriculture – its performance and the factors that account for it, and thechallenges that the sector faces. While many of the factors and challenges are national and global innature, this Resource Book tackles the factors that lead to the poor and unsystematic involvement oflocal governments in attempts to modernize agriculture.

A proposed framework for developing agriculture at the local level is then outlined – laying down anunderstanding of LAD and suggesting five (5) key steps that address the disconnect between national

1S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

INTRODUCTION

and local initiatives, and between local government and other stakeholder efforts. The Resource Bookalso outlines the continuum of different agricultural systems that were examined based on sustainability.

Chapter 2 discusses the essentials of the policy environment that support LGU leadership andinnovation in local agricultural development and management.

Chapter 3 explores the issues around leadership and governance, management, AFMA implementation,and devolution as they concern agricultural development locally. The recommendations are focusedon adjustments that can be made at the local level with the support of other stakeholders such as civilsociety organizations, the private sector and government agencies. It suggests necessary shifts in theinvolvement of local stakeholders, in the ways plans are prepared, in the perspectives around productivity,farm management and agri-entrepreneurship, and in the delivery of agricultural services. The chapteralso explores the burgeoning domestic and international market for organic and herbal produce.

Chapter 4 presents examples of good practices that showcase LGU efforts in agricultural servicedelivery, along with civil society and private sector efforts to promote sustainable agriculture strategies.These practices demonstrate diverse and effective strategies in agricultural development planning,resource mobilization, institutional arrangements, and the promotion of entrepreneurship.

Chapter 5 identifies references and tools that local governments and support institutions could use tostrengthen LGU abilities in agricultural development. Contact details for sites that could be visited forstudy tours are also provided, as are the contact information for agencies and institutions that couldassist local communities in organic, herbal, and natural products development.

Specific references to LGUs as contained in the AFMA are outlined in the Annex.

INTRODUCTION

2 S E R V I C E D E L I V E R Y W I T H I M P A C T: R E S O U R C E B O O K S F O R L O C A L G O V E R N M E N T

OVERVIEW OF THE AGRICULTURESECTOR

CHAPTER 1


CHAPTER 1❙ Philippine Agriculture in Crisis: A Troubling Scenario

◗ SIGNIFICANT ROLE OF AGRICULTURE IN NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

In the Philippine economy, agriculture contributes seventeen percent (17%) to about twentypercent (20%) to the Gross Domestic Product1. Around seventy percent (70%) of this output comesfrom the agribusiness industry and at least twenty-one percent (21%) from primary agriculture andfisheries.

At least forty percent (40%) of working Filipinos are in the agriculture/agribusiness sector.

In the 1970s, the Philippines had one of the highest growth rates in the region in terms ofagricultural productivity (4.9 percent average annual growth in Gross Value Added or GVA). ManyFilipinos in the countryside benefited from this as more than 50 percent of the populationdepended on agriculture for their subsistence.2

◗ PROFILE OF AGRICULTURAL CROPS

Palay remains the leading crop coming mainly from the rice granaries of the country – Central Luzon,Cagayan Valley, and the Western Visayas. These areas contribute at least 40 percent of the riceproduction. Mindanao and the Ilocos regions are potential major rice producers once full irrigationis established.

OVERVIEW OF THE AGRICULTURE SECTOR

6

Corn is the second major agricultural produce of the country. However, contribution of palay andcorn to the agricultural GDP is declining, while livestock and poultry are on the rise.

Table 1: Percentage contribution of Agriculture, Fishery, and Forestry to GDP, 1995-1997

1 LOCAL AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT


Industry 1995 1996 1997

1. Agricultural Crops 21.31 20.93 20.56

Agricultural Crops 17.02 16.89 16.72

Palay 3.51 3.56 3.37

Corn 1.23 1.17 1.16

Coconut 0.92 0.81 0.82

Sugarcane 0.49 0.57 0.54

Banana 0.35 0.35 0.36

Other Crops 5.12 4.91 4.95

Livestock 2.47 2.49 2.49

Poultry 2.00 2.11 2.14

Agri. Act. And services 0.93 0.92 0.89

2. Forestry 0.22 0.22 0.22

Agri., Fishery & Forestry 21.53 21.15 20.78

Source of Data: National Statistical Coordination Board (NCSB) in Adriano (1999).

7

◗ DECLINING TRENDS IN AGRICULTURE

But the agriculture sector is in a state of crisis.

Agricultural growth plummeted from a high growth rate of 4.6 percent for the period 1965-1980to a depressing 1.4 percent growth rate for the period 1980-1997.Agricultural GVA, which is a measure of productivity, dipped to 0.4 percent in the last decade(1990-1999).

Table 2: Growth in Agricultural GVA and Agricultural Exports, Some Asian Countries)

OVERVIEW OF THE AGRICULTURE SECTOR 1


1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-1999

Agri GVA Agri Exports Agri GVA Agri Exports Agri GVA Agri Exports*

Philippines 4.9 14.6 1.0 -4.6 0.4 3.4

Indonesia 2.0 20.0 4.9 4.7 1.6 8.4

Malaysia 6.5 19.3 3.8 3.1 0.5 7.5

Thailand 4.2 21.2 3.9 4.9 -2.4 4.2

China 2.7 13.1 5.6 2.7 2.2 1.6

India 1.8 14.6 3.0 0.8 3.7 8.5

Pakistan 3.0 13.8 4.3 3.2 3.4 1.4

Nepal 0.8 -2.9 2.7 0.7 2.0 2.1

Bangladesh 1.4 2.6 1.9 -1.5 3.2 -0.5

*Source: ADB Outlook, various years (unless otherwise indicated)*Using regression, source of basic data: FAO

Source: Tolentino, B., The Unpopular Imperatives. 2002 Annual Meeting, Philippine Economics Society, 14 March 2002

8

For the past ten years, paddy yields of neighboring countries outshone Philippine productionoutputs which has averaged only 2.9 tons per hectare. Other neighboring countries fare better(Vietnam = 3.6 tons/ha.; Korea = 6.1 tons/ha.; Japan = 6.1 tons/ha.).Export earnings are constantly declining with an annual average negative growth rate of 3.01percent over the last five years. In 2001, export earnings from agricultural crops were placed atUS$1.30 billion, 34.6 percent below the previous year’s receipts. 3

The Philippines continues to import basic food staples. Rice imports in the last five yearsranged from 722.40 thousand metric tons in 1997 to 808.23 thousand metric tons in 2001. 4

Local supply of rice is dwindling due to production shortfall and artificial shortage. Low andstagnant productivity can be attributed partly to the limited production area presently available.Less than a million hectares of irrigated rice lands are available. During the growth years ofPhilippine agriculture in 1976-1981, the Philippines was among the best agriculture performersin Asia. Rice production and agricultural performance were at their peak.

- GVA was growing at a rate of 4.9 percent, while China had 2.7 percent, and Bangladesh,1.4 percent.

- Agricultural exports were also at a high 24.6 percent, compared to the 13.1 percent of Chinaand the 2.6 percent of Bangladesh.

In 1981, things began to change for the worse. Agricultural productivity slipped from a high of4.9 percent to a measly 0.4 percent. China’s agricultural productivity stood at 2.2 percent,while Bangladesh stood at 3.2 percent. Agricultural exports also began to decline from agrowth rate of 14.6 percent in 1980 to a depressing –4.6 percent in 1990, while it went up to 3.4percent in 1999, it has not gone up to its previous level. The situation is aggravated by the barrage of agricultural imports. Rice imports now accountfor 8.09 percent of the total supply of the country. In the past decades, rice imports averagedonly 1.09 percent of the supply.



9

◗ EFFECTS OF DOWNTREND IN AGRICULTURE

The declining trend in agriculture significantly hit the rural, agricultural sector which comprises atleast two-thirds of the population. Ironically, the sector that contributes extensively to thePhilippine economy is besieged by problems of food security and poverty.

One-fourth of agricultural workers are underemployed. Employment in agriculture, forecasted bygovernment economists to increase by at least 500,000 jobs annually from the supposed openingup of new export markets, barely increased from 10.18 million in 2000 to 10.8 million in 2001. 5

A rural household spends some fifty to sixty percent of its income on food. Sometimes within a year,rice farmers need to purchase rice for their consumption.

This deplorable situation is compounded by the expensive cost of rice in the country. Comparedwith Thailand and Vietnam, the price of rice in the Philippines is at least double.

◗ SOME REASONS BEHIND THE DOWNTREND

Shift in government priority investments. In the 1970s, irrigation and rural facilities were highin public agricultural investments. This changed in the 1980s to the 1990s as public investment focusin agriculture tipped toward the National Food Authority’s price support program and paymentsfor land acquisition under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). The neglect of thebasics in terms of agricultural research and development, irrigation, information, and educationled to a failure to secure sources of growth in productivity and income diversification in rural areas.The shift in government measures also needs to be understood within the larger context of poorgovernance in agriculture (i.e., the lack of accountability, coordination, and program focus inpublic spending for agriculture and natural resource.)6



10

Failing Agricultural Resource Base. There is a limited rice production area— irrigated rice landscover only 600,000 to 800,000 hectares (Thailand has 3 million hectares; Vietnam has 6 million).Existing irrigated lands were neglected—no major investments in irrigation were made in the past15 years. Past government administrations failed to provide irrigation facilities for potentiallyirrigable areas, such as those in Mindanao. Land conversion of agricultural lands to non-agriculturaluse (e.g., residential), particularly in Regions II and IV, has increased over the years.

High Production Costs and Prices of Agricultural Commodities. High production costs directlyaffect prices of agricultural commodities, to the detriment of the farmers and agricultural workers.Chances are any increase in the production cost (e.g., high maintenance of irrigation, expensivefertilizers, etc.) will lead to a decrease in wages and earnings of farmers. Consequently, this will alsolead to an increase in the prices of agricultural products such as rice, the main commodityconsumed by farmers.

In 2001, it was more expensive for a typical Filipino farmer to produce rice vis-à-vis his earnings fromselling rice. The average production cost per kilo was P7.60, while the buying price went as low asP5.50 (in the Bicol region, during the wet season).

Only 65,000 rice farmers benefit from the high buying price (P9.00) of the National FoodAuthority. Around 3 million rice farmers are still at the mercy of price controls set by traders andthe rice cartel.During the rice crisis of 1995-1997, the domestic wholesale price per kilogram of rice soared toas high as P32.00. Thai rice was sold at P7.00 while Vietnamese rice was sold at P6.00. It was ironicthen that prices were at that level when the rice production output of the Philippines (3 metrictons of palay per hectare) was higher than that of Thailand’s 2.7 metric tons and Vietnam’s 2 metrictons.



11

Rice production in the Philippines is more costly compared to some neighboring countries.

In 1999, the cost of paddy production in the Philippines (P34,701) was 50 percent more thanthe cost in Thailand, Vietnam, and Indonesia.Minus the labor cost, paddy production expenses in the Philippines were pegged at P15,124.In Indonesia, this was pegged at P7,731. In Vietnam, it was P9,695.

From the point of view of the private sector, it is costly to “do business” in the rural areas. There isserious under-investment in rural infrastructure, especially in roads and power. The policies andregulations governing private sector investment are deemed archaic and the peace and ordersituation remains problematic.7

Detrimental Effect of Price Subsidy. Price subsidy through the NFA is a “bad investment”strategyfor the government because of the ‘buying high’ but ‘selling low’ scheme, which leads to anaverage loss of P7.00-P8.00 per kilogram of rice. Furthermore, the NFA strategy of buying only frombulk suppliers favored traders more. Likewise, the release of imported rice to the open market putsmall farmers at a disadvantage.

There is a need to review and reassess the existing development and management of Philippineagriculture which has been characterized as centralized.

◗ CENTRALIZED APPROACH TO AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT

National government agricultural development initiatives have been sectoral, fragmented, andcommodity-oriented.

1970s-early 1980s: The Marcos government at the start gained access to foreign loans which gavecountryside development a boost. Hence, the Philippines experienced one of the highest agriculturalgrowth rates in the region during this period. This was short-lived, however, as the inability of the



12

state to efficiently utilize and service such loans became evident during the early 1980s. Limitedforeign capital led to a halt in the building of farm-to-market roads, irrigation facilities, and othersupport services.

1986-1992: Under the Aquino administration, agricultural decline continued, perhaps due tothe administration’s preoccupation with asserting its legitimacy and defending democratic gains.Some interventions were introduced (such as the rural credit system via the ComprehensiveAgricultural Loan Fund or CALF), while rice and corn production were also enhanced.

1992-1997: For the Ramos government, agricultural programs were guided by the Medium-TermAgricultural Development Plan (MTADP). Some of its banner programs included grain productionenhancement, key commercial crops development, and the Gintong Ani program, which focusedon providing credit to farmers. Food security became a priority concern. The debilitating effectsof the El Niño phenomenon, however, proved to be a major obstacle in agricultural development.

1997-2001: The short-lived Estrada administration included in its Ten Point Agenda thefollowing agricultural program strategies—revitalization of productivity programs, quick responseto calamity/disaster situations, infrastructure development such as irrigation, research anddevelopment, extension and training, and rural financing.

2001 to the present: The Macapagal-Arroyo government pursues its Ginintuang MasaganangAni programs which tackle the problems of food security and poverty alleviation. Self-sufficiencyin agricultural development is implemented through four measures: modernized productivity incorn and other feed crops, diversification, livestock enterprise development, and recovery and growthof the fisheries sector.

Despite efforts in devolution, local government units are still largely considered the mereextension/replica of the national government and its programs. Most LGUs still rely on thenational government in the development and implementation of agricultural programs.



13

Insufficient fund transfer – Even after the devolution of agricultural services to local governments,80 percent of national agricultural funds still go to central offices, while only 8 percent go to localgovernment units.Incongruent national and local plans – Programs of the Department of Agriculture rarelycapture LGU priorities. Plans are also not as clearly integrated.

Evidently, the national government has thus far failed to secure the necessary reforms in agriculturaldevelopment. Fr. Francis Lucas of the Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and RuralDevelopment (ANGOC) believes that the changes should pay attention to the following: 8

Needs of Filipino citizens, majority of whom are poor Alleviation of the poor majority’s sufferingFor the farmers, their needs as persons rather than merely the productivity of their farms Food security and food self-sufficiency as the main ticket to survival of a nation Assuring equity instead of national economic growth that is beneficial to and controlled by afew at the expense of the majority

To many observers, these changes have a higher chance of taking place if the impetus fordeveloping agriculture were happening at the local, rather than at the national and highly-centralized level.

❙ Hope for the Farmers: Gaining a New Perspective

◗ CHANGING AGRICULTURAL LANDSCAPE

Rapid urbanization and industrialization, as well as asset reform (land distribution through CARP)in the countryside led to the break up of large farm estates (i.e., the haciendas) into small farmlands.



14

The nature of technology, the goods to be produced, and the structure of the agricultural sectormust keep up with this development.

The small farms agricultural model, likened to those of the modern European agricultural models,may be adopted in the country, provided critical measures are promoted and practiced. Allstakeholders must adjust to this reality. Farmers must be equipped with appropriate knowledgeand skills, policies must be realigned, assets and infrastructure support must be adjusted.

Farmers must also face the realities of globalization. With the inclusion of the Philippines in the WorldTrade Organization, international policies on market liberalization and deregulation, as well as tradeliberalization in the agriculture sector will have implications on Filipino farmers.

Globalization is projected to lead to greater market access and thus increase exports especially toJapan, the US, and Europe. Higher commodity prices will lead to increased export earnings. Thedemand to streamline processes to become more competitive is expected to cause more efficientresource allocation within agriculture, as well as across sectors. Government will need to focus onmeaningful and lasting support for the farm sector. There would be higher growth in productionand employment generation and benefits to consumers of processed food that are relying ontraditionally highly-protected sectors (e.g., sugar and corn)

Attractive and upbeat the above projections may be, globalization also poses threats and challengesto agriculture. For instance, there could be job displacements in the short-term. The dismantlingof special trade arrangements that traditionally have been advantageous to some crops like sugarcould shake up farmers and farm workers who are dependent on that sector and are mostvulnerable to any changes. Less developed countries like the Philippines are pressured to relaxquantitative restrictions (QRs) such as import quotas and tariffs. Local markets are thus flooded withcheap agricultural imports such as rice and poultry products. Finally, the global playing field is hardlylevel, if one were to take it from the many charges of “unfair trade” practices that have beenleveled against developed countries.



15

Not surprisingly, debates continue to rage over the advantages and disadvantages of participatingin the WTO.

Unless the current directions of national policy—full participation in the global order—is changed,the question that must be addressed is how best to prepare the agriculture sector for theforeseeable threats and challenges and how to position the sector so it could take advantage ofthe benefits.

Dr. Arsenio Balisacan of the Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research inAgriculture (SEARCA), believes that the rural poor need to be enabled through policy, investment,and institutional reforms. These changes will enhance the efficiency of domestic markets and provideimproved access to technology, infrastructure, and education.

Dr. Balisacan also admits that in successful cases of rural development and poverty reduction, “thekey driver to reforms has been neither globalization nor agricultural policy in developed countries.Rather, it is, by and large, the internal realization that reforms are for the benefit of the country andits citizens.”9

For Fr. Lucas of ANGOC, global competition for agriculture might mean the extinction of small farmersand farming because they need to have the scale to compete. Furthermore, farming suffers fromthe perception that it is an aging profession.

In light of the effects of globalization on agriculture, there needs to be a three-way devolutioninvolving key players: devolution from national to local governments, from the state to civil societyand from state to markets.10

Devolving power and responsibility from national government to local areas means furtherstrengthening local governments and preparing them for the impact of globalization on agriculture.The decentralization process picked up with the passage of the Local Government Code in 1991



16

and local government entities are still learning the ropes. The national government needs toinvest more on and emphasize the improvement of the devolution infrastructure. Even devolutionfrom state to civil society entails encouraging participation in agricultural programs and governance.

Owing to historical experience and to prevent the further concentration of wealth in large businessinterests, devolution from the state to markets needs to address the following questions: (1) Canbusiness provide agricultural services to farmers without taking over ownership of the farm andthe farmers themselves? (2) How can multinational and transnational corporations be madeaccountable for their role in agricultural development?

Business interests that have traditionally been viewed as profit-oriented are perceived as goingagainst the equity and poverty-alleviation bias of civil society. Local government units are viewedas capable of balancing the interests of these other major players. In many cases, it is perceived thatthe shifts in power, participation, and resources described above will have more meaning and will“stick” at the local level.

◗ LOCALIZATION OF AGRICULTURAL RESPONSIBILITIES

The Local Government Code of 1991 (RA 7160) set the current pace of devolution. In the agriculturesector, personnel, including extension workers, were devolved to the local governments. Accessto funds for local development was also improved through an increase in the Internal RevenueAllotment (IRA) share of LGUs.

Another major agricultural policy landmark is the Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act (AFMAor RA 8435) which strengthened the critical role of LGUs in agricultural production and foodsecurity. Local agricultural and fisheries modernization plans were supposed to become theprimary bases for developing a national agricultural and fisheries modernization plan.

Executive Order (EO) 86 paved the way for the creation of Provincial Food Security Councils, whichare tasked to monitor the implementation of provincial food security programs.



17

❙ Localizing Agricultural Development

◗ THE VISION OF LOCAL AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT

From the 1970s to the present, agricultural development has been perceived to be synonymousto agricultural growth. While the latter is a main component of agricultural development, it haslimited scope as it primarily focuses on productivity, performance and agricultural outputs.National government programs for agriculture, whether consciously or otherwise, tended toemphasize such parameters.

Despite the reference to, and recognition of, local agricultural development (LAD), there seems tobe little understanding and consensus among stakeholders over its “real”meaning. There is a needto articulate a vision that would unite the many stakeholders and be the basis for interventions,initiatives, and investments in the sector.

Local Government Perspective. A survey undertaken by LGSP, ANGOC and the PhilippineDevelopment Assistance Programme (PDAP) in July 2003 indicates that, on the one hand,agricultural workers of local government units associated local agricultural development withincreased productivity. On the other hand, they also link it to sustainable agricultural practices. Rathertelling is the low ranking given to improved agri-extension and support facilities, along with themobilization of other stakeholders.



18

Private Sector Perspective. From a private sector point of view, as represented by the NationalAgribusiness Development Center, agricultural development must be based on enterprise. Itshould be economically profitable and sustainable for farmers.



Table 3: Vision for Local Agricultural Development table in LAD Discussion Paper)

What is your vision of local agriculture development Count* Percent** (n=3)

1. Productivity 10 27.0%

2. Sustainable Agriculture 10 27.0%

3. Household food sufficiency and food security 9 24.3%

4. Higher income for households 6 16.2%

5. Dependent on DA’s vision 5 13.5%

6. Additional jobs and livelihood for farmers 4 10.8%

7. Marketing and global competitiveness 4 10.8%

8. Agro-industrialization 4 10.8%

9. community-based agriculture 2 5.4%

10. Improvement of farming system and diversification 2 5.4%

11. Infrastructure development 2 5.4%

12. Organic farming 2 5.4%

13. Improved agri-extension and support facilitites 1 2.7%

14. Mobilization of other stakeholders 1 2.7%

*Number of times vision was cited by respondents* Count over total number of respondents (37)

19

Non-Government Organization Perspective. Civil society organizations, such as the PDAP,highlight the empowering capability of agricultural development. Farmers should work not merelyto get by, but to develop the capacity to secure livelihood, and eventually work towards ruralenterprise-based growth levels.

Given these considerations, a broader and, perhaps, more relevant definition of Local AgriculturalDevelopment should include enhanced social relationships and structures, socio-economicprogress, and environmental development. Agricultural development, therefore, refers to the totalprogress of the agricultural systems, relationships, and structures that prioritize development ofthe locale, that is, development that benefits the local community and local agricultural resources.

◗ LOCAL AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

Local agricultural development requires a shifting of paradigms and mindsets. Given the decadesof centralized planning and implementation, LGUs and other local stakeholders must view localagricultural development in terms of their own local realities—relationships, structures, resources,socio-cultural realities, requirements, and capacities.

Local agricultural development entails a bottom-up approach to progress, in contrast to the top-down strategies of the national government. Inherent in this approach is an emphasis on processas against output. Consultations, dialogues, and consensus-building are used in the process.

In short, it is not only the local government that is involved in local agricultural development. Theprocess is defined, most probably, by a collaborative arrangement among the LGU, civil society,farmers and business sectors. The leadership and facilitating role of the LGU is also recognized inthis arrangement.

5


20

In practice, the shifts in paradigm will mean concrete changes in planning and managing localagricultural development. Mobilization of local stakeholders and their active participation in theprocess will be crucial. The survival-oriented mentality of most farmers must give way to a focuson food security/sufficiency and to increased sensitivity to market demands, along with a willingnessto participate in the market. Innovations in farm management, extension services, research anddevelopment, and farmer education also need to take place.

One of the goals of local agricultural development is to achieve sustainability. Shifts in technologyand practices must also occur from the conventional agricultural practices (e.g., mono-cropping,high reliance on chemical inputs) to a more ecologically-friendly yet high-yielding agriculturalmethodologies. (See continuum of Agricultural Practices below)



Figure 1. Agricultural Practices Sustainability Continuum

Low Sustainability Organic / Biological / RegenerativeHigh

Sustainability

Conventional(monoculture,chemical inputs)

Minimumtillage, fertilizerplace-ments,etc.

Low InputSustainableAgriculture(LISA)

Low ExternalInputSustainableAgriculture(LEISA)

Biodynamic Permaculture NatureFarming

NaturalFarming

External solutionsto internalproblems,detachment,compensatorycontrol,unawareness,disempowerment

Higherefficiency ofapplied inputs

Substitution ofbenign inputs

Benigndesign andmanagement

Internal solutions to internal problems, integration, balance,awareness, responsive to feedback, complex, indirect, long-term, bio-ecological, global approaches to global problems,empowerment

GOAL

LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANDATES ONAGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 2


CHAPTER 2Through the decades, local government units have been encouraged to take on increasinglymore active roles in agricultural development. Two major recent national policies have seen to that—the 1991 Local Government Code and the 1997 Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act. Asearly as 1987, when Executive Order 116 further decentralized the Department of Agriculture throughthe creation of the Provincial/Municipal Agricultural Offices, policy framework, public investmentsand support services were already being pushed for more localized, domestic, and export-orientedagri-business enterprises.

❙ The 1991 Local Government Code:Opportunities from Devolution andLocalization

The 1991 Local Government Code revolutionized the concept of local governance in the country.Even though they had the mandate to handle local affairs, local government officials wereconsidered before by many as mere local politicians and at best, as extensions of the nationalgovernment. With the new Local Government Code, however, devolved powers and decentralizedfunctions and responsibilities made these officials more responsible for local development. Localmanagement and development of agriculture is one of the areas that got devolved to localgovernments.

◗ SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE LGUS

Under Section 17 of the Code, (a) LGUs shall endeavor to be self-reliant and shall continueexercising the powers and discharging the duties and functions currently vested upon them.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANDATES ON AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT

24

They shall also discharge the duties and responsibilities of the national agencies and officesdevolved to them.

(b) Such basic services and facilities include, but are not limited to, the following:

(1) For a Barangay:

(i) Agricultural support services which include planting materials, distribution system, andoperation of farm produce collection and buying stations;

(2) For a Municipality:

(i) Extension and on-site research services and facilities related to agriculture and fisheryactivities which include dispersal of livestock and poultry, fingerlings, and other seedlingmaterials for aquaculture; palay, corn, and vegetable seed farms; medicinal plant gardens;fruit tree, coconut, and other kinds of seedling nurseries; demonstration farms; qualitycontrol of copra and improvement and development of local distribution channels,preferably through cooperatives; inter-barangay irrigation system; water and soil resourceutilization and conservation projects; and enforcement of fishery laws in municipal watersincluding the conservation of mangroves;

(viii) Infrastructure facilities intended primarily to service the needs of the residents of themunicipality and which are funded out of municipal funds including, but not limited to,municipal…, communal irrigation, small water impounding projects and other similarprojects;



25

(3) For a Province:

(i) Agricultural extension and on-site research services and facilities which include theprevention and control of plant and animal pests and diseases; dairy farms, livestockmarkets, animal breeding stations, and artificial insemination centers; and assistance in theorganization of farmers' and fishermen's cooperatives and other collective organizations,as well as the transfer of appropriate technology;

(vii) Infrastructure facilities intended to service the needs of the residents of the province andwhich are funded out of provincial funds including, but not limited to, provincial …, andirrigation systems;… and similar facilities;

(4) For a City:

All the services and facilities of the municipality and province…

◗ RESOURCE ALLOCATION AND FISCAL MANAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES

Aside from these direct mandates for agricultural management, there are other opportunities forlocal government officials to flex their powers and resources in pursuit of agricultural development.

They are given more leeway in terms of resource allocation and mobilization.

Local government units are granted the power to raise local taxes and revenues from sand, graveland quarry resources, and amusement to be able to source their own funds. Also, there is a provision on the increase in the share of LGUs from the Internal RevenueAllotment (IRA) from 20 percent to at least 40 percent.Moreover, there are mandatory and optional positions for local officials in each level of localgovernment. Local chief executives have the power to appoint local personnel.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANDATES ON AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT 2


26

◗ MOBILIZATION OF OTHER STAKEHOLDERS

The private sector and civil society, through local people’s organizations, non-governmentorganizations, cause-oriented groups, and other organizations are now given greater opportunityto participate in local decision-making and in the delivery of services. Partnerships, joint ventures,and working alliances are strongly encouraged.

In concrete terms, the avenues for partnerships include the following:

Allocation of seats to local bodies. Non-government organizations (NGOs) are allocated at leastone-fourth of the seats in the Local Development Council, the primary policymaking andplanning body for the area. The participation of NGOs provides opportunities for LGUs toconsult constituents and to improve coordination efforts to secure development goals. Otherlocal special bodies that have an agricultural orientation are the Agrarian Reform Councils(ARCs), Agricultural Food Councils (AFCs), and Fisheries and Aquatic Resource ManagementCouncils (FARMCs).Joint ventures and undertakings. Local government units may enter into joint undertakingswith NGOs in the areas of delivery of basic services, capability building and livelihood projects,local enterprise development, agriculture diversification, rural industrialization, ecologicalbalance, and enhancement of economic and social well-being of the people.

❙ Preparing for the 21st Century: TheAgriculture and Fisheries ModernizationAct

Another landmark legislation for agriculture is the 1997 Agriculture and Fisheries ModernizationAct. It aims to boost the agriculture and fisheries sectors through modernization, greater involvementof small stakeholders, food security and food self-sufficiency, and people empowerment.



27

The current Ginintuang Masaganang Ani (GMA) Makapagpabagong Programa Tungo sa Masaganaat Maunlad na Agrikultura at Pangisdaan of the Macapagal-Arroyo administration program servesas the blueprint and guiding framework in the implementation of AFMA.

One of its major strategies is the LGU-led approach to agriculture program implementation.Perhaps for the first time, local government units will spearhead the implementation of the GMAprogram, with the Department of Agriculture, the Department of the Interior and Local Government,and other concerned agencies providing financial and technical support.

◗ AN INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT APPROACH THROUGH SAFDZS

LGUs will assume leadership through the creation of the Strategic Agriculture and FisheriesDevelopment Zones or SAFDZs. The SAFDZ refers to an identified area within the Network ofProtected Areas for Agricultural and Agro-Industrial Development (NPAAD). These are selected areasfor production, agro-processing and marketing activities which are expected to develop andmodernize the agriculture and fisheries sector.

Specific responsibilities of the LGU under AFMA:

1. Irrigation Service (AFMA Chapter 4. Sec. 31)

The planning, design and management of Communal Irrigation Systems (CIS) including themanagement of the National Irrigation Authority’s (NIA) assets and resources in relation to CISshall be transferred to the LGU.

The budget for the development, construction, operation and maintenance of the CIS andother types of irrigation systems shall be prepared by and coursed through the LGUs.

NIA will continue to render technical assistance to the LGUs even after the devolution iscompleted.



28

2. The National Information Network (AFMA, Sec. 38)

The National Information Network shall provide information and marketing services to thegeneral public. These include: supply data, demand data, price and price trends, productstandards, directory of cooperatives, traders, key market centers and other units concerned withagriculture (and fisheries) at the provincial and municipal level, resource accounting data,market forecasts, research information and technology, among others.

The LGUs shall coordinate with the DA for technical assistance to accelerate the creation ofinformation networks and training in the use of information for end-users in their respectivejurisdictions.

3. Agriculture and Fisheries Infrastructure Support Services

The LGU and the other departments (DPWH, DOTC and DTI) shall coordinate with the DA toaddress the infrastructure requirements of AFMA, such as, but not limited to: farm-to-market roads,water supply systems, public markets, and abattoirs. The LGUs will be encouraged to turn overthe management and supervision of public markets and abattoirs to market vendors’cooperatives.

4. Agricultural Extension

The LGUs shall be responsible for delivering direct agriculture and fisheries extension services.The provincial governments shall integrate the operations for the extension services and shallundertake an annual evaluation of all municipal extension programs.

The DA, together with state colleges and universities, shall assist in the LGU’s extension systemby improving their effectiveness and efficiency through capability-building and complementaryextension activities.



29

Because of the nature and extent of operations of the SAFDZ, it offers several fields for the exerciseof effective leadership and innovative management. These include:

a. Formulating an SAFDZ integrated development plan, which should be integrated into otherlocal plans such as the local land use and zoning plan, local development plan, etc.

b. Facilitating the preparation of a comprehensive SAFDZ integrated development plan whereidentified areas cross municipal and political borders.

c. Streamlining and consolidating of agricultural programs and services of LGUs and nationalagencies, as well as other stakeholders, through the sharing of resources and complementationof roles and responsibilities.

For the period of 2001-2004, an annual budget of P20 billion will be allocated to implement theAFMA. Budget distribution is shown in Table 4.



Table 4 AFMA Budget

AFMA Components Peso (Billions) Percent (%)

1. Irrigation 6.00 30.00

2. Post-Harvest Facilities 2.00 10.00

3. Other Infrastructure 2.00 10.00

4. Credit 2.00 10.00

5. Marketing Assistance 1.60 8.00

6. Research and Development 2.00 10.00

7. Capability-Building 1.00 5.00

8. National Information Network .80 4.00

9. Salary Supplement for LGU Extension Workers 1.20 6.00

10. National Agriculture & Fisheries Education System 1.00 5.00

11. Rural Non-Farm Employment Training .35 1.75

12. SAFDZs .05 0.25

Total 20.00 100.00

30

(For more details on reference to LGUs in the AFMA, refer to the Annex.)

❙ Monitoring Food Security Programs:Executive Order 86

In 1999, Executive Order 86 was issued, creating Food Security Councils at the national andprovincial levels. The main task of these councils was to monitor the implementation of the foodsecurity programs developed at the local levels. Provincial governors were tasked to take theinitiative in this monitoring function by inviting the participation of other stakeholders.

Executive Order 86, together with the AFMA, further defined and strengthened local governmentinvolvement in agriculture. It spelled out the following:

Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Plans are to be developed by LGUs and funded by thenational government.Resource allocation and utilization of national government agencies, particularly the DA, willbe made more transparent through more frequent coordination meetings and encountersbetween the Office of the Provincial Agriculturist (OPA) and the DA Regional Director.Local government units are asked to recognize the imperative of updating staff managerial skillsand functions; and are challenged to exercise more decisive leadership in implementingagricultural development programs.



ISSUES, CHALLENGES ANDRECOMMENDATIONS IN

LOCAL AGRICULTURALDEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 3


CHAPTER 3❙ On Agricultural Leadership and Governance

The sustainability and long-term implementation of agricultural programs were drastically affectedby frequent transitions in government administration and political decision-making.

Centerpiece programs and services tend to overlap and/or are repackaged versions of a previousadministration’s initiatives. For instance, the Ginintuang Masaganang Ani (GMA) does not differmuch from Agrikulturang MakaMASA, which, in turn, is a reconditioned version of the Gintong Aniand Gintong Ani Plus programs of previous administrations.

Economist Fermin Adriano reviewed the government strategies to address food security andagricultural productivity, citing the similarities among the programs across the variousadministrations. In each program, low levels of success were attributed to high program costs,regional financial crises, major policy mistakes, and currency devaluation, among others. 11

From these trends, it is obvious that on the one hand, the national framework needs to be adjusted.On the other hand, the local chief executives should exercise their autonomy and readilydemonstrate their leadership and vision with respect to developing and managing agriculture intheir areas of jurisdiction.

ISSUES, CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

34

❙ Management and Structural Problems

In development planning, there is a tendency to utilize a reactive problem-solving, piecemealapproach (e.g., addressing specific concerns), instead of a more forward-looking, proactiveapproach. The low interest of most LGUs in agricultural development is reflected in the lack of aclearly articulated vision and direction for local rural development.

The current management of agricultural development does not foster and nurture local initiatives.Projects are either subsumed in national program/s or are distinct initiatives supported by servicesavailable from national program/s. Initiatives in the agriculture service delivery, whether by the LGUsor by the national government, are generally sporadic, fragmented, reactive and done on apiecemeal basis. In pursuing nationally mandated programs, LGU involvement in management isreduced to producing annual requests for services (as captured in annual investment plans.)

Local government officials are not prepared to take on additional responsibilities brought aboutby the localization of agricultural development. Operations are left to local agriculturists andveterinarians; rarely does the local chief executive take on a direct hands-on approach to agriculturaldevelopment. The traditional and conservative mindsets of local chief executives (i.e., as politiciansrather than leaders/development managers) are still common.

A multi-stakeholder approach to agricultural development and management has yet to beinstitutionalized in local governments. The power and responsibility of managing local ruraldevelopment is still largely perceived to be solely in the hands of LGUs.

❙ Other Devolution/Localization Concerns

There is still no formal mechanism coordinating the regional structure of the Department ofAgriculture with the local government (the PAO and the MAO).



35

There is a disparity between the plans and budget priorities prepared by the regional officesand the actual budget proposals of local governments.

Many LGUs complain that they are not adequately prepared or given support by the DA inplanning and implementing agriculture projects. Very few provinces invested in human resourcedevelopment for devolved DA personnel.

The lack of synergy between national and regional plans has left local governments to their owndevices. The relatively weak technical capabilities of provincial and municipal agriculture staffresulted in the poor use of provincial allocations given the lag in project identification andpreparation.

There is low budget use by the DA which was attributed to the limited interaction between theregional office and the provinces in identifying priority projects.

Budget allocation remains subject to partisan politics. In many areas, budget allocations forgenuine priority areas were redirected to bailiwicks of political leaders.

On the Implementation of AFMA:

AFMA was not fully implemented due to severe budgetary constraints. The original annual P20billion-budget of the DA shrank to P16 billion in 1999.

Over-reliance on central funding hindered the implementation of projects, despite the presenceof SAFDZ plans. Around 90 percent of the DA budget goes to operating expenditures, leavingonly a small amount for agricultural service delivery (such as AFMA-related projects).

LGUs have difficulty in providing counterpart resources. Aside from limited budget counterparts,there is a lack of extension workers at the LGUs.

ISSUES, CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3


36

❙ RECOMMENDATIONS

For LGUs to effectively take the lead in developing and managing local agricultural resourceswith the participation of local stakeholders, there must be changes in the way plans are prepared,implemented, monitored and evaluated. They should be geared towards productivity, farmmanagement and agri-entrepreneurship, and the delivery of agricultural services.

The recommendationsare focused on adjustments that can be made at the local level with thesupport of the stakeholders such as civil society organizations, farmers, the private sector andoversight agencies.

◗ IMPROVEMENTS IN PLANNING AND MANAGING LOCAL AGRICULTURALDEVELOPMENT

Strengthening participation in efforts to localize agricultural development involves a five-stageprocess that entails: (1) mobilizing stakeholders; (2) undertaking competitive assessment; (3)developing the local agricultural development plan in a participatory manner; (4) implementingthe plan in collaboration with stakeholders; and (5) monitoring, evaluating and refining the planin an iterative manner.

Successfully mobilizing stakeholders is key to efforts to localize agricultural development. This meansinvolving farmer organizations, cooperatives, agribusiness associations, rural women groups,local academic institutions, financing institutions such as rural banks, and line agencies, amongothers. They can serve as mechanisms for eliciting participation and input from parties that areacknowledged to be critical in agricultural and rural development. In particular, local specialbodies such as Agrarian Reform Councils, Agricultural Food Councils, Fisheries and AquaticResource Management Councils can serve as venues for intelligent discourse and should beinvolved in strategic planning to determine the vision and direction of local agricultural development.



37

Undertaking competitive assessment to determine the comparative advantage of local agriculturecan help put local agricultural initiatives on track. For instance, a basic task is to compare localcommodities to market specifications and requirements, as well as to match local capabilities withmarket demands.

Afterwards, local agricultural development strategies that are consistent with the identifiedcompetitive advantage of the locality have to be formulated or selected, and, together with otherlocal stakeholders, developed into a plan (i.e., as specific programs, projects, services and activities).

The next stage is to transform the Agricultural Development Plan into concrete annual workplansand include it in the LGU budget. These workplans can be implemented if stakeholders supportthem and if a budget is allocated for the projects. Where resources are inadequate, LGUs shouldstrive to enlist local support and contributions (i.e., from local stakeholders), and generate assistancefrom national, and, where warranted, international agencies.

The last stage pertains to the monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of the AgriculturalDevelopment Plan to allow for adjustments that will improve its responsiveness. Again, multi-sectoralinvolvement is important.

◗ SHIFT FROM SUBSISTENCE AND SURVIVAL MODE TO FOODSECURITY/SUFFICIENCY PARADIGM

The paradigm in relation to food security needs to be reoriented to ensure the availability,adequacy, accessibility, and acceptability of the food supply.

Local requirements must first be satisfied before focusing on an international market. The nationalgovernment can set the policy direction toward this end by allocating more resources to agricultureand regulating the conversion of agricultural lands.



38

◗ PROMOTION OF FARM MANAGEMENT AND AGRI-ENTREPRENEURSHIPSTRATEGIES

Subsistence farming must give way to a market-oriented, farm systems approach. This means thatcrop selection and production must have a direct correlation to market demands and should increasefarmers’ income, without sacrificing food security, ecological balance, and sustainability.

Farmers can venture into agri-entrepreneurship with its attendant changes in technologicalsupport, financing, organizing and social preparation. Capacity development in support of farmmanagement, among others, is, however, needed to support this shift. Both local government officialsand farmers are also encouraged to be managers.

Market links and other support can emerge from the multi-sectoral partnership between LGUs, NGOs,POs, and business sector.

◗ MORE RESPONSIVE, CLIENT-BASED AGRICULTURE EXTENSION SERVICES

Agriculture extension service must be client-based and responsive to the local realities of farmers.

Agricultural research and development can also be localized through the involvement of capablevolunteer-farmers and linking them with formal research institutions.

This shift would require technology and systems dissemination through techno- demo farms, andthe cooperation of farmers, agricultural technologists and other organizations; the provision oftechnical and management services; and through institutional development.

The steps mentioned in this section are made feasible by changes in the political environment,particularly the enabling policies on devolution and local agricultural development.



39

◗ OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS IN PROMOTING ORGANICAGRICULTURE

As defined by the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), organicagriculture includes all agricultural systems that promote the environmentally, socially, andeconomically sound production of food and fibers. By respecting the natural capacity of plants,animals and the landscape, organic agriculture aims to optimize quality in all aspects of agricultureand the environment. Organic agriculture dramatically reduces external inputs by refraining fromthe use of chemo-synthetic fertilizers, pesticides and pharmaceuticals. Instead, it allows thepowerful laws of nature to increase both agricultural yields and disease resistance.

◗ LGU PROMOTION OF ORGANIC AGRICULTURE CAN BENEFIT LOCAL FARMINGCOMMUNITIES:

1. It can INCREASE agricultural productivity through increased diversity, long-term soil fertility, highfood quality, reduced pest/disease incidence, self-reliant production systems, and stableproduction.

2. It can IMPROVE the environment through reduced pollution, reduced dependence on non-renewable resources, negligible soil erosion, wildlife protection, more resilient agro-ecosystems,and the compatibility of production with the environment.

3. It can IMPROVE local economic conditions through a stronger and self-reliant economy (throughan increase in the income of farmers), income security, increased returns, reduced cashinvestments, and reduced risks.

4. It can ENHANCE the social condition of the community through improved health, bettereducation, stronger community, reduced rural migration, gender equality, increased employmentand better quality of the food supply.



40

◗ SOME TRENDS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR ORGANIC AGRICULTURE

The current market demand is considerably higher than the supply, a situation that createspotential opportunities for developing countries in the short and medium term. The majorinternational markets are the US, the EU and Japan. In Asia, the major market is Japan, but to a smallerdegree, also Taiwan and Singapore, as well as Australia and New Zealand.

The global organic market size in terms of retail sales was estimated at US$ 11 billion in 1998 andUS$ 17.5 billion in 2000. With an increasing potential and annual growth rate between 20-30percent, the global market is projected to reach US$ 100 billion in 2008.

In the Philippines, the organic sector is relatively small. Although domestic production is growingat 10 to 20 percent annually, less than one percent of the agricultural hectarage in the Philippinesis farmed organically, with many concentrated outside Metro Manila.

In 2000, the Philippine organic exports included muscovado sugar for Germany and Japan, freshbananas for Japan, banana chips and coconut oil and chips for Europe.

In the local market, major organic products include rice, fresh vegetables and sugar, and majororganic imports include honey, tea, coffee, spices, and mostly processed food. The premium pricefor organic products is estimated between 20-30 percent.

The usual marketing channels are as follows: specialized organic outlets (Greenbelt, Alabang,TESDA, SIDCOR in Metro Manila), health shops, farmers’ cooperatives, and selected supermarketsfor rice and muscovado. The target market for organic products covers a range—from the middleto upper classes.



41

Organic agriculture offers a great opportunity for local farming communities and farmers’organizations to explore agri-business ventures. LGUs can encourage farmer-groups to becomeinvolved in organic agriculture by:

1. Partnering with local groups such as NGOs and private sector groups that promote sustainable,organic agriculture. It is important to understand the framework and principles behind thestrategy. Two NGOs— SIBAT and MKAVI—are already mentioned in this Resource Book.

2. Applying the framework and principles in the formulation and development of the localAgricultural Development Plan. The importance of a comprehensive plan for agriculturaldevelopment is supported by the experience of Negros Occidental and Irosin in Sorsogon.

3. Being committed to implement programs and projects. Committed implementation entails fundallocation and sourcing (e.g., the Negros Occidental case); massive advocacy and socialpreparation (the Irosin case); and ingenuity in project development (the Davao del Norte case),among others.

◗ OPPORTUNITIES IN MEDICINAL PLANT/HERBAL PRODUCTS

Medicinal plants/herbal products could form part of the local agricultural development strategybecause of the significant demand for them in the global market.

The present global market demand for herbal products is estimated at US$ 80 billion. In Malaysia,the market size is estimated at US$ 1.2 billion with an annual dynamic growth rate of 10-20percent. Over 8,000 products have been registered and approved; the export of herbal productsis over US$ 50 million. There are also over 800 herbal manufacturing companies producing herbalmedicines and herbal cosmetic lines in Malaysia.



In Germany, the estimated market size for herbal products is estimated at US$ 3.5 billion, and itcontinues to grow. Most of the herbs used are cultivated abroad by contract growers in Latin Americaand India, and then imported in bulk and packaged in Germany.

The combined market size of herbal products for France, Italy, and Spain is estimated at US$ 1.5billion. The US market size is estimated at US$ 1.5 billion.

Table 5 analyzes information concerning traditional and health care in China and the Philippines.

Table 5. Comparison between traditional and health care in China and the Philippines

China (1986) Philippines (2000) No. of licensed traditional doctors * 324,270 Less than 10

No. of licensed traditional pharmacists: 147,510 None

Hospital beds for traditional 86,540 NoneChinese medicine patients

No. of herbal manufacturing plants Over 500 Less than 4

No. of staff employed Approx. 100,000 Less than 100

Value of outputs of plants US$571 M US$ 540,000 (or 0.1 percent of the output of China)

* Natural medicine doctors registered under the Dept. of Health

42



43

What are the local medicinal plants and herbal products available for possible agri-businessventures?

In the Philippines, herbal or medicinal plants that are commonly used include lagundi in tabletsfor cough or asthma; sambong, a diuretic for kidney stone dissolution; ampalaya (Makiling variety)for diabetes; luya for motion sickness; akapulko as anti-fungal; luyang dilaw as anti-inflammatoryin rheumatism; bawang for blood cholesterol reduction and as anti-fungal; banaba for diabetes;tsaang gubat for diarrhea and cavity prevention; yerba buena as antispasmodic; and bayabas as anantiseptic and for wound healing.

Medicinal plants that are being developed with potential for use by the herbal industry include:

1. Neem – insect repellant2. Sweet basil – sleeping aid, also used for dandruff control in shampoo3. Makabuhay – scabies, immune system stimulant 4. Alibungog – anti-inflammatory5. Alagaw – anti-inflammatory 6. Takip kuhol or Takip suso – immune system stimulant, wound healing 7. Amargo (Quasia amara) – digestive aid, immune system stimulant 8. Dandelion – immune system stimulant

Aromatic plants sought for essential oil extraction that are used for fragrance are:

1. Citronella2. Lemongrass3. Patchouli4. Ylang-ylang

Local government units are encouraged to incorporate these in developing strategies that can beincluded in the planning and implementation of their agricultural development programs.



GOOD PRACTICES IN LOCALAGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER 4


CHAPTER 4The firstset of cases highlights innovative strategies employed by local government units inaddressing specific agricultural concerns in their communities. These are offered in this ResourceBook as references to help local government officials and other stakeholders create, develop andapply innovative approaches and strategies. Briefly, the cases mentioned tackle the followingconcerns that have been addressed by particular strategies.

GOOD PRACTICES IN LOCAL AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT

Agricultural Concern/Issue Approach/Strategy

1. food security; lack ofirrigation

Pagkaon 2000 Food Sufficiency Program (Provincial Government ofNegros Occidental)

- Irrigation development (diversion dams, small water impounding,etc.)

- Productivity enhancement (fish distribution, carabao distribution)- Partnership with stakeholders (from barangay to provincial levels)

2. land distribution Integrated Agrarian Reform Program (municipality of Irosin, Sorsogon)- Organization of agrarian reform beneficiaries - Skills enhancement- Inter-agency coordinated assistance approach through local special

body- Fund sourcing

3. pest control; productivity Plant Protection Technology (provincial government of Davao delNorte)

- Mass propagation of Trichogramma insect- Field demonstration and distribution- Training- Monitoring

48

The next set of cases highlights efforts of civil society and the private sector in the promotion ofsustainable agriculture through a diversity of projects (e.g., capability-building, technologicaldevelopment, organizing, etc.).



THE GOAL

The province of Negros Occidental, like many rural, agricultural areas in thecountry, has been experiencing a steady decline in agricultural productivity,along with food shortage problems. Rice yield in 1996 was at a low 2.4 metrictons per hectare (the national average was 3 metric tons per hectare) andcorn production was even lower at 1.93 metric tons per hectare. Poverty inthe countryside was prevalent.

To address this situation, the Office of the Provincial Governor initiated steps both at theorganizational/institutional and community levels. The provincial government undertookorganizational development which led to the creation of the Agricultural Engineering andIrrigation Systems Development Division. Agriculturists were assigned to different citiesand municipalities in the province. Local special bodies were created and consultationswere conducted to facilitate the development and implementation of the program.

All of these interventions paved the way for the formulation of a local agriculturaldevelopment program which effectively addressed the problems of low agriculturalproductivity and food security: the Pagkaon 2000 Food Sufficiency Program.

KEY FEATURES OF THE PROGRAM

Framework for local agricultural development. The various interventions introduced bythe provincial government was integrated into the Pagkaon 2000 Program. The programserved as the guiding framework of the sub-components of agricultural development to

Local Government Efforts in Agricultural Service Delivery

49

GOOD PRACTICES IN LOCAL AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT 4


Contact Information:Office of the ProvincialGovernorNegros OccidentalProvince

PAGKAON 2000 FOOD SUFFICIENCY PROGRAM: NEGROS OCCIDENTAL PROVINCE

50



promote food security at the household level. Although the program was centered on infrastructuredevelopment, it employed other strategies such as crop diversification, fisheries and aquaculturedevelopment, nutrition program, and information and education campaigns. As a whole, the programtook on the form of a comprehensive approach to the development of local agricultural resources.

Infrastructure development strategies. The provincial government prioritized agricultural development.Local government structures and mechanisms were put in place, paving the way for a smoothimplementation of agricultural projects. Irrigation development and construction were varied: diversiondams, small water impounding, small farm reservoirs, and pump irrigation. Social infrastructuredevelopment was also implemented through productivity enhancement strategies such as cropdiversification; fisheries and aquaculture development; fish distribution; and information, education, andadvocacy campaigns (e.g., School-on- the-Air).

Institution-building and partnership mechanisms. By strengthening the provincial government officethrough the creation of the Agricultural Engineering and Irrigation Systems Development Divisionand other local special bodies, such as the Agricultural and Fisheries Committee and the IrrigationDevelopment Council, the involvement of local stakeholders was institutionalized. Informal inputs alsofound their way into the program through barangay and district consultations/ meetings, dialogues withfarmers, and technical conferences with government agencies.

STRATEGIES IN PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION

Development of a comprehensive agricultural program (Pagkaon 2000)Creation and strengthening of institutions involved in spearheading the program, particularly theOffice of the Provincial Government and local special bodies

Negros Occidental Province PAGKAON 2000 FOOD SUFFICIENCY PROGRAM

51

Fund allocation and resource management (P112 million so far has been spent for irrigationdevelopment; P18 million for pre- and post-harvest facilities; P4 million for scholarships; creation ofspecial funds; automatic budget appropriations)Consultative and participative processes: regular meetings and consultations at the barangay,municipality, district, and provincial levelsInstitutionalization of monitoring and evaluation mechanisms (deployment of agriculturists permunicipality/cities; monthly assessments)

GAINS/BENEFITS OF THE PROGRAM

The agricultural resource base of the province expanded as irrigated areas were increased from 31,000hectares in 1996 to 39,000 hectares in 1999. Approximately 9,564 farmers gained from this development.In addition to this, 171 various farm equipment were distributed and post-harvest facilities were alsoconstructed.

To further augment the livelihood capacity of the farmers, 1,070 carabaos and 260,000 fingerlings of tilapiaand other species were distributed.

These translated to enhanced agricultural productivity after three years of implementing the program.Rice yield increased from 2.4 metric tons per hectare in 1996 to 3.35 metric tons per hectare in 1999, whilecorn yield improved from 1.93 metric tons per hectare in 1995 to 2.9 metric tons per hectare in 1999.Household income also increased by 30 percent to 39 percent. As a result, under-nutrition casesdropped from 12 percent in 1996 to 9 percent in 1999. In addition to these, the provincial governmentwas able send 80 scholars to different universities nationwide. 283 farmers graduated from skillsenhancement radio courses offered by the School-on-the Air program.



PAGKAON 2000 FOOD SUFFICIENCY PROGRAM Negros Occidental Province

52

INTEGRATED AGRARIAN REFORM PROGRAM: IROSIN, SORSOGON

THE GOAL

Rural poverty in the municipality of Irosin, Sorsogon was traced to landlessnessof the farmers and their lack of control over their farmlands. From thispremise, local agricultural development was centered on agrarian reform. The

innovation lies in the program’s integrated area development approach, which covered thecomponents of agricultural productivity and livelihood, rural infrastructure andelectrification, environment, health, and gender and development.


Community organization and capability-building. The Integrated Agrarian Reform Program(IARP) of Irosin organized and enhanced the capabilities of agrarian reform beneficiaries.A series of training courses on values orientation, gender sensitivity, authentic humanism,farm planning and management and organizational development skills was conducted toprepare the farmers for effective agricultural productivity tasks.

Partnership mechanisms. The Municipal Agrarian Reform Council (MARC), headed by themayor and composed of representatives from 10 government agencies, private sector, non-government organizations and cooperatives/people’s organizations was organized. Acommon local agricultural development plan was formulated then guided and monitoredby the MARC.

Organizational development. The MARC had operational structures that facilitated theimplementation of various tasks and functions. The MARC Management Committee took




Contact Information:Office of the MayorIrosin, Sorsogon

53

charge of accessing to resources and using them, while the finance committee managed fund use. A“coordinated assistance approach” defined the working relationships of MARC institutional members.

Funding support. Irosin did not rely solely on national government funding for its IARP. Having beendeclared as an Agrarian Reform Community, the municipality gained access to various sources of fundswhich amounted to P10 million a year. The regular funding of projects led to the development ofinfrastructure and support services.

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES

Formulation of an Integrated Agrarian Reform ProgramCreation of local special bodies (e.g., Municipal Agrarian Reform Council, MARC ManagementCommittee, Finance Committee) to spearhead program implementationMulti-sectoral consultation and planningMassive information campaign on the benefits of agrarian reformHands-on negotiation with absentee landowners to fast-track land distributionFund allocation and resource mobilization (LGU allocation of P2 million; P2 million from Land Bank;at least P10 million a year from external sources and NGOs)Effective partnership and networking (e.g., support from LIKAS, a non-government organization,reached a total of P15 million; this was used for the development of cooperatives, health services,promotion of sustainable agriculture, gender and development, and post-harvest facilities)


As a result of the agricultural development interventions, land was distributed in Irosin at a faster pacecompared to the other municipalities of Sorsogon province. As of November 1998, around 75-85



INTEGRATED AGRARIAN REFORM PROGRAM Irosin, Sorsogon

54



percent of lands eligible for distribution through CARP were covered by Certificate of Land OwnershipAwards or CLOAs. This benefited at least 75 percent of the municipality’s agrarian reform beneficiaries.

The organizational and farm management capabilities of participating farmers and their groups werealso enhanced. Infrastructure and other support systems in the form of farm-to-market roads, irrigation,credit programs, and water systems helped develop local agricultural relations and performance in Irosin.

Irosin, Sorsogon INTEGRATED AGRARIAN REFORM PROGRAM

PLANT PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM:PROVINCE OF DAVAO DEL NORTE

THE GOAL

One of the main agricultural problems in the province of Davao del Nortehas been the heavy use by farmers of hazardous, synthetic chemicalpesticides for the control of harmful insects in corn, rice, cacao, andvegetables. Such dependence was caused by decades of agricultural practicethat relied on pesticides to increase productivity.

The provincial government of Davao del Norte, through the Office of theProvincial Agriculturist (OPA), developed and implemented a natural, environment-friendlystrategy to fend off agricultural pests and insects harmful to crops: the use of Trichogrammain its Plant Protection Technology Program.


Local Research and Development. The provincial agriculturist piloted the breeding of theTrichogramma insect in a laboratory. With ample support from different sources, theproduction of the insect expanded.

Social acceptance strategies. With the participation of cooperatives, field demonstration trialswere conducted to demonstrate the plant protection technology. Farmers, after training,were also involved in the pilot studies through monitoring and data-gathering activities.


55



Contact Information:Office of the ProvincialGovernor

Office of the ProvincialAgriculturistDavao del NorteProvince

56



Funding and technical support. The provincial government allocated funding for the development andimplementation of the technology (P450,000 for the laboratory and equipment, P111,000 for operations,and P155,000 for demonstration farms), and was able to tap other funding sources. The private sectorwas involved through technical assistance provided by Nestle Philippines.

PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES

Laboratory pilot-testing and production of Trichogramma by the provincial agriculturistProvincial government support through funding and other fund-sourcing activitiesField demonstration trials and training that involved cooperativesMass propagation and distribution of Trichogramma cardsMonitoring by farmers through the Trichocards


The natural plant protection technology did improve agricultural productivity for the programparticipants. Yields in corn jumped from 1 metric ton per hectare to 3 metric tons per hectare and yieldsin cacao soared from 250 kilograms per hectare a year to 600 in 1994.

Costs of agricultural production also dropped as farmers recorded savings that averaged P900 toP1,000 per hectare.

As the program reduced the exposure of farmlands to the hazards of chemical pesticides, agriculturalsustainability was also ensured.

Davao del Norte Province PLANT PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

THE GOAL

Sibol ng Agham at Teknolohiya (SIBAT), a non-government organization,focuses its agricultural services program on enhancing farmers’ organizedand conscious capability for sustainable agriculture.

Its goal is to mitigate the negative effects of conventional or modern agriculture, whichhas resulted in the lack of sustainability and the loss of control by poor farmers over foodproduction and agro-ecological systems.

PROGRAM COMPONENTS

Rural Ecological Farm Planning and DevelopmentCapability-buildingGenetic Resource Protection through Integrated Community Seed-bankingUrban Food ProductionWatershed ManagementWater Systems Development

PROGRAM STRATEGIES

Stakeholders consultationParticipatory situational/needs analysis

Civil Society and Private Sector Promotion of SustainableAgriculture Strategies

57



Contact InformationExecutive Director SIBATTel: (02) 926-8971/

410-2354

SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE PROGRAM: SIBOL NG AGHAM AT TEKNOLOHIYA (SIBAT)

58



Participatory planning and program/project developmentStrengthening of farmer organization Preference for appropriate technology

Sibol ng Agham at Teknolohiya (SIBAT) SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE PROGRAM

59



THE GOAL

Mt. Kitanglad Agri-Ventures, Inc., a business entity, produces highlandsweet bananas for export to Asia and the Middle East. As part of its corporateaims, it endeavors to conserve soil, water, and other environmental resourcesfor the preservation of the ecosystem.

During the venture’s pre-development stage, ecological baseline informationwas determined from the project site. Due to market demands and thedeclining environmental condition in the area, conservation techniques were incorporatedin the production and management of banana exports.

PROGRAM COMPONENTS

Ecosystem ConservationWildlife ConservationIntegrated Pest ManagementConservation of Water ResourcesSoil ConservationCollaboration with Stakeholders


Contact InformationOperations ManagerMt. Kitanglad Agri-Ventures, Inc. (MKAVI)Alanib, Lantapan,BukidnonTel: (084)822-1138;

(0916)336-2124

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION IN COMMERCIAL BANANA PRODUCTION

60



STANDARDS AND PRINCIPLES FOLLOWED

This is based on the Better Banana Project, an international environmental certification similar to ISOcertification:

Ecosystem ConservationWildlife ConservationFair treatment and good conditionsGood community relationsIntegrated Pest ManagementIntegrated Waste ManagementWater ConservationSoil ConservationPlanning and Monitoring

Mt. Kitanglad Agri-Ventures, Inc. BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION IN COMMERCIAL BANANA PRODUCTION

61



THE GOAL

The Alternative Indigenous Development Foundation, Inc. (AID Foundation)is a non-government organization engaged in the development ofagricultural technology for upland communities. Its goal is to facilitatetechnology transfer so that upland farms can be developed and productionenhanced.

PROGRAM COMPONENT

Development of Water Pumps. Different types of water pumps were designedfor upland farming. A hydraulic ram pump was eventually developed and promoted as alow-cost, low maintenance, environment-friendly technology that could transform rainfall-dependent farms into integrated ones.

Main Features of the Hydraulic Ram Pump

Utilizes the momentum of a large flow of water under a small head to raise a smallerquantity of water to a higher elevationA valve is arranged to close suddenly, creating a water hammer of high pressure thatforces water to a higher elevation


Contact InformationExecutive DirectorAlternative IndigenousDevelopmentFoundation, Inc. (AIDFoundation)Lot 30, Block 12Puentevella Subd. Brgy.Taculing, Bacolod CityTel: (034) 4354691Fax: (034) 4462330

LOCAL RAM PUMP MANUFACTURING FOR SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION AND UPLANDCOMMUNITIES

62



Requires a minimum fall of at least 75 centimeters and a minimum flow of water of at least 8 litersper minute

Advantages of the Ram Pump

Use of renewable energy (falling water)Very minimum operation cost; no need for electricity or fuelPumps automatically on a 24-hour basisDurableMinimal number of moving partsCan pump up to 120 meters elevationAble to use many sources of water: springs, streams, irrigation canals, etc.Spare parts can be easily fabricated

The output will depend on several factors: flow of water intake, pump size, fall of water and the deliveryheight.

AID LOCAL RAM PUMP MANUFACTURING FOR SMALL-SCALE IRRIGATION AND UPLAND COMMUNITIES

63



THE GOAL

The Pambansang Kilusan ng mga Samahang Magsasaka (PAKISAMA) seeksto provide agricultural extension services to its farmer-members. Its mainstrategy is to train and deploy a select group of farmers from among itsmember people's organizations to lead and provide agricultural extensionservices to ensure viable farming systems among its members.

PROGRAM COMPONENTS

On Farm School Systems - situation-oriented, on-site learning centersoffering three experiential coursesExtension Services - organization of farmer-members into farmer field school units andorientation on program and servicesSupport Inputs and Facilities - part of extension services in the form of provision of seeds,fertilizer, starters/breeders, etc.Marketing

OPERATIONAL STRATEGIES

Selection, recruitment, training and deploymentConversion of candidate farms into model farmsInstallation of at least 3 farmer-trainers/extensionists (FXs) per barangay


Contact InformationExecutive DirectorPambansang Kilusan ngmga SamahangMagsasaka (PAKISAMA)Rm. 202 PartnershipCenter59. C. Salvador St., LoyolaHts., Quezon CityTelefax: (02) 4361689Email:[email protected]

AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICES PROGRAM

64



Two-day immersions per week of FXsEnsuring mobility of FXs and provision of incentivesEnsuring guidance and supervision of FXs


As of 2000, a total of 144 farmer-trainers/extensionists were developed by the program through skillsenhancement and capability-building to undertake agricultural extension services to other farmer-members.

PAKISAMA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICES PROGRAM

REFERENCES AND TOOLS

CHAPTER 5

67

REFERENCES AND TOOLS 5


❙ Recommended Sites for Study Tours

RECOMMENDEDSITES

HIGHLIGHTS CONTACT DETAILS

Geo Farm Integrated Appropriate Technologies Home gardening, agro-forestry,integrated farmingBiogas, solar panels and windmillTotal waste managementHerbal medicine, spirulina andholistic healingAgro-ecology

The ManagementGeo FarmBarrio Mangayao, Bayambang,PangasinanTel: (075) 592-3349Email: [email protected]

Kablon Farm Organic farmFood processing centerProducts – passion fruit juice,assorted jellies and jams andtablea

ManagerKablon Farm Tupi, South Cotabato 9505Telefax: (083) 228-8508Email: [email protected]

Kalahan EducationalFoundation

Food processing made fromindigenous fruitsOrganic farming

Executive DirectorKalahan Educational Foundation Sta. Fe, Imugan, Nueva Vizcaya

68



RECOMMENDEDSITES

HIGHLIGHTS CONTACT DETAILS

Gourmet Farms, Inc. Organic vegetable farmFood processing centerOrganic marketGourmet Restaurant

Chief Operating OfficerGourmet Farms, Inc.52 Aguinaldo Highway, Lalaan 2,4118 Silang, CaviteTel: (046) 414-0137 to 38Fax: (046) 414-0613Email:[email protected]

Mag-UugmadFoundation, Inc.

Sloping agricultural landtechnology (SALT) farmingOrganic vegetable production

ManagerSustainable Upland AgricultureResource Center (SUARC)Guba, Cebu

Makilala, NorthCotabato

Agro-forestryBio-dynamic farming Microbial technology

Executive DirectorDon Bosco Diocesan YouthCenter, Inc. Makilala, North Cotabato

Mindanao BaptistRural Life Center(MBRLC)

Sloping agricultural land technology(SALT) farming (1–4)

Executive Director MBRLC Bansalan, Davao del Sur

Mt. Kitanglad AgriVentures, Inc.

Diversified commercial bananaplantation practicing sustainableagriculture certified by rainforestalliance under ECO OK fair trade label

Operations ManagerMt. Kitanglad Agri Ventures, Inc.Alanib, Lantapan, BukidnonTel: (02) 926-8971/410-2354

69



❙ Contact Details for Organic, Herbaland Natural Products Development

OPPORTUNITIES / REQUIREMENTS CONTACT DETAILS

1. Organic certification and inspection forlocal markets

2. Advisory/support for organic certificationfor export markets

Executive DirectorOrganic Certification Center of the Philippines, Inc.Golden Shell Pavilion Roxas Blvd. - Gil Puyat Ave.,Pasay City 1300, Metro ManilaTel: (02) 831-2483Fax: (02) 832-3965Email: [email protected]

1. Herbal development program2. Product licensing program3. Export promotion of organic, herbal and

natural products

Natural Products Division Chief Center for International Trade Expositions andMissions (CITEM)Golden Shell Pavilion Roxas Blvd - Gil Puyat Ave.,Pasay City 1300, Metro ManilaTel: (02) 831-2483Fax: (02) 832-3965Email: [email protected]

1. Herbal agriculture2. Production trial 3. Feasibility studies4. Contract growing

Department HeadDept. of HorticultureUPLB, Los Baños, Laguna

70



OPPORTUNITIES / REQUIREMENTS CONTACT DETAILS

1. Herbal processing2. Technical assistance 3. Technology transfer4. Referral service

Director GeneralPhilippine Institute of Traditional and AlternativeHealth CareBldg 10, San Lazaro CompoundSanta Cruz, ManilaMetro ManilaFax: (02) 781-8838

71

❙ Reference Materials and Practical Tools

A. Integrated Area Development Tools

1. Conceptual ReviewCommunity-Based/ Area-Based Conceptual Framework

2. Selection of project areaPoverty indicatorsEcosystems assessment tools, including GIS, transect, etc.

3. Assessment of project areaParticipatory Rural AppraisalEnvironmental mappingCommunity mappingScopingSWOT

4. IAD PlanningTechnology of ParticipationZOPPLogical FrameworkEnvironment & Natural Resources AccountingExtended Cost-Benefit AnalysisEnvironmental Impact Assessment

5. Project ImplementationOperations ManualComputerized MIS



72

CO/CD ManualsBenefits Monitoring and Evaluation

B. University of the Philippines – Los Baños Agro-forestry Program

Soil and Water Conservation: A Training Manual. 1994

C. DAR-UNDP SARDIC Programme (1999)

Compendium on Sustainable Agriculture. Perspectives and Strategies of Advocates and Practitionersin the Philippines. 208 pp.

D. Galing Pook Foundation (2001)

Kaban Galing. The Philippine Case Bank on Innovation and Exemplary Practices in Local Governance.Volume 1. Striving for Good Local Governance. 95 pp.Volume 2. Managing the Environment. 85 pp.Volume 3. Transforming the Local Economy. 129 pp.Volume 4. Fighting Poverty Together. 101 pp.Volume 5. Promoting Excellence in Urban Governance. 55 pp.Volume 6. Institutionalizing Child Friendly Governance. 119 pp.

E. International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) (1991)

Pandey, R.K. A Primer on Organic-Based Rice Farming. 201 pp.

F. PAKISAMA (2001)

Sustainable Agriculture. The Pakisama Viewpoint. 39 pp.



73

G. Pilipinas Shell Foundation, Inc. (1989)

Pama-agi sa Mainuswagon Nga Pagpanguma para sa Benepisyaryo sa Repormang Agraryo. 230 pp.

H. International Institute of Rural Reconstruction

Publications and Communications Department, International Institute of Rural ReconstructionY.C. James YenSilang, Cavite 4118 Tel: (046) 4142417Fax: (046) 4142420Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

1. Shifting Cultivation: Towards Sustainability and Resource Conservation2. Enhancing Ownership and Sustainability: A Resource Book on Participation 20013. Going to Scale: Can We Bring More Benefits to More People More Quickly?4. Enhancing Sustainability of Rice Economy in the Philippines5. Farmers’Changing the Face of Technology: Choices and Adaptations of Technology Options,

1999.6. Environmental Health: A sourcebook of materials, 1999.7. Participatory Monitoring & Evaluation: Experiences & Lessons8. Creative Training: A User’s Guide, 1998.9. Resource Management In Rain-fed Dry Lands: An Information Kit, 1997.

10. Environmentally Sound Technologies For Women in Agriculture, 1996.11. Recording And Using Indigenous Knowledge: A Manual, 1995.12. Resource Management for Upland Areas in Southeast Asia, 1995.13. Ethno-Veterinary Medicine in Asia: An Information Kit on Traditional Animal Health Care

Practice, 1994.



74

14. The Bio-Intensive to Small-Scale Household Food Production, 1993.15. Environment, Agricultural and Natural Resources Management: Basic Concept, 1993.16. Environment, Agricultural and Natural Resource Management: Ideas for Action, 1993.17. Agroforestry Technology Information Kit, 1992.18. Farmer-proven Integrated Agriculture-Aquaculture. A Technology Information Kit, 1992.19. Low-External Input Rice Production Technology Information Kit, 1990.20. Towards Better Enterprises: Business Development, Marketing & Microfinance Practices

I. Philippine Rice Research Institute Email: [email protected]

1. Technoguides

a. 10 Steps in Compost Production (English, Ilocano, Tagalog) b. Pagpaparami ng Purong Binhi ng Palayc. Rodents Management d. Controlled Irrigation e. Management of Zinc-deficient Soilsf. Management of Golden Apple Snailg. Minus-one Element Techniqueh. Management of the Rice Black Bugi. Leaf Color Chart (English, Tagalog, Ilocano editions)j. Equipment for Rice Production and Processingk. 40-kilogram Certified Seeds Per Hectarel. Characteristics of Popular Rice Varietiesm. Rice Stem Borers in the Philippinesn. Rice Tungro Virus Disease



75

2. Manuals/catalogs

a. Genetic Rice Resourcesb. Field Guide on Harmful & Useful Organisms in the Philippine Rice Fieldsc. Let's Produce More Rice (A Training Manual)d. NCT Manual for Rice: Guidelines and Policiese. Pagpaparami ng Binhing Haybrid na Palayf. Philippine Seedboard Rice Varietiesg. Rice Field Weeds in the Philippinesh. Virus and Virus-like Diseases of Rice in the Philippines

3. Books/Proceedings/Others

a. A Recipe Book on Traditional Rice Food Products in the Philippinesb. Highland Rice Production in the Philippine Cordillerac. Host index of Plant Diseases in the Philippinesd. Advances and Challenges in Hybrid Rice Technology in the Philippinese. GO-NGO Collaboration: Towards People Empowermentf. Philippine Rice Statistics (1970-1996)g. Regional Rice Statistics (1970-1992)h. Rice Statistics Handbook (1970-1997)i. Mga Katawagan sa Agrikultura (May Diin sa Pagpapalayan – An English-Filipino Dictionary)




ENDNOTES

1Reaction to “Philippine Agriculture: Are We Ready for the Competition?”by Fr. Francis Lucas of theAsian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development at the Department of Agricultureand UP Program in Development Economics Lecture Series, Bureau of Soils and Water Management,Quezon City, 17 July 2003

2Ibid.

3Ibid.

4Ibid.

5Ibid.

6Philippine Agriculture: Are We Ready for the Competition? A Paper presented by Dr. Arsenio M.Balisacan at the Department of Agriculture and UP Program in Development Economics LectureSeries, Bureau of Soils and Water Management, Quezon City, 17 July 2003.

7Ibid.

8Fr. Francis Lucas

9Dr. Balisacan

10Fr. Francis Lucas

78

11Adriano, Fermin P. The State of Philippine Agriculture and the Role of Local Government. Athematic paper on agriculture included in the policy booklet entitled, “Food Security fromBelow. Strengthening National Government-Local Government Partnership in Grains Production.(1999)”




ANNEXES

REFERENCES TO LGUs IN THE AGRICULTURE ANDFISHERIES MODERNIZATION ACT OF 1997 (RA 8435)

TITLE 1 PRODUCTION AND MARKETING SUPPORT SERVICES

Chapter 1 Strategic Agricultural and Fisheries Development Zones

SEC. 7. Model Farms. The Department, in coordination with the local government units (LGUs) andappropriate government agencies, may designate agrarian reform communities (ARCs) and otherareas within the SAFDZ suitable for economic scale production which will serve as model farms.

SEC. 9. Delineation of Strategic Agriculture and Fisheries Development Zones. The Department, inconsultation with the Department of Agrarian Reform, the Department of Trade and Industry, theDepartment of Environment and Natural Resources, Department of Science and Technology, theconcerned LGUs, the organized farmers and fisherfolk groups, the private sector and communitiesshall, without prejudice to the development of identified economic zones and free ports, establishand delineate based on sound resource accounting, the SAFDZ within one (1) year from theeffectivity of this Act.

Chapter 2 Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Plan

SEC. 19. Role of Other Agencies. All units and agencies of the government shall support theDepartment in the implementation of the AFMP.

80

The Department of the Interior and Local Government shall provide assistance to the Departmentin mobilizing resources under the control of local government units.

Chapter 3 Credit

SEC. 23. Scope of the Agro-Industry Modernization Credit and Financing Program (AMCFP). The Agro-industry Modernization Credit and Financing Program shall include the package and delivery ofvarious credit assistance programs for the following:

i) Privately-funded and LGU-funded irrigation systems that are designed to protect thewatershed;

Chapter 4 Irrigation

SEC. 31. Communal Irrigation Systems (CIS). The Department shall, within five (5) years from theeffectivity of this Act, devolve the planning, design and management of CISs, including the transferof NIA's assets and resources in relation to the CIS, to the LGUs. The budget for the development,construction, operation and maintenance of the CIS and other types of irrigation systems shall beprepared by and coursed through the LGUs. The NIA shall continue to provide technical assistanceto the LGUs even after complete devolution of the Irrigation Systems to the LGUs, as may bedeemed necessary.

Chapter 5 Information and Marketing Support Service

SEC. 39. Coverage. A market information system shall be installed for the use and benefit of, butnot limited to, the farmers and fisherfolk, cooperatives, traders, processors, the LGUs and theDepartment.

LOCAL AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT


81

SEC. 43. Initial Set-up. The Department shall provide technical assistance in setting-up the NIN atthe local level through the cooperatives and LGUs: Provided, That, at the local level, a system thatwill make marketing information and services related to agriculture and fisheries will be readilyavailable in the city/municipal public market for the benefit of the producers, traders and consumers.

SEC. 44. Role of Government Agencies. The Bureau of Agricultural Statistics will serve as the centralinformation server and will provide technical assistance to end-users in accessing and analyzingproduct and market information and technology.

The Department of Transportation and Communications shall provide technical and infrastructureassistance to the Department in setting up the NIN.

LGUs shall coordinate with the Department for technical assistance in order to accelerate theestablishment and training of information end-users in their respective jurisdictions.

Chapter 6 Other Infrastructure

SEC. 46. Agriculture and Fisheries Infrastructure Support Services. The Department of Public Worksand Highways, the Department of Transportation and Communications, the Department of Tradeand Industry and the LGUs shall coordinate with the Department to address the infrastructurerequirements in accordance with this Act: Provided, That, the Department and the LGUs shall alsostrengthen its agricultural engineering groups to provide the necessary technical and engineeringsupport in carrying out the smooth and expeditious implementation of agricultural infrastructureprojects.

SEC. 52. Farm-to-Market Roads. The Department shall coordinate with the LGUs and the resident-farmers and fisherfolk in order to identify priority locations of farm-to-market roads that takeinto account the number of farmers and fisherfolk, and their families who shall benefit therefromand the amount, kind and importance of agricultural and fisheries products produced in the area.

ANNEXES


82

Construction of farm-to-market roads shall be a priority investment of the LGUs which shallprovide a counterpart of not less than ten percent (10%) of the project cost subject to their IRA level.

SEC. 55. Water Supply System. The Department shall coordinate with the DPWH and the LGUs forthe identification and installation of water supply system in the locality for agro-industrial uses toenhance agriculture and fisheries development in the area.

SEC. 58. Public Market and Abattoirs. The Department shall encourage the LGUs to turn over themanagement and supervision of public markets and abattoirs to market vendors' cooperatives andfor that purpose, the appropriation for post-harvest facilities shall include the support for marketvendors' cooperatives.

The Department shall coordinate with the LGUs in the establishment of standardized marketsystems and use of sanitary market facilities, and abattoirs, intended to ensure food safety and quality.

TITLE 2 HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

SEC. 71. Counterpart Funding from LGUs. The LGUs shall, within two (2) years from the effectivityof this Act, provide at least ten percent (10%) of the Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses(MOOE) budget for the operation of the provincial institutes within their area of responsibility.

In consultation with the LGUs, the CHED shall develop a provincial-national partnership schemefor a reasonable sharing of financial support taking into account social equity factors for poorprovinces.



83

TITLE 3 RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT AND EXTENSION

Chapter 2 Extension Services

SEC. 90. The Role of Local Government Units. The LGUs shall be responsible for delivering directagriculture and fisheries extension services.

The provincial governments shall integrate the operations for the agriculture extension servicesand shall undertake an annual evaluation of all municipal extension programs.

The extension programs of state colleges and universities shall primarily focus on the improvementof the capability of the LGU extension service by providing:

a) Degree and non-degree training programs;b) Technical assistance;c) Extension cum research activities;d) Monitoring and evaluation of LGU extension projects; ande) Information support services through the tri-media and electronics.

SEC. 92. The Role of Government Agencies. The Department, together with state colleges anduniversities shall assist in the LGU's extension system by improving their effectiveness and efficiencythrough capability building and complementary extension activities such as:

a) technical assistance;b) training of LGU extension personnel;c) improvement of physical facilities;d) extension cum research; ande) information support services.

ANNEXES


84

SEC. 95. Extension Communication Support for LGUs. The Department, in coordination with the publicand private universities and colleges, shall develop an integrated multimedia support for nationaland LGU extension programs. The Department shall assist the LGUs in the computerization ofcommunication support services to clients and linkages to the NIN.

TITLE 4 RURAL NON-FARM EMPLOYMENT

Chapter 1

SEC. 98. Principles. The Department, in coordination with the appropriate government agencies,shall formulate the Basic Needs Program to create employment and cushion the effects ofliberalization based on the following principles:

a) No credit subsidies shall be granted. The normal rules of banking shall apply to all enterprisesinvolved, provided that existing credit arrangements with ARBs shall not be affected;

b) Enterprises can use training, information, advisory and related services of the Government freeof charge;

c) The participation of the private sector shall be voluntary.

Teams composed of specialists from government agencies and the private sectors shall developpilot programs in selected locales to establish the planning, implementation and evaluationprocedures.

SEC. 99. Participation of Government Agencies. The replication of the program shall be theresponsibility of the local government units concerned in collaboration with the appropriategovernment agencies, and the private sector. The local government units shall bear the costs ofpromoting and monitoring the basic needs program for which their IRA shall be increasedaccordingly as recommended by the Secretary of the Department: Provided, That the appropriatenational government agencies shall continue to provide the necessary technical as well as financialassistance to the LGUs in the replication of the program.



85

Chapter 3 Rural Industrialization Industry Dispersal Program

SEC. 101. Role of Government Agencies. The appropriate government agencies, under the leadershipof the LGUs concerned, shall provide integrated services and information to prospective enterprisesunder the one-stop-shop concept.

Local government units are authorized to undertake investment and marketing missions providedthat the costs of such missions are borne by the LGUs concerned. In making their land use plans,the LGUs, in consultation with the appropriate government agencies concerned, shall identify areasfor industrial parks.

Chapter 4 Training of Workers

SEC. 104. Role of TESDA. TESDA shall organize local committees that will advise on the scope, natureand duration of training for the above-mentioned programs.

TESDA is authorized to request the additional budgetary resources for these programs: Provided,That after a reasonable period, the task of coordinating the training is transferred to the LGUsconcerned.

GENERAL PROVISIONS

SEC. 111. Initial Appropriation. For the first year of implementation of this Act, the amount of Twentybillion pesos (P20,000,000,000.00) is hereby appropriated. The Department is hereby authorizedto realign its appropriations in the current year of the date of effectivity of this Act to conform withthe requirements of this Act: Provided, That the amount shall be allocated and disbursed asfollows:

7) Five percent (5%) for capability-building of farmers and fisherfolk organizations and LGUs forthe effective implementation of the agriculture and fisheries programs at the local level;

ANNEXES


re-envisioning local agricultural development - a guide for development managers

Documents