FROM the 1950s up to the early 1980s, when leftist ideas were at the peak of influence in local intellectual discourse, the development motto adopted for our agricultural sector was "land to the tiller." This meant the implementation of a land reform program that would distribute large tracts owned by hacienderos — wealthy landlords — and their families to the actual farmers.

It was argued that land ownership would encourage tillers to work harder to increase productivity as they would be able to capture all the benefits. They would no longer be compelled to share with landlords by virtue of being the landowner.

A series of land distribution programs were implemented by successive political administrations, culminating in the passage of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) of 1988. Unlike its predecessors where distribution was limited to lands planted to rice and corn, the CARL covered all agricultural lands regardless of the crop planted.

With around 5 million hectares of our agricultural lands already distributed, the "land to the tillers" call continues among leftist groups and their sympathizers.

Ironically, the protracted implementation of land reform resulted in the fragmentation of our farmlands into miniscule sizes. Small farmers cannot thus raise productivity as they are unable to afford modern farm equipment and technology. This, in turn, has practically consigned small cultivators to perpetual poverty because the land that they own is too small to earn a decent income, more so with a growing family.

But the motto persists despite the ideological bankruptcy.

On the industrial front and during the same era, we adopted the "Philippines for the Filipinos" motto to trigger the growth of our industrial base. It was proudly claimed that it was an expression of our nationalist fervor, and some consider the period as the golden years of Filipino nationalism.

Note that the leading figures who espoused this nationalist motto never actively pushed the "land to the tiller" agenda. That was expected because they came from the landowning class. Advocating for the distributive measure was in direct conflict with their economic interests.

Unfortunately, just like in our agricultural sector, the benefits of "Philippines for the Filipinos" were largely confined to the oligarchy. Their economic roots can be traced to their being hacienderos. As they possessed the required capital to invest in capital-intensive manufacturing industries, they used this opening to diversify their investment portfolios.

The protectionist policy embedded in the "Philippines for the Filipinos" motto meant guaranteed profits for the oligarchy. Their manufactured goods did not face competition from imported products as the latter were banned or were imposed high tariffs to make them more expensive. In addition, the oligarchy was given priority in the allocation of scarce dollars that were used for procuring imported equipment to churn out products.

The end result was that Filipino consumers suffered from the high cost of goods and services, which expectedly were generally of low quality given absence of competition. The agricultural sector also suffered because the export earnings that could be used to modernize it were diverted to supporting the needs of the inefficient industrial sector.

The woes of Filipino consumers did not end there: The Department of Agriculture (DA), the agency primarily mandated to promote agricultural development, adopted the view that its main task was to serve as "champion of the farmers," particularly small ones.

Aligned with this, the DA believed that it should continually subsidize, at ever-increasing amounts, farmer production efforts to ensure rising output. It felt obligated to protect small cultivators from competition by imposing import bans or high tariffs. The conviction was that this would allow our farmers to be competitive despite obvious inefficiency of miniscule farms.

The only problem is that while it benefits around 10 million farmers and fishers at most, it penalizes more than 100 million Filipino consumers via high food prices and low-quality goods due to absence of competition and options.

The results are devastating for Filipinos and the nation: persistent high inflation as food inflation contributes nearly half to the overall rate; severe malnutrition among our people, particularly kids; and scandalously high stunting among children 5 years old and below. Malnutrition and stunting in the Philippines are the highest in the region.

These have led to cognitive disabilities among our children because 90 percent of an individual's brain is formed from conception up to 5 years of age. We are now reaping the horrific consequences as seen in their embarrassingly low grades in the Program for International Student Assessment examination where the Philippines landed near the bottom. This has placed the future of this country in jeopardy.

To correct the situation, we need to urgently change our agricultural development motto. I propose that it be "nutritious and quality food at all times at affordable prices to all."

This will necessitate making our agricultural sector efficient and competitive by extending assistance, not just dole outs, that will truly make farmers efficient and competitive. This will mean interventions not only at the production stage but also along the supply and value chains to lower costs and ensure the availability of quality products.

This will require strategic decision-making on trade-related issues as a means of balancing supply and demand, particularly when the former falls short. This will entail streamlining DA functions and recruiting technically competent people who understand the agro-climatic requirements of crops, their economic viability and their positions in global trade.

There is nothing new to what I am saying. The simple reason is that the motto I proposed is actually the way the UN Food and Agriculture Organization defines "food security." Our problem is that we equate the term "food self-sufficiency" to "food security." Anyone who does that does not understand the dynamics and complexity of agricultural development.

fdadriano88@gmail.com

Read The Rest at :