Promouvoir la participation des parties intéressées dans le développement de la réforme agraire des communautés aux Philippines
Cet article montre la corrélation positive entre une participation systématique des parties intéressées et une amélioration de la productivité, ainsi qu' une hausse des revenus d'après l'expérience d'un grand nombre de ménages ruraux du Projet élargi de réforme agraire (CARP) aux Philippines. Le projet «Communautés durables de la réforme agraire-support technique à la réforme agraire et développement rural» (SARC-TSARRD) a facilité un changement dans les vies des ménages. Ce projet est financé conjointement par les Gouvernements des Pays-Bas et des Philippines par l'intermédiaire de son Département de la réforme agraire (DAR), et il a été mis en oeuvre par l'Organisation des Nations Unies pour l'alimentation et l'agriculture par le biais d'un fonds fiduciaire. Pour réaliser ses objectifs, le Projet FAO/SARC-TSARRD a initié et appliqué à très grande échelle un programme participatif ancré à un processus élargi du développement des systèmes agricoles (FSD), qui s'adresse aux contraintes prioritaires des communautés de la réforme agraire et peuvent améliorer leur accès aux services de support et accroître leur niveau de productivité et de revenu sur une base durable. Depuis 1995, le projet a collaboré avec le DAR au développement de ces communautés.
Promover la participación de las partes interesadas en el desarrollo de la reforma agraria de las comunidades de Filipinas
Este artículo muestra la correlación positiva existente entre la participación sistemática de las partes interesadas y el incremento de la productividad y de los ingresos, como revela la experiencia de un gran número de familias rurales del Programa Completo de Reforma Agraria (CARP) en las Filipinas. El proyecto que ha facilitado el cambio en las vidas de estas familias es el de «Comunidades sostenibles de la reforma agraria -Apoyo técnico a la reforma agraria y al desarrollo rural (SARC-TSARRD». Este proyecto está financiado conjuntamente por los gobiernos de los Países Bajos y de la República de Filipinas a través de su Departamento de Reforma Agraria, y que está llevando a cabo la Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Agricultura y la Alimentación través de un fondo fiduciario. Para alcanzar sus objetivos, se puso en marcha el proyecto FAO/SARC-TSARRD con un programa participativo en gran escala. Este proyecto está anclado en un amplio proceso de desarrollo de sistemas de explotación agrícola que afronta las limitaciones prioritarias de las comunidades de la reforma agraria para que puedan mejorar el acceso a los servicios de ayuda y aumentar su nivel de productividad e ingresos en un marco sostenible. Desde 1995 el Proyecto colabora con el Departamento de Reforma Agraria en el desarrollo de estas comunidades.
Menachem Lourie is Chief Technical Adviser for FAO projects GCP/PHI/042/NET and GCP/PHI/040/ITA
This paper illustrates the positive correlation between the systematic participation of stakeholders and improved productivity and increased incomes as experienced by a large number of rural households that are beneficiaries of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program in the Philippines. The project, Sustainable Agrarian Reform Communities - Technical Support to Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (FAO/SARC-TSARRD), has helped to facilitate the change in the lives of these households' members. This project is jointly funded by the Governments of the Netherlands and the Philippines through the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), and is being executed by FAO through a trust fund. To achieve its objectives, the FAO/SARC-TSARRD project initiated and applied a large-scale participatory programme anchored on an expanded farming systems development process to address the priority constraints of agrarian reform communities. Since 1995, the project has collaborated with DAR in developing these communities to improve their access to support services and increase their levels of productivity and income on a sustainable basis.
The agriculture sector continues to play a significant role in the economy of the Philippines in terms of direct contribution to production, employment and farmers' income. It accounts for about 22 percent of the GDP and 16 percent of export income, and remains the most important source of employment, providing income to 43 percent of the labour force. Nearly 60 percent of the population live in rural areas and are directly or indirectly dependent on agriculture for their livelihood.
Agricultural policies have given priority to the agricultural export-oriented commodity producers, dominated by a small proportion of large-scale landowners who, until 1988, controlled 70 percent of the total agricultural land. Consequently, the livelihoods of the majority of agricultural producers, including 10 million tenants and farm workers and about 2 million small owner-cultivators, have not improved.
The persistent widespread rural poverty is also related to low productivity and the dependence of rural households on inferior resource bases such as upland areas, and is aggravated by the lack of alternative rural employment. Low farm incomes are related to weak rural infrastructure, limited expertise in improved farming technologies, insufficient marketing information, poor access to low-interest production credit, inadequate post-harvest facilities, weak farmers' organizations and the slow implementation of agrarian reform prior to 1992.
In addition to the widespread rural poverty, continuing bipolar and inequitable agricultural development conditions have generated malnutrition and rural-urban migration. The average farm family income is about US$750 to US$1 000 per year, while farm wages average US$2-3 plus food per day, depending on the type of work and season. About 50 percent of the rural population live below the established poverty line while about 1.6 million rural households lack sufficient income to overcome malnutrition. Women suffer the most from low incomes and underemployment of the rural labour force, particularly in female-managed and female-headed households.
Recognizing the vital role of agriculture in economic recovery and its direct impact on rural poverty, in the late 1980s the government implemented a series of institutional reforms that included the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). CARP was instituted on 22 July 1987 by virtue of Proclamation No. 131 and by the subsequent enactment on 10 June 1988 of Republic Act No. 6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL). Its mandate is the distribution of public and private lands to farmer beneficiaries in an effort to increase agricultural productivity, enhance income, develop rural infrastructure and support services, and improve the standard of living of the agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs). CARP has a total scope of 8.06 million hectares of which 5.34 million hectares (66 percent) have been distributed (Department of Agrarian Reform [DAR], June 2000).
The FAO/SARC-TSARRD project was set up primarily as an institutional strengthening project. Its specific mandate is to assist DAR in transforming ARBs into self-reliant and productive farmers. It also has the task of helping to address the main thrusts of DAR which are geared towards food security and poverty alleviation.
The project provides technical assistance to DAR in its implementation of CARP. CARP addresses national efforts to improve the tenurial status and livelihood of more than 3 million ARBs, more than half of whom have already received their land titles. Yet many of these beneficiaries, including those who are part of the agrarian reform communities (ARCs),1 belong to the least developed rural households whose incomes fall below the established poverty line for rural areas in the Philippines.
Many beneficiaries, formerly landless labourers and tenants, are now owners of small parcels of land. To make their land productive, they require a package of services such as cooperative development and management, agricultural extension services, access to institutional credit, infrastructure facilities (farm-to-market roads, irrigation and post-harvest facilities) and improved marketing linkages. They also need access to information on market prices and demand to be able to respond quickly to the changing patterns in the domestic and international markets. These support services will enable them to improve their on-farm and off-farm productivity and thereby increase their income. Many of these small farmers have been organized into various types of farmers' organizations and are now the focus of assistance.
To ensure that support services are provided to ARCs, DAR actively promotes activities for programme beneficiaries' development. The need has become even more pronounced with the devolution of certain support service functions from the national government agencies to the local government units at the provincial and municipal levels.2 Basic services and facilities such as agricultural extension, community-based forestry projects, infrastructure projects and other support services have been transferred to local government units.
In its implementation of CARP, DAR made a strategic decision to focus its activities comprehensively on ARCs. This strategy was found to be more effective than thinly spreading the government's limited resources over its scattered beneficiaries. As a result, the development of ARCs has become the centrepiece of CARP implementation. With the assistance of FAO/SARC-TSARRD, DAR has adopted an area- and people-focused approach that integrates all the development efforts for its beneficiaries.
Within the ARCs there are several types of organizations such as cooperatives, associations and auto-saving groups. DAR has provided them with staff support through development facilitators who have the task of coordinating the provision of services to their respective ARCs. DAR also provided training, supplies and facilities. Some of the organizations were able to take advantage of institutional credit that is not easily accessible to individual beneficiaries. The ultimate goal is to transform these ARCs into self-sustaining economic and social entities that could then be in a better position to request and obtain higher levels of support services from the different administrative and political bodies.
To achieve its objectives, FAO/SARC-TSARRD developed and applied participatory development approaches that helped project beneficiaries improve their access to the necessary support services and increased their levels of productivity and income on a sustainable basis.
The major partners in this development process have been identified as follows:
As primary beneficiaries or major stakeholders, they have actively participated in nearly 436 cases where the FAO/SARC-TSARRD approach was applied to develop ARCs.
An important feature is the promotion of participation of stakeholders at all levels in the project's development cycle. This cycle consists of the following interrelated components, which are explained in more detail below:
The FSD approach as applied by FAO/SARC-TSARRD covers a wide range of community development processes. In addition to adopting the major FSD components that include classifying farm practices into farming systems and looking into their specific constraints and potentials, the approach has dynamically evolved and expanded to include integrated area development elements while placing emphasis on stakeholders' participation.
Through a network of about 850 DAR field staff, the project established farmer-led development teams in each selected ARC. These teams are composed of farmer-leaders, DAR field staff (who are mainly the municipal-level officers), representatives of the respective local government units (usually involving the municipal agriculturist, planning officer and the municipal engineer) and personnel of NGOs active in the area. The composition of the teams reflects the choice of those who have the distinct advantage of a clear understanding of specific local conditions and are therefore most relevant to the ARC development process. As a whole, the applied FSD process is consistent with the decentralization and devolution of development functions to local administrative levels.
These FSD teams are guided by the project over a two-and-a-half-month period through a structured six-phase training-cum-planning exercise that results in the preparation of realistic development plans for the ARCs. These plans are presented by the teams to their respective communities and subsequently become part of the development plans of the local governments.
The training-cum-planning exercise. This exercise aims to develop local teams that will be guided in the preparation of a development plan for their respective ARCs and that will continuously explore ways to improve their farm and non-farm productivity, thereby increasing the incomes of both beneficiaries and other individuals in the area. The exercise is composed of the following phases:
Encouraging participation of the barangay residents. The FSD training-cum-planning exercise includes a programme of consultation with barangay residents who have been a significant source of data for planning purposes and for mobilizing local support. The workshop consultations encourage barangay residents to identify and prioritize their major constraints and pinpoint areas where community contribution would complement external support.
FSD activities have been conducted in 436 out of 1 311 ARCs established nationwide and the development plans that were generated are in various stages of implementation. Moreover, the application of the FSD approach has created a growing demand for its replication in other ARCs.
Growing demand for FSD programme application. The growing demand for the application of the project's approaches is clear from the numerous requests that the project continues to receive from DAR field staff, barangay captains, municipal mayors, NGOs and those implementing foreign-assisted projects for the inclusion of their ARCs in the FSD programme. In several cases, local government units of fifth class municipalities have initiated FSD activities on their own or through a cost-sharing arrangement with the project. In most cases, the project has provided guidance mainly through DAR trainers who have become FSD practitioners.
The project has also extended technical assistance in the application of the FSD approach to 24 local government units in five provinces in municipalities where ARCs are located. One example is the municipality of Manolo Fortich, in the province of Bukidnon, Mindanao. The project gave technical assistance to the municipal government in holding an orientation training and consultation workshop for its barangay workers. It also provided assistance when the local government unit applied the FSD approach to its community development planning, leading to the formulation of the Municipal Integrated Development Plan.
To address the growing demand for FSD application, the project has conducted three intensive trainers' training courses of 35 days each for selected field staff of DAR and NGO personnel. This has enabled the project to establish a cadre of experienced trainers in order to cover more ARCs and, at the same time, ensure sustainability of the development process.
Adapting the training-cum-planning activities to local situations. Special care was taken to develop a training-cum-planning exercise that is easily understood and allows the full participation of all members of the FSD team. In many ways, it can be seen as a "balancing act" between the need to adopt sophisticated planning methods that may, however, result in losing farmers' full participation, and the need to avoid an oversimplistic method that is close to the traditional and ineffective "shopping list" approach.
The FSD training-cum-planning activities as applied by the project do not use the usual theoretical textbook approach to area development planning. Instead, the training is specifically designed to suit local ARC conditions. In this context, an FSD training manual has been developed that is continuously updated to integrate the significant field experience gained during the last five years of FSD application.
Mobilizing funds through ARC development plans. The ARC development plans prepared using the participatory approach serve as a basis for sourcing funds from the farmers' organizations' own savings, DAR's Agrarian Reform Fund, respective local government units and foreign grants, as well as major loans from international banks and investments from the private sector.
The project's experience in applying the FSD approach has been recognized by foreign donor agencies. Large-scale loans provided by the World Bank, AsDB and others have focused on such an approach as a basis for and, in many cases, as a condition for approving project loans intended for ARC development. Recognizing the positive and significant impact of the project's approach to ARC development, DAR has institutionalized FSD as a development strategy for its ARCs.
Expanding beyond the confines of ARCs. ARCs are located within municipalities and do not function in isolation. Many of the solutions to the constraints within the ARC are found outside the confines of the community, at the municipal level and beyond. The community depends on the wider environment for most of its requirements in terms of specialized and essential services. Thus, linkages with municipal and provincial administrative levels are being closely established and must be sustained.
Since development activities in an ARC often benefit small farmers beyond its boundaries, the FSD approach is being applied within the wider context of rural development. The DAR administration and project staff are therefore continuously exploring ways of using the FSD approach to reach out to a larger number of ARBs situated outside the confines of ARCs.
Monitoring and evaluating stakeholders' participation. The project monitors and evaluates stakeholders' participation through the nationwide network of DAR field staff who are in constant touch with other stakeholders. The performance of the project is checked mainly through progress monitoring and impact assessment exercises conducted as follows:
Impact on the beneficiaries. The project-supported activities are part of a long, ongoing process and not all the benefits derived from these interventions can be measured in a direct and quantifiable manner. However, there is already sufficient evidence as to their impact on the target beneficiaries. Two studies - one conducted by the project itself in 1998 covering the period 1995 to 1997 and a more recent one conducted by the World Bank-supported Agrarian Reform Communities Development Project (ARCDP) - have confirmed a significant positive correlation between the project's activities and the increase in household income.
The study Impact of the FSD application in the development of ARCs, conducted by FAO/SARC-TSARRD in 1998, involved 29 ARCs. The study conducted by ARCDP covered 55 ARCs and more beneficiaries in areas where the FAO/SARC-TSARRD project had applied its development approaches from 1996 to 1998. Baseline information drawn from the ARC plans was compared with the situation at the end of 1999. Among many other performance indicators, the most prominent was the conclusion that the real net household annual income has increased by an average of 61 percent in 42 ARCs (or 76 percent of 55 ARCs studied). Such a significant result was attained during the same period when the growth in gross value added in agriculture was only 2.9 percent for 1996 to 1997, -6.6 percent for 1997 to 1998 and 3.8 percent for 1998 to 1999.
In terms of support services, thousands of farming households now have access to infrastructure facilities such as roads and bridges, thus substantially reducing the cost of transporting agricultural products to market centres. Other support facilities have enabled them to grow a second crop using irrigation systems, gain better access to credit at lower interest rates to fund farm inputs, improve farm technologies and practices through training and demonstration farms, acquire good quality seeds and planting materials, engage in non-farm and on-farm activities such as poultry and livestock production, and diversify into higher-value crops - all of which address concerns for food security and increased income.
It is clear from these experiences that projects featuring stakeholders' participation in the development process exhibit greater acceptability, viability and replicability, and generate meaningful benefits and sustained impact.
Post-FSD training courses in the ARCs are held in line with the needs identified by the beneficiaries during the FSD process. These needs are also articulated in ARC development plans. To prepare for post-FSD training courses, collaboration between the respective local government unit and other relevant local institutions in the ARC is necessary.
In several cases, minor inputs are provided to facilitate the adoption of technologies or to initiate small-scale income-generating projects. Farmers are also provided with training materials that they can use when replicating the training. A total of 383 training activities have been held, attended by 6 015 beneficiaries.
Objectives of the training courses. The broad objective of the training courses is to improve and/or initiate farm-level small-scale enterprises to increase the productivity and income of farm households. The courses also aim to promote self-reliance among the farmer participants and their cooperatives in order to strengthen their organizations. The specific objectives are to:
Coordination meetings were held between FAO/SARC-TSARRD and relevant staff
(i.e. from UNDP's Support to Asset Reform through Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Programme and Development of Indigenous Communities [UNDP-SARDIC] and ARCDP) to produce detailed guidelines to identify, prepare, hold and monitor the post-FSD training courses. Using the approved guidelines, the FSD teams and the relevant foreign-assisted project field staff identified specific training courses needed by their respective ARCs. In each case, a training course proposal using a standard format was prepared for approval. Care was taken to meet the anticipated project proposals generated by these training courses. Thus, cost-sharing arrangements with farmers' organizations, including the replication of the training materials to be left behind, were arranged. Collaboration with the respective local government units and other relevant local institutions was extremely beneficial.
Type of training courses and materials provided. The training courses covered various non-farm and on-farm technologies, including livestock and poultry farming, fisheries and upland development. Some organizational development courses also helped to strengthen the ARB farmers' organizations and enhanced the managerial skills of the ARC leaders.
Types of training 1. On-farm
2. Non-farm
3. Organizational
4. Gender issues |
The materials provided as start-up inputs for the on-farm courses included certified seeds/seedlings, fertilizers, garden tools, improved animal stocks, feeds, veterinary medicines and fingerlings. Sewing machines, cloth, accessories, bottles, raw materials, utensils/tools, hand looms, filters, banana chippers and plastic sealers were provided for the non-farm courses.
Training methodology and venues. Most of the training adopted the season-long or cycle-long type of approach. This involved one to two days of classroom discussions followed by on-field problem-solving sessions performed by the farmer participants on their own farms. A resource person or the agricultural technicians assigned to the ARC were asked to facilitate. Training materials were distributed when needed for specific farm tasks.
The classroom discussions were usually followed by workshops to simulate or practise the skills learned. In some courses, actual on-field demonstrations were conducted. Some courses included field trips to model farms. Most of the courses were conducted on-site, in barangay halls or in public school classrooms, while some took place in training centres where facilities for certain technologies were available.
Although primarily intended for farmers, other participants attended the post-FSD training courses. Most of these participants were agricultural technicians from the agricultural offices of municipalities in which the ARCs are located. Their attendance was requested by their superiors in order to update their technical knowledge and to provide them with a basis to monitor the adoption of the technologies by the farmer participants.
The expertise of the academic and training institutions close to the ARCs was tapped in these post-FSD training sessions, as was the assistance of local government units, NGOs and people's organizations active in the area. The local government provided technicians from the provincial and municipal agricultural offices. The national offices providing technical support were the Department of Trade and Industry and affiliated offices of the Department of Agriculture, such as PhilRice. Resource persons were also drawn from universities such as Visayas State College of Agriculture and Central Mindanao University.
As a result of this collaboration, new linkages were forged, networks were expanded and limited resources were pooled and maximized. In all these activities, the participation of the stakeholders in the process of developing the ARCs was promoted.
Initial results of the post-FSD activities. To monitor the initial progress of the 97 post-FSD training courses conducted under the WB-ARCDP, 38 courses were selected as a sample (39 percent of the total). The study covered the period 1998 to 1999. These courses were mostly on subjects identified during FSD activities by the respective ARCs, and they therefore indicate the ARC situation that the ARBs wanted to improve. The Table presents a summary of the findings.
In most cases, the post-FSD training courses revealed significant progress in terms of productivity and income. It may be noted that trainees who adapted the technology recommended during the livestock, poultry and fisheries training courses posted significant increases in household income. Additional evidence also points to the fact that the number of adapters is increasing.
Summary of findings
Type of post-FSD training |
No. of training courses |
No. of |
No. of trainees |
No. of trainees who adapted the recommended technology |
Percentage of trainees who adapted the technology |
Changes in average net income per adaptor (pesos) | |||||
|
|
|
|
Males |
Females |
Total |
Males |
Females |
Total |
|
Before |
After |
Cultivation: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Rice |
10 |
10 |
174 |
97 |
271 |
70 |
48 |
118 |
44 |
7 746 |
10 427 |
- Vegetables |
7 |
7 |
80 |
91 |
171 |
86 |
72 |
158 |
92 |
6 451 |
12 140 |
- Banana |
1 |
1 |
17 |
8 |
25 |
7 |
|
7 |
28 |
1 500 |
3 000 |
- Sugar cane |
1 |
1 |
10 |
5 |
15 |
10 |
5 |
15 |
100 |
10 521 |
9 011 |
Duck raising |
4 |
4 |
20 |
60 |
80 |
19 |
31 |
50 |
63 |
none |
4 848 |
Swine production |
5 |
5 |
68 |
68 |
136 |
19 |
38 |
57 |
42 |
none |
9 381 |
Native chicken |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Production |
1 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
100 |
none |
2 250 |
Food processing |
5 |
5 |
36 |
108 |
144 |
|
50 |
50 |
35 |
none |
1 426 |
Cut flowers |
1 |
1 |
3 |
19 |
22 |
|
20 |
20 |
91 |
none |
18 000 |
Inland fish culture |
2 |
2 |
32 |
26 |
58 |
16 |
|
16 |
28 |
none |
(3 580) |
Crab fattening |
1 |
1 |
19 |
13 |
32 |
60 |
20 |
80 |
250 |
none |
68 400 |
|
|
38 |
38 |
460 |
498 |
958 |
288 |
287 |
575 |
60 |
|
|
Source: FAO/SARC-TSARRD in collaboration with UNDP-SARDIC (PHI/96/025).
Before the application of the agribusiness linkage approach, most ARBs relied on traditional crops such as rice and maize, and on traditional markets defined by the presence of intermediaries buying at very low prices. As a result of these conditions, ARBs obtained little profit from their farming operations and also lacked relevant market information such as commodities in high demand, lucrative market outlets and current prices, and the necessary tools and mechanisms to embark on a market-oriented and demand-led production system.
The agrarian reform programme altered the structure of ownership and control over agricultural lands. Prior to CARP, farmers relied on landowners to run farms, mobilize resources, finance production and market products. With the transfer of landownership, ARBs were practically abandoned to their own problems relating to production and post-production.
Yet there was some wariness on the part of the private sector, particularly agribusiness enterprises and corporations, about dealing with small farmers. The sector did not know how to conduct business transactions in areas covered by agrarian reform, which were initially regarded as anathema to business interests. Business arrangements under the new "landownership regime" were not yet defined and the business sector was hesitant to invest in such areas. There was little functional linkage between the ARBs and the private sector.
Moreover, DAR had no clear strategy and operational framework for linking beneficiaries with agribusiness enterprises and corporations. There was no programme to encourage the sector to invest in agrarian reform areas and no DAR staff had been designated or trained for this purpose.
Since one of the project's main aims is to assist DAR in improving linkages between ARBs (the producers) and agribusiness firms and enterprises in order to improve farmers' incomes, a three-pronged strategy was developed:
DAR found this strategy both effective and practical, and consequently launched the Investment and Marketing Assistance Program as one of its major programmes, based mainly on the approaches developed by the project.
The market-matching activities provide a forum where farmer leaders of ARB organizations and representatives of processing enterprises, other buyers, agribusiness entrepreneurs and investors can discuss how to establish a buyer-seller relationship and conduct their business. The raw material requirements of processors and exporters are matched with the produce of beneficiaries willing to supply agricultural products under a buyer-seller agreement. The discussions are open and candid, and the resulting marketing agreements and subsequent transactions usually lead to a situation where benefits are shared by both parties.
During the period 1997 to 2000, more than 75 marketing agreements were undertaken, involving more than 300 farmers' organizations and 176 agribusiness enterprises. More than 260 ARCs were covered, involving more than 35 000 ARBs nationwide.
Since ARBs supply their agricultural products under an arrangement mutually beneficial to both parties, this ensures that farmers have a steady market for their produce, and businesses are ensured a reliable supply of raw materials. In some cases, ARBs and agribusiness enterprises even enter into other arrangements such as partnerships and joint ventures.
The market linkages with leading agribusiness corporations that were facilitated by the project have resulted in increased incomes among beneficiaries. As an example, maize farmers in the province of Isabela in Luzon who were linked to a business enterprise were encouraged to produce groundnuts. As a result, their net incomes from this production increased from Php 10 000 to Php 28 000 per hectare per season. Similarly, coffee farmers in the Cordilleras achieved more than a twofold increase in incomes because of a successful business collaboration and higher buying prices than those of traditional buyers. Another example is the establishment of a long-term market linkage for ARBs growing mango and other fruits in Davao Oriental.
Efforts to attract the private sector became even more crucial when the government began to encounter financial constraints affecting the flow of funds from the Agrarian Reform Fund. This fund is the sole public fund allocated by the government to support development activities of beneficiaries. Involving the private sector in development was not only a good strategy to augment government resources but also made the private sector a key partner and an important stakeholder in the development of ARCs.
Despite the credit programmes available to farmers' organizations and the several years of implementing such programmes, loan utilization as well as programme reach have been low. There are instances where ARB organizations in one region have not availed themselves of a single credit project under these programmes.
The most common reasons cited have been the stringent qualification and lending criteria of financial institutions and the inability of cooperatives to go through the accreditation process. This is primarily a result of the low organizational maturity level of most organizations as seen in terms of required membership, capital buildup, internal controls and other criteria.
An assessment by FAO/SARC-TSARRD revealed that even those already qualified still find it difficult to take advantage of the credit programme. The basic problem stems from the lack of understanding or appreciation of specific requirements in filling out loan application forms and the data or information required in a proposal. Hence, proposals or applications keep going back and forth between cooperatives and lending institutions such as the Land Bank of the Philippines.
Even in the latest report covering 801 barangay workshop consultations nationwide, one of the main problems identified by community residents was the lack or absence of access to credit facilities to finance farm production and other endeavours. To ease the problems of access to credit and to provide capital for viable projects and enterprises, the project developed an approach whereby ARB organizations/cooperatives with project ideas are matched with relevant financing institutions.
This matching approach borrows heavily from the project's experience in agribusiness-matching, whereby business enterprises and ARBs enter into mutually beneficial business arrangements. The project also provides the venue by which ARB cooperatives can meet with financing institutions and discuss credit proposals. This provides an opportunity for credit institutions to understand the ARBs' credit proposals and for cooperatives to understand loan procedures in order to meet the requirements of the credit institutions. The procedure is as follows:
There is little available information for ARBs on prospective sources of financing. The project therefore produced and disseminated a revised Primer on credit programs for ARBs and small farmers: a guide to accessing credit. The primer contains the following basic information: purpose of the loan; criteria for eligibility; terms and conditions; steps to follow; contact offices and numbers of relevant institutions; and other relevant information. The primer has been a useful and practical guide to farmers' organizations, as well as in holding credit facilitation workshops. It has been disseminated and is in high demand among ARBs and DAR field officers with the task of assisting in the delivery of support services to ARCs.
The project's credit facilitation scheme works under the existing conditions and utilizes simple, practical approaches to rural development credit. The scheme has already shown promising results.
Establishing an effective project to create an impact on rural development that focuses on enhancing stakeholders' participation takes a considerable amount of time. The influencing factors include the need to put in place experienced staff, the learning process of understanding the local conditions and the establishment of an effective and reliable network of field staff, local government officials, NGO personnel and private sector representatives. In addition, the change in government administration and in the key personnel of DAR normally requires time to assimilate and adopt activities initiated by the previous administration. Thus the period needed to attain this level of effectiveness is sometimes beyond the normal timeframe of a donor/government-supported project.
One of the basic principles guiding the project from the start was the clear identification of its stakeholders. After assessing their respective roles and their potential as partners in the development of the ARCs, the project established a collaborative, long-term working relationship, avoiding as far as possible special types of arrangements or ad hoc structures, which tend to collapse once a project ends. The project staff was able to build on, enhance and strengthen its linkages from the national down to the local level.
It was, moreover, of paramount importance to establish a positive working environment with DAR - from the top management to the field-level staff.
By adapting to some culturally unique yet positive ways of working in the Philippines, the project was able to develop a second informal line of communication that facilitated its progress. It balanced its input in order to avoid creating dependency on project activities and, instead, to stimulate active and enthusiastic participation.
ARCDP. 2000. Report on the ARCDP impact assessment. Agrarian Reform Communities Development Project (ARCDP). August. (preliminary draft)
FAO/SARC-TSARRD. 1998. Handbook on financing programs for agrarian reform beneficiaries. Quezon City, Philippines, DAR and SARC-TSARRD Project.
FAO/SARC-TSARRD. 1999. Project brief. A report on the SARC-TSARDD project's components, operating structures, target beneficiaries and linkages with partner organizations. December. Quezon City, Philippines.
FAO/SARC-TSARRD. 1999. A report on the impact of the farming systems development application in the development of agrarian reform communities. October. Quezon City, Philippines.
FAO/SARC-TSARRD. 1999. Farmers' productivity enhancement training for FSD-covered UNDP/ SARDIC-assisted ARCs (May-August 1999). September. Quezon City, Philippines.
FAO/SARC-TSARRD. 2000. Doing business in agrarian reform communities. Quezon City, Philippines.
FAO/SARC-TSARRD. 2000. Report on the collaboration of FAO/SARC-TSARRD and UNDP-SARDIC projects: accomplishment of activities under contractual agreement, 1997-2000. December. Quezon City, Philippines. (final draft)
FAO/SARC-TSARRD. 2000. Second progress report on the activities of FAO/SARC-TSARRD in support of the World Bank-assisted ARCDP under UTF/PHI/044/PHI. September-December. Quezon City, Philippines.
FAO/SARC-TSARRD. 2000. Innovative approach in facilitating access of small farmers to credit: experience in the Philippine Agrarian Reform Program. November. Quezon City, Philippines.
FAO/SARC-TSARRD. 2000. A report on the NGO-PO Partners Consultative Workshop. September. Quezon City, Philippines.
FAO/SARC-TSARRD. 2000. Innovative experience in agribusiness linkaging for agrarian reform beneficiaries. Quezon City, Philippines.
FAO/SARC-TSAARD. 2000. Agribusiness promotions and negotiations: project experience in coffee and banana in ARCs in the Philippines, by A. Portugal. Paper presented at the Regional Expert Consultation on Farm-Agribusiness Linkages held in Bangkok, September 2000. Quezon City, Philippines.
FAO/SARC-TSARRD. 2000. Market matching and credit facilitation. Workshop materials.
21-23 June. Davao City, Philippines.
FAO/SARC-TSARRD. 2000. Barangay workshop consultation report: development needs identified by residents of 505 rural communities in the Philippines. Quezon City, Philippines.
FAO/SARC-TSARRD & DAR. 2000. Primer on credit programs for ARBs and small farmers: a guide to accessing credit. October. Quezon City, Philippines.
1 An ARC is a contiguous area composed of a cluster of barangays (villages) within a municipality with at least 60 percent of its population composed of ARBs. As of December 2000, 1 311 ARCs have been established nationwide by DAR and there are plans to reach a total of 2 000 by 2004.
2 The transfer and devolution of certain powers and responsibilities that relate to support services to local government units are included in the 1991 Local Government Code.