Volume V No. 3 May- June 1987 ISSN 0115-9097 III lib II II I I I mm Agrarian Reform The present administration has empha- in the Philippines rural development as a,focal pointof its development strategy. Agriculture has i ' ' been viewed as the sector which will t ! EDITOR'S NOTE: No other tsmesince the EDSA revolution has_ bitterly polarized lead both short-term recovery and long- the Philippine society than the proposed agrarian reform program. A_ we go to press_ run growth. However, the prospects for the President is on the verge of signing a land reform order amMst emotional condem- sustainable growth in the agricultural nations by both the landless and landowners, The landless,..its supposed beneficiary, sector are hampered by the highly skewed spearheaded by the militant peasant organization, the Kilusang Magbubuldd ng Pili. distribution of landholdings which consti- pinas (KMP) have denounced the "watered down" version of the Comprehensive tute a barrier to social and political Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) as no better than the failed Marcos-initiated prog- stability as well as to the dual goals of rant On the other hand, the landowners have issued an impassioned threat of civil equity and efficiency. More specifically, disorder should the order be signed and implemented an agriculture-led, employment-oriented In a more ob/ective tone, Dr. MaLAgnes R. Quisumbing, our guestwriter for this development strategy without a signifi- issue, tries to sort out the conflicting issues and interests based from her numerous cant land reform program will not lead to exposure on the land reform ism_ Dr. QuisumbingtsatpresentAssistantPro[essorat a strong positive impact on the rural the University of the Philippines' School of Economics. She has done varied studies poor, nor will it lead to sustained broad- on Philippine agriculture and development, and of late, co.authored the section on based rural development (Day/d, 1986: land reform in An Agenda for Action for the Philippine Rural Sector by the Agricul- 1.4). Moreover, the agriculture growth tu_l Policy and Strategy Team; and again a co-tmthor o1"the raonogrffph In Search of process itself runs the risk of exacerbating a Land Reform Design for the Philippines done this year by the UP Los Baffos Agri- that inequality, since benefits from new culturalPolicy Research Program. technology, irrigation, and market infras- Dr. Quisumbing reiterates her belief that land reform must be enacted before trueture tend to be capitalized into higher Congress convenes in July. One notes that even the conservative Catholic Church land values, to the benefit of present has thrown its support to this stand..But beyond the question of when looms a.btgger landowners. Finally, the existing in- concern: Will it be a genuine land reform? Political observers believe that the answer to surgency problem can be traced to the this indicates the course which the Aquino government is and may have been taldng people's perception of social injustice, since it was swept to where it is now by the original people power, and this will only worsen ff redistributive structural refo-fius are not undertaken. CONTENTS Page Agrarian Reform in the Philippines .................................................... 1 PIDS Working Papers ................................................................ 13 P I DS Staff Papers . .............. 16 UPDATE New Publications _' :: _ ............ 14 Seminars ,.. 15 Forthcoming Seminars ......... ......................... . ........................... 15 lib I II IIII II I
Transcript
Volume V No. 3 May- June 1987 ISSN 0115-9097III lib II II I I I mm
Agrarian ReformThe present administration has empha-
in the Philippines rural development as a,focal point of itsdevelopment strategy. Agriculture has
i
' ' been viewed as the sector which will
t !EDITOR'S NOTE: No other tsme since the EDSA revolution has _ bitterly polarized lead both short-term recovery and long-the Philippine society than the proposed agrarian reform program. A_ we go to press_ run growth. However, the prospects forthe President is on the verge of signing a land reform order amMst emotional condem- sustainable growth in the agriculturalnations by both the landless and landowners, The landless,..its supposed beneficiary, sector are hampered by the highly skewedspearheaded by the militant peasant organization, the Kilusang Magbubuldd ng Pili. distribution of landholdings which consti-pinas (KMP) have denounced the "watered down" version of the Comprehensive tute a barrier to social and political
Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) as no better than the failed Marcos-initiated prog- stability as well as to the dual goals ofrant On the other hand, the landowners have issued an impassioned threat of civil equity and efficiency. More specifically,disorder should the order be signed and implemented an agriculture-led, employment-oriented
In a more ob/ective tone, Dr. MaLAgnes R. Quisumbing, our guestwriter for this development strategy without a signifi-issue, tries to sort out the conflicting issues and interests based from her numerous cant land reform program will not lead toexposure on the land reform ism_ Dr. QuisumbingtsatpresentAssistantPro[essorat a strong positive impact on the ruralthe University of the Philippines' School of Economics. She has done varied studies poor, nor will it lead to sustained broad-on Philippine agriculture and development, and of late, co.authored the section on based rural development (Day/d, 1986:land reform in An Agenda for Action for the Philippine Rural Sector by the Agricul- 1.4). Moreover, the agriculture growthtu_l Policy and Strategy Team; and again a co-tmthor o1"the raonogrffph In Search of process itself runs the risk of exacerbatinga Land Reform Design for the Philippines done this year by the UP Los Baffos Agri- that inequality, since benefits from newculturalPolicy Research Program. technology, irrigation, and market infras-
Dr. Quisumbing reiterates her belief that land reform must be enacted before trueture tend to be capitalized into higherCongress convenes in July. One notes that even the conservative Catholic Church land values, to the benefit of presenthas thrown its support to this stand..But beyond the question of when looms a.btgger landowners. Finally, the existing in-concern: Will it be a genuine land reform? Political observers believe that the answer to surgency problem can be traced to thethis indicates the course which the Aquino government is and may have been taldng people's perception of social injustice,since it was swept to where it is now by the original people power, and this will only worsen ff redistributive
structural refo-fius are not undertaken.
CONTENTS Page
Agrarian Reform in the Philippines .................................................... 1PIDS Working Papers ................................................................ 13PI DS Staff Papers ............... 16
UPDATE
New Publications _' :: _ ............ 14Seminars ,.. 15
DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH,NEWS 2 MAY - JUNE 1987.I il I i in n ......
IIIIIIII
" operations. Thereibre, the exemption of of the 1950s, and the 1972 shift from a
"' land under landlords' direct administra- democratic to an authoritarian regime.),i.'.'_.:' _':Oaf ' tion had the effect of reducing labor While it is true that political motivation is
_'"_:_t¢ oommlrc/M..¢_la._/s,a input per hectare below an optimum certainly a crucial factor in agrarian
_" _'_ "¢_(i_,. '__!ii' level. Second, the limitation to rice and reform, it is likewise true that in the•, _)J • . , , •= corn land induced landlords to divert medium and long-term, there are
their land to other crops. Third, regula- objective economic realities which are. . ." . ,.._ ,.,
tions on tenancy contracts (especially the essential to make agrarian reform sustain-Previous administrations have, in prohibition of share tenancy)and control able. Thus, agrarian reform must be
fact, recognized the importance of land on land rent reduced the incentive of viewed not only as a political norreform as a policy issue. This is evidenced landowners to rent out their land in small counter-insurgency tool (which wouldby its continued presence in the econo- parcels, thus decreasing potential employ, lead to piecemea_ and short-term efforts)mic and political agenda since the period ment of landless workers (Hayami, but as a part of a broader developmentof Commonwealth. However, the actual 1987b). Finally the encouragement of strategy for the agricultural sector.redistributive impact of previous prog- large-scale plantation agriculture served to' This paper aims to present andrams have been limited for several perpetuate a form of production organi- clarify some economic issues related to
reasons. One reason is that prograrns have zation which is not suited to a land- agrarian reform. It begins, by reviewingremained essentially the same over the scarce, labor surplus economy like the data on Philippine rural poverty and its
past thirty years, (i.e. government put- Philippines., relationship to tenurial patterns; It the_chase of tenanted land and its resale to Another reason lbr the lukewarm proceeds to discuss the issues of agri. t
tenants (Winfel, 1983]), and has not been impact of previous programs is the pre- cultural heterogeneity, economies of scaleresponsive to the changing economic and dominant political motivation without and tenurial arrangements. Later, policypolitical realities of the grassroots. Aside adequate consideration of the under- directions under the Aquino administra-from the focus on tenanted land, previous lying economic factors which enable tion are cited, namely, the Agrarian andprograms have been further restricted to agrarian reform to be an economically- Natural Resources Reform Provision ofgrain crops (i.e. rice and corn) on the viable proposition. Previous regimes have the 1986 Constitution, and the proposedargument that the inclusion of export often introduced land reform policies as Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Prog.crops traditionally grown on plantations stop gap measures to appease political ram (CARP). Finally, some policies whichmay disrupt production and endanger an unrest - witness the past administrations' would provide incentives for an efficientimportatit source of foreign exchange implementation of land reform policies and equitable pattern of land distribu.earnings. At the same time, the Marcos only during crisis periods (e.g. the peasant tion in the Philippines and supportive of
administration pursued policies which, unrest in the 1930s. the Huk movement agrarian reform are discussed.encouraged the development of large-
scaleplantation agriculture and the entry Table 1. 'Total Number of Familiesby BroadIndustry Groupof foreign investment into the agricultural (National Standard); Third Quarters,1980-1983sector. Thus, whatever efforts were tnade' (in thousands)toward redistribution of land ownership Averagein rich and corn were counteracted by Annualpolicies which served to increase asset Growth
industry Group 1980 1981 1982 1983 Rate (%)concentration ,in the plantation sector
(Quisumbingand.4driano,1987). Philippines 8677 8894 9111 9382 2.4The combinatiori'of those two con-
flitting policy directions also served to Agriculture 4897 5042 5120 5346 3.0create biases against the efficient utili- Non-agriculture 3780 3852 3991 3982 1.8zation of land for increasing employmentand labor income. First, the limited Bottom 30%
application of previous programs to Total 2599 2666 2771 2812 2.5
tenanted land created a strong incentive AgricultUre 2124 2184 2217 2310 2,8for landlords to evict tenants and Non-agriculture 475 482 514 493 1.3cultivate their land under direct adminis-
tration. Labor input and hence, agri- Other Incomecultural output and labor income perhectare, are usually higher in smalJ family Groups 6078 6228 6380 6525 2.4farms than large farms, based on hired Agriculture 2773 2858 2903 3036 3.1labor, because of the inherent difficulty Non-agriculture 3305 3370 3477 3489 1.8
in supervising wage laborers for spatially.dispersed and ecologically diverse farm Source: NCSO
IIIIIII
Administrator
Administrator
'DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH NEWS 3 MAY -JUNE 1987..... , ...........
Rural Poverty and Land TenurePatterns1 Table2. RegionalPovertyindicators,1983 and 1985.
A distributional policy such as land 1983z 191152
reform is best understood when situated
in the context of the poverty situation in URBAN RURALthe rural areas. Following the 1983 Proverty Poverty Provorty Poverty Poverty Poverty
NEDA Development Planning Committee Region line 3 incidence line incidence line incidence
which classified the bottom 30 percent of
the income bracket as poor, a cursory (inP) (%) (inP) (%) (inP) 1%)view of the rural poverty situation isneeded. NCR Metro Manila 840 11.2 3,282 44.1 ....
Table I provides data on the number 1. Ilocos 678 40.3 3,093 56.2 2,139 51.1
of families for agricultural and non- 2. CagayanValley 678 43,i 2,897 48.6 2;092 55.6agricultural income groups, broken down
3. Central Luzon 696 27.4 3,153 45.2 2,104 43.8into poor and non-poor families for the
eriod 1980 to 1983. As of the third 4. Southern Tagalog 768 31.3 3,048 50.6 2,174 59.1uarter of 1983, there are over 5.3 5. Bicol 660 42.7 2,625 62.3 2,047 76.0
million families in the agricultural sector, 6. Western Visayas 696 50.5 3,069 65,0 2,249 76.2
representing 57 percent of total popula. 7. Central Visayas 732 48.1 2,426 58.9 1,818 73.4
tion. Over 82 percent or 2.3 million 8. EasternVisayas 654 33.00 2,733 70.1 1,822 70.5 !
families in this sector belong to the 9. Western Mindanao 768 40,1 2,650 61.6 2,025 66.0bottom 30 percent income bracket.10. Northern Mindanao 678 38.6 2,952 65.7 2,022 66.3
The annual growth rate of thebottom 30 percent income bracket 11. Southern Mindanao 738 33.3 2,998 59.6 2,079 62.8families is higher at 2.8 percent compared 12. Central Mindanao 666 28.4 2,624 56.8 2,161 67.0
to the 1.3 percent annual increase of their PHILIPPINES 39.0 3,021 52.1 2,066 63.7non-agricultural counterparts. In general,we can conclude that from the absolute
number of families and populationgrowth rates,-the agricultural sector hasexperienced a substantial increase inpoverty incidence relative to the rest of 1WorldBank (1985),
_he country, 2Inter-agency Working Group on Poverty Determination (1986).3ASuch a view, however, is limited per capita poverty line multiplied by 8 to make comparisions consistent with the1985. The poverty line was computed based- on rice expenditure sufficient to meet
_ecause it is not based on an absolute calorie-requirements blown up to a food threshold and a total threshold. See World Bankneasttre of deprivation nor does it con- (1985) fnrdetails.;ider regional variations in povertyincidence. A regional analysis of povertywould be more usefial in identifying key Table 2 presents alternative estimates (1985). Bearing these caveats in mind, letfactors related to rural poverty, of poverty incidence in 1983 and 1985, us proceed to Table 2. The data for 1983
based on the National Census and show that regions with the highestStatistics Office (NCSO) Integrated poverty incidences are Western Visayas
Profile of the Rural Poor Survey of Houseb.olds (ISH); computed (50%), Central Visayas (48%), Bicolby the World Bank (1985) for 1983, and (43%), Cagayan Valley (43%), Ilocosthe Inter-Agency Working Group on (40%) and Western Mindanao (40 % ).
Regional analysis of poverty is- Poverty Determination (1986) for 1984o The lowest poverty incidence rates areimportant because poverty incidence What is immediately apparent is that the in Metro Manila (11% ) and Centralvaries markedly across geographic regions. World Bank poverty lines are conservative Luzon (27%).It is also essential in identifying priority compared to those adopted by the Inter- Rural-urban breakdowns based onareas for intervention. The identification Agency Working Group, and this tends to 1985 data show that poverty incidence isof regions with high poverty incidence, underestimate the poverty incidence highest in the rural areas of Westernhowever, must be taken only as a first figures. In previous studies on the Philip- Visayas (76.2%), Bicol (76.0%), Centralstep because of wide intraregional pines, the World Bank has also tended to Visayas (73.4%), Central Mindanao
variation (e.g. between provinces and use conservative poverty lines; and this (67.0%),NorthernMindanao(66.3%),andmunicipalities), practice has been criticized by Mangahas Western Mindanao (66.0%). The regions
- 9 ' 2b " 4b " dO " dO60 40 20 0 "" WESTERN MINDA
Percent ] PercentI
/
12 11CENTRAL SOUTHERNMINDANAO MINDANAO
with the lowest rural poverty incidence
are Central Luzon (43.8%) and Ilocos Table 3. ComparativeIndex of Mean Family Incomeby Type of Family(51.1% ). (all families -- 10O)1980-1983.
Agricultural incomes are substantial-ly lower than non-agricultural incomes.It comes as no surprise, therefore, that a Typesof family T h i r d Q u a r t • r F o u r t h Q u a r t e r1980 1981 1982 1983 1980 1981 1982 1983greater number of families in the bottom30 percent of the income distribution are All Families 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
. in agriculture. A more detailed picture Agricultural Operators 66.0 64.2 65.0 64.1 70.2 64.8 85.7 76.7can be obtained by examining an index Palay 67.4 64.3 64.4 61.3 81.5 75.7 97,2 109.3of income by occupation as compared Corn 56.4 49.6 46.2 44.1 51.7 38.1 40.6 40.6with the national average (See Table 3). Coconut 59.7 55.2 57.5 75.0 58.7 49.2 76.6 70.8Except for livestock and poultry opera-tors, incomes in the agricultural sector are Sugarcane 15.4 101.6 180,6 92.2 166.5 322.9 299.6 76.3
Other Crops 67.4 63.4 63.0 56.9 52,4 49.4 127.7 54.2generally below the national average.Forexample, agricultural wage laborers LivestockandPoultry 112,6 114.3 127.9 101,4 113,8 109.4 110.8 91.3received 55.6 percent of the national Fishing 66,6 72.3 66.4 58.4 63.8 61.5 71.5 62.2average income in 1983. AgriculturalWages 50.8 50.0 50,5 55.6 63,2 48.1 60.6 44.3andSalaries
More recent data from the 1983 ISHNon-agricultural 142,2 144.6 143.1 144.7 135,5 144.3 162.2 129.3
permit us to analyze the breakdown ofpoverty incidence by main source of
, I I IIIII il i-
• DEVELOPMENT RESEARCHNEW£ 6 MAY--JUNE 1987ii iii iiiilIIIi
Table 4, Area of Farms, by Type and Tenure of OperatorPhilippines, 1971,
(percentage distribution)
% oftotal
physical Tenureof farmafarm
Type of Farm Ow=led Rentedor Leased Other t'ormsFully Part For share For fixed Runt free Ma==ager O[her_
percenc in 1981. With respect to palay, owners decreased from 77.6 percent to highest poverty incidence,the percentage of farm area under owner- 75.3 percent• while that rented or leased
operated status (both categories) in- increased f'rom 1.8.5 percent to 19.6
increased from 65.7 percent to 68.1 per- percent. /t is relatively easy to shift land An analysis of the commercial cropscent from 1971 to 1981. However, the out from corn to avoid ir_clusion in OLTP (e.g. totgacco, sugarca_te, bar_ana and
percentage of palay'farm area which was because corn production does not require pineappie) is more difficult •because of
rented or lease increased from 27.6 so nmch semi-perrnanent land improve- change % category deimitionso Many ofpercent .to 29,4 percent. Furtlaermore, ments as does paddy rice cultivation, these were reported as marJager-operatedwhile the percentage under snare tenancy A more dramatic deterioration occurred, in the 1971 cextsus; this category hasbeen
decreased, the leasehold percentage in- in coconut; a drastic decline in percentage el_nmated in _he later census, and it iscreased. This is consistent witb. the scheme of owner-operated farms t'roln 81.1 u.nciear where the category has been
to shift from share tenancy to leasehold percent to 73.8 percent; a marked in- absorbed. One approach would classify
operations, creased in share and leasehold tenancy manager-operated farms under those
trom 14.8 percent to 214.9 percent. The leased for a fixed amount of money/
The situation in corn, which was trends in tenure status of corn and produce; this is consistent with the
supposed ro 'be under the Operadon Land coconut fames are alarming, since these leasing of large tracts for plantation
Transfer Program (OLTP), is slightly crops, which have t'he highest propoltion purposes from the NatiorJal Developmentworse. Corn area operated by farm of tenanted farms, are also those with the Corporation.
2 [ J I llll IIlllll [ • IIIIIIIIII
Administrator
DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH NEWS 8 MAY -JuNE 1987__ '.............. In I I I ill|l I I I nimBI I i i
m
Table 6 Sample Typology of Farm Enterprises and Crops in thePhilippines.
Demand Peasant Foods Industrial/Luxury ExportsSupply (Consumed primarily within Consumed by wage- (for Industrial use or
the agricultural sector, earners;available consumption by highsubsistence crops) on market income groups))
]_conomic Issues in Agrarian enterprises can be made based on: (1) the corn and vegetables are typically ga'ownReform mode of production to which they belong on small-scale peasant farms, while corn-
(primitive community, semifeudal, or mercial farms and agribusiness corpora-capitalist); (2) their respective status in tions (e.g. those growing bananas and
A The Need for a Comprehensive the labor market, (whether family or pineapples for export) would be classi-Program hired labor is predominant); and (3) the fled as capitalist enterprises because of
degree of control they exercise over the large scale operations and the use of wagt_state. The typology of farm enterprises labor_ There are also non-capitalist planta-
A genuiile land refonu program, can then be interfaced with a typology of tions such as those in sugar and coconut,being a question of just distribution of crops based on conditions of supply and where the predominant arrangement isreturns to land and natural resources, demand. Supply comes from imports and tenancy or wage labor, the latter beingshould :not be viewed as specific to any domestic production, the latter coming differentiated from capitalist enterprisescrop, to type of tenure, or economic size from capitalist and peasant enterprises due to the existence of other social andof operational landholding (David, 1986: where the differentiating variables are institutional ties between the worker and
1.5). The pitfalls of confining agrarian jointly the scale of production and the the landlord (as in the hacienda systemrefoma to specific crops or to particular use of hired labor. Demand- conditions, of Negros). The technical requirementstenurial forms not only create incentives on the other hand, provide a basis for the for each crop as well as its labor institu-
for evasion, but also lead to neglect of classification of crops into four cate- tions may be different so that a singlecrops/forms of productive organization gories: peasant foods, wage foods, indus- agrarian reform scheme may not bewhere inequality is more pronounced, trial and luxury crops, and exports, based uniformly applicable. However, thisHowever, one of the difficulties of formu- on geographic locus of disappearance, the does not negate the need for the redistri-lating such a comprehensive scheme is weight of the crops in the consumer price bution of land ownership and access tothe underlying heterogeneity of the index, and the share of the crop market- rental income from land. Due to the
agrictfltural sector, ed. difference in production-marketing ar-The agricultural sector is ciaaracte- A typology of the agricultural sector rangements across crops and variations in
rized by different production and market- would show the diversity of production patterns of land ownership, which maying arrangements across crops: Following arrangements in the.Philippines as shown have cultural and ecological bases (e.g,de Janvry (1981), a typology of form in Table 6. For example, rootcrops, rice, tribal and communal lands), land reform
DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH NEWS 9 MAY -JuNE 1987I HIH III I II IIiIII
programs must be flexible in design and for custom flowing; sugar planters in contract farming schemes or collectiveimplementation. Thus, attention must be Negros say that a farm size of 50 hectares ownership.given to various institutional arrange- enables efficient use of such large-scalements under which this can take place, machinery. However, this bottleneck for
small holders can be solved through the C. TenurialArrangementuse of the custom-plowing service of
B. Economies of Scale tractors, which is readily available in the A major issue in the land reformsugar areas of Batangas and Bukidnon, debate is whether or not the governmentwhere both small and large sugar planters should impose the type of tenure rela-
The loss of economies of scale is coexist. Thus, diseconomies of scale tions on land reform beneficiaries. Foroften used against the extension of land need not be inherent to small farms so example, the shift from share tenancy to
reform to the plantation sector. It is long as a viable rental market for leasehold tenancy was instituted on theoften argued that parcelling out or machinery and other support services grounds that: (1)sharetenancyisineffi-dividing the operational unit may disrupt exists, cient compared to fixed rent (leasehod
production processes, with detrimental. Data from sugar farms also indicate tenancy) or wage labor; (2)share tenancyeffects in productivity. This argument is that small farms may be more cost- is the most exploitative form of produc-
based on two premises: First, land efficient in producing sugar (Habits, tion relations; and (3)the tenant shouldreform is equated to the subdivision 1977). Table 7 shows that small sugar be liberated fromhis "feudal bondage" toof operating units, and second, significant farms incur the least cost to produce the landlord.
_economies of scale exist in the plantation one picul of sugar. The cost per picul Despite the popular appeal Of suchsector. However, both arguments do not even increased for longer farm size care- arguments, however, restrictions on thehave convincing empirical evidence in gories. Furthermore, a comparison with form of tenancy may have negative impli-their favor. First, land reform involves the other sugar-producing Asian countries cation and may, in fact, be unfounded.redistribution of ownership, and is not reveals that the Philippines has extra- First, •theoretical studies have shown that,equated with the subdivision of the
ordinarily large farms. The Philippines all other things being equal, in the pre-operational unit. In this case, the loss ofis an anomaly since almost half of its sence of risk and uncertainty, share-
economies of scale is moot and academic, total sugar cane area consists of farms cropping is equivalent to a combinationsince the farm enterprise will still be exceeding 50 hectares in size, while farms of fixed-rent of fixed-wage contractsoperated as a large unit, though owner- smaller than 5 hectares account for (Newbery, 1977, Reid, 1976). Empiricalship will be democratized. Second, the
99 percent of sugar cane farms in studies in the Philippines(e.g.Ministryofexistence of economies of scale in agri- Taiwan, 99 percent in Japan, 6°35 per- Agrarian Reform, 1983) also show noculture is subject to question. Recent cent in India, and 72 percent in Pakistan. significant productivity differencesstudies (e.g. Hayami and Ruttan, 1985, Habito points out that if other countries between tenure categories, while farmCh. 6; Hayami, 1987a) have shown that, have done well with predominantly small practices, farm inputs and irrigation arealthough increasing returns in agricultural sugar cane farms, there seems to be no variables which do affect farm produc-
production tend to prevail in high-wage reason why the Philippines, cannot. If tion. Thus, singling out tenanted farms oneconomies that demand large-scale capital economies of scale do exist m processing the basis of the inefficiency argument isequipment to save on labor, agriculture in and marketing activities, small farmers not justifiable. Second, assuming thatlow-wage developing economies is can still take advantage of these through labor income is the major source ofgenerally characterized by constant
...... , • JlJ m,
returns or even scale diseconomles. Even
in the case of commercial crops such as
sugar, scale economies appear to exist Table 7. Sugar Production Costs for Different Farm Sizes.only in processing activities but not infarm production itseff. -..................
A recent study based on field obser- FarmSize " AverageCostperPicul (_'1rations (H_ami, Quisumbing andAdriano, 1987) has concluded that scale ..... _ :_=_economies do not exist in the production Small farms ( IO hectares and below) IO7.50
of most tree crops such as coconuts,coffee, and cacao. Production and Medium forms (between IO to 50 hectares) 124 .OO
marketing of these crops require neitherlarge-scale machinery nor central manage- Large farms (above 50 hectares ) 120 .OO
ment, both of which could be pos_iblesources of scale economies. In the case of
$ouroe of basic data : PHILSUCOM_ A :5aheme for the Rationalization of the Philippine SuE(Ifsugar, however, scale economies seem to I_dustry,1985, InHablto(1987).
be linked to the use of large-scale tractors ................ _,,• . ] ." li_
' I IIIII I IIIII II llllll I II IIIlllIllllllll
DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH NEWS 10 MAY - JUNE 1987I I A Ill
income for the tenant and agricultural generate enough cash income, or to avail.
laborer, the share of labor vis-a-vis shares of outside credit sources have expressed i::':'.::'!''/.!.:."." .' .""::':i'i.'"" '"' ";'"i.i '"":".!'. ')" ' ''!":'"'"i'i"!'"i"i:iaccruing to land or capitaT'may be more their desire to become leaseholders ! i .:i..'"'i;crucial in defining "exploitation" than (Hayami, Quisumbing and Adriano, ' :.:..".ii.i:i._,:::i.. :tlfthe form of tenancy itself. That is, other 1987:9). Thus, it may be wiser to make a ......."'""" 'forms of production organization which transition to leasehold status optional, comzng:".:are not characterized by tenancy may Furthermore, it is crucial that support . ,:elite",,
' ....'....' ..''.'.
even result in lower employment and services be part and parcel of a land grolabor income, and may even have higher reform strategy, (e.g. extension services ':th_concentrations in asset ownership. Per- to increase the skills and productivity of
haps the most obvious example would be the farmer_beneficiary, and credit prog- .wottldilwage labor on sugar plantations and rams) to enable him to purchase neces- ': ::i':i.'.:"''capitalist enterprises like multinational sary production inputs. .. :.. '..
" ' ' .i.". ''
agribusiness plantations. Third, since rural .:'...
product and factor markets are imperfect, . ............... .. ....... '..i.i.:.'iiiii.'...ii''''''':.'the landlord (ff he is not an absentee) i!:':'"...... '.... "'""':' :may serve as the conduit for credit .". '..:....:i.!.:):....ii'..;
i'"..'. .. _,. ._-needed to purchase production inputs, workers to a lU..t share from their laborAbolishing the social and economic in the utilization of marine and f.ishing
resources" (Article XIH, Section 7).institutions of tenancy without pro- ...: .viding adequate support services through Moreover, the Constitution also pro=
other institutional arrangements may ..........:.:.._vides the legal framework for the imple-
have detrimental effects on the viability i.'.':. "..:.: mentation aspects of th.e progr_n. Inof the small farmer. Fourth, the issue of particular, the Constitution provides that:
landless workers, who would be excluded !.'";.'":":' ..:'.""ii'i"."'".: '" :' (1) The progam should, ensure land-from a tenure-based identification of land owners of "just compensation" for allreform beneficiaries, is completely their lands which have been affect byneglected. Finally, .restrictions may lead land reform; (2) Congess may prescribeto even more inequitable production Recent Development on the retention limit hased on a number ofarrangements. There is an increased Agrarian. Reform 2 criteria ranging from "ecological, deve-incentive to evict tenants (and substitute lopmental, or equity considerations";hired labours) to avoid inclusion in land One of the major differences of the (3) incentives for voluntary land-sharingreform, thus reducing the amount of proposed agrarian reform program from schemes shall be provided by the state;employment and labor income, its predecessors is that it is mandated in (4) One of the state's primary fimctions
the 1986 Constitution. Unlike previous in the program is to ensure that theland reform policies, the scope and physical and marketing infrastructures
!::.i'.'"' ...'..:.":i"".'':":'.'.!'::.'i..':::..i:'."..'.':.i'".[".".:":":"'"'"............... .:i:"7.:'("."..: coverage of the proposed program are sti- essential to the production and distribu-
"'..'..i..:...."'._ .':':"':..':"' ' pulated in the newly ratified Constitu- tion of the agricultural commodities"::.:the ;._-s°cial":"and tion. Article XIII, specifically Sections 4 shall be adequately provided; (5) Partici-
ol,,:,renancy to 8 stipulatedthat all agricultural lands, pation by all parties who will be affected
adequate, sup,..i.i regardless of the crops being cultivated by the program should be elicited in theor their legal categories, (i.e., public or. formulation of the agrarian reformprivate) shall be covered by the agrarian scheme; and (6) The eovernment shouldreform program. The potential coverage develop mechanisms which will encourageincludes some 12 million hectares of cul- landowners to invest the proceeds of the
".'i_.'"" tivated lands and four million hectares program to agribusiness/industrial under-'.:!.........:..:.:". :':"" of uncultivated and idle lands affecting takings.
approximately 30 million farmers, Some critics (e.g. Lard, 1.986) point
The above arguments do not imply regular farmworkers and their respective out that the abovementioned clausesthat tenurial change is undesirable, families as beneficiaries, could restrict the equitable distributionRather, these suggest that legislation, of The Constitution also provides that of all agricultural croplands and naturaltenurial changes without the provision of the principle of agrarian reform shall be resources. For instance, if just compen-other . support mechanisms may be applied to the disposition and exploita- sation were equated to the market valuecounterproductive. For example, the tion of natural resources especially those of the agricultural lands (which is the
often.legislated abolition.of share tenancy, suitable for agricultural purposes. Like. interpretation of the Constitutional Com-may not be beneficial to the farmer who wise, it empowers the government to mission), then the redistribution of lands-is short of cash. On the other hand, share formulate provisions which protect the to small farmers and farmworkers will nottenants who have already been able to rights of subsistence fishermen and fish- jibe with the true spirit of. the land
DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH NEWS 11 MAY -JuNE 1987IIIII11
reform program. Rather, such a redi.s- visions would be substantially watered can be implemented under RA 3844 andtribution would 0e equivalent to an down. LOI 227, or und_ the series of Executiveexchange act_vi_y in a land market. This is one of the reasons why the Orders regartiing sequestered lands.
Further, since majority of the prospecCive present govermnent is trying to produce Among the three programs whichbeneficiaries of this program (i.e. the a land ret0rm package which already will affect privately-owned agricultural
small farrn growers and farmworkers) derans the concepts and the mechanics lands (i.e. Programs A, B and C), Programbelong to the lowes'c income rung of the for irnpierrlenting the agrarian reform C encompasses the largest hectarage as itcountry, a land price that is no different proga-am. The essential components of involves some 3.5 million hectares or
from its markec value would certainly be this program are discussed 'below. approximately 35 percent of total landbeyond the financial reach oi these bene- retorm areas (See Table 8). This ranksficiaHes, second to the area classified under
Program D (it should be pointed out thatAnother loophole m this Constltu- "Agrarian reform must be the latter program is concerned with
tional legislation pertatr.s to the t'etention viewed not only as a political public and not privately-owned lands).limit. Not only is Congress accordedmuch leeway m terms of identifying the nor counter-insurgency tool but Ot the 3.5 million hectares in Program C,appropriate land ceiling but more amport- as a part of a broader develop- lands categorized as plantations utilizingantly, another seccionintheConsutution ment strategy for the agricul- wage labor account t'or 2.33 millionhectares, or 61 percent. The remainingstipulates hectarage limits for public agri- llgrai sector, ""cuhuraliands that can de owned or leased area consists of 562,000 hectares of
by private corporat:ions an.d Filipino tenanted rice and corn retained areas andindividuals. Specxiicaily, Article XIII of 957,000 hectares of tenanted non-riceand corn areas. There is a concensus how-
the newly-ratified Constitution, section 3 Comprehensive Agrarian Reform ever, that the haciendas and agribusiness
states that: Progrmn (CARP) plantations are the most politicaUy-sensitive, since there is no existing land
"Priva_e corporarzons or associations The proposed Comprehensive Agra- reform legislation covering plantationmay not hold such alienaole lands of the rian Reform' Prograrn is the cornerstone agriculture.
public' domain except, by lease,, for a of the Aqumo Adrmnistration's land Lastly, Program D involves the,period nor exceeding rwen_-five years, refbma strategy. Although the CARP is distribution of five million hectares' of
renewable Ibr not more than twenty- still currently being examined (especially pubhc alienable and disposable landsfive years, renewable ]br not more than the mechanics of its implementation and suited for agriculture, and which can betwenty-live .years, and not to exceed possible sources of financing), the form reformed under Commonwealth Act 141
one thousand hectares in area. Cin'zens and content of the program have akeady and Executive orders issued by Presidentof the Phii'ippines may l'ease not more been developed. Aquino.
than five thousand nectua'es, or acquire The CARP, which will affect The Department of AgrarianReformnot more than twelve hectares thereby'by approxnnately 11.1 million hectares of (DAR) plans to implement Programs, A,purchase, homestead, or grant, "' (under- agricultural lands (or roughly one half of B, and D in 1987, leaving the contro-scorings added), the total area of arable lands), is intencted versial Program C tbr implementation in
to take effect between 1987 and 1992.1989. The terminal year for the comple-
Although this section incl.udes a condi- The CARP is divided into four programs, tion .of the four programs is set at 1992,tional clause which particularly takes into based on the land category covered and the year when President Corazon Aquinoaccoun_ the '_r¢qtiirernei:tts of agrarian its proposed time frame. Table 5 provides ends her six-year term.retorm '_ (refer to paragraph 2 of section a description of these programs.3), the past experience of the country is The first phase (Program A) calls At present, the Cabinet Action Corn-replete with instances whereby private for the completion of Operation Land mittee is finalizing the mechanics of theforeign and domestic corporations as well Transfer under P.D. 27 as well as the CARP before Congress is convened inas local individuals were able to augment implementation of the landed estates July 1987. The purpose is to define this
their landholdings by using a sindiar program. This covers some 1.3 million program and. begin its implementationConstitutional stipulation (refer to hectares of tenanted rice and corn lands, prior to the convening of Congress; it isArticZeXIIin the 1915 Constitution). or 12 percent o1" the total proposed hoped that its immediate implementa-
Lastly, if"the mechanics of the laud reform area. Program A can be under- tion would reduce dramaticaUy therefoml program were letI fbr Congress taken under existing laws. backlog (in terms of time and finances)to decide, its actual implementation may Program B involves the expansion of that would result ff Congress .were leftbe considerably delayed. Moreover, it" land relbrm to idle and abandoned lands, to design the agrarian reform pl'ogram.Congie_s will be dominated by people and lands that will be expropriated. The Currently, however, the Committeecoming front 'the landlord and elite group, affected land area is estimated at 939,000 is still laced with several constraints,then one could expect that the redistri- hectares, 18 percent of the total land primarily financial in nature. It isbutive potential of the land reform pro- reform area (.See Table 8). This program estimated that some P63 billion would
Administrator
DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH NEWS 12 MAY -JUNE 1987...... II II II II I
be required to finance the four programs.
Table 8. The Four Programsof the Land transfer acquisitions alone wouldComprehensiveAgrarianReform Program cost the government about P28 billion (or
(CARP) 44 percent of the total financial cost ofthe CARP, assuming the state will sub-sidize 20 percent of the total land corn-
PROGRAM LAND TIME pensation value. The total expendituresCATEGORY DESCRIPTION TARGETAREA FRAME include the following: P13.0 billion for
Area Percentto credit services, P5.6 billion for extensionIthoumndh_=tares} total services, P8.0 billion for the agro-forest
development projects, P3.0 billion for
Program A Tenanted rice land census, and P5.4 billion for otherand corn lands operational and administrative expenses.
In terms of funding sources, theunderP.D. 27 1,300 11.7 1987-1989Committee hopes to finance 59 percent
- Landsnotyet of the CARP's cost through foreign loanscovered by DAR 722 6.5 whi/_ the remaining 41 percent shall be
- Lands covered by EPs 11 n.s generated from the domestic economy.- Lands covered by LCs 562 5.1 At present, the Committee, with the
assistance of the Inter-Agency Tas_Program B Private lands 939 8.5 1987-1989 Force, is carefully examining various
- Idle and mechanisms of obtaining funds from bothabandonedlands 189 1.7 foreign and local institutions/sources at
- Foreclosed lands 300 2.7 the lowest cost possible.
- Sequestered farms 50 0.4 There is also the question of just- Voluntary offers 300 2.7 compensation for landowners. This issue= Lands to be expropriated 100 0.9 is intimately linked to the subsidy which
the government is willing to fund and is
Program C Plantations, etc., capable of financing, as well as itsi
which are affordabillty from the perspective of the
privatelands 3,852 prospective beneficiaries.
., - Haciendasunder
' land administration 2,333 21.0 Some Suggestions for Acting-- Tenantedrice andcorn
land with the retention At this point, there is no question,,limit 562 5.1 that there is a popular demand for I
- Tenanted non-rice and genuine agrarian reform program.11
corn croplands 957 8.6 National public opinion polls (Mangahas,1987) consistently show the sentiment of
Program D Public alienable the majority as: (1) the extent of landanddisposablelands reform under the Marcos regime wassuitable for insufficient (64% ); (2) most would
agriculture 5,000 45.1 1987-1989 approve the extension of land reform
- Public A & D coverage to all crops (67%), tenure formsland suitablefor (65%), natural resources (61%) and pub-
agriculture ("handog lic lands (62%); and (30, 60) percent oftitulo"), DAR settle- the respondents are willing to pay a taxments, or logged-over to Finance an expanded land refbrmlands, areasof cancelled/ program.
However, land reform is still anexpiredPLAs, TLAs, urgent and unresolved issue. While aFLAs, andunnecessary majority (63%) are satisfied with govern-andcivilian reservations ment efforts on land reform so far, only
TOTAL lands 11,091 100.0 half (51%) think that government hasdone better in this area than the Marcos
Source of Basic Data: Gerardo Bulatao's discussion of the A¢ce/erated Land Reform Program administration, and two-fifths (39 %) feltduring a PIDs Media Forum on Agrarian Reharm held lastFebruary I3, I987o that there has been no change yet. Final-
ly, two-thirds (65%); would like the
IIlIIIIlI IIII III
Administrator
Administrator
Administrator
DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH NEWS 13 MAY -JUNE 1987
IIIII I IIIIIIlllPresident to enact land reform legislation lation. Thus, at this moment perhaps the the bureaucracy to seek "institutionalright away to include Hacienda Luisita most formidable barrier to land reform rent at the expense of the poor who haveand not wait for Congress. All these would be the landed elites who stand to little legal knowledge (Hayami, Quisum-results are indicative of the urgency of lose their economic and political bases bingandAdriano, 1987:15).an accelerated land reform program and due to land reform.tile special need for the President's family Notwithstanding politieally-motiva-to participate in it (Mangahas, 1987:4). ted opposition to the program, land
The comprehensive nature of the reform will not succeed in bringing aboutproposed agrarian reform program is a a substantial improvement in efficiency NOTESmarked departure from its predecessors, and equity unless it is supported byGiven current political realities and bud- policies designed to reduce incentives 1This section is based largely on twogetary constraints, however, the like- to hold land for speculation or hoarding papers, namely Quisumbing and Cruzlihood of the dilution of the program's as,well as to increase incentives for labor (1986) and Mangahas and Quisumbingredistributive intent increases with each use.. Certain policies can be implemen- (1.986).day's delay in the promulgation and ted immediately, such as a ceilhlg on
implementation of land refoml legisla- aggregate landholdings, a progressive land 2This section is taken from a reviewtion. Political pressure from land groups tax and the deregulation of tenancy of past land reform programs and accom-demanding exemption from the program, contracts as a complementary measure plishments in Quisumbing and Adriano
_i_ increase in the proposed seven hectare to the proposed prognun. Finally, to (1987).cenfion limit, and more generous modes ensure the success of land reform, its
of-compensation is mounting. Further- rules must be simple, transparent, and 3Based on the presentation ofmore, there is a growing tendency to uniform. Complex regulations and inclu- Gerardo Bulatao, Undersecretary forleave the implementation details to Cong- sions of numerous clauses for exceptions Planning, Department of Agrarian Re-ress. Unfortunately, history has shown will reduce the chances of effective form, at the Philippine Institute forthat Congress tends to adopt a less redis- implementation. Moreover, it will en- Development Studies' Media Forum ontributive stance towards land reform legis- courage activities from landed elites and Agrarian Reform, 13 February 1987.
PIDS WORKING PAPERS
W.P. #8309 Economic Incentives and Comparative Ad- W.P. #8501 A Review of Welfare in the Coconut Industry.vantage in the Philippine Cotton Industry. Sylvia N, Guerrero.
= Arsenio BalisacarL W.P0 # 8502 Financing the Budget Deficit in the Philippines.
W.P, #8401 Interseetotal Capital Flows and Balanced Agro- EliM. Remolona_
Industrial Development in the Philippines, W.P. #8601 Trade Liberalization Experience in the Philip,Manuel S. J. de Leon pines,, 1960-84. Florian Alburo and Geoffrey
W.P. #8402 Forest Land Management in the Context of Shephera_
National Land Use. Adolfo E Revilla, Jr. W.P. #8602 lnte_Tated Summary Report: Population Ptes-
W.P. #8403 Policy Issues on Commercial Forest Manage. sure and Migration - Implications for Upland
ment. Cerenilla A, Cruz and Marian Segura. Development. Ma. Concepcion Z C_ruz.
delosAngele_ W.P. #8603 Factors Affecting the Choice of Location: A
W.P. #8404 The Impact of Government Policies on Forest Survey of Foreign and Local Firms in theResources Utilization. Gerald C Nelson. Philippines. Alejandro N. Herrin and Ernesto
W.P. #8405 Population Pressure, Migration and Ma rket M. Pernia.
Implications for Upland Development. Ma. W.P. #8701 Macroeconomic Adjustment in the Philippines:Concepcion Cruz. 1983-85. Manuel F. Montea
W.P. #8406 Tenme, Technology and Productivity of Agro.
for_txy Schemes. Ana Doris Capistrano and W.P. #8702 Costs of A_icultural Credit in the Philippines:The Short-Run Effects of Interest Rate De-
Sam Fujisak,_ regulation. Irma C Corales and Carlos E.W.P. #8407 Environmental Effects of Watershed Modifi-
Cueva_cations. Wilfredo P. David.
W.P. #8408 Management and Cost of Watershed Reforest. W.P. #8703 Can the Informal Lenders Be Co*Opted intoation: The pantabansan and Magat, Jose A, Government Credit 1Programs? EmmanuelGalvez. F. Esguerro.
W.P. # 8409 Workshop Papers on "The Consequences of W.P. #8704 Comparative Bank Study: A Background Paper.Small Rice FarmMechanizationin the Philip- MarioR Lambert¢
Administrator
::1987
:: : :: :: info_al: ::
ers: as _0fiduits:i:The:paperdkscusses clientele inthe Philippines ::: ::: : : :: :.... Primary data were::coitected fr0m a::
.... :: .... Sample of rural banks, brafiches of privaie:i: : : : : :: : ::ReSults: of the :showed that : commercial banks and vrivate:: develop:
:::::::::::::::::: : ::: :: : ::;:::::::: ;: :: the generally :ment banks. Analysis Was mailflYbased :::::::: :: : ::high :rate:::0f :recovery 0f :governmem, on secondary and more aggregative data, ::
.... : : funds und:er:fiie istbe high: fhe fi_dings could aid Jr_formulating the:: : :::::::: ::::::: : : : : ::penaity: rate:6f 42 percent for all past due research design for the comparative bank :
comparativeiy higher studies.:: : ........ .......reason: Results Showed that the performance i
:: is: :the USe::of entities ::other: than banks : 0if these financial instituti0ns is some :i
: to extend:Credit:to farmers:: : ......... way: conditioned by the.:_oper_ng:pollcy:
: :basic prJn_ framework i:e,_ RBs and PDBs did little : ::
....... ii:ciplesi:and:pr0cessess that::are at work in savings mobilization : because of..... ........ :: : rnraifinancial:marketsi One:is:tile natural : financial support the?_ got from
:::: _- ....... ...... ieciaiJzationlamong:rural:lenders accord-goVernment:and Central Bal_k; lnc0n!: :::::: t61their:iC0nlpetition: advantage, of trast, KBs brancl'_esdid: intensive savings:: : ::::Which:the division oflab0r:between funds i mobilization drive in regi.r_ns:ontside the
.... i ..... .... one as, i National.notablefind.'mg:is However :o_benefits t0 be:gained:fr0m linking credit rating:near: the NatiOnal Capital: Region
: transactionS: m other :m_rkets. The ad, operate like branches of KBs. The:strong::
:: vantage :of the i:informal lender over the competitive eavirolm_ent could i::
formal iender is that the former does not : compelled them to operate as efficiently:.: ii:s:g0od: for both. as: ::....... ........... of the: tfiree finantiial
SeCretariat: and the ASEAN Col_u_nittee Board approach; lhnit exclusion list: use The Ptailippme institwte fbr Develop_il" (IDk_;) 'together with The:::i::onTrade atidTouriSm Participants came a differentiated appr0ach peculiar to the l ment St-t_dies "P _'
' Agricultural t.redit Pohcy Louncit. .....:::academe, gOver_m_ent::sector: eonC'rete C0ndffions Of member com_tries; " ' ...._ " .......
S: I r0f lndustries::i Jower: doi_iestlC) c0ntent requirement; (ACPC), and 'the Ohi0: State University:.... i : standstill and e_ent_ilal rol:lback of con- (OSU); witJ h01d a two:day workshop
:: use: of process : requh'ement; non- "Rural Financial Markets Research," on: i:'tl_e most:sueces_thl organlzatior_s tariff: barriers periodic assessment of:: 19..20 August,. 1987. The venue f0rl the: :
• mong develop:: use o!ASEAN industrial : workshop is ihe Operations Room of:In: his:rep0rt, he: noted: : cooperation to increase complimer tar_-NEDA sa:Makati Builomg, Amorsoto St., : : :.......... esia;Mala_;i : _ies' and esiablisttrnent of a DeveIo _nent : LegazpiVNage, Makati ....
Ba._k of Asean_ .... ......:.... :: ....... :
:newly:industriaiizing countrk S) ......at::rio:st dyfmrnic :rates iri .the seven_ :
..... iel e:ighties,: however An in-house sem.inar )o discuss a :: _F _ ,
from page: i4) ........ Completed research study On "mancmg :...... The Society for lnternationa_ Deve- Public Sector De_eioprnent Expenditure:::
analysis:. The demand iopmentl (SID): is holding its 19th World in the Philipp:mes, 1975.1985," will. be i
Conference ::on: "POverty:: DeVelopment held on Augast ?, 1987 at the NEDA sa :: :::Manila Electr ic: cam;: :i: cOilec{ive Survival':, 01i:Marcli 25..29 Makati Bldg, ]?his seminar will be the first i i i
:: Tile sub-: o/f a series t00e presented by Dr. Rosarioare G. Manasan, prir;cipal i_vestigator of
Poverty study: ........ : : : ...... : :
:electlrici:tY:! i crisis in the:Th:rd World and the Lessons :
_:::prieeViron:: The PISS,: together with
:and :to:a certain::extent:i: tique::0 f tile NOn:Gover_maental System;national:..... Development Resea_'ch '_center-_:..... Marc:h:27:Pubiic ReSponsibilities andthe: (IDRC):is t_oldh_g a Workshop ion the: :
ifiSe price:: :Role of::tile State; March CoUective: _.YpJand Resource PoLicy:ProgaoaunPro:i :i ject members:to present tlieia,preiin'iina-t'y i
........... if: _slwillbe:: reports and to: alloW project membersl :)g::in:Devel0pinent and and selected participants to make recom: i : : ::
:mendations : before project: results: a*;6::GraSsroots: finaliz,
PIDS STAFF PAPERS
1. S.P. #8201 An Analysis of Fertilizer in the Philippines. tuxing: A Short Empirical Note. Erlinda iV[..Cristina C David and Arsenio M. Balisacar_ Medalla.
(printed also in J. P.D. 1981). 19. S.P. #8502 A Decomposition Analysis of Philippine Export2. S.P. #8202 Credit and Price Policies in Philippine Agri- and import Pexformance, 1974-198Z Ponciano
culture. Cris'tina C David. S, [nta[, Jr.3. S.P. 4#8203 Government Policies and Farm Mechanization 20. S.P. #8503 Philippine Export and Terms of Trade Instabi-
in the Philippines. Cristina C. David. lity, 1965-1982. Ponciano S. lnral, ,h.
4. S.P. #8204 Shadow Prices of Goods and Resources in the 21. S.P. #8504 Methodology for Measuring Protection and
Philippines: AnAssessment.ErlindaM. Medalla. Comparative Advantage. Erlinda M. Medalla
5. S.P. #8205 Aal Analysis of the Behavior of the Commercial and John H. Powe1:
Banks. Mario 1_ Lamberte. 22. S.P. #8505 Food, Fuel and Urbanization in the Philippines.6. S.P. #8301 Exchange Rate Flexibility and intervention Ale]andro N. I-lerrin, Manuel E Monres, Rodol.
Policy in the Philippines. 1973-1981. Filologo fo F. Florentino.
Pante, Jr. 23. S.P. #8506 Rural Development Experience: Economic Per-
7. S.P. #8302 On the Use of the DRC Criterion in Selecting spectives. RobertE. Evensor_Projects. Erlinda M. Medalla. 24. S.P. # 8507 Financial Liberalization and the Internal Strue-
8. S.P. #8303 Monetary Aggregates and Economic Activity. ture of the Capital Markets: The Philipph-,.e
Mario R. Lambert_ Case. Mario B. Larabert_9. S.P. #8304 Effective Protection Rates and Internal Indkect
25. S.P. # 8508 The Rural Banking System: Need for RefOrms:-Taxes in the Philippine Setting. Rosario G.
ManasarL Mario B. Lamberte
10. S.P. #8305 Response to Balance of Payments Crisis in the 26. S.P. #8509 Social Adequacy and Economic Effects of
1970s, Korea and the Philippines. John H, Social Security: The Philippine Case: Mario B.Powen Lamberte.
11. S.P. #8 101 A Study of Philippine Real Property Taxation. 27. S.P. #8601 Impact of BOI Incentives on Rate of Return,Ca3_¢tano W. Paderanga, Jr. Factor Prices and Relative Factor Use: A
12. S.P. 4#8402 Public Enterprise in the Philippines in i982: Comparative Analysis of Incentives Under the
A Definitional and Taxonomical Exercise. Omnibus Investments Code of 1981 (P.D. 1789)
Rosario G. Manasan. and the Investment Incentive Policy Act
13. S.P. #8403 Estimating the Shadow Exchange Rate, the (B.P. 391). Rosario G. Manasan.Shadow Wage Rate and the Social Rate of . 28. S.P. #8602 Financial Reforms and Balance-of-payments
Discount for the Philippines. Erlinda M. Crisis: The Case of the Philippines. Eli Remo-M edalkz lona and Marto Lamberte.
14. S.P. #8404 Development Finance and State Banking: A 29. S.P. #8603 A Macroeconomie Overview of Public Enter-
Survey of Expetience. EditaA. Tar_ prises in the Philippines, 1975-1984. Rosario15. S.P. #8405 Derived Protection for Nonffaded Prirnary G. Manasart
Product. Erlinda M. Medalla. 30. S.P. #8701 Revenue Performance of National Government
:16. S_P. #8406 Modelling the Effects of Devaluation on Prices_ Taxes, 1975-1985. Rosario G. Manasan andOutput and the Trade Balance: The Philippine Rosario G. Querubin
Experience. Mb_ Cecilia Gonzales. 31. S.P. # 8702 Rural Financial Markets: A Review of lAtera-
l7. S.P. #8407 The Development Bank of the Philippines and ture. Mario B. Lamberte and Joseph Lira.
the Financial Crisis, A Descriptive AJmlysis. 32. S.P. #8703 Residential Demand for Electricity and Pricing
Mario B. Lamberte. Policy Implication in a Developing Economy:
18. S.P. #850i The Protection Structure, Resource Flows and The Case of the Philippines. Clodualdo R, Fran-
the Capital-Labor Ratio in Philippine Manufae- cisco.
NEWS publication PHILIPPINE DEVELOPMENT
I]: highlights findings and recommendations t_om PIDS-sponsored researches or related studies done by other institutions. PIDS s_in_rs, publiea-
I !tions, ongoing and forthcoming projects wllich are of interest to policymakers, planners, administrators and researchers are also announced.I PIDS is a non.stock, non-profit government research institution engaged in long.term policy-oriented research. This publication is part of the Insti-
tute's program to disseminate information to promote the utilization of research findings.
The views and opinions published here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Institute. Inquiries regarding any of thestudies or PIDS papers contained in this publication, as well as suggestions and comments are welcome. Please address all correspondence or inquiries
,i,_3_SEARCH INFORMATION DEPARTMENT (RID)_;',PHILIPPINE INSTITUTE FOI_ DEVELOPMi_NT STUDIES (PIDS)
' '_'ROOM 515, NEDA SA MAKATI BUILDING
106 AMORSOLO STREET, LEGASPI VILLAGE,
MAKATI, METRO MANILA ' " ,Re_entered as second class mail at the Makati Central Post Office on April 27, 1987. Private flu-ms and individuals am charged for deliwr_ ,nd mailinll'
,:iserviees at an annual rate of P50,00, Students, libraries, academic and research institutions ate charged at an annual rate of P40.00. For foreign ml__ibers, the annual rate is $12 00. 'i
