"Filipino rice farmers in Laguna province incorporate rice straw, a good and abundant source of organic material, back in the field." Photo by Organic via Wikimedia Commons. Caption provided by Wikimedia Commons.
In his "Talk of the Town" article in the Philippine Daily Inquirer on 19 June 2016, Dr. Tadem welcomes the appointment of Paeng Marian as Agrarian Reform secretary and surveys the poor track record of the government in implementing agrarian reform. He discusses various anti-land reform provisions in the CARP and the CARPER (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program with Reforms); and resistance from land owners, powerful politicians, and big property developers. There are cases of land grabbing and harassment of farmers. Also impeding agrarian reforms are Special Economic Zones throughout the Philippines and "inadequate support services" to agrarian reform beneficiaries, who find it difficult to be "viable producers." The lack of support also "jeopardize" what otherwise have been gains.
Below are excerpts from the essay:
....The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) and its extension, the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program Extension with Reforms (Carper) had provisions that were generally favorable to their intended beneficiaries. But Carp and Carper were also essentially the result of a compromise between pro and antiagrarian reform blocs in Congress and thus also contained provisions, inserted by antireform and landowner lobbyists, that are considered legal loopholes.
In five years under the Aquino administration, less than 20 percent of the goal for land distribution has been accomplished. As of December 2015, there remained a balance of about 477,000 ha of undistributed lands while 1 million ha of agricultural lands inexplicably vanished from the public records. To camouflage its lackluster performance, the DAR has resorted to merely reporting the issuances of notices of coverage as accomplishments while keeping from public view the more essential indicators of certificates of land ownership awards (CLOAs) and, even more crucial, emancipation patents (EPs).
Dr. Tadem also questions the viability of the "fully functioning property-rights regime."
....Under conditions of a protocapitalist system where political and other noneconomic factors play dominant roles, where rural elites are predatory in character and where rent-seeking financial speculation through aggressive property developers rules the day, it would be the height of naiveté to dream of a fully functioning property-rights regime. Even today, the absence of such a regime has not prevented “investors” from invoking the “laws” of the market by encroaching on land reform areas and harassing and dislocating legitimate ARBs and other farming communities. All in the name of productivity, efficiency and optimum land utilization. On the other hand, an “efficiently managed” property rights regime will simply open wide the floodgates of the rural areas to modern versions of the unlamented landlord class and reintroduce the oppressive and exploitative social relations that necessitated a land reform program in the first place. It is precisely this elite-biased property rights regime in the rural sector that a truly just and meaningful agrarian reform seeks to prevent and where it exists, to overturn.
He ends with several recommendations, including the need to "constitute a high level independent commission of upright and credible citizens with legal powers to evaluate and audit the performance of the DAR, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and LandBank, and investigate all circumventions of coverage and human rights violations against farmers and farmworkers, their leaders and supporters.
Dr. Eduardo Tadem specializes in rural development, agrarian reform, and the peasantry, among other topics. The editor in chief of Asian Studies: Journal of Critical Perspectives on Asia, he handles graduate courses on Southeast Asia and on Theories and Perspectives in Asian Studies. His most recent publication is “Technocracy and the Peasantry: Martial Law Development Paradigms and Philippine Agrarian Reform,” 2015. Journal of Contemporary Asia, Vol. 45. No.3. He has a PhD in Southeast Asian Studies from the National University of Singapore. Visit his faculty profile here.
The UP Asian Center offers M.A. degrees in Asian Studies with four fields of specialization: Northeast Asia, Southeast Asia, South Asia, and West Asia. The Center also has an M.A. program in Philippine Studies that allows students to major in Philippine society and culture, Philippine foreign relations, or Philippine development studies. The Center offers a Ph.D. program in Philippine Studies in conjunction with the College of Arts and Letters and the College of Social Sciences and Philosophy. Get an overview of these programs. The Asian Center also houses a peer-reviewed, open-access journal, Asian Studies: Journal of Critical Perspectives on Asia. It has published several books and monographs, and hosts or organizes various lectures and conferences.