Rare Periodicals

The Barrio and the government

Media

Part of Panorama

Title

The Barrio and the government

Creator

Hufana, Alejandrino G.

Identifier

Look homeward, angel

Language

English

Source

Volume XII (Issue No.4) April 1960

Year

1960

Subject

Community development

Government programs

Rural development projects

Rights

Fulltext

APRIL 1960 Entered as second class mail matter at the Manila Post Offie' on Dee. 7. 1955 VOL. XII MANILA, PHILIPPINES No. 4 Look homeward, angel by Alejandrino G. Hufana ommunii y development are big words. In a country like the Philippines, espe­ cially, these outcroppings of “so­ cial amelioration” programs are taken as the solution to backwardness of every in the nation except its As a working program, development is bigger in its scope than its slogan value. Consider that there are 19,000 which are involved in the to determine whether competence can receive benefit from government as sistance. In the recent past, government projects have been established like the ACCFA-F ACOMA, the NARRA and more recently the PACD. Evaluation of their work does not necessarily summarize the big task of government as­ sistance when it is spread out over these 19,000 rural communi­ ties. The standard for such pro­ gress report will be one of com­ parison. Further back, in the Com­ monwealth era, and even before it, Philippine administration had recognized the backwardness of these rural areas, and it was taken as the reason for the rise of “ra­ dicalism,” with emphasis in mind of the Central Luzon uprisings from 1925 to 1935. This backlog of progress led Manuel Quezon to formulate his “social justice” program, and the same situation, in graver form, led the postwar administratiqn t o establish t h e EDCOR. Talks about rural industrial­ ization have suddenly intensified. This had been presaged since President Quirinos time when there was talk of total economic mobilization. But it took Ramon Magsaysay to come up with a formula for helping the barrios come into their own. It was in his time that indeed the central government implemented its often avowed intention, and home rule was introduced into the Philip­ pine barrio. Home rule must be qualified before the enthusiasm for it can muddle the issue at the level of definitions. In defining it, Dr. Buenaven­ tura M. Villanueva, executive sec­ retary of the Community Deve­ lopment Research Council, points out in his study The Barrio Peo­ ple and Barrio Government that competent barrio government is dependent upon at least three factors: “skills and competence in barrio institutions, values and cul­ tural matrix.” The study also classifies a barrio’s cultural affairs into the “formal” which are main­ ly political and economic activi * ties and the "informal” which are the personal and inter-per­ sonal or family practices which are variables set by tradition and by superstition. For the 19,000 barrios to de­ velop along the community deve­ lopment plan, they should adopt programs which take these factors into account. In other words, the people can help develop them­ selves if they take a ready hand as well as demonstrate their effi­ ciency in managing their own af­ fairs. Community development is not a new idea in government poli­ cies. It has operated before through several agencies: the PACD, the NARRA, the ACC­ FA-F ACOMA—all of which were started on the premise that the national government could be strengthened if it extended to its 4 Panorama lowest possible political unit the principle of barrio home rule. Now, there seems to be a para­ dox here: barrio home rule is actually decentralization yet local autonomy would help develop the national government’s own cen­ tral position. This is so because even as these agencies, working on a coordinated scale, allow local autonomy to take effect, their success or failure will reflect on the incumbent administration . . . for its neglect or concern regard­ ing the implementation of the field projects of these agencies. It is the individual agency’s respon­ sibility, however, to effect its plans of community development through its humblest agent in the field who provides each and every barrio with the stimulus for self­ help. The office of the Presidential Assistant on Community Develop­ ment was created on January 6, 1956, upon President Magsaysay’s Executive Order No. 156 “to im­ plement the program of commun­ ity development throughout the Philippines, to carry out effective­ ly the program of giving the rural population fair and full oppor­ tunities in the pursuit of a digni­ fied and abundant life, and to provide effective planning and co­ ordinating machinery in insuring the success of the above policies.” As a coordinating agency of the government, it aimed to avoid overlapping and duplication of community development goals of various government agencies—a si­ tuation uncovered by the Com­ munity Development Planning, a local fact-finding council. This council found out that these gov­ ernment agencies were running multi-purpose projects towards these goals. CJ * o achieve the necessary co­ ordination, the PACD upon its establishment undertook the training of Community Develop­ ment Workers, CDW’s, in short, who would link the PACD office and the barrio people directly. A cursory glance at this initial step indicates a centralization of functions which, though happily streamlined this way, seems final­ ly destined to follow the usual practice of the government to govern its lower and dispersed political units from an exclusive­ ly central vantage. In this set-up, the CDW’s act as representatives of the central authority. There is a semblance of decentralization, however. The organizational struc­ ture of the PACD shows that on the national level it is assisted in its work by an Inter-depart­ mental Coordination Committee composed of bureau representa­ tives who are directly connected with rural development activities. On the provincial and municipal levels the pattern is similar, with the local government heads acting as chairmen of their respective Community Development Coun­ cils, their CD officers as execu­ April I960 5 tive secretaries thereof, and the representatives of their depart­ ments as members. Apparently, decentralization courses through these channels that branch out to the f a r f 1 u n g communities to which community development, plans are directed, with the Muni­ cipal Community Development Council as the last depository of policy formulations being direct­ ly in contact with rural prob­ lems. To achieve a nationwide scope of activity, the PACD established community development training centers in strategic points throughout the country, where trainees undergo a recruit curri­ culum and orientation and be­ come pledged CDW’s. There used to be eight training cen­ ters, but they have been closed after one training term to meet with circumstantial difficulties. Only the original Luzon Com­ munity Development Training Center, novV called Community Development Center, was retained due to its favorable site in Los Banos and to the limitless co­ operation given it by the U.P. College of Agriculture. Here, the training of CDW continues, in order to assure a steady number of workers who will do the ac­ tual work of community deve­ lopment and consequently bring about the envisaged barrio home rule. Since most CDW’s are na­ tives of the communities to which they are assigned to work, it is expected that stimulation to bar­ rio self-rule can start much faster in the light of their skills. As of May 1959, these trained workers numbered 1,510 (plus 3 foreigners on specialized training on what is known as “third coun­ try” extension). They constitute the office and field force that im­ plements the PACD program which is categorized into: 1 — frants-in-aid projects which contriute to increased production and income, like swine, rabbit, duck and poultry raising, livestock and plant disease control, oyster farm­ ing, seed and fruit tree dispersal, nursery and gardening, coconut dryer, communal irrigation, pas­ ture, salt and threshing ground development, and fishing; 2—self­ help improvement projects which include community centers, foot­ bridges, communal roads, multi6 Panorama purpose playgrounds and the like; and 3—health and sanitation pro­ jects, like communal toilets, arte­ sian wells, garbage disposal sys­ tems, and others. Grants-in-aid projects originate from the barrio people themselves. The barrio council embodies their petition for a project in a resolu­ tion which is channeled through the local government councils to the President who in turn relays it to the PACD. This office, with the cooperation of the various government agencies directly en­ gaged in community development, usually undertakes the launching of a project aided by govern­ ment assistance in the form of materials, not cash, on the firstcome first-served basis. Self-help improvement projects proceed from the grants-in-aid ap­ proach. They form a pattern of acceptance by the barrio people that they can do on their own with partial government assist­ ance. Accordingly, self-help is the next logical step towards barrio improvement, in which barrio and local government resources com­ bine, the former donating locally available materials and tools, and supplying volunteer labor, the lat­ ter footing the expenditure for construction equipments and wa­ ges of operators. The PACD, with the government bureau con­ cerned, provides processed mate­ rials, equipment and not locally available technical guidance. By latest accounting in 53 provinces, self-help grants-in-aid projects to­ tal 12,410 worth PIO,508,139.38 while health and sanitation pro­ jects are worth P4,946,810.25. It is interesting to note that in all these project-categories barrio share snows no falling below half the total expenditures, and that it is even higher than the shares of the PACD, the local govern­ ment, and technical agency com­ bined. This bespeaks well of the capacity of barrio people for self­ improvement. he Agricultural Credit and •Cooperative Financing Ad­ ministration (ACCFA) was creat­ ed by Republic Act No. 821 on August 14, 1952. Its function is to assist small farmers in secur­ ing credit which they cannot otherwise obtain, except at con­ ventionally usurious rates from April 1960 7 moneylenders, and to aid them in marketing their products by en­ couraging them to group tnemselves into cooperative associa­ tions known in the collective as FACOMA. Thus, the ACCFA evidently aims to raise living standard in the farming areas and, more particularly, to place agri­ culture on equal economic foot­ ing with other industries. These aims find implementa­ tion in a five fold ACCFA-FACOMA program that (1) grants personal loans to qualified small producers actually engaged in ag­ riculture, thereby promoting pro­ ducer-controlled and producerowned cooperatives whicn should make for a unified system of pro­ cessing, storage and marketing of agricultural products; (2) extends financial assistance and other es­ sential services to the construc­ tion of facilities for cooperative processing, storage and marketing, as well as for production; (3) fa­ cilitates placement of FACOMAstored commodities in domestic and foreign commerce so that farmers may be able to profit di­ rectly through their FACOMA’s, thus checking inefficient distribu­ tion of agricultural products; (4) encourages .credit institutions to be established in rural areas by enticing private banks with ac­ cumulated farm produce and with availability of comprehensive pro­ duction and credit information; and (5) holds privilege of redis­ counting its qualified indebted­ ness with the Central Bank, the Development Bank of the Phil­ ippines (formerly the RFC) and the Philippine National Bank in the pursuance of its authorized activities. The ACCFA carries out its activities through its central office and field personnel who have been trained primarily as co-op organizers. As of 1959, more than a thousand of them were assigned to 512 FACOMA’s covering 51 provinces, 669 towns and 12,464 barrios. Registered with the Secu­ rities and Exchange Commission and affiliated with the ACCFA, these FACOMA’s have a total membership of 295,187, includ­ ing 20 federations of co-ops and the Central Cooperative Ex­ change, a national federation, which are capitalized at P28.6 8 Panorama million, of which P6.1 million has been paid up. Extension of credit services in the form of production, farm im­ provement, commodity, facility and merchandising loans to FA­ COMA’s and individual FACO­ MA members is the basic objec­ tive of the ACCFA FACOMA program. These loans, as of May 1959, show a cumulative total of P184,185,819, with the pro­ duction taking up the most, farm improvement the least. The liber­ ality of credit is mutual—the loans are granted almost without colla­ teral and loan repayments aver­ age 85 per cent, the unpaid bal­ ance of which represents chattel mortgages for carabaos and crops and community storage in FA­ COMA warehouses. /Certain special operations are conducted by tne ACCFA. There is, for instance, its imple­ mentation of the congressional price support program for Vir­ ginia leaf tobacco through short­ term from the Central Bank, now estimated at P240 million but readily covered up by the actual stock of redried tobacco leaf sold to aromatic cigarette manufacturers. Since 1954, the ACCFA has been buying and re­ drying tobacco leaf from tobacco co-ops at subsidy prices ranging from P3.60 to P0.80 per kilo in accordance with grades deter­ mined by its own personnel and the Bureau of Internal Revenue. Another ACCFA operation lies in the ramie industry through a Pl6 million contract with the CCE which buys ramie fibers from farmers, processes it in Ja­ pan then allots it to ramie pro­ ducers for local distribution. Other operations involve distribu­ tion of fertilizer and certified seeds which the ACCFA undertakes in cooperation with the Department of Agriculture and Natural Re­ sources. In 1958, P2,269,420 worth of R.A. 1609 and imported and locally-produced fertilizer was distributed to fanners. By any accounting, these achievements are laudable. Again, as in the PACD set-up, the tend­ ency to delegate central powers to field representatives must ac­ count for the ACCFA-FACOMA’s being this active. Recently, April i960 9 however, this agency has been thrown into bad light in the press by the abuse of the same powers. Whether it will redeem itself by the nature of its function in the cooperative system, which in it­ self is conducive to barrio home rule, remains to be evaluated. ID epublic Act No. 1160 creat'' ed the National Resettle­ ment and Rehabilitation Admin­ istration (NARRA) on June 18, 1954. This agency is actually an improved version of two earlier agencies—the National Land Set­ tlement Administration (NLSA) and the Land Settlement and De­ velopment Company (LASEDECO)—which were established in 1939 and 1950, respectively, to solve the problem of uneven land distribution in the Philippines. The NARRA has for its pur­ pose the development of puDlic land suitable for agriculture, homesteading and organized set­ tlement; the resettlement of fami­ lies from congestedly tenanted and over-populated areas into sparsely occupied provinces; the survey and subdivision of public lands believed suitable for agri­ culture into family-size farms of six to ten hectares each; the ex­ pansion of road and bridge con­ structions, public health and so­ cial work, school and agricultural extensions, and of other govern­ ment services to settlement sites; and the securing of land titles for qualified settlers. Presently, the NARRA main­ tains a total of 18 settlement pro­ jects in Bukidnon, Sulu, Lanao, Cotabato, Tarlac, Masbate, Capiz, Negros Occidental, Palawan, Isa­ bela, Laguna, Negros Oriental, Rizal, Davao and Camarines Sur. A total of 23,201 individuals have been resettled in these areas as of May 1959, and of this num­ ber, 10,205 are pioneers. Patents approved total 7,338, vesting qual­ ified settlers with ownership of farm lots originally allocated to them for home-building by raf­ fles. To these resettled individuals, this new lease on life is an en­ viable one. They receive assist­ ance in the control of plant and animal disease, in seed selection, and in the methods of planting root crops and legumes and pro­ per plowing. Direct aid comes to them in tne form of medicine, seeds and seedlings, farm imple­ ments, fowls, hogs, carabaos, and the like. To safeguard their health and to guide them along hygienic lines, maternity and child care, nutritional and such cultural education, the govern­ ment provides the services of experienced physicians, dentists, nurses, midwives and clinic aides. Periodic calls on settlement com­ munities are made by govern­ ment experts on agriculture, health and rural living and by education officials who deliver lec­ tures and conduct barrio seminars. Above all, the NARRA patron­ 10 Panorama izes the produce of the settlers at current market prices to pro­ tect them from the aliens who buy their crops at give-away prices. Bodegas are also built and stocked up with sufficient staple crop supply to meet crop failures on settlement sites. With other phases of public service—like help­ ing build roads to facilitate mar­ keting of crops at commercial centers, laying out bridges and culverts for purposes of commu­ nication and irrigation, setting up artesian wells to insure continu­ ous water supply, and maintain­ ing and operating lumber mills to provide cheap construction lumber, fuel and fertilizer from sawdust for settlement farms— the NARRA is certainly doing its full share in community develop­ ment. It shows, among the gov­ ernment agencies described, the least tendency to being politically exploited. This is due perhaps to the absence in its structure of an elaborately stratified gradation of authority, or to the unlikelihood of extracting from its operations big personal gains. It therefore presents an ideal enterprise, more of actual work than of ways-andmeans, that will redound to the realization of the barrio home rule idea. The facts of achievement shared by the foregoing gov­ ernment agencies, of course, out­ weigh the fallible conduct of some individual personnel who di­ vine in their duties some oppor­ tunity to subserve themselves. Evaluation of these facts will be more in demand in the light of the "new deal” pledge to the bar­ rio people by the Office of the President in 1953. For all its sensational appearance in a politi­ cally charged scene, this deal­ community development—has tak­ en up the best available convic­ tion to give way for the rural areas to assert their capabilities for social and economic advance­ ment, though they will not in the main turn out to be model villages. True, in social behavior there can be no precise measure­ ment of result or even of cause. But somehow evaluation of work accomplished may provide the clue, especially when “welfare," as of now, has acquired an oc­ cupational identity. Such evalua­ tion is being done at the Com­ munitv Development Research Council (CDRC). A joint project of the Univer­ sity of the Philippines and the PACD, the CDRC started work by a memorandum of understand­ ing drawn by the presidential assistant and the university on August 28, 1957, and which will remain in effect, unless sooner terminated by the contracting par­ ties, until June 30, 1961. The con,tract obliges its parties "to set up a cooperative endeavor . . . for qualitative evaluation of the methodology employed in the Philippine Community Develop­ April i960 11 ment Program in order to deter­ mine better ways and means to increase the effectiveness of the Program; and to create a research organization therefor . . .” Being t hi s organization, the CDRC has explored the commun­ ity development program and for­ mulated four broad problem areas which were then made subject of research for 1957-58. The first area relates to PACD operations, an examination of the grants-in-aid and community de­ velopment training program and the effectiveness in the assign­ ment of CD workers; the second deals with the different levels of coordination among government agencies engaged in community development, and with how the village power structure receives the impact of community deve­ lopment work; the third covers the participation of people in the program which includes innova­ tions and proposals made by CD workers as they go along in their field work, the phases of daily life in the barrio where the CD program is aplied; and the fourth explores “the etiology of rural poverty,” that is, the fac­ tors—special psychological, econo­ mic and others—that keep the people from improving their con­ ditions. These formulations are based at most upon the methods of problem-solution and the ap­ proaches that can combine ideal and practicality. The researchers cannot afford to be vague where they are committed to the dedica­ tion that they are finding a way for the upliftment of barrio life, an upliftment, by the way, that is long overdue. Their findings are now utilized as guides in the implementation of the CD pro­ gram at large. Hlready Congress has formu1 lated a barrio code for the acceleration of community deve­ lopment based upon a barrio study furnished by the CDRC and copies of which were made available to public schools for class material. Barrio leadership, according to this study, mentioned earlier in this article, is wanting in many respects, chief among which is the problem of founding a bureaucracy in the barrio. There simply are not so many activities to justfy such a system and to keep the barrio busy along this line. Nevertheless, tne study re­ commends eventual home rule when literacy and competence warrant it, and the most elemen­ Panorama tary education that can bring this about has a big task at hand. Other completed research pro­ jects have probed into the prob­ lem areas which the CDRC has formulated as subject-goals. One study is on rural health practices and conditions in two municipalities in Laguna from which practical corrective mea­ sures were drawn. Another study is on factors related to the ac­ ceptance or rejection of innova­ tions in swine and poultry pro­ duction in rural areas; a third is on the integration of resources in community development in Batangas; a fourth on some socio­ economic effects of building bar­ rio roads. Together with studies in pro­ gress and in outline form—which promise to be noteworthy in that they aim to examine the dynamics of power in a municipality re­ ceiving the impact of community development, agricultural innova­ tions, levels of living among ru­ ral families, marketing farm pro­ ducts, leadership competencies in community developed areas, and even the role of the ACCFAFACOMA agency—the completed projects serve as indicators of work done and values or signi­ ficance attained under the CD program which seems to advance, deleting its defects by sheer mo­ mentum, allowing no quarter for its detractors to put in a criticism or two. Yet, evaluation does not cost much, considering that, as of June 30, 1959, it only amounted to Pl 19,470.96. This means that of the CDRC peso, 76% goes to re­ search, 5.1% to supplies and equipment, and 18.9% to admin­ istration. With this systematic and inten­ sive evaluation, the CD program may finally become a remedial program, auguring a maturity for home rule in Philippine If the PACD, the ACCFAFACOMA, and the NARRA are the means towards this end, their defects must automatically be overlooked. Keeping in mind the barrio home rule idea, the paradox seems to be that, while the government decentralizes through its delegat­ ed representatives in the field, the lesser the chance of home rule appears to effect. Whereas, if there is maximum centralization, that is, a liaison between govern­ ment and community, the people show more response to self-im­ provement. April 1960 13 lans, any plan, look good on paper. It is, however, not the case when practices are con­ cerned. The CD worker, for in­ stance, is trained to initiate dis­ cussion groups in the barrio in the expectation that these will redound to the understanding by the people of their own prob­ lems. Understanding makes for half of effective participation in barrio affairs. Ana in most rural areas, such affairs would mean the relationship of tenants and landlords. In this respect, the PACD pro­ gram is pitifully deficient. It does not give ideological training to its trainees, with the result that the CD worker may be indeed a trouble-shooter as regards scru­ tinizing the needs of the barrio and placing order for materials here and there. But how can he even discuss the undesirable as­ pects of subsistence farming or the more elementary evils of ten­ ancy with the people who live it from tradition ana usage? With­ out this basic discussion the daily activities and habits of the rural population he serves will remain what they are—social and econo­ mic variables subject to the exfdoitation and caprices of the andlord caste—as in the begin­ ning. Accordingly, intentions for lo­ cal autonomy will be inseparable from agrarian truobles. It will be too much to expect from the PACD that its community work­ ers behave beyond their techni­ cal capacity and be land reform­ ers, too. Neither can the ACCFA and the FACOMAS to which the CD worker is told to turn his barrio group for agricultural help, do full service. The encumbran­ ces these agencies suffer need not be recited. For one, perhaps the bluntest, they have not realized for the farming groups under their influence any substantial in­ crease in farm income. This points to the defect in their cooperative system, which is most discernible in the tobacco boom in the Ilocos and the northern reaches of Pangasinan. In our last visit to La Union (where buyers prefer the auality of its leaf to the yield elsewnere), the people benefited by tobacco, wholesale or retail, are not the small producers but the middle­ men who, expectedly, are Chi­ nese or mainly Chinese-invested. The farmers instinctively go to these middlemen who pay on the spot and in take-home cash where the FACOMAS would take sev­ eral weeks to disburse an equal amount, duly receipted. Hence, the government agency is up against private competition that operates without 'tape of any kind; it thus considerably loses what should accrue to its co-op funds. CT he farmers, on the other 1 hand, are not any wiser to the fact that the prosperity they 14 Panorama are experiencing is artificially in­ duced by artificial demand. Not encouraged by storage facilities FACOMAS should offer, they are attracted to sell even immature leaves outright before the com­ ing rainfall will wash their crop away. They know that tobacco is good only for six months in a year when the dry season holds for picking. In tum, the middle­ men buy everything and are quickly rewarded because the farmers are in a hurry and that grading does not matter to them. As a result, most of the choicest leaves are classified at lowest pri­ ces, mixed clandestinely with a few real low-graders. Meanwhile, the ACCFA and the FACOMAS have plenty to do in improving the level of liv­ ing of the rural folk. The Magsingal experiment in Ilocos Sur has been cited precisely for its success along this line. (F. Sionil Jose, "The Filipino and His Land"'). But generally, the trou­ ble with these agencies is they seldom explore possibilities of crop diversification in the areas they operate, their functions fol­ lowing, if at all, a one-crop eco­ nomy. This results in idling bet­ ween planting and harvest, the bodegas empty. If harvest de­ pends on the outcome of pests and typhoons, the ACCFA and the FACOMAS necessarily rely most of the time on extracurri­ cular eventualities, such as pri­ mitive seed selection, unchanged ways of planting, and the tropi­ cal weather. Rizal did not speak wildly about Filipino indolence. It is a birthright, aggravated by the absence of rural activity in every sphere of living. The ACCFA-FACOMA entitv should be reinvigorated, in which case a training program, as we would wish for the PACD, be followed. As the ICA land tenure advisor to the Philippine pointed out, the ACCFA is one of the logical agencies to cope with detaued training in land tenure, credit and marketing. An ACCFA team should be sent to each 20barrio unit to instruct good farm­ ing methods at farmer level, con­ duct barrio meetings—as the PA­ CD personnel is doing—in which farm education is tied with credit know-how, the local FACOMA instituting pilot projects on the understanding that FACOMA loan funds are to be used for workstock, farm implements, seeds, fertilizers and insecticides. As fur­ ther encouragement, the FACO­ MA will have finances readily available to farmers towards the eventual stamping out of middle­ men who take in as much as 25 to 40 per cent of farm in­ come in the share tenancy sys­ tem. (T hese first steps will clear the ground for the farmer’s faith in their activities and will direct the increase of ACCFA borrowers and of agricultural proAPRIL I960 15 duce channeled to FACOMA warehouses. Care must be taken that clean records are kept at the start and must be kept open to the members. One of the great grounds of distrust in the tenant communities is the keeping of books for farm products in secret or by the landlords word of honor which of course can be readily withdrawn come the time when it will work against his interests. It is said only too well that farm tenancy will not disappear. Had historical events indicated that it should, there would be no need for literatures on the subject, all of them enclosing ideas that did move men, who embraced them as ways of life, to do or die. Historical fact is in­ fallible, especially when it is ap­ plied to economics. Population pressure alone bears testimony that land cannot just support it. In the hundred years prior to 1940, writes William Vogt in Road to Survival, the world po­ pulation more than doubled— from 1,000,000,000 to 2,200,000,000. The excess could be partly relieved by industrialization. 1/1 owadays conditions are scarce­ ly better. And in this situa­ tion the NARRA has been en­ visioned to work wonders. By a series of agreements, this agency should have all the coordination it required from the Bureau of Forestry, in matters of timber concessions; from the Bureau of Lands in the adjudication of land claims, contract-survey procedures and transfer of title to settler; from the Bureau of Soils in the classification of land usefulness within reservations sought by the NARRA; from the NAWASA in the matter of water wells for the settlements; from the Depart­ ment of Public Works in the construction and maintenance of feeder roads in and out of these communities; from the Depart 16 Panorama ment of Health in the establish­ ment of sanitation centers for the settlers, from the Department of Education in servicing settle­ ment children with elementary education; from the Bureau of Plant Industry in seed selection, improvement and distribution to settlement farmers; from the Bureau of Agricultural Extension in the development of agricultural productivity and marketing chan­ nels for farm products; from the ACCFA, PNB and RFC in the extension of credit sendees to these rural sites; from the Land Tenure Administration in the screening of settlers from congest­ ed estates for NARRA resettle­ ment; from the local government in terms of police and other in­ termediate support; and from the PACD in left-off phases of com­ munity development. Again, these impressive agree­ ments are not practicable. In a report of the actino land settle­ ment adviser, the Bureau of For estry and Lands find their rec­ ords, maps and surveys so inac­ curate, missing or incomplete that they cannot point to arable tracts to allocate the minimum 10,000 hectares that NARRA seeks to break even with the administration expense of settlement. With 22,000 or more families applying for title only 6,600 titles have been issued, and these on few good land. Crop failures are the result. The nature of the soils on these settlements has not been predetermined, the Bureau of Soils studying soils and classify ing land in several settlements after the settlers were moved in. The Narra has met with se­ rious difficulties in nearly every other phase of settlement lift’. Fact-finders know that the surface-water pumps it has installed are almost entirely useless. Half the wells it dug—1 to 3 to each settlement against the NAWASA minimum standard of 10 to 20—are dried up. Feeder roads fare no better. They serve only about 10 per cent of the total farm lots most of which can be reached only by power-wagon. An allweather road sometimes connects three or four settlements, but the be negotiated even sled. rest cannot by carabao Public health staffs could not maintain themselves too. The de­ partment concerned discontinued payment of personnel at 8 settle­ ments. Only a few clinics, built by the Charity Sweepstakes, are housed in more or less perma­ nent buildings, though they are pitifully equipped, and in mala­ rial cases they run short of drugs. If they are adequately supplied refrigeration is still to be wished for the quickly spoiling serums. A brighter side appears in the critical condition of the NARRA settlements. Elementary schools, though proceeding without text­ books and sufficient schoolhouses to shelter the 14,000 children en­ rolled, usually manage to dish out education by the strength of their teaching staff which includes teachers with college degrees. Be­ sides this, the NARRA is justi­ fiably proud of its 2-centavo charge on seedlings from tis own nurseries against the 10-centavo each for coffee seedlings obtain­ able elsewhere. One of the more significant failures in the NARRA program is its Land Tenure Administra­ tion coordination work. The LT A has for its primary function the screening of tenants for NARRA resettlement, for which in its ori­ ginal efficient farm lots would then be selected by lot for NAR­ RA settlement sites. The LTA seems not to have favored this idea which must have ended at its office. However, this is little felt in a situation where ineptness is pre­ valent. It can be pointed out at the very beginning that, anyway, the NARRA is not the redemp­ tion it could be in the integrated land reform movement. It has re­ settled, on direct order of the President, only 89 families from the Batanes in January 1958; it has moved a mere percentagesome from the unrest in Central Luzon—to the four projects it has opened at the Lasedeco pioneer projects. The ICA-supplied tools for the farms have been delivered indiscriminately; many, as a re­ sult, received not enough of the implements. The six-month sub­ sistence rations the NARRA should furnish the settlements for the production season are charged to the settlers’ account in Manila where all NARRA’s high-salaried employees, about 200 of them, are situated against the 500 in the field force who are cursorily trained. /I t best the NARRA exhibits n haste. In Palawan, where the EDCOR at one time rejected a farm site, the NARRA estab­ lished the Panacan settlement which involved a million pesos (F. Sionil Jose, "The Filipino and His Land’"). Because of the general aridity of that farm, the amount may just as well be counted as a loss. Other EDCOR pointers should give the NARRA direction, am­ 18 Panorama ong which are the former’s me­ thod of screening its settlers with emphasis on ability to work, toge­ ther with considerations about their age, civil status, and educa­ tion. Or it should take the cue from the report of the Advisory Committee on Large Estates Prob­ lems when it examined the defi­ ciencies of the Bureau of Lands in the administration of landed estates in 1951. The committee recommended a type of adminis­ tration similar to that of Lasedeco. This is to forestall the un­ happy situation the homesteader, purchaser, or lessee finds him­ self in when the awarding en­ tity leaves him to his own re­ sources upon acquiring the land, to rise or fall according to his ability. But, as the ICA land tenure advisor said in 1958, the Philip­ pine land tenure agencies are to be congratulated for the progress they have made in land reform, working as they did under ad­ verse conditions compared with those which education in this country has overcome. The ten­ ant-farmer’s average annual in­ come, it is recalled, is less than 400 pesos, his production per hec­ tare of staples (rice and corn) has for a half-century remained the same. This constitutes the biggest unsolved land reform problem in 1958 several causes of which are: the large number of share tenants—700,000 more or less; the difficulties in the trans­ fer of land ownership; congestion in farming areas and reluctance for resettlement; restrictions on farm mechanization. The first of these causes alone is enough to engage government effort for a while. Share ten­ ancy, predominant in rice-crop areas, is an endeavor of both ten­ ant and landlord, the former fur­ nishing the labor, and the latter, the land. Fortunately, Republic Act 1199, known as the Agri­ cultural Tenancy Act, now pro­ vides a net 70% for the tenant in the division of the produce. Under the old system his share was 50% though he furnished the labor, workstock, farm im­ plements, and half the transplant­ ing expenses. The government, therefore, should attempt to in­ crease the percentage of tenants receiving the 70% share. Moreover, the government has yet to combat the stranglehold of the lessee, the farm overseer, the tenant-leader, and the rice mer­ chant on the share-tenant. These middlemen, it is found, take 25 to 40 per cent from the tenant’s income for all kinds of representa­ tion on the gross yield. And it also has to provide credit and marketing facilities for the tenant who, in the final analysis, is man­ aged by the landholder on a 5545 sharing arrangement. The landholder has simply advanced to the tenant certain interest­ laden credit and price-fixed the April 1960 farm commodity with the rice merchant. (T\ ifficulties in the transfer of U land ownership are the offi­ cial headaches of the Land Ten­ ure Administration in its task of acquiring large estates and sub­ dividing and reselling them. For one thing, only a negligible per centage of the 200 big landhold­ ers with whom it has negotiated have sold portions of their land­ holdings. This is understandable in this country where land is the surest source of income and pres­ tige. While its tax is minimal, land is priced so excessively that tenants acquiring them may not be able to repay. All this is due to the absence of systematic farm appraisal based on productive va­ lue and political influence exert­ ed on the LT A to buy unclassi­ fied land at more than its fair market value. Though the mar­ ket value of land, however, was reasonable, large scale purchases by the government could not still be effected for lack of necessarv funds. Regarding congestion and re­ luctance for resettlement, the 1948 census shows 60% tenanev in the provinces where farm population pressure is most felt. While the Bureau of Lands maintains that there is no lack of arable public lands, at least for the next 10 to 15 years, for resettling pur­ poses, many of the tenants are reluctant to migrate from their domicile though this is steadily becoming impossible to live in. Much more, if moved into the new sites, they show signs of complete dependence on the gov­ ernment for livelihood. Farm mechanization could be the answer to these ills. Yet, it could work both ways—for and against tenant interests. The Ag­ ricultural Tenancy Act, for ex­ ample, can give the owner legal basis for evicting tenants in or­ der to mechanize his land. The application for mechanization is directed to the Secretary of Agri­ culture and Natural Resources through the Agricultural Ten; ancy Commission which will then investigate the suitability of the land in question for mechanized farming. The Court of Industrial Relations, created by Republic Act 1267, approves or disapproves the application. An executive or­ der from President Magsaysay restricted this pursuit, however, stating that no tenants can be ejected under any circumstances bv the landowner mechanizing. The order highlights the fallacy of mechanization of overloaded farms. Mechnization in these cases entails large scale transporta­ tion of tenant familities and land is not readily available for them. Of course this again calls for government action. The govern­ ment may be forced to negotiate for machinery, fuel, and techni­ cal advisers with an exporting na­ tion, since the reasons on the 20 Panorama towards the creation of tenant side of mechanization are hopeful employments heretofore unavail­ able. The field contacts of the Agricultural Tenancy Commis­ sion and the Court of the Agra­ rian Relations may yet argue for the adoption of modern farming methods. Only recodified agrarian laws that the peasantry under­ stand, together with agricultural and other economic education, can bring this about. Eventual decentralization o f government powers, implemented with a means of honesty in the rural communities, will be one of that progress’ happiest aspects. Huge Seamount Discovered Off African Coast A huge undersea mountain, higher than Califor­ nia’s Mt. Whitney, has been discovered in the South Atlantic. The formation, termed a seamount by geolo­ gists, rises 15,980 feet from the ocean floor. Its platform top is 210 feet below the surface of the ocean, with one isolated knob rising to within 120 feet of the surface. Discovered by Columbia University scientists aboard the university research vessel Verna about 550 miles west of the Cape of Good Hope, South Africa, the cone-shaped seamount is some 35 miles across at the base and five miles across at the top. Previously unknown to mariners, the seamount could have proved a menace to mariners, scientists said. A submarine with its sonar not in operation could possibly have rammed the formation before being aware of its existence. ¥ April i960 21

pages

3-21