Food sufficiency in the Philippines: An impossible dream

Food sufficiency in the Philippines still remain an impossible dream as clearly shown by the actions and policies of the government. When inflation hit 9.7% this September 2018, the immediate response was to flood the market with imported products. That was logical as a “vulcaseal” solution but a bad idea for long term direction. We may be able to address food security temporarily but never food security.

Unfortunately, the importation policy will be here to stay. As Agriculture Secretary Manny Pinol clearly stated:

"Our food security program requires a ten- to 20 year-forward planning and we're looking at Papua New Guinea as our food security insurance… So if our 3.9 million hectares could feed 95 percent of Filipinos right now, you can just imagine what four million hectares in Papua New Guinea would be able to contribute to our food security program.”

First, the vision is only food security not sustainability.

Second, food security will be realized not by developing our local resources but that of Papua New Guinea. The produce will then be imported to the Philippines – an interesting idea for a non-Lennonist country that claims to be blessed with natural resources. Clearly, it means spending the country’s hard-earned dollars and widen the balance of payments against the government.

With the increase of imports for the third quarter of 2018, according to the report of the Banko Sentral ng Pilipinas, the country registered a trade deficit of US$1.9 billion. This is 18.1% higher compared with the importation of goods in the third quarter of 2017. With the highly liberalized trade relations with China, the Philippines can expect to be a dumping ground for Chinese products which includes agriculture and agriculture-related products. Who can forget the trade agreement for the importation of galunggong (round scad) which were bashed by the netizens as these may just come from the West Philippine Sea?

While the government boasts of enacting the Organic Agriculture Act of 2010 (Republic Act No. 10068), it lacks the teeth to control the use of chemical fertilizers and the arm to operate programs that could address behavioral and perspective issues on agriculture. Apparently, both the funds and the technology are not fully downloaded to the local government units (LGUs) so the latter could not even hire focal persons for organic agriculture.

As if to bypass further the LGUs, the Department of Agriculture is planning to implement a policy starting next year that limits the provision of technical expertise and farm inputs. Rather, the department will just provide direct loans to farmers ranging from P10,000 to P100,000.

While this may encourage self-help among farmers and curtail the emergence of the fertilizer scam, the program is suspect because it was not crafted with utmost transparency. First, how sure is the department and the general public that the beneficiaries will be real farmers? Remember that until now, the list of the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program beneficiaries is still being questioned given the presence of regularly validated list. This being so, how much more the Registry System for the Basic Sector in Agriculture (RSBSA) list which was only done once? If the RSBSA will not be used, which list will be used then? Second, there are also questions on the timing of the program. Why implement the program in the election season especially if the list of possible beneficiaries is not even made public yet for validation purposes? This being so, it not impossible to repeat the ghost beneficiaries of the pork barrel scam or even the agriculture department’s fertilizer scam.

Lastly, the lack of clear policies and programs to build the food security base from within simply shows the impossibility of attaining food sustainability. As defined, “(A) sustainable community food system is a collaborative network that integrates sustainable food production, processing, distribution, consumption and waste management in order to enhance the environmental, economic and social health of a particular place.” It is anchored on locally-based, self-reliant food economy that recirculates the financial capital within the community or, in this case, at least within the country.

With the government’s policy of importation and dependence on other countries for agricultural produce, it is impossible to expect food sustainability even in the distant future. The good news is, we can be food secure. The bad news: We can be food secure as long as we have dollars to buy food from other countries.