Philippine Rice Extension

Theoretically, if the Philippines can increase average yield by one ton per hectare, it can stop rice importation and can even enjoy a surplus. However, the yield gap between the Philippines and other Asian countries is widening. The factors identified as the major causes of yield gap include biophysical, technical, socioeconomic, institutional, and technological factors. The most critical issues are the quality of the extension system, the research structure, and the policy environment.

The current extension theory and practice in the Philippines

• Structure and management. The Department of Agriculture (DA) is the sole chief manager of programs.
• Program design, budget, and implementation. The Field Operations Service (FOS) is the one responsible for managing targets, strategies, methods, and budgets. It also oversees Regional Field Units (RFUs).
• LGU and farmer participation. LGU and farmer participation is limited to target verification and attendance to meetings and seminars. Participation is encouraged through incentives and private goods.
• Major focus. The DA’s current program assumes that new rice knowledge and technology will be well-adopted if it will be accompanied by subsidized inputs and facilities. As such, a significant portion of the budget goes to subsidy distribution. The focus is shifted from learning new rice knowledge to receiving subsidy and private goods.
• Knowledge management. The current approach does not lend itself to creative and responsive rice extension program making knowledge management weak. Knowledge management only emphasizes the quantity of farmer training, techno-demonstrations, farmer-field schools, leaflets distributed, and inputs issued.
• Resources diversion. As rice extension becomes a second priority and subsidy distribution becomes the priority, budget is diverted to the latter and the quality of rice extension is not given the attention it needs.

 Rice extension program reform

• Structure and management. The program must be fully decentralized. Effective and efficient rice extension requires the implementation of decentralized agriculture extension services built on strong partnership between central and local government units (LGUs).

o   The central government must be responsible for national policy making, standards setting, financing, production of goods, performance monitoring and evaluation, and LGU support.

o   LGUs must be free to define rice problems in their specific areas and determine the appropriate solutions to address these problems. They must be responsible for translating policies into local programs and projects like advisory services, training, information and communication support system, linkage facilitation between farmers and knowledge institutions, and program monitoring and evaluation.

• Program design, budget, and focus. One of the program designs that must be reformed is the budget structure. Allocation must be based on the program’s general objectives and goals. The DA must strengthen LGU capabilities to improve service quality and provide counterpart funding to empower the LGUs. Funding must be in the form of transparent and predictable grant system.
• Knowledge management. The national rice program must give attention and financial support for knowledge management improvement. A dynamic knowledge management requires that various agricultural stakeholders have the opportunity to work, learn, and share experiences within and among each other.

o   Research networks and information and communications technology (ICT) must be used to address systematic issues and develop the right organizational framework and culture.

o   LGUs must be able to use a dynamic value-chain approach that links producers, creditors, traders, and the market.

o   A holistic approach must focus on organizational development and management.

o   The principle of farmer-to-farmer and extensionist-to-extensionist learning approach must be optimized.

• Farm management. The central challenge for rice extension is farm management, the ability of farmers to use appropriate cultural management practices to optimize productivity. This requires that strategies be customized at the local level.
• Provision of public goods. Public investment in rice extension services must focus on the provision of public goods like trainings, demonstrations, and seminars on sustainable agriculture. The government must also address market failures, enhance market development, and provide agricultural services that are not provided by the private sector. At the same time, the government must avoid activities that distort the market.

Source:

Ponce, Eliseo, “Rice Extension”, Securing Rice, Reducing Poverty, (CSEARCA, 2006), pp. 107-126.