DAR Sec. Gil de los Reyes enumerates three valid reasons why the Philippines’ Agrarian Reform Program must continue after June 30, 2014 when Republic Act 9700 or Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program Extension with Reform (CARPer) ends. Sec. De los Reyes cited the following reasons:
1. There is nothing in the law that states that the DAR cannot distribute CARP-covered agricultural lands beyond 2014;
2. Section 30 of RA 9700 states that distribution of land with pending cases/proceedings will continue beyond 2014; and
3. The aforementioned was confirmed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in its Opinion Nos. 59 in 2011 and 60 in 2013.
Similarly, DAR Undersecretary for Legal Affairs Anthony Parungao said that the DAR will continue to acquire and distribute lands beyond June 2014.
“It is incorrect to use June 2014 as deadline. Our position is that we can proceed with land acquisition & distribution (LAD) even beyond the said date for lands where notice of coverage have already been served,” Parungao said citing Section 30 of RA 9700 which states: “Resolution of Cases. — Any case and/or proceeding involving the implementation of the provisions of Republic Act No. 6657, as amended, which may remain pending on June 30, 2014 shall be allowed to proceed to its finality and be executed even beyond such date.”
“Our legal position has been sustained by the Department of Justice through its legal opinions Nos. 59, s 2011 and 60 , issued early and mid July 2013, respectively,” he added.
The DOJ opinions, he said, gives the DAR the “green light” to proceed with Land Acquisition & Distribution (LAD) and continue implementing the two other major programs under CARPer, namely Agrarian Justice Delivery and Program Beneficiaries Development (PBD)
According to Parungao, LAD targets for the next four years are 160,000 hectares for 2013, 240,000 has. for 2014, 180,000 has. for 2015, and 112,000 has. for 2016 respectively.
During the Orientation Workshop on Public Relations, Crisis PR, and Broadcaster’s Training held at the Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP) at Tagaytay City on September 28-October 1,2013, Sec De los Reyes urged the DAR Information officers to make bold steps in educating the public on Agrarian Reform and initiate discussions on its implications on the socio economic situation of smallholder
farmers (comprised mostly of agrarian reform beneficiaries) in the Philippine agricultural sector today. He also encouraged to showcase and present the many success stories that are happening in the Agrarian Reform Communities (ARCs) while ensuring utmost ”transparency & accountability” in all transactions of DAR officials and personnel.
The “truth about agrarian reform in the past four decades was that 60% of distributed lands are those that are easier, less tedious and less contentious to distribute”, the secretary continued. “Contrast that to the nature of lands that are left for distribution from 2013 to 2016 of which 501,718 out of 822,488 hectares or 61% are under mandatory /compulsory acquisition, and where aggregate landholdings above five (5) hectares will now be placed under the coverage of CARP, one can expect a radically different and a very, very contentious part of land acquisition and distribution”.
“A lot of problems will arise along the way and we can get killed in the process but we have to do our job.” Sec Gil said. He also proudly pointed out the distribution of Hacienda Luisita in Tarlac in a series of programs in the first two weeks of October amidst the disbelief of skeptics and CARPer detractors. Hacienda Luisita has a total of 6,884 lots with an equal area of 6,600 square meters each for the 6,212 identified Farm Worker Beneficiaries spread across 10 barangays in municipalities of Concepcion and La Paz and in Tarlac City, all of Tarlac Province.
* * *
In the book A Survey of Business Models of Smallholder farms by Somja Vermeulen et al (2009) published by Food Agricultural Organization (FAO) and IFAD, it focuses on SMALLHOLDERS VERSUS LARGE FARMS. It says:“There has been long-standing debate about farm size and productivity. Some argue that the era of the smallholder farmer is over, and that for reasons of efficiency, small farms should be consolidated into fewer large holdings, allowing for economies of scale and increased mechanisation. They point on the one hand to impoverished peasant farmers on the margins of existence with little ability to generate a surplus for investment in the farm enterprise and limited capacity to adopt new technology, and on the other to profitable large farms, accessing world markets, and providing employment and good wages to the local rural workforce.
Others refute such arguments and note that for many crops there are few if any economies of scale in agricultural production. They point on the one hand to dynamic smallholder production, in which innovation and investment are very evident, as people adapt to new market opportunities and changing environmental conditions, and on the other hand to inefficient, extensive large farms with few workers, low wages and poor productivity.
There is ample evidence to support either case, depending on the type of crop, the policy context, and forms of support available to different kinds of farmer. Small farms are generally family-run, may be subsistence-based or market- oriented, using few or many external inputs, working manually or with machinery, and tend to be more labour-intensive. Large farms are generally market-oriented, may be family-run like small farms or corporate, and use few if any or many labourers. They may also rely on specialised management firms to run the agricultural business.
Both small and large farms may be resource poor or rich, use largely manual methods or machinery, and use the land extensively or intensively. Because of this great variation in farm types, any statements on the relative merits of small versus large farms can only be relevant within specific social, economic and biophysical environments.
In addition, empirical research has documented a wide variety of business models involving diverse combinations of small to large-scale players; false dichotomies between small and large-scale should therefore be avoided.
Scale economies may be achieved by mechanisation and large-scale processing facilities in crops such as sugarcane, some cereals and soya. Many perennial crops such as rubber, fruit and vegetables may do better under intensive production with a significant proportion of manual input, though scale efficiencies may apply in packing and transport, with direct implications for production
In the absence of economies of scale, small farms may be more efficient than large ones because of the favourable incentive structure in self- employed farming and the significant transaction and monitoring costs associated with hired labour (de Janvry et al. 2001).
However, groups of smallholders may also organise themselves to jointly store, grade and sell their produce to gain access to large buyers.”