CIRCUTING COPY c. TO BE RETURNED TO REPRT FILE C P DOCUMENT OF INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION Not For Public Use 39 Vol. 4 RETURN TO Report No. 39a-PH AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY PHILIPPINES (in four volumes) VOLUME IV ANNEXES 11 - 15 May 2, 1973 Regional Projects Department Asia Regional Office This report was prepared for official use only by the Bank Group. It may not be published, quoted or cited without Bank Group authorization. The Bank Group does not accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the report. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY VOLUME IV ANNEXES 11 - 15 ANNEX 11. AGRICULTURAL CREDIT ANNEX 12. TREE CROPS ANNEX 13. LAND REFORM AND SETTLEMENT ANNEX 14. PRODUCTION ECONOMICS - RICE AND CORN ANNEX 15. STATISTICAL ANNEX AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY PHILIPPINES ANNEX 11. AGRICULTURAL CREDIT ANNEX 11 Page 1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Recent Developments ................................. 1 Credit Institutions ................................. 3 Rural Banks .................................... 3 Supervised Credit ......................... 8 Training for Credit Supervisors ........... 11 IBRD Credit for Mechanization ............. 12 Commercial Credit for Mechanical Equipment ............................ 15 ACA Credit and Cooperatives .................... 16 Commercial Banks ............................... 24 Development Institutions ....................... 27 The Development Bank of the Philippines ... 27 Private Development Banks .................. 34 Private Development Corporation of the Philippines ............................. 36 Financing Land Transfer ......................... 37 The Land Bank .............................. 37 The Agrarian Reform Fund ................... 38 Interest Rates .................................. 39 TABLES 1: Estimated New Agricultural Loans, 1969-71 2: Estimated Loans Outstanding, 1970 and 1971 3: Number and Location of Rural Banks ANNEX 11 Page 2 TABLES (cont.) 4: Loans Granted by the Rural Banking System, 1967-1971 5: Consolidated Comparative Balance Sheets of Rural Banks - End of Year 1968-1968-71 6: Average Assets of 573 Rural Bank Borrowers in 1965 and present pesos 7: Consolidated Comparative Income and Expenses of Rural Bank, Years 1968-71 8: Regional Distribution of Rediscounts granted to Rural Banks by the Central Bank Classified as to Crops or Projects 9: Second Rural Credit Project Loan Releases by Purpose as of January 25, 1972 10: Comparison of Cost of Mechanical and Human Power in Four Asian Countries, 1967 11: Sales of Tractors and Power Tillers (1961-1971) 12: Consolidated Operating Statement of 104 Farmers' Cooperatives 1969/70 and 1970/71 13: Profits and Losses of 104 Cooperatives in 1970/71 14: Comparative Consolidated Balance Sheet of 104 Farmers' Cooperatives as of June 30, 1970 and 1971 15: Condensed Comparative Statement of Operations for Fiscal Years 1969-70 and 1970-71 16: Loans Released by ACA, 1969-70 and 1970-71 17: Collections of ACA Loans, 1968-71 18: Collections of ACA and Predecessor Agency Credits in Nueva Ecija Province, 1953-1971 19: Credit Outstanding from Commercial Banks (including PNB) - End of Period, 1968-71 20: PNB Loans Outstanding by Industry: 1967-1971, as of December 31 of the Year Indicated 21: PNB Loans Granted by Industry: 1967-1971 72: PNB Loan Collections by Industry: 1967-1971 23: Balance Sheet of Development Bank of the Philippines 24: Number and Amount of Agricultural Loans Approved at FY 1965/66-1970/71 25: DBP Loans Approved for Selected Agricultural Processing Industries, FY 1965/66 - 1970/71 26: DBP Distribution of Agricultural Loans Approved by Size, 1965/66- 1969/70 27: DBP: Annual Outstanding Loan Volume by Sector, FY 1967-71 28: DBP: Past Due Loans and Loans in Litigation, June 30, 1971 29: Comparative Coordinated Balance Sheet of Operating Private Development Banks - End of Year in Million of Pesos 30: Loans Granted by Private Development Banks, 1967-71 31: Comparative Consolidated Profit and Loss Statement of Operating Private Development Banks 32: Major Official Interest Rates in Percent ANNEX 11 Page 1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT Recent Developments 1. Most farm investment has been financed with farmers' own resources. A sample study suggests that credit finances only 9-14% of total farm-owners' investments. 1/ A recent survey of farm indebtedness by the Bureau of Agri- cultural Economics (BAEcon) indicates that about one-fourth of all farmers borrowed during the crop year 1971-72. And over half of the borrowers obtained financing from non-institutional sources - private moneylenders, landlords, and relatives of friends. The heaviest incidence of borrowing was in Central Luzon (about 45% of the farmers borrowed), where credit was needed for fertilizers for HYV rice and where farmers suffered crop damage from toangro disease. 2. Farm production credit advanced by institutions in 1971 totalled $2.9 billion, according to official data (Table 1), only about 20% of agri- cultural gross product (f 14.5 billion). Even this is an overstatement, in- asmuch as renewals of previous loans are included and some loans ostensibly for agriculture are diverted to other purposes. Allowing for these factors, the mission estimates that total institutional agricultural credit outstandin- ('on both production and marketing) at the and of 1971 was V 3.4 billion rompared with V 3.3 billion a year previous (Table 2). With an increace in the price level of over 15% in 1971, the amount of institutional credit apparently declined in real terms in that year. Most production credit is granted by rural banks and the Philippine National Bank (the latter the main source of credit for sugar planters). The Agricultural Credit Adminis- tration, a government agencv to provide credit to small farmers in land reform areas, accounted for only about 1% of total production credit in 1971. Most credit for marketing is provided by the Government-owned Philippine National Bank (PNB) and privately owned commercial banks. Longer-term loans have come largely from the Government Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP), which also makes funds available to the private development banks. Altogether longer-term credit from these institutions accounted for less than 15% of credit outstanding at the end of 1971. 3. The demand for institutional agricultural credit is expected to rise rapidly for several reasons. First, spread of HYV technology will 1/ Dominador A. Clemente, Jr., "The AGLF Credit Program," pp. 9-18, and Eugenio P. Ladrido, "The CB:IBRD Credit Program," pp. 10-16, in Interna- tional Rice Research Institute, "Seminar on Economics of Rice Production in the Philippines," Los Bafos, December 11-13, 1967. ANNEX 11 Page 2 require increasing expenditures for production inputs, particularly fertilizers. At present, perhaps only 30% of the riceland is fertilized and very little of cornland is so treated. Together these crops, 3.1 million ha of rice and 2.4 million ha of corn, account for more than half of all cropped land in the nation. Second, the land reform program, which is expected to convert into owners perhaps as many as a million tenants on 1.8 million ha of rice and cornland, will create an additional need for credit, partly to supplant credit previously furnished by the landlord, but also for capital improve- ments to enhance productivity. Third, long-term development loans will also be needed especially to exploit the large potentials for smallholder fishponds, cattle enterprises and tree farming. 4. Following the Presidential Decree on land reform, Government moved to strengthen the financial resources of the major credit institutions and to make them more responsive to the needs of smallholders. It is estimated that to provide the production credit needs of the land reform program will require expansion of production credit of about 0 350 million over the next 4 or 5 years. This will place a considerable additional burden on the private rural banking system, the main source of such credit to smallholders. In 1972, rural banks granted total agricultural loans of about V 725 millions. 5. Moreover, rural banks have had few dealings with sharecroppers, who generally lacked collateral security. It is recognized that to service the new owners will likely involve higher risks than the rural banks have faced heretofore. Thus, the rural banks have been authorized rediscounting privileges of 100%, Government guarantees of 85% of the loans made, and low-cost money from the Central Bank (1%) providing the loans are supervised by agricultural technicians. 6. Despite fairly rapid expansion,rural banks do not yet provide geographic coverage of the nation. Of some 600 banks, two-thirds are in Luzon while coverage of other islands is quite sparse. PNB is also planning to extend branches to areas which lack credit facilities, particularly in Mindanao. DBP is also expanding its activities. Additional financial resources have been provided to both PNB and DBP. 7. Government plans to rely primarily on hese institutions - rural banks, PNB and DBP - to provide short and longer-term investment credit under the land reform program rather than on the Agricultural Credit Adminis- tration (ACA), which in addition to cooperati-e marketing functions has provided credit to cooperatives and members of cooperatives, particularly in areas with land reform programs. This decision reflpctg the poor performance of ACA relative to rural banks in collection of loans. During 1964-71, collections amounted to only 64% of releases; collections from production loans associated with land reform were only about 40% of releases. 8. An Agrarian Reform Fund, established by Presidential Decree No. 85, will finance and/or guarantee payment to landowners for farmers acquired by tenants as well as guarantee production loans. The Fund has resources of about ? 2 billion, consisting of securities held by the Central Bank, Government guarantee funds provided by earlier appropriations, real estate, ANNEX 11 Page 3 shares of stocks of private corporations and other assets of Government controlled financial institutions, and peso proceeds of foreign loans. Government expects a high rate of default in the initial years of the program, and consequently a considerable drain on the fund. 9. The land reform program will place heavy operational strain on the institutions entrusted to provide credit support to the program, particularly the rural banks. A rapid expansion in banking facilities to areas which are inadequately served, if at all, and in the training of competent tech- nicians for credit supervision will be required in order to improve pro- ductivity of the former tenants and minimize defaults on loans. Credit Institutions Rural Banks 10. The rural banks of the Philippines provide institutional credit and banking services to low-income rural areas. A number of other developing Asian countries have sent missions to study the rural banks of the Philippines and to receive training in their methods. The most important explanation for rural banks' success is their organization as locally-owned, profit- making institutions, with government financial participation but under private control. On the other hand, rural banks, to protect their invest- ments and make profits, have generally avoided providing credit to the poorest Filipino farmers, who represent the greatest credit risks. Various government incentives to institute supervised credit (providing technical assistance) and guarantees for loans are designed to enable the rural banks to extend their services to this group. 11. The Central Bank has prepared a five-year expansion program for the rural banking system. The number of rural banks, now almost 600, is to reach 1,000 by 1975. These are expected to make loans totaling f 4.5 billion to no less than four million customers. 1/ 12. The rural banking system was established in 1952, after a long history of unsuccessful efforts to provide credit and banking facilities for Philippine rural areas. 2/ In the same year the "Agricultural Credit and Cooperative Finance Agency," the predecessor of ACA, was established with larger scope and more credit resources. However, the rural banks are now far more important than ACA. Over the past 5 years, an average of 42 new rural banks a year have been opened (Table 3). I/ Central Bank, Department of Rural Banks, "Annual Report of the Rural Banking System for the Year Ended December 31, 1970," Manila, 1971, (mimeographed, p. 4). 2/ For an excellent historical review, see: Honesto 0. Francisco (Direc- tor, Department of Rural Banks), "The Philippine Rural Banking System," Manila, undated (mimeographed), pp. 1-2. ANNEX 11 Page 4 13. Generally, each rural bank serves the area of one municipality (small town). Rural banks may lend to small farmers, small industries and commercial undertakings in their immediate vicinity. Small farmers are defined as those that cultivate no more than 50 ha. The average size of rural bank loans in 1972 was 0 1,400. Rural banks are authorized to lend to cooperatives, but until recently this seemed too risky to be considered seriously. 14. Most lending is for periods of one year or less. Larger rural banks may obtain permission to make medium- and long-term loans for the pur- chase of land, improvement of real estate, or purchaQe -f agricultural and industrial equipment; -any of the agricultural equipment have been financed by the IBRD "mechanization loans" 1/ (Table 4). 15. Interest charges are limited to a maximum of 12%. However, ordinary loans usually are discounted in advance, raising the effective rate to approximately 13.2%. (Discountine in advance is prohibited for supervised credit and for CB:IBRD mechanization loans.) Rural banks are supposed to make marketing loans at 9% interest, but almost never do; the few exceptions seem to involve storage of crops in warehouses controlled by the maior stockholders of the rural bank. Very recently. the Rural Bank Act has been amended to allow equity investment in allied undertakings including warehousing companies up to 25% of net worth of the bank. 16. At present, around 20% of all loans outstanding are past due or in litigation for collection (Table 5). Ultimate losses, however, are likely to run less than 1%. Loans go mainly to larger farmers or to affluent non- farmers living in small towns. Some loans to tenant farmers are made with the guarantee of their landlord; until recently loans were never made to leaseholders. According to a study made in 1962, the average rural bank borrower was 48 years old, had six persons in his family. and an annual family income of Y 5,307. His average capital investment amounted to o r 22,193, or roughly r 38,838 at today's prices (Table 6). 17. Almost half the borrowers reported previous borrowing from other sources. Of the loans obtained, a surprisingly high proportion (62%) came from institutional sources, particularly banks, insurance companies, and the government farm credit agency. Clearly the customers of rural banks in that year were among the more prosperous members of rural society and a majority had access to other financial institutions or other sources of credit. 18. Rural banks are promoted and closely supervised by the Central Bank's Department of Rural Banks. Before a new rural bank opens its doors, key officials must go through a three-week training course and middle-level employees receive a six-week training course at the Institute of Rural Banking, largely at the expense of the Central Bank. Minimum educational qualifications are required for the bookkeeper (BS in commerce, with major 1/ In addition, long-term loans may be made with rural banks' own resources to small-scale industries and merchants, with a capital investment of no more than 0 50,000, recently raised from 0 25,000. ANNEX 11 Page 5 in accounting), and the cashier (two years' college, with 12 units in accounting). While there are no formal qualifications for the position of Manager, many rural bank managers are medical doctors and other professionals, who divide their time between the bank and their regular occupation. As might be expected in truly rural areas, very few have had any previous bank- ing experience. 19. Each rural bank is visited frequently by a team of auditors from the Department of Rural Banks. Out of the Department's total staff of 463, some 221 are auditors, or an average of one auditor to every 2.7 rural banks. In addition, each rural bank that rediscounts loans with the Central Bank is visited frequently by a pre-audit team from the Central Bank's Department of Loans and Credits and is also subject to post-audit controls. 20. Results of this control have been impressive. So far, only 34 rural banks have become "distressed". Of these, 19 continue to operate under Central Bank, and 13 are under liquidation. 21. Major violations of the rules uncovered by examiners include indirect loans to shareholders or employees, charging of unauthorized fees to increase effective interest rates, loans to ineligible borrowers (those with over 50 ha of land), simulated payments (to cover up delinquencies and rollover credits), "splitting" of large loans into a number of small notes that are eligible for rediscount (under V 5,000), and the use of dummy borrowers to hide the true destination of loans. To obtain additional funds, some rural banks pay extra-legal interest rates on deposits, up to 18% per annum. Other rural banks receive temporary overdrafts from commercial banks; even at the legal rate of 14% for such overdrafts, the cost exceeds the legal charge for rural bank loans. 22. Private investors must pay in a minimum of V 100,000 for the common stock before a rural bank can be organized. The Central Bank (operating through the DBP to get around its own charter limitations is supposed to match this investment, peso for peso, by buying nonvoting preference shares. 1/ In recent years, however, a scarcity of funds has prevented the Central Bank from fulfilling this commitment. 23. On the other hand, the original requirement that rural banks buy out the Central Bank's shares has not been enforced. A recent amendment requires these shares to be acquired within one year or they may be sold to the general public. Rural banks' reserve for this purpose amounts to 1 46.0 million but only V 8.6 million has been used while the balance has been used for lending purposes. 24. Most rural banks were established and continue to be controlled by family groups. Usually such groups also have interests in landholdings, palay trading or milling, and similar rural enterprises. At the present stage of development, such family family groups are the only source of 1/ To date, sources of funds include USAID (1 10 million), sales of reparations goods (r 4 million), and the Central Bank profits (f 56 million). ANNEX 11 Page 6 investment capital in rural areas and are primarily interested in enterprises that they can manage and control. At present, no family group is allowed to own more than 35% of the shares in any one rural bank. Stockholders of the existing rural banks are not allowed to invest in new rural banks within the same province. 25. Rural banks in effect have been a local monopoly. They are not allowed to open branches (even within their own municipality). Rural banks may only rediscount credits from their own area (with some exceptions for old customers, or for customer authorized by the rural bank that has juris- diction). However, the Central Bank may authorize the establishment of a competing rural bank in their municipality, if the credit needs of farmers are not met. 26. The Department of Rural Banks is also trying to force a wider distribution of share ownership. Applicants for new charters will be required to organize so-called "community-oriented" banks, in which no family group may control more than 35% of the voting stock. Cooperatives may invest as an incorporator up to 20% of the stock. 27. Around 35% of all assets have been acquired with government funds, through the purchase of preferred stock and rediscounting of loans by the Central Bank. The proportion of government financing declined somewhat during 1970 and 1971, but probably will increase as a result of the new program of supervised credit. During 1971, total assets rose by f 128.6 million, reflecting increases indeposits, funds from official sources, new private investments in common stock and reserves accumulated out of profits. 28. In theory, rediscounts are a temporary privilege, and rural banks are supposed to mobilize local savings as their major source of loan funds. 1/ In practice, the availability of low-cost official financing helps to reduce the pressure on rural banks to seek out more deposits. The relatively low official interest rate, of course, offers only a limited attraction for the savings of rural residents. 29. Average earnings on private shares are estimated at 18.1%, even though earnings on total net worth are a relatively low 8.1% (Table 7). 2/ However, the maximum dividend that may be paid on private shares is 14%. This may have seemed generous when rural banks were first established, but as a result of inflation and rising interest rates it is no longer com- petitive with alternative investments. Furthermore, the Central Bank's rules require that substantial reserves be set aside for eventual redemption of the preferred stock. This reduces typical dividends to around 8% per annum, less than the interest paid for some time deposits. 1/ Central Bank of the Philippines, "Rediscounting Guidelines for Rural Banks and Up-Dated Primer on Rediscounting by Rural Banks with the Central Bank of the Philippines," Manila, 1972. 2/ Rural banks are exempt from taxation as long as their net worth, excluding the Central Bank's investment in preference shares, does not exceed f 1 million; in practice few rural banks have approached the limit. ANNEX 11 Page 7 30. Agricultural credits to be rediscounted must have no more than 270 days to rue (out of an original term of no more than one year) and must have been used for short-term or operating expenses. 1/ They may not be overdue or renewed. For regular credits, the Central Bank lends a maximum of 80% of the amount due and for supervised credit up to 100%. Eligible papers covering loans under supervised credit is charged 3% per annum with a maximum rebate of 2% while other eligible papers under non-supervised credit is charged 1% over the existing interest rate on savings deposits. The implementation of the 7% interest on non-supervised loans is deferred up to June 30, 1973, in view of the lack of trained agricultural technicians to be hired by rural banks. The total obligation of a rural bank with the Central Bank arising from rediscounting authorized herein shall not exceed three hundred per cent (300%) of its net worth, plus fifty percent (50%) of its monthly average savings deposit liabilities for the four (4) months period immediately preceding its date of loan application for papers covering loans granted under the supervised credit scheme and one hundred per cent (100%) of its net worth, plus 50% of its monthly average savings deposit liabilities during the four-month period immediately preceding its date of loan application for papers covering loans granted under the non- supervised credit scheme. Past due rediscount obligations of rural banks are subject to an additional 7% per annum penalty for "liquidated damages" (Table 8). Rural banks are ineligible if: (a) they have not submitted a plan for payment of unpaid sub- scriptions to their capital stock; (b) past due loans exceed 25% of outstanding loans (except loans to land reform beneficiaries), or their total deposits with the Central Bank; (c) they are in default on any obligations to the Central Bank; (d) they have not met legal reserve requirements; 2/ (e) their required capital investment has not been fulfilled, or their investment in bank premises exceeds their authorized figure; or (f) loans over r 10,000 may only be rediscounted if less than 40% of all loans are in excess of that figure. 31. The government, on the other hand, seems reluctant to encourage the development of rural banks into decentralized "full-service" commercial banks. There is a desire to concentrate rural banks' efforts on the fulfillment of certain highly specialized rural credit needs. This has taken the form of a 1/ Credits to land reform beneficiaries must mature no less than two months after the harvest; commercial credits may not run more than 180 days. 2/ 14% of demand deposits, 12% of savings deposits, and 10% of time deposits; 1% of deposits must be deposited with the Central Bank and the remainder may be invested in government-guaranteed bonds. ANNEX 11 Page 8 new supervised credit and loan guarantee program for short-term credit to truly small farmers and the CB:IBRD mechanization loans for long-term credit. 32. The government has concluded that its best hope for providing pro- duction loans to implement land reform and rice self-sufficiency is to shift rural banks from collateralized lending to supervised credit. To make this conversion palatable to the rural banks, government is offering a guarantee against financial risks, plus Central Bank financing at very low interest rates. The Department of Rural Banks hopes that these advantages will convert virtually all rural bank lending into supervised credit within three to four years. Supervised Credit 33. Beginning in 1963, pilot programs of supervised credit were instituted by the Department of Rural Banks and DBP. In general, these were successful, but they enjoyed certain advantages that could only be equalled with great difficulty in a large-scale program. The pilot program in rural banks began with selected groups of farmers who had previously borrowed from rural banks. In general, these were small or medium farmers who owned their land and were among the more progressive and credit-worthy in their area. Technicians were supplied to provide close supervision, at the expense of the Central Bank. One technician was available for every 100 borrowers. 34. These technicians received special training for a year, including nine months of classroom work and living with poor farm families in remote villages and three months of credit supervision in the field. Some 60 graduates of agricultural colleges received this training 1/ at a cost of f 3,000 per participant (equivalent to Y 5,200 at today's prices). However, the entire program was discontinued primarily because the cost seemed so high. 35. Thanks to the selection of borrowers and the adequate supply of well-trained technicians, the pilot programs produced excellent results. In the case of the rural banks, full or partial repayments of loans were made by all participants and amounted to 91% of disbursements. A control group of nonsupervised borrowers repaid only 63% of the amount due and 19% made no payments at all. Because of bad weather and a decline in prices, the net income of supervised borrowers fell by only 3%, while the incomes of a non- supervised comparison group fell by 30%. 2/ 1/ One-third of them now work for DBP, as appraisers, economic analysts, or in other functions remote from the supervision of small loans. The other two-thirds work for the Department of Rural Banks and continue to spend much of their time in some form of credit supervision. 2/ Amando M. Dalisay and Teofilo T. Azada, "The Supervised Credit System among Selected Rural Banks in Luzon Philippine-American Workshop on Rural Development, U.P. College of Agriculture, Los Baios, June 6-17, 1966 (mimeo). ANNEX 11 Page 9 36. On the other hand, some difficult problems arose. Some farmers used some of the credit to finance consumption; natural calamities prevented some borrowers from repaying their loans on time; high illiteracy and older farmers' suspicion of young technicians hindered the introduction of new techniques, and many rural banks were reluctant to lend to tenant farmers or leaseholders who were unable to offer real estate as collateral. 37. To overcome this reluctance, the Agricultural Guarantee and Loan Fund (AGLF) was established. This fund, administered by the Central Bank, was used to make special time deposits with selected rural banks, at an in- terest rate of 4-1/4%. The deposits were used to make loans to small farmers, at 12%, without collateral requirements. Supervision was supposed to be pro- vided by the extension service but, in practice, supervision was nominal. 38. Rural banks were assured that any losses over 30% of each loan would be met by the guarantee fund and were charged a 1% premium for this guarantee. As of December 1971, rural banks had paid in over f 1 million in premiums. However, the guarantee required the rural banks to take all pos- sible legal action to collect before asking for reimbursement. This has been construed in such a way that no rural bank has ever collected for any loss under the program. 39. A total of 261 rural banks participated in the program. Of these, 141 (with r 29.9 million of special time deposits) were in land reform areas, primarily in Central Luzon. Loans outstanding at the end of 1971 amounted to r 34.7 million. Overdue special time deposits amounted to P 8.0 million or 23% of the amount outstanding, and 11.0% of all loans granted. 1/ On the whole, results were disappointing and suggest that credit supervision was inadequate. Delinquencies on AGLF loans were high. A sample survey of 349 borrowers under the AGLF, made in 1968, showed that only 58% had fully paid their loans and 42% were overdue. 2/ 40. There is some doubt as to the program's effectiveness in raising agricultural production. A sample of AGLF borrowers, compared with a similar group of nonborrowers, showed the following increase in yields for palay: 3/ (In Cavans per Hectare) 1964-67 1967-68 % Increase (average) Borrowers 37 53 43.2 Nonborrowers 29 49 69.0 Nonborrowers as % of borrowers 78 92 160 1/ Central Bank of the Philippines, Department of Rural Banks, Memorandum as of 31 December 1971. 2/ Dominador A. Clemente, "The AGLF Credit Program", in: IRRI, Seminar on Economics of Rice Pr6duction in the Philippines, Los Banos, December, 1969, p. 9.7. 3/ Source: Clemente, op. cit., pp. 9.21 and 9.22. ANNEX 11 Page 10 The higher initial yields of borrowers were not surprising, since past and expected yields were criteria for the selection of participants in the pro- gram. However, nonborrowers made even more rapid progress than the borrower and ended up with yields only 8% below those of borrowers. 41. Based on the experience of the AGLF, similar separate arrangements were made for credits to small fishermen and for loans to tenant farmers through rural banks in the Nueva Ecija land reform area. Small fishermen were defined as those with vessels of no more than 3 gross tons. The maximum loan was r 5,000, for up to three years. Purposes included purchase of a boat, inboard motor, nets, etc. Borrowers must be members of an active and viable fishermen's cooperative and must pledge to market their entire catch through the cooperative. 1/ A minimum of 30% of the proceeds is deducted to pay off their loan. Rural banks pay 6% for the special time deposit granted to them under this program and charge 12% interest to the borrower (not deductible in advance). Loans to fishermen, considered particularly risky, are guaranteed up to 80% by the AGLF. They may be secured by real estate or by the fisherman's equipment plus two acceptable comakers. 42. Loans in support of the Nueva Ecija land reform program come out of a "Special Agricultural Loan Fund" of f 1.5 million, provided by a loan of USAID counterpart funds. 2/ Eligible rural banks are chosen by agreement between the Central Bank and the Director of the Nueva Ecija Land Reform Integrated Development Program, a multi-agency government effort. 43. Each participating bank must hire an acceptable full-time techni- cian. Loans go only to small farm operators (with less than 10 ha of land and no more than 5 ha of irrigated land) and mainly to farmers who do not own real estate collateral. These must belong to seldas of five or more farmers. Loans may also be granted with the guarantee of a farmers' as- sociation, which takes over the right to operate a delinquent borrowers' leasehold if necessary to ensure payment. An agreed amount of palay or other crops must be deposited in a bonded warehouse chosen by the rural bank (with preference to farmers' cooperatives). The program allows production loans for up to one year with supervised releases to meet actual requirements. In addition, commodity loans of up to 180 days may be made to finance harvested crops until they are sold. The maximum interest charge on production loans is 12% per annum (not collected in advance); an additional fee of 1.5% for technical assistance was not implemented. No other charges may be made. The maximum interest rate on commodity loans is 10%. 44. Loans are made out of "special time deposits" made at 4-1/2% per annum for up to 2-1/2 years. They may also be rediscounted with the Central Bank. Loans are not guaranteed, but may be repaid over two years (with a 1/ The cooperatives must agreed to market its fish through the Greater Manila Terminal Food Market. 2/ ACA received a loan of Y 18.5 million to conduct a similar program for its clients in Nueva Ecija. ANNEX 11 Page 11 corresponding prolongation of the special time deposit) in the event of a crop failure. 45. In 1971 a new and very ambitious supervised credit program was in- stituted as part of the land reform program. 1/ This combined the features of the AGLF, the SALF and several other previous programs, while transferring from ACA to the rural banks the primary responsibility for lending to land reform beneficiaries. The AGFL ceased to operate, and its assets were trans- ferred to a new "Agricultural Guarantee Fund" (AGF). This Fund is governed by a board including the Secretaries of Finance, Agriculture and Natural Resources, and Agrarian Reform, the Governor of the Central Bank and the President of the Rural Bankers' Association. Rural banks that make loans under an approved supervised credit procedure can insure against losses of up to 85%, if due to crop failures caused by natural calamities, pests or dis- eases. Payment of claims within 60 days is promised, subject to retroactive adjustment during a one-year period. However, rural banks remain responsible for using all possible means to collect the loan and reimburse the guarantee fund. The guarantee fee is 1% per annum, paid by the rural bank. 2/ A fine of at least ? 100,000 and imprisonment for a minimum of 10 years are provided as penalties for collusion between borrowers and rural banks to defraud the AGF. 46. Under Presidential Decree No. 85 (December 24, 1972), AGLF the Central Bank Calamity Fund, established following the floods of 1972 and other guarantee and loan funds were made part nf the Agrarian Reform Fund which provides guarantees of payments to landlords for lands transferred to tenants and to banks for production credit advanced. Training for Credit Supervisors 47. Participating rural banks are required to hire at least one super- vising credit technician, acceptable to the Central Bank, with a B.S. in Agriculture. As a temporary stopgap, up to 400 technicians from the exten- sion service of the Central Bank will be loaned to rural banks. Unlike. previous arrangements for part-time use of government technicians, which were unsatisfactory, they will be detailed full-time to individual rural banks for a period of six months. To obtain their cooperation, the rural banks will pay incentive allowances of f 1 per farmer supervised per month, plus V-3 per loan collected in full. A government technician who supervises 200 farmers could earn an additional 0 1,800 in six months, or at least as much as his normal salary for the period. 48. Each technician before he is hired receives a month or more training at the Agricultural Credit and Cooperative Institute of the University of the Philippines College of Agriculture. By early 1973, 500 had been trained. There seems to be an adequate supply of possible candidates, since Philippine universities graduate around 1,500 agriculturists a year. Applicants for training include recent college graduates and some employees of government agricultural agencies. 1/ RA 6390, dated 2 August 1071. 2/ The risk premium for similar coverage under crop insurance has been estimated at 6-7%. ANNEX 11 Page 12 49. In the past, successful supervised credit programs in the Philippines have provided one technician per 100-200 farmers. Most qualified observers believe that this degree of supervision also will be necessary for the pres- ent program. Indeed, some maintain that the upper limit of 200 borrowers could only be attained under favorable conditions. 50. A number of rural banks have begun to supply motorbikes to their technicians (usually as loans, to be repaid out of their travel allowances), and the Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources is supplying them to government technicians. The IBRD has provided loan funds to buy jeeps for some of the agricultural credit supervisors of the Central Bank. Vehicles are also needed for rural bank and government supervisory personnel. 51. A number of rural bankers have come to the conclusion that the 2% rebate on supervised loans will not pay a technician's salary and expenses unless he "supervises" at least 700 farmers. Apart from the effect of more supervisors on net profits, some rural bankers are concerned about the effect on their organization if they add large numbers of well-paid technicians. Some government officials recognize that credit supervisors cannot earn their annual cost if they work only on rice, particularly in areas where irrigation is not adequate for two crops a year. These officials hope that rural banks will support the planting of off-season crops (corn, livestock, vegetables, etc.). So far, however, the special arrangements for guarantees and rediscount credit do not apply to such diversified crops. IBRD Credit for Mechanization 52. Since 1967, rural banks have made long-term loans, with resources obtained through the Central Bankfromtwo IBRD loans, primarily for the purchase of mechanical cultivation equipment. As of March 1972, total dis- bursements amounted to US$10.5 million, out of a program totalling US$20.8 million. Loan releases under the second loan were 0 14.1 million (approximately US$2.2 million) at the end of January 1972 (Table 9). By December 31, 1972, releases rose to f 36.5 million, mostly for tractors and power tillers. 53. These loans have undoubtedly helped to increase the number of wheeled tractors and power tillers in operation in the country. The lend- ing terms - the length of loan and interest rate - were much more favorable than the terms available from purely commercial sources. 54. The extent of mechanization in the Philippines is low. This is due to relatively low wages for human labor and the relatively high cost of mechanical equipment (Table 10). Some Philippine officials fear that any substantial increase in mechanization may increase unemployment and under- employment, defeating the government's social purposes, and reducing the opportunity to mobilize unused labor for productive purposes. 55. Before 1970, imported mechanical equipment enjoyed the advantages of an overvalued exchange rate. The introduction of a floating exchange rate in 1969 (with a de facto devaluation from around P 3.9 to 6.4 per dollar) slowed down sales of mechanical equipment for several years, but ANNEX 11 Page 13 there are now signs of renewed momentum because farm prices rose in turn (Table 11). 56. Around 40% of all four-wheel tractor sales are made on the in- stallment plan, with the distributor providing credit over two years for perhaps 60% of the list price. The nominal interest rate is 12% on the declining balance, but for sales not financed by the dealer there is a cash discount of 7-1/2-10%. The actual interest cost of installment sales is estimated below (per V 100 of purchase price): Rate of cash discount 7-1/2% 10% Down payment 40 40 Amount borrowed 60 60 Average amount borrowed over period 30 30 Cash discount foregone, per annum 3.25 5.00 Cash discount as % of average borrowed 10.8 16.7 Plus: interest on declining balance 12.0 12.0 Total true interest 22.8 28.7 57. Machinery dealers finance part of their installment credit with loans or discounts from finance companies at 18-24% true interest. The re- mainder is financed with their own resources or with foreign suppliers' credit (usually at about 8% interest). 58. There are several obstacles to increased financing of mechanical equipment by existing institutions. One of these is that amortization rates for the CB:IBRD loan and other similar programs have been unrealistically liberal. In many cases, operation by inexperienced owners and the lack of adequate service facilities have resulted in tractors and tillers becoming inoperable in around three years, while loan payments are scheduled for seven or more years. As a result, large numbers of tractors and tillers have had to be repossessed. 59. Many potentially usable power tillers and some tractors have been taken out of service because of the lack of spare parts. Some years ago, over a dozen brands of power tillers were distributed in the Philippines. However, fierce competition drove all but two or three out of the market, leaving many tillers as orphans without dealers to supply spare parts. This has also happened to some brands of tractors in areas where dealer- ships have been cancelled or given up. 60. To remain eligible for CB:IBRD financing, dealers must pledge to provide adequate maintenance and spare parts services. Furthermore, the Department of Rural Banks tries to visit each CB:IBRD borrower at least once a year to check on the condition of his equipment. The CB:IBRD terms should be broadened to allow loans for equipment of repair shops or even for financing of major spare parts or overhauls for individual owners (e.g. replacement of engines or transmissions). 61. Some of these problems have been buried in the wake of the float- ing rate. This not only raised the price of new machinery but led to an ANNEX 11 Page 14 increase in the price of second-hand machines, making it possible for many banks to sell their repossessed equipment for enough to collect their loans. However, many bankers have become disillusioned with loans for mechanical equipment because of disrepair. When the CB:IBRD program first began, most lenders accepted the equipment as collateral for a full 50% of its invoiced price. At present, many rural banks lend only 50% of the appraisal. The effect is to require real estate collateral as the chief security for mechanization loans. 62. The DBP and private development banks also have become very con- servative; some private development banks allow no value for equipment in setting collateral requirements. According to one tractor importer, only 3 of the 30 private development banks will finance mechanical equipment. The remainder either do not have funds or are afraid to lend for this purpose. 63. The reluctance to lend is reinforced by several restrictive rules of the Central Bank and of the CB:IBRD loan. At present, only around 120 rural banks are authorized to make CB:IBRD loans; most others are excluded because their overdue loans exceed limits set by the Central Bank. Most of the rural banks that are eligible to participate are unable to make loans for larger equipment because they cannot lend more than 15% of their net worth to any one borrower. The increase in the "floating rate" has raised the internal price of many standard machines to such an extent that they exceed this limit. For example, a 55 HP tractor and rice thresher (a popular combination for custom operators, since it extends their working season) now costs ? 123,000. To handle loans of this size, a rural bank must have at least # 820,000 in net worth, and only a handful of the existing banks can qualify. 64. On the other hand, possibilities for using the CB:IBRD loan have been enhanced by recent relaxation of certain restrictions. The second loan provides for loans to finance poultry, swine and fish ponds, and has been extended to include tree crops, off-farm storage, and cargo trucks. The IBRD also agreed to use of the loan to purchase jeeps for most (though not all) of the Central Bank technicians who are assigned to field super- vision and coordination of the program. Also, the requirement for 10% participation by rural banks with their own funds was removed. 65. Some further relaxation of restrictions might be in order. For example, present rules allow finance of over-the-road trucks, but not pickup trucks which are desired by larger farmers to service their mechanical equip- ment and maintain liaison. Similarly, the new rules allow financing of fish- ing vessels, but there is no provision for financing shop equipment that is needed for maintenance of fishing vessels. Last but not least, rural banks and the Central Bank should be allowed to make more liberal use of the credit to purchase vehicles for the use of their technicians. To avoid possible abuses, these should be limited to utility-type vehicles (jeeps), and should be available only for use outside the Manila area. ANNEX 11 Page 15 Commercial Credit for Mechanical Equipment 66. According to a leading tractor importer, there are now 10,000- 12,000 four-wheeled tractors in operation in the Philippines, plus perhaps 10,000 two-wheeled tillers. According to a study made by staff members of IRRI and the University of the Philippines' College of Agriculture, 1/ four- wheel tractors were purchased mainly by sugarcane planters until 1967. In that year, rice producers bought more tractors than sugarcane growers, partly as a result of the expansion of mechanization credit under the first CB:IBRD loan. 2/ 67. Many small farmers have off-farm sources of income and it is often more profitable to hire out farming operations than to forego their other incomes. Tractors or two-wheel tillers usually are owned by medium-size farmers who provide custom plowing or tilling for smaller landowners. Over four-fifths of the rice farmers who own tractors provide such services. 3/ 68. Mechanical cultivation equipment is most suited for areas with larger farms. According to studies made at IRRI two-wheel tractors are more economical than animal cultivation on farms of over 4 ha, and four-wheel tractors are the least expensive type of equipment for farms of over 50 ha. 4/ Tractors can have an important advantage in irrigated areas where two or more crops a year are possible; the time needed for tilling between irrigated crops can be reduced, allowing more time for growth. This factor can lead a farm operator to purchase a tractor even though the total cost may be somewhat higher than the cost of animal cultivation, or custom serv- ices (which may not be available when needed). Thus, the expansion of irrigated areas may tend to increase the demand for mechanical cultivation equipment. 69. To date, two-wheel tillers have not met with as much favor as in neighboring Taiwan, or in Japan. The two major importers of standard two- wheel tillers (with 7 horsepower diesel engines) are now preparing for local manufacture, under license from their Japanese suppliers. Thanks to tax incentives for local production, it will be possible to reduce the retail price by perhaps 20%. This should be enough to make tillers significantly more competitive. A tractor-mounted bagging combine which retails for around 1/ R. Barker, S.S. Johnson, N. Alviar and N. Orano, "Comparative Economic Analysis of Farm Data on the Use of Carabao and Tractors in Lowland Rice Farming", Manila, February 24 - March 1, 1969 (mimeo). 2/ At present, almost all sugar land is tilled by tractors, while less than one-fourth of all rice land is cultivated mechanically. 3/ Amer U Khan, Fred E. Nichols and Bert B. Buff, "Contract No. AID/csd - 2541, Agricultural Equipment Development Research for Tropical Agri- culture Semi-Annual Progress Report No. 13, July 1 to December 31, 1971", IRRI, Los BaRos, 1972. /j Khan, Nichols & Duff, 2. cit., p. 19; Fig. 29a. Carabao would be less expensive than four-wheel tractors up to 31 ha. ANNEX 11 Page 16 i 50,000 is available on very generous credit terms provided by a European government. It will be sold to Philippine buyers with credit from DBP, at an interest rate of 12% repayable over seven years. 70. One Philippine manufacturer plans to produce a low-cost tiller designed by IRRI which would retail for as little as f 3,000, or the price of 3-4 carabaos. Daily cultivating capacity will be approximately half that of standard tillers, costing five times as much. 71. Philippine manufacturers have the capacity for the development of a light farm equipment industry. Local pump manufacturers supply most of the country's requirements and one has begun to export to another Asian country, using the trade-marks and design of a Japanese manufacturer. Further development of local production will depend on the availability of financing for larger sales. For example, one manufacturer will soon be able to produce most of the components for 3,500 diesel engines (7 HP) per year, in excess of current sales of tillers. The use of this capacity will depend on the expansion of sales of irrigation pumps and fishing boat engines. 72. Demands for more mechanization credit may also result from the introduction of crop harvesting machinery. For example, since the recent rise in the prices of rice and feed grains, combines are again beginning to be sold, mostly to custom operators. 73. Sugarcane harvesters, now used to a limited extent in the Philippines, seem to be marginally economical in those areas (such as Tarlac) where there is a shortage of hand labor for harvesting, and workers earn as much as 0 7 per ton for cutting and loading cane. They are, however, quite uneconomical in areas where labor is readily available and earn as little as f 4 per ton of cane. Even in areas where wages are high, sugarcane harvesters clear only a small margin for profit. 74. Several provincial development authorities have purchased fleets of tractors, either with appropriated funds or on suppliers' credits, and are trying to operate tractor pools. One tractor importer plans to organize a custom cultivation venture, using repossessed and traded-in tractors. ACA Credit and Cooperatives 75. Most Philippine agricultural cooperatives were created after 1952, as part of a government-organized and financed effort to meet the credit needs of the 600,000 Philippine farmers who were sharecroppers. Under pressure to produce quick results, responsible officials organized hundreds of cooperatives, often without developing local leadership. These cooperatives were used to distribute government funds to areas of unrest, partly for political reasons. Credit was their main function, and the development of supply and marketing services was secondary.1/ Cooperatives received a commission on the loans made to their members, whether or not the loans were collected and this commission was their chief source of revenue. 1/ However, they were usually called "FACOMAS", or "Farmers' Cooperative Marketing Associations". ANNEX 11 Page 17 76. At the time many tenants were subsistence farmers. Much of the credit provided through cooperatives was spent on additional consumption and a large proportion of the loans were defaulted. Members often invested as little as ) 10-20 in return for promises of loans of 1 500-1,000, access to fertilizer at heavily subsidized prices, use of equipment pools, and other advantages. 77. All cooperatives, regardless of size, were required to hire a full-time manager, secretary-treasurer, bookkeeper, warehouseman, and up to six permanent laborers to increase employment in rural areas. Management was often weak and sometimes dishonest. Furthermore, government supervision was inadequate. 78. After an initial period of success, the new farmers' cooperatives were in serious difficulty. Delinquencies rose to two-thirds of loans, and four-fifths of the cooperatives lost money. In 1963, as part of land re- form, the Government agency for farmer cooperatives was reorganized under the name of "Agricultural Credit Administration" (ACA). ACA was allowed to lend only to small landowners and leaseholders, and could not finance share- tenants who remained under landlord control. Although ACA was under less political pressure than its predecessor, it increasingly served the aims of the land reform 1/ and later of the program for self-sufficiency in rice. Cooperative development was relegated to second or third place and was di- vided between ACA and a reorganized extension service, the Agricultural Productivity Commission (APC). 79. This division of functions was not satisfactory. Members of the extension service gave preference to their regular duties and loan super- vision became perfunctory. The role of promoting activities takes the form of reorganizing, consolidating, or merging moribund cooperatives. 80. Although the original intention was to organize one cooperative in each municipality, this target was never attained. The number of re- gistered agricultural cooperatives was 687 in June 1971. Of these, 293 were "active." The membership in active cooperatives was 116,600. The paid-in capital of active cooperatives was r 22 million, while that of in- active cooperatives totalled f 3.8 million. 81. During 1970-71, 17 new cooperatives were established, with 1,800 farmer members, and a paid-in capital of f 308,900. These included palay, vegetable, sugar, cacao, poultry, livestock, garlic and onion cooperatives. 82. The financial statements for 1970-71 show that the 104 coopera- tives that reported draw most of their earnings from sales of inputs, warehousing, milling and marketing of farm crops (Table 13). Between 1969/70 and 1970/71 there was an 18% increase in sales and fees from milling almost doubled, but this increase was exceeded by rises in costs. General and administrative expenses rose by 1 332,400 while the net margin 1/ Under RA 6389, ACA is required to "coordinate and cooperate with the Department (... of Agrarian Reform ...) as its credit arm and shall devote its resources to agrarian reform." (Sec. 14.) ANNEX 11 Page 18 from sales, milling and warehousing increased by only f 189,200, and service fees and other income declined. Net margins for all 104 cooperatives amounted to V 478,026. However, 60 of the cooperatives earned margins totalling r 1,082,954, while 44 had losses amounting to 0 604,928 (Table 14). 83. Between June 1970 and June 1971, combined net worth shows some improvement, but continued negative as a result of past losses (Table 14). Reorganization or revival of existing cooperatives is inhibited by the existence of such losses. ACA maintains a policy of authorizing only one cooperative in each municipality, and new members are reluctant to take over the liabilities of the past. ACA has the authority to write off its claims for past loans, but uses it sparingly. 84. The combined balance sheet shows loans receivable from members Y 48.8 million and the amounts due to ACA of r 56.8 million in June 1971. The difference is largely due to the use of ACA loan funds to cover operating losses or to make fixed capital investments. For the 104 cooperatives, such amounted to V 6.8 million as of June 1970 and rose to r 7.3 million by June 1971. 85. According to an unpublished sample survey, very successful cooperatives handle an average of 55,000 cavans of palay a year, with a staff of ten, or an average of 5,500 cavans per staff member. In contrast, the least successful cooperatives handle around 2,400 cavans with six employees, or an average of 383 cavans per staff member per year. At an average of V 2,400 per worker per year, staff wages and salaries cost I 0.45/cavan for successful cooperatives and f 6/cavan for unsuccessful ones. 1/ This survey indicates that cooperatives paid their members an average of ? 22/cavan of palay, whereas private buyers paid an average of f 23 to persons who had borrowed through the cooperative. Borrowers from landlords or money-lenders received even higher prices, an average of P 25 for those who were members of a cooperative and of V 29 for non- members. 86. Most cooperatives are able to sell fertilizer below commercial prices, because cooperatives are exempt from a 7% sales tax. However, part of this 7% advantage is offset by the comparatively high margin charged by ACA, in order to cover its high administrative costs. 87. ACA's resources consist almost entirely of loans and grants from government agencies (financed to an important extent by USAID counter- part funds). Total resources received from the government budget as capital contributions amounted to V 106 million between 1963 and April 30, 1972. Loans from AID counterpart and other liabilities amounted to f 67.9 million as of June 30, 1971. 88. The Land Reform Law permits ACA to borrow from the DBP and the PNB at the lowest normal interest rates. However, even if these institu- tions had funds available, ACA could not afford to do so, since its own 1/ Information supplied by Dr. L.B. Darrah, U.P. College of Agriculture, Los BaTlos. ANNEX 11 Page 19 lending rate is lower and it is required to pay its administrative expenses out of its earnings. Present interest on ACA's lending is fixed at 8% for loans to or through cooperatives and 12% for loans directly to individual farmers. 89. Interest income received from loans by ACA amounted to approxi- mately 4.3% of loans outstanding, reflecting substantial arrears and de- faults. Deposits of excess funds in banks earned a higher rate of interest and accounted for 44% of the total interest from both sources. Expenses are high, primarily for personnel costs, and ACA loses money in most years (Table 15). 90. ACA lends to cooperatives for their own needs, as well as to farmers -- longer-term (5-10 year) loans to cooperatives for capital improvements, and short-term loans to support purchase of inputs for re- sale to members or as marketing loans (up to 180 days) to buy crops from members (Table 16). The cooperative is required to finance 20% of any movable capital equipment with its own resources but may borrow 100% of the cost of fixed facilities, provided it owns the land on which they will be erected. This land is mortgaged to ACA, so that most cooperatives do not have collateral available to borrow from other credit institutions. ACA also has financed a national marketing cooperative (GRAMACOP). 91. Loans to small land owners and leaseholders may be made either directly, or through their cooperatives. In either case, the borrower is the farmer, and the cooperative's role is limited to handling paperwork, disbursing the loan and collecting on behalf of ACA. Loans through co- operatives bear 8% interest, but cooperatives may add up to 4% as a "service fee", and usually do so. 92. The maximum production loan is f 2,000 and no more than 60% of the value of a "crop delivery pledge." The cooperative warehouse collects for the production loan before releasing the stored crop to a buyer. Members of cooperatives sign marketing pledges for ten-year periods; non- members may pledge only enough to cover their annual loan obligations. ACA will refinance loans for three years in the event of natural calamities that affect the harvest. 93. The only real penalty for failure to fulfill a marketing pledge is refusal of future access to ACA credit. Most farmers still think of their cooperatives as semi-governmental institutions and assign a low priority to repayment of ACA credit. ACA's loans frequently arrive late and many farmers borrow from private moneylenders to get their crops into the ground. At harvest time, the private moneylender is repaid first, even if this involves violation of the marketing pledge. According to a survey conducted in Nueva Ecija, only 32% of all farmers fulfill their marketing pledges to cooperatives, while 29% do not, and 39% make no pledge, made no reply, or did not remember. 1/ 1/ Economic Development Foundation, "ACA Phase I, Evaluation of Total. Operations of FC's in Nueva Ecija", page 4.12. ANNEX 11 Page 20 94. Farmers who store their harvest in cooperative warehouses may receive commodity loans for up to 120 days, at 8% interest. Any balance due under production loans must be liquidated out of the commodity loan. This year members of a typical palay cooperative receive loans of 10 pesos per cavan of marketing pledge, to be used for the following purposes: Total for Purpose Pesos per ha 2 hectares Seed 30 60 Land preparation 50 pesos per ha starting with second hectare 50 Transplanting 50 100 Fertilizer 5 x 17 pesos 85 170 Chemicals 20 40 Subtotal 420 Subsistence 30% of total up to a maximum of 120 120 640 Average per hectare 320 95. ACA is the only agricultural credit institution that makes data available on the aging of its loans (Table 17). For 1964-71 collec- tions amount to only 64% of releases. It has concentrated on lending to land reform beneficiaries, whose repayment record is substantially worse than average. Total collections from production loans connected with land reform were 37-41%, while other production loans were repaid at a rate of 55-69%. Collection rates in Nueva Ecija have deteriorated with the intro- duction of land reform (Table 18). 96. During the past two years, a new Administrator has made valiant efforts to improve ACA's operations. A number of cooperatives have been reorganized or merged, in an effort to increase their volume to viable levels. Training programs have been expanded and improved for elected leaders and staff members of cooperatives. Pressure has been put on co- operatives to earn a profit, and to accumulate capital from earnings or members' investments, so as to make themselves eligible for credit from normal sources. In addition, a number of pilot projects have been under- taken, to try to find alternatives to the unsatisfactory experiences of the past. These include cooperative or "compact" farms, a barrio (village) level cooperative, and joint liability groups of five to seven farmers (called seldas or damayans). ANNEX 11 Page 21 97. The pilot projects in compact farming have just begun and re- sults are not yet available. These include some 80-100 farmers on con- tiguous irrigated plots. Each project is to be equipped with a machinery pool and will have the services of a crop technician and an agricultural engineer. A barrio level cooperative has been established in one village, with 91 farmers. It has been described as a "moshav", although it does not follow the principles of the Israeli moshav in particular, or of Rochedale cooperatives in general. This project has had some success, largely be- cause it receives the full-time attention of two foreign technicians, provided by a foreign bilateral program. It is doubtful whether coopera- tive management can be provided at a reasonable cost for a significant portion of the Philippines' many thousands of barrios. 98. Joint liability groups, promoted both by ACA and by a number of rural banks, seem more promising. The members guarantee each others' borrowings and credit is refused to farmers who are unable or unwilling to join with their neighbors in such a group. ACA has taken an important step towards the success of this program, by making it clear that farmers could not rely on ACA credit in the long run and should begin to accumulate savings pools. Some cooperatives have opened joint accounts in rural banks and members are to deposit 10% of the cash that they borrow. This deposit is held until the selda as a whole agrees to use it for supplemental crop loans, emergency personal loans, joint investments in a water pump, or other similar uses. Each member is expected to contribute another 10%, out of the following years' crop loans, so that after 10 years the savings pool will be sufficient to provide members with their annual crop loan needs. For example, in Pangasinan Province, ACA has encouraged the organization of 470 "seldas", with 3,400 members who farm 6,000 hectares. A total of r 197,840 has been collected as "capital formation." 99. Finally, greater emphasis has been placed on improvement in marketing. A national Grain Marketing Cooperative has been established, with a V 5 million line of credit, but it has not won much confidence. It handles only around one-tenth of the rice traded by farmers' cooperatives and obtains its grain from local cooperatives. It does not handle palay for farmers' accounts. 100. Despite some signs of progress, the Philippine Government as a whole has not regained confidence in ACA's ability to handle credit. According to the Four-Year Plan, "The Agricultural Credit Administration will concentrate its lending operations in areas not serviced by rural banks, with emphasis mainly on supplying the credit needs of cooperatives. Studies will be undertaken on the possibility of channeling the funds and lending operations of the ACA through rural banks instead of directly to individual farmers." 1/ 1/ Page 122. ANNEX 11 Page 22 101. The government-sponsored Special Committee on Agricultural Lending listed the pros and cons of confining ACA to technical assistance and eliminating its lending program (except where rural banks do not exist) as follows: Advantages - No duplication of operations and facilities. - The credit program would be easier to manage. - The rate of collections may be improved. Disadvantages - If the rural banks fail to meet credit needs, there will be no backstopping agency. - ACA will serve sub-marginal farmers better. 102. In practice, several years would be needed to phase out ACA's credit program, and build up the supervised credit program of the rural banks. During this period, the success or failure of the rural banks should become evident. If ACA is needed as a backstop, its credit func- tion can be reprieved. 103. ACA should concentrate on helping farmers' cooperatives to improve their management. Farmers' cooperatives should concentrate on increasing the supply of inputs and increasing their share in the marketing of mem- bers' crops. Most credit could be supplied by rural banks, through the new supervised credit program in such a way as to support the growth of "seldas" and the strengthening of cooperative marketing. This will require abatement of jurisdictional conflict between ACA and the Central Bank's Department of Rural Banks. Both are enjoined by law to cooperate; neither has. 104. Rural banks also could finance the marketing operations of cooperatives, by making credit available for the purchase and storage of members' crops. Some experts have suggested that groups of farmers' co- operatives, covering a number of adjacent municipalities, should be permit- ted to organize rural banks of their own. The Central Bank might provide more generous investments in preferred shares for such cooperative banks (at 2:1 or even 3:1 instead of the present 1:1 participation in equity). However, cooperatives would have to put up significant amounts of their own capital, and the new institutions would operate as private enterprises. Borrowers might be required to buy shares in these rural banks, possibly by adding a small portion to their loan obligations. 105. Long-term requirements of farmers' cooperatives for warehouses, rice mills, etc. should be financed by the DBP and private development banks. To make this possible, DBP should soften its rigid rules on collateral for lending to cooperatives. In addition, cooperatives' balance ANNEX 11 Page 23 sheets should be adjusted to reflect present realities, rather than past sins. Uncollectable loans should be written off and physical facilities should be re-appraised. ACA should make corresponding adjustments in its claims and should accept second mortgages as security for facility loans, whenever necessary to permit well-run cooperatives to borrow from other sources. 106. In connection with any future long-term financing, the economic justification of investments in centralized rice milling should be care- fully studied. Many farmers prefer to take their rice to small "Kiskisan" mills 1/ and cooperatives should not try to introduce improved milling where their potential members do not want it. On the other hand, the economic advantages of proper drying and storage seem to be sufficiently large to make improvement of these services advantageous for cooperatives and their members. 107. To compete effectively, Philippine cooperatives must approach or even exceed the efficiency of private enterprises. To help achieve this objective: (a) ACA or some other central agency should ensure adequate and timely availability of the right kinds of fertilizers and other inputs; (b) cooperatives should organize trucking services, with their own or hired vehicles, to pick up palay from the fields, rather than waiting for members to deliver to central ware- houses at their own expense; (c) cooperatives must be provided with adequate financing so that they can buy palay from members who wish to sell for cash; (d) marketing pledges must be enforced more vigorously, possibly through closer coordination between cooperatives and rural banks; (e) ACA should develop and introduce simple but effective cost accounting methods, to provide cooperatives with a better departmentalized breakdown of costs and earnings; (f) adequate inventory controls should be developed and intro- duced for all cooperatives; (g) preventive maintenance of machinery and other equipment should be encouraged, with necessary technical assistance provided by ACA; and 1/ Because less-perfectly separated rice better meets their taste in home consumption, a bigger proportion comes out as "bran" to meet animal feed needs, and the distance between the farm and the mill is smaller. ANNEX 11 Page 24 (h) last, but most important of all, cooperative management must be improved and larger salaries for managers should be encouraged. 1/ Commercial Banks 108. There are 40 commercial banks in the Philippines, most of which make few loans outside the immediate vicinity of Manila and a few other large cities. Most commercial banks have some branches in provincial capitals, but few try to extend credit in rural areas. The most important exception is the government-owned Philippine National Bank. Some other com- mercial banks also make agricultural loans, mostly to sugar planters and other large growers, and commercial banks are important in the financing of trade in agricultural export commodities (such as copra). 109. All commercial banks report that a large share of their total lending goes to agriculture, and lending to agricultural production and trade was reported at about 24% of all commercial bank lending in September 1971 (Table 19). Commercial bank credit for sugar production was r 828.5 million in September 1971, or 46% of the credit for all agriculture. The Philippine National Bank alone accounted for around V 631 million of sugar credit and r 989 million of all agricultural credit (December 1971 figures). 110. Loans for sugar, palay, coconuts, poultry, fruits and vegetables, cattle and dairy farms, fisheries and certain industries enjoy preferential rediscount privileges at the Central Bank. The normal preference includes rediscounting at 80% of face value, with an interest rate of 7-3/4%. Lower priority loans are discounted at 50-65% of their face value and are charged a higher interest rate. 111. In theory, commercial banks are allowed to rediscount up to the equivalent of 100% of their paid-in capital as of the end of 1969. However, rediscounts have been frozen at the generally-lower level of May 1970. Subsequently, a consortium of 22 banks has been allowed to use its frozen allowances to finance sugar loans of the Philippine National Bank (whose own rediscounting privileges had been exhausted). In part, commercial banks want to keep PNB in business to handle small planters, since small loans are unprofitable. 112. Even without this special arrangement, a disproportionate share of Central Bank rediscounting has gone to the Philippine National Bank. At the end of December 1971, Central Bank credit to the PNB for rice and corn (mostly for frozen loans to the Rice and Corn Administration 2/) amounted to 1/ According to an unpublished survey made by Prof. L.B. Darrah of the U.P. College of Agriculture (Los Baios), the least successful coopera- tives pay managers as little as r 150 per month, while the most success- ful pay f 450-500 per month. Managerial salaries that do not even provide a modest standard of living (forcing the manager to find other sources of income) are false economy. 2/ PNB took over supervision of some of the RCA's warehousing operations, to help prevent additional losses. ANNEX 11 Page 25 g 302 million, or 36% of all Central Bank credit to commercial banks. The loans to RCA have recently been repaid, thus sharply increasing PNB loan capacity. 113. Although it is owned almost entirely by the Philippine Government, the Philippine National Bank operates as a regular commercial bank. It is the largest commercial bank in the country, with 147 branches and agencies, and around 27% of all commercial banking resources. The PNB deals with a wide public and has over one million deposit accounts (though over half its deposits come from governmental and semigovernmental agencies). More than any other commercial bank, the PNB has the size and geographic spread that would be needed to play an important part in filling the country's agricultural credit needs. 114. As a commercial bank, PNB only makes short-term loans. Most of these are secured by real estate or other tangible collateral. Most agri- cultural credit is in the form of crop loans, secured by first or second mortgages on real estate, at 50-60% of the appraised value. Leaseholders or sharecroppers may also borrow, if they offer guarantees from their landlord (or, in the case of rice, from their cooperative). Collateral requirements tend to be less severe for loans to sugar planters than for other crops. 115. The maximum term of PNB's agricultural loans is the normal period between planting and sale (2-10 months for most field crops, but up to 17 months for sugar). Loans are supposed to be released in installments, related to the need for expenditures on crop inputs and supervised to ensure use for their intended purposes. In practice, supervision seems to be limited, particularly for sugar loans. 116. Usually, PNB releases the full amount of its loans to the borrower, enabling a full rediscount with the Central Bank. In the past, PNB often required that the balance not released be deposited in a special savings account. Recently, this procedure was forbidden by the Central Bank, as a form of compensating deposit that raises the true interest rate 1/. 117. PNB's lending maximum is 50-70% of the borrower's net share of the estimated crop. For sugar, a fixed amount per picul is loaned. Corn crop loans are made only to growers of 25 ha or more. Corn planters must provide real estate collateral in addition to the crop mortgage. The interest on crop loans is 13% which is 1% higher than the official rate of rural banks. 118. PNB also offers so-called time loans for the purchase of machines, farm animals, permanent improvements. etc. These are secured by first mortgages on real estate (at 60% of appraised value), for growers of corn, palay, coconuts and cassava. The interest rate is 12%, but loans are available only for one year and are not easily renewable. 1/ However, it has just been introduced for rural bank supervised credits. ANNEX 11 Page 26 119. PNB is an important source of working capital for the sugar and coconut processing industries, and for sugar, palay and coconut trade (Tables 20 to 22). Much of the lending to the coconut industry goes to plants affiliated with PNB's industrial subsidiary, the National Investment and Development Corporation (NIDC). The NIDC originally was established to take over industrial enterprises which had gone bankrupt after borrowing heavily from the PNB. The NIDC is heavily involved in crop processing, textiles, a large rice plantation, and rural construction materials enterprises. Its net income before taxes for 1971 was ? 8.8 million, or 3.5% of its net worth ( 250.1 million). An NIDC-owned fish freezing plant and a sugar mill are being organized as cooperatives of small producers. 120. In recent years, the PNB has concentrated on the financing of sugar production and milling and the deficit of the Rice and Corn Administra- tion. In 1971, some r 989 million or around 35% was identified as financing agricultural credit, about the same proportion as in 1967. However, loans outstanding to sugar planters more than doubled from 1967 to 1971. On the other hand, loans for palay declined by 25% (Table 21). 121. While there has been some improvement in collections of sugar loans, these continue to lag in comparison with other agricultural loans. In 1971, collections on loans for sugar amounted to only 94.9% of loans granted, while collections for all other agriculture amounted to 147.7% of loans granted. 122. The percentage of overdue loans to the private sector as a whole stood at 22% at the end of 1971. In addition, PNB's loans to government agencies (mostly the Rice and Corn Administration) amounted to # 25 million, or 29% of its entire portfolio 1/. Of these 96.4% were in default as to interest, while two-thirds had overdue principal payments as well. As a result, PNB's average earnings on loans and discounts amounted to a mere 6.5% per annum and PNB's profit fell to only 2.5% of its net worth. 123. Furthermore (like DBP discussed below), PNB's financial position was impaired by its guarantees of foreign supplier's credits, not included in the statistics on credits granted with its own funds. Among these are guarantees of suppliers' credits for twelve new sugar centrals. Some of these are high-cost installations, with only nominal equity capital and are located in areas where production is still inadequate to keep them operating efficiently. After the introduction of the floating rate, most could not meet their contractual obligations to foreign suppliers and PNB had to fulfill its guarantees. PNB's initial exposure was approximately $148 million and it has advanced approximately $30 million to fulfill its guarantees of foreign credits for sugar centrals. 124. Until recently, PNB could not expand its lending to the sugar industry because its charter prohibits commitment of more than 15% of all loans to any one industry. This has now been increased to 20%. 1/ PNB Annual Report, Mimeographed advance copy, page 10. ANNEX 11 Page 27 125. There is need for PNB to broaden its activities beyond its concen- tration on sugar financing so that it functions as a truly national in- stitution. The recent changes in its charter make it possible for PNB to move rapidly in this direction. Development Institutions 126. Long-term credit for agriculture is provided mainly by the government-owned Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP), 30 closely- associated private development banks, and the "Private Development Corporation of the Philippines" (PDCP). Rural banks, originally organized to provide short-term credit, also make long-term loans under the CB:IBRD mechanization program. The Development Bank of the Philippines 127. The DBP is the official financial institution specializing in long-term development credit. In 1965 it supplied two-thirds of all the Philippine long-term credit from financial institutions. DBP's importance has declined in recent years as a result of financial difficulties. These are now being overcome and DBP is again expanding its financing. 128. The present organization was established in 1958. DBP is supposed to receive 50% of the proceeds of sale of reparations goods until June 14, 1973, as payment against Government's subscriptions to capital stock. Col- lectable as of September 30, 1972, amounted to V 1,130 million of which DBP received V 32.5 million. In addition, DBP is supposed to receive 25% of the investible funds of the Government Service Insurance System and the Social Security System (not all of which has been made available).1/ 129. DBP's other sources of financing include U.S. Pl 480 counterpart funds, CCC and Canadian Wheat Board credits, IBRD loans, loans from foreign private banks, time and savings deposits, and sale of its bonds. The value of DBP bonds outstanding has been stable in recent years, amounting to 17% of the public sector debt, with ? 729.8 million in the hands of the Central Bank and V 464.4 million held by the public at the end of 1971. New bonds are sold to the public only as outstanding bonds are redeemed. Sales to the public are severely limited by competition from "Central Bank Certificates of Indebtedness". Savings and time deposits have been increasing, but still accounted for only 10% of total resources at the end of 1971 (Table 23). 130. In 1970, after the institution of the floating exchange rate, DBP was assigned 24% of the proceeds of a stabilization tax on exports. This is to be used to make loans to export industries and to private agricul- tural development projects, particularly for industries or crops that are affected by the export tax. DBP expects to receive V 400-450 million from this source during 1970-74. 1/ For a history of DBP, see: Julio V. Macuja, "25 Years of DBP-REC Rehabili- tation and Development Financing" in: DBP Bulletin, Vol. VII, No. 1-A, Makati, January 17, 1972. ANNEX 11 Page 28 131. DBP's charter requires it to make 45% of its loans to industry, 35% to agriculture, and 20% for real estate (including low-cost housing), local government needs, and certain other purposes. 132. Loans by economic activity, during the 25 years ending in 1971, are shown below: Million Pesos Agriculture 977-- /2 Industry 2,480-- Private Development Banks 128 Preferred stocks 205 Real estate, rural electrifi- cation, municipal utilities, and others 853 Total 4,643 /1 169,575 loans. /2 17,613 loans. In addition, the DBP has guaranteed foreign suppliers' credits to Philippine industries. 133. As of March 1972, DBP had approved foreign exchange guarantees totalling $1,026.9 million. Of these, $379.4 million were still outstanding, and were equivalent to r 2,569 million at a rate of r 6.77 per dollar. By then, however, DBP had already made good on guarantees for the equivalent of f 1,376.2 million in suppliers' credits. Deducting later repayments from Philippine debtors and some DBP advances which have been formally refinanced as long-term loans, the net amount that DBP has expended because of its guarantees is f 885.4 million. 134. Installments due on suppliers' credits from July 1972 to June 1973 total $69 million, and similar amounts are covered by DBP's guarantees in subsequent years. Most guarantees were for industrial projects, and agricultural guarantees are only a small fraction of the total. However, industrial guarantees included $73 million for several new sugar centrals, and large sums for flour mills, a rice mill, and lumber and wood industries. Although DBP had to step in to meet the sugar centrals' obligation they are beginning to reimburse DBP as they go into production. 135. During 1961-66, the DBP guaranteed many foreign loans. In February 1970, when balance-of-payment difficulties caused the introduction of a float- ing exchange rate, foreign sources of credit began pressing for repayment and refused to renew the loans as they fell due. At the same time, many ANNEX 11 Page 29 Philippine borrowers of suppliers' credit defaulted on their obligations and DBP had to fulfill its guarantees. 136. When the floating rate was introduced, DBP owed $63 million in its own name, and was responsible for $547 million of debts guaranteed to foreign suppliers. The total represented around one-third of the entire foreign debt of the Philippines. DBP managed to reduce its foreign liabilities by $140 million between 1 March 1970 and 30 June 1971. To do so it had to increase its collections, and reduce its new lending for develop- ment. Agricultural lending suffered a particularly heavy drop, since DBP had to increase loans to industry to refinance guarantees as they fell due. Only in the late spring of 1972 was DBP able again to expand its lending. 137. Foreign private bankers were impressed by the fact that DBP was able to pay off around $200 million of its guaranteed obligations without asking for rescheduling and are willing to consider extension of more credit. Discussions also are under way with international lending agencies to make new credit available for agricultural development. 138. Thus, DBP stands at what may be a turning point. Its past liquidity problems have been overcome (with considerable help from the Central Bank); and there have been some significant improvements in its internal management. Potentially, DBP could assume its leading role in long-term financing and particularly in the financing of agriculture. 139. The most important crops for DBP lending are palay, coconuts, livestock and piggeries, sugar, poultry, and fisheries (Tables 24 and 25). Most loans to processing industries went to rice and corn mills followed by sugar centrals. In the peak year of 1967/68, DBP approved 18,106 agricul- tural loans, with a total value of 135.4 million. Some three-fourths of the loans in recent years have been less than V 5,000 but these accounted for less than one-fourth of the amount loaned (Table 26). Agriculture's share of outstanding loans was only 15% in 1971, down from 20-24% in previous years. The net increase during 1970-71 was only V 2 million (Table 27). 140. At present, DBP must pay 8-9% for most of its borrowed resources and administrative costs are at least 3-4%. Nevertheless, DBP's interest rate for new loans is a maximum of 12% 1/. The rate for the DBP/IBRD grain storage program has been adjusted up to that figure from 11%. Small loans (under g 5,000) or loans for low-cost housing are made at 9%. Most of DBP's outstanding loans were made in earlier years, at still lower interest rates (6-9%) even when past-due loans are refinanced, the new rate of interest is in effect. 141. Stronger measures, including more effective supervision, could be taken to overcome deliberate delinquencies (Table 28). For example, many of DBP's and PNB's overdue industrial loans were paid up after the Central 1/ Interest is not discounted in advance. The only extra charge of commis- sion is a commitment fee of 1/4 of 1% on loans not drawn down within 90 days. ANNEX 11 Page 30 Bank "blacklisted" delinquent firms and refused to open up import letters of credit or to rediscount their borrowing from any other banks. 142. DBP usually lends on the security of first mortgages on real estate. Loans are limited to estimated needs for agricultural financing and to 60% of the appraised value of titled land (or 40% of the appraised value of untitled land). DBP's appraisals usually are 10-15% below actual market value. 143. In the case of rice, an even lower lending ratio prevails. Palay land, whose market price may be as high as 0 8-10,000/ha is evaluated according to a complex formula laid down by DBP's Board of Directors. Land producing 50 cavans per hectare is allowed a value of 0 1,050. For certain purposes, this may be averaged with an appraised value which may not exceed ' 5,000. The resulting average of around r 3,000 may be used to secure a loan of 60% of ? 1,800 per hectare. The loan value of around 0 1,800/ha bears some reasonable relationship to financing of an irrigation pump, costing perhaps ? 6,000 and serving up to 5 ha. 144. Working capital credit is made available for 270 days under the DBP-IBRD grain storage program, but can be renewed in declining amounts over 4-1/2 years. Careful supervision of this type of credit is needed, considering difficulties that were experienced with previous DBP working capital credits for grain storage and milling enterprises. 145. Recently, an exception was made to the requirement for real estate collateral, to allow loans to leaseholders for irrigation pumps (secured by the pump set alone). This was intended as a contribution by DBP to the fulfillment of land reform purposes. It was suggested orig- inally by the Manager of DBP's branch in Tarlac, an area where many tenants have been converted into leaseholders and where there is much dis- content. 146. On the other hand, the recently-negotiated IBRD loan for cattle development has increased the severity of security requirements. Larger borrowers must provide a 50% equity participation, in addition to meeting the DBP's requirement of collateral. Furthermore, the equity participation must be made in fresh funds or in kind but not existing real estate or cattle. Real estate collateral and a sizeable equity participation are alternative ways to provide security to lenders, each with its own advantages and dis- advantages, but each reasonable by itself. However, a combination of the two, in the proportions that apply in this case, presents a virtually in- surmountable obstacle for most Philippine cattlemen and is far above the requirements for other types of developmental lending. It is unlikely that larger projects will be able to make use of the IBRD loan under these conditions. 147. According to its latest annual report, DBP hopes to expand its agricultural lending, "so that the benefits of development can be spread more evenly throughout the nation." 1/ Around 30 special lending programs 1/ Development Bank of the Philippines, "Annual Report, 1970-71", Makati, 1972 (mimeographed draft, page 20). ANNEX 11 Page 31 are in operation and plans for continuation of the most important ones are as follows: Palay: Financing of 20,000 ha, totalling 0 25 million, or an average I 1,250/ha (an unreasonably high figure unless it is in- tended mainly for permanent improvements). Feed grains: Financing of 3,000 ha of corn, 2,000 ha of soybeans, and 1,000 ha of sorghum, during five years beginning in July 1971, with V 7.5 million, f 3 million and V 1 million, respectively, or an average of 0 1,917/ha (again, the figures far exceed requirements for working capital). Grain storage: The $14.3 million IBRD loan (equivalent to r 93 million), originally intended to set up thirty integrated 2,000-ton storage units and six 5,000-ton units, plus expansion and modernization of 30 existing mills and warehouses. Coconuts: l 15 million to increase production and improve handling of copra from existing plantations. Loans for new plantings will be given at a rate of I 1,500/ha, with supervision and staggered releases so that the land along (plus the growing coconut palms) will cover most collateral requirements. No pay- ments will be required until the seventh year, and only interest will be collected until full production is reached. Irrigation pumps: 2,000 units are to be obtained with credit from Denmark for the irrigation of 20,000 ha of riceland (esti- mated total cost: 1 12 million). Poultry: V 10 million for continued increases in poultry pro- duction, at a rate of 7-8% per annum. Swine: ? 10 million to increase the growth rate to 8% per annum. Sugar: 10 million to promote higher productivity. Fish: ? 8 million for fresh and brackish water fishponds (a $35 million program for both ocean and inland fishing is under con- sideration by an FAO/IBRD study team). Beef: f 7.25 million to stimulate cattle ranching; the pending IBRD cattle loan would increase this to approximately f 84.5 million. 1/ Abaca: ? 1.5 million to stimulate production to meet future pulp and paper demands. 1/ $7.5 million from IBRD and $5.5 million from DBP and the closely-associa- ted private development banks (described below). ANNEX 11 Page 32 Vegetable and Fruit: 0 1 million for exportable products like mushrooms, peanuts, ginger, garlic, mangoes, etc. Miscellaneous crops: 0 9.75 million. 148. The total of Y 291 million (not including a possible fisheries loan under appraisal by IBRD) could increase DBP's outstanding agricultural loans by as much as 71%. However, there is some question as to the ability of DBP's existing administrative structure to support such an increase in volume, while maintaining reasonable standards of quality. 149. A large share of DBP's limited resources for project analysis and credit supervision are concentrated in its agricultural division. Even so, this division does not have the manpower to make feasibility studies of all important projects. A program is underway to train a number of employees in feasibility work, at a 6-month special course at the University of the Philippines. 150. DBP pioneered the first experiments with supervised credit in the Philippines, with initial programs around Cabanatuan and Legaspi. For this purpose some 24 supervisors were given careful training over a period of a year. Of these, 21 remain with DBP. They have been promoted into desk jobs at headquarters, and are largely engaged in processing loan applications. For a time, DBP tried to rely on part-time help from the farm technicians of the extension service (APC), but this turned out to be unsatisfactory, not only for DBP, but also for the rural banks and ACA. 151. Many DBP branches have farm technicians on their staff, who are supposed to visit potential borrowers to check on their applications. They are supposed to make a minimum of one visit a year to supervise outstanding loans. These, however, have not been trained in supervision of credit and are mostly used to appraise collateral. Furthermore, DBP does not have enough vehicles for its farm technicians, so that their ability to leave the branch offices is limited. 152. Most loans must be made in accordance with detailed instructions and programs prepared in DBP's headquarters, requiring analysis and cross- checking by the staffs of DBP's branches. Even after prescribed procedures are completed, Branch Managers may only authorize loans up to r 5,000 with- out approval by headquarters. Headquarters' approval takes around two months. Consequently, many potential customers prefer to deal with other sources of credit. 153. Commercial bank branch managers usually have authority to approve loans up to ? 50,000. Most DBP branch managers believe they should be allowed to approve loans up to at least r 15-25,000. Such an increase would help to inspire needed improvements in local branches' initiative and in DEP's support of local economic development efforts in rural areas. 154. DBP is encumbered with excessive red tape, partly emanating from other government agencies, and partly self-generated. For example, borrowers ANNEX 11 Page 33 from DBP are supposed to submit land tax receipts for the last 5 years or a certificate from the municipal Treasurer that they have been paid. If their property is untitled, they must obtain a certificate from the Bureau of Public Lands that the property is not part of the public domain plus affidavits from adjoining property owners to corroborate property lines. If all such formal- ities were enforced, it would be virtually impossible for the DBP to lend money to small borrowers. 155. The need for an increase in efficiency and productivity is found in all of DBP's installations. For example, one DBP branch administers assets worth V 10 million, has earnings which might be 1% per annum before allowing for overhead and administrative costs, and a net loss after accounting for all costs. The branch has 40 employees and the total number of borrowers is 1,500, or 37.5 borrowers per employee. 156. As a government-owned long-term financing institution, DBP is a logical channel for medium and long-term credit from international sources, such as the IBRD. During the period when DBP was suffering from financial problems, this role was also undertaken by others, particularly by the Central Bank, in connection with the CB:IBRD mechanization loans. The rural banks have done a good job. While their primary responsibility is short term credit, they provide a useful function in long term credit as well, particularly since they are familiar with local needs. 157. DBP's ability to use additional resources wisely may depend on the completion of reforms which have only just begun. DBP's functions need to be redefined and reduced in number. At present, DBP does a little bit of everything in the field of long-term credit, plus some financing of short-term requirements. There is not a single financial institution in the Philippines that does not overlap in some way with the activities of DBP. In trying to fill so many functions, DBP has been forced to build up excessive overhead costs, and has not been able to concentrate on doing a few things well. 158. Therefore, DBP should concentrate on long-term financing and should specialize in larger loans and equity investments. As a government and a development institution, its overhead costs will necessarily be high. Small borrowers cannot afford to support their fair share of such costs and their requests should be referred to rural and private development banks, whose costs are lower. Also, DBP should devote an increasing share of its resources to providing wholesale financing, guidance and technical assistance to private development banks, and possibly rural banks. 159. DBP's capabilities for economic analysis of projects should be greatly strengthened, technical assistance should be sought from foreign sources and from other Philippine institutions. Top management should insist on adequate studies before any important loan or investment is made. 160. Finally, DBP should generally not act as an entrepreneur or manager, but should confine itself to promotion and financing of the projects of others. In particular, it should reconsider whether it should be the owner or operator of a large project like the Greater Manila Trade and Food Market (GMTFM). DBP ANNEX 11 Page 34 cannot afford to be so involved in new projects as to lose the critical attitude and selective function that characterize a financial institution. Private Development Banks 161. The Development Bank of the Philippines is legally required to help establish private development banks. Originally, the DBP was expected to assist in the formation of these banks in each province and major city. However, only 30 private development banks have been established, and four more are being organized. 1/ Over half of the provinces still have no pri- vate development bank. A major constraint is that DBP is not eager to provide low cost money to these private banks in view of its own tight financial position. 162. The 1952 law provided that / 75 million out of DBP's receipts from reparations sales would be used to purchase preferred stock and re- discount loans for private development banks. Of this, V 25 million was to be used to purchase preferred shares, up to the value of private investments in the common stock in each bank. DBP also was supposed to receive r 10 million a year out of the profits of the Central Bank of the Philippines, as additional resources for private development banks. However, collections of reparations proceeds fell well below expectations. The Central Bank advanced f 42 million to DBP to finance the program, but subsequently this advance was reduced to r 27 million. Also, little was received out of the Central Bank's profits. By 1969, virtually all of DBP's initial obligation to invest r 25 million in preferred shares had been fulfilled. Rediscounts amounted to only V 27.4 million at the end of 1971, or 55% of the originally- promised r 50 million (Table 29). 163. Private development banks are organized under the law for mortgage banks 2/ with a minimum paid-in capital of r 7 million of which half may be provided by the DBP in the form of preferred shares. These are entitled to a cumulative dividend of 1% during the first five years, 2% in the next five years, and 3% thereafter. DBP's shares have full voting rights and repre- sentatives of DBP sit on the Boards of Directors. The DBP preferred shares can be sold to private buyers, with preference for the holders of common shares but so far this has not happened. The maximum ownership of common stock by any one family is 50% and interlocking directorates are prohibited. 164. At present, DBP charges 8% for its rediscount credits to private development banks, and a penalty of 2% per annum on delinquencies. Private development banks are also authorized to rediscount directly with the Central Bank. However, this has never taken place since three-fourths or more of private development bank credits consists of long-term loans. The security and high cost of rediscount facilities forces development banks to make serious efforts to increase their deposits. 1/ Only one has failed. 2/ R.A. 4093 as amended by R.A. 4887. ANNEX 11 Page 35 165. The DBP financing in the form of preferred share and rediscounts amounted to 28.5% of total liabilities and net worth in 1971 (Table 29). The growth in private development banks' assets from f 119 million in 1967 to P 183 million in 1971 was financed mainly by increases in deposits (P 44 million) and private investment in common stock (P 12.2 million). 166. Private development banks may make medium-term (3-5 years) to long-term (6-10 years) loans. Up to 25% of their loans may be short-term (1-2 years). Short-term loans cannot be rediscounted with DBP but offer opportunities to increase income by charging commissions or other fees at more frequent intervals. Around 20% of all loans are for low-cost housing (a maximum cost of 0 10,000 per house). Private development banks may not legally charge more than 12% per annum on their loans (plus filing and in- spection fees) but often manage to charge over 18% true interest. 167. In 1971, private development banks granted 6,073 agricultural loans, with a total value of f 40 million and an average value of about P 6,600. Agricultural lending made up more than half of the total. (Table 30). Maturities of these loans were: Number Amount (million pesos) Short term (up to 3 years) 1,410 5.2 3 to 4 years 2,261 11.7 4 to 5 years 493 3.5 5 years or more 1,909 19.4 Total 6,073 39.8 168. Overdue loans amount to 13-15% of the total. However, around 3-5% of loans are collected through legal action, and most losses are re- covered through the sale of foreclosed property. 169. Private development banks are inspected both by the bank examiners of the Central Bank and by auditors from DBP. However, DBP has "only" six field staff to cover 31 banks and its audit is superficial. The abolition of DPB's auditing function might be considered. 170. Private development banks are at some disadvantage compared to rural banks, which have access to the special CB:IBRD credits running for seven years. The association of development bankers is now asking access to the CB:IBRD program, arguing that as development banks they would also be equipped to handle long-term loans. 171. Private development banks report increasingly unfavorable earnings (Table 31). The return on common stock is estimated at a mere 10.8% per annum and the return on total net worth is an unsatisfactory 6.0%, less ANNEX 11 Page 36 favorable than the corresponding figures for rural banks. - As in the case of rural banks, the controlling owners of private development banks try to compensate for low profits through high salaries, expense allowances and nepotism. 172. DBP's lack of funds for the purchase of preferred shares and the penury of rediscount facilities have caused a decline in the establish- ment of private development banks. Some have become moribund. However, a number continue to operate well and several good new ones have been estab- lished in recent years. Some are controlled by groups that also own rural banks and wish to branch out into long-term developmental financing. 173. As a group, private development banks are useful institutions and should be encouraged. Private Development Corporation of the Philippines 174. The Private Development Corporation of the Philippines (PDCP), while not legally a bank, is an important source of long-term development finance (particularly for large projects). In the past, the PDCP has shied away from agriculture, for fear of risks, lack of specialized staff, and the apparent paucity of competent entrepreneurs who were interested in agricultural projects. Agriculture's share in PDCP's total long-term loans and investments was only 2.4% at the end of 1971. 175. Manufacturing took 46% of the PDCP's resources, including agriculture-related industries such as feed mills, fabrication of power tillers, desiccated coconut, logging, plywood and core veneer, a pulp and paper plant (to be based on abaca), a sugar refinery, crude rubber proces- sing, etc. 176. The PDCP has an excellent international reputation and had received f 269 million at the end of 1971 from various international organizations, as shown below: Million Pesos /1 IBRD- 227 USAID 28 ADB 14 Total 269 /1 Channeled through GOP-owned Philippine National Bank. 1/ Private development banks are exempt from taxes on their net assets (after deducting DBP's preferred shareholdings) that do not exceed } 10 million. ANNEX 11 Page 37 177. Originally, the PDCP operated as a purely private enterprise, with little or no intervention from government agencies. Recently, how- ever, its use of international financing has been restricted, for balance of payments and other reasons. International borrowing now may be used only for industrial investments approved by the Board of Investment, or for agricultural projects approved by the National Economic Council. 178. Partly as a result of these restrictions, PDCP is showing increasing interest in diversification, particularly in agricultural lending. In February, 1970, PDCP began an active policy of searching for new opportunities and promoting new enterprises, whereas before it had awaited applications from private enterprises organized by others. PDCP's minimum loan of V 300,000 has been reduced to ' 50,000, and PDCP has begun to explore the possibility of cooperating with DBP, private development banks and rural banks. 179. Although these are promising beginnings, it is unlikely that PDCP will be permitted to contract additional obligations to international lending institutions at the present time. Should government policies change, international lending agencies might wish to consider a special line of credit to support greater PDCP participation in the financing of agricultural projects. Financing Land Transfer The Land Bank 180. Prior to the recent land reform decree, demand for credit to finance land purchases was very small. Compensation for purchased or expropriated land was made through the Land Bank 20% in cash and 80% in 25-year bondsl/. Bonds bear tax-free interest at 6%, worth perhaps 9% in terms of taxable income and well below the going rate for similar tax-free bonds of other government credit agencies, e.g., DBP bonds at 9% tax-free, repurchasable at par on demand. Land Bank bonds sold in the open market at a 20-40% discount. Therefore, few landowners volunteered to sell their property to the land reform agency. The government avoided expropriation under the land reform law and issuance of Land Bank bonds was restricted to the quantity permitted by the bank's cash resources and landowners' limited willingness to volunteer. Only 13.3 million of Land Bank bonds had been issued by the end of 1971 to finance the purchase of 3,888 ha, and another 15,300 ha were in various stages of negotiation.2/ This was only a small fraction of the government's target of 40,000-50,000 ha per year. I/ Expropriated landowners may elect to take 30% in Land Bank shares, in lieu of the corresponding amount in bonds. 2/ Land Bank of the Philippines, "Annual Report, FY 1970-71," Manila, 1972, pages 2-3. ANNEX 11 Page 38 181. To speed up land reform, the law was amended in August, 1971, to provide more cash for the Land Bank and make Land Bank bonds more attractive. 1- Land Bank bonds were made eligible for immediate use for the following purposes: (a) purchase of reparations goods from the government; (b) purchase of stock or assets of certain government-owned corDorations; (c) collateral for loans from the Philippine National Bank, Development Bank of the Philippines, Government Pension (GSIS), and Social Security System; (d) collateral, up to 60% of the face value, for loans from any bank to finance investments in productive enterprises; and (e) purchase of agricultural land or other real property belonging to the Government. These provisions enhanced the value of the bonds but had had only marginal effect on release of land by the time of the recent land reform decree. The Agrarian Reform Fund 182. Under the newly announced program mandatory transfer as much as 1.8 million ha to tenants may be involved, representing a total asset value of about Y 6.2 billion (US$900 million). The Agrarian Reform Fund, established by Presidential Decree No. 85, to finance and guarantee payment to land owners from whom land is acquired and to guarantee loans for agricultural production has initial resources of V 2 billion (about US$300 million). The government plans to offer 5 options to effect title transfers: (a) straight 15-year payments at 6% interest by tenant- farmer. The Agrarian Reform Fund guarantees payment in the event of default; (b) cash payment of 10% and balance in 25-year bonds at tax free interest of 6% (the previous method of payment); (c) annuity to landlord (with insurance feature); (d) leasehold plan for tenant-farmers who prefer to assume ownership; and (e) exchange for share of assets in Fund Portfolio. 183. Government estimates that most land owners will opt for the Annuity scheme (50%); the 10% cash and balance in bonds option (20%); Exchange for 1/ RA 6390, 2 August 1971. ANNEX 11 Page 39 assets (19%); straight 15-year payment (10%); and leasehold (1%). Government also estimates that the net fund requirement for land transfer during 1973-77 would be about f 1.2 billion (about US$180 million). Interest Rates 184. The special incentives of expanded rediscounting facilities at low interest charges and guarantee of loans appear to be necessary in order to increase institutional lending to small holders. Lending rates are generally at ceilings prescribed by Philippine usury laws (12% on secure loans and 14% on unsecured loans) (Table 32). Without such intervention credit would flow to nonagricultural purposes rather than to small holder agriculture where the risks of typhoons, floods and crop failure and non payment of loans are substantial 1/. 185. For many small holders, the only resource has been the private money lender at very high interest rates. In extreme cases, moneylenders' rates may reach 10% per month (120% annum) or even more, particularly for loans which repayed wholly or partly in terms of commodities. For example, a traditional interest charge for loans of 100 pesos during the rice cropping season (4 to 6 months) is 2-3 cavans of palay. Some years ago, when a cavan of palay sold for roughly 15 pesos, this was the equivalent of 60-90% per annum for a six-month loan. With the increase in the price of rice, the interest rate is now the equivalent of around 120% per annum if the loan is for six months, and 180% per annum if it is for four months. Similarly, a fertilizer dealer may sell ? 100 worth of fertilizer in return for repayment of the principal in money, plus 3 cavans of palay as interest; if the harvest comes three months after the application of the fertilizer, the true interest rate is 360% per year. In sugar areas, a 25-peso loan may be repaid with one picul of sugar in ten months; equivalent to roughly 120% a year. 186. In the last year or so, the "normal" rate for private lending was in the vicinity of 20-40% per annum 2/. Reasons for the decline in private moneylenders rates include the "yardstick" effect of lending by rural banks and the Agricultural Credit Administration, and the spread of information about the usury law by the government's land reform teams. 1/ Analysis of a possible crop insurance system indicates that to insure for 70-80% of a normal rice crop (with the farmer carrying the risk of a 20-30% reduction in yield), an annual premium of 6-7% of the normal crop would be required. Ross Dimock, "A Preliminary Report on the Feasibility of Crop and Livestock Disaster Insurance in the Philip- pines", USAID and Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Manila, July 1971. 2/ The Agricultural Credit Administration estimated a minimum of 20% (in its "Annual Report for 1970-71", Manila, 1972, page 34). Dr. L.B. Darah of the U.P. College of Agriculture found an average rate of 38% in an unpublished study. ANNEX 11 Table 1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 1: ESTIMATED NEW AGRICULTURAL LOANS 1969-71 1969 1970 1971 Institutions Produc- Market- Total Produc- Market- Total Produc- Market- Total tion ing tion ing _ tion ing ------------------------------- million pesos ----- ---------------------------- I Government-o,rned Agricultural Credit Administration 23.4 5.4 28.8 30.9 14.3 45.2 32.3 10.2 42.5 Development Bank of the Philippines: Operating 55.6 - - n.a. - - 11.7 - - Capital Assets 42.1 - n.a. - 12.3 Total 917. 7 77 13.0 70.75 1.0 rl- -2.O 0 27.-0 Philippines National Bank 482.5 80.6 563.1 555.3 279.5 834.8 672.0 325.6 997.6 Subtotal 603.6 131.3 734.9 654.4 304.8 959.2 728.3 335.8 1064.1 II Privately-Cwned Commercial Banks 2/ 836.9 1210.3 2047.2 1275A. 1946.7 3222,1 1451.1 2469.8 3920.9 Private Development Banks Operating 4.1 - - 5.6 - - 5.2 - - Capital Costs 186 - 24.6 - - 34.8 - Total 2___ -0 226 30.2 77 30.2 T7_. _70-70 Rural Banks Operating h09.2 - - h9o.o - 592.9 Capital Assets /7.5 - .6. - 13. Total _1_77 -0.2 _7197 496. -0.2 9777 7077 -0.3 70777 Savings Banks 2.3 - - . - - 0. - - Other c/ 15.6 - - 22.2 - - 53.5 - - Subtotal 2504.6 21 2 3772.7 21 1. 2 70.2 U621.7 Grand total 1897.7 13T17 32395 2h76.2 221.7 .7 2806.0 .7 a/ Excluding PNB; partially estimated. Shows one-half of reported total, on the assumption that 50% of loans granted actually were renewals rather than new credits. 2/ Medium- and long-term loans under CB:IBRD, AGLF and other special programs. 2/ National Industrial Development Corp. (subsidiary of PNB), Private Development Corp. of the Philippines, Bancom Development Corp., etc. Source: Ad Hoc Committee to Study the Agricultural Credit System in the Philippines, "Agricultural Credit Report," Manila, 1972, Appendices 5 and 6. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 2: ESTIMATED LOANS OUTSTANDING, 1970 AND 1971 31 December 1970 31 December 1971 Increase in 1971 Agriculture Total Agriculture Total Agriculture Total ---------------------------in millions of pesos---------------------------- Philippine National Bank 973.1 2,841.8 989.0 2,821.8 15.9 -20.0 Other Commercial Banks 1,274.1 5,592.0 1,221.0 a/ 6,678.2 a/ -53.1 86.2 Subtotal 2,247,2 8,433.8 2,210.0 a 9,500.0a/ -37.2 66.2 Rural Banks b/ 501.9 526.1 601.5 636.0 99.6 109.9 Development Bank of the Philippines 395.6 2,278.7 395.6 2,704.1 0 425.4 Private Development Banks 82.4 c/ 129.1 85.60/ 145.4 3.2 16.3 Agricultural Credit Administration 54.2 5h.2 65.3 65.3 11.1 11.1 Total 3,281.3 11,421.9 3,358.0 13,o50.8 76.7 1,628.9 a! Mission estimate. b/ Net loans minus nonagricultural loans. c/ Estimated at 63.84 of total in 1970 and 58., in 1971 based on percentage of loans granted in 1967-70 and 1968-71, respectively. /0 ' L' u -L IN)H ANNEX 11 Table 3 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3: NUMBER AND LOCATION OF RURAL BANKS Year Luzon Visayos Mindanos Total 1967 281 53 35 369 1968 203 69 39 411 1969 326 79 47 452 1970 345 86 59 486 1971 375 100 6L 539 Source: Central Bank, Departnent of Rural Banks PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 4: LOANS GRANTED BY THE RURAL BANKING SYSTEM, 1967-1971 (In pesos) AGRICULTURAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL OTHER LOANS & ADVANCES TOTAL December 31 Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount 1967 366,911 334,904,972 28,177 40,651,731 8,183 12,013,550 4,467 1,608,267 407,738 389,178,520 1968 384,934 378,146,613 26,579 40,799,890 7,950 12,884,075 4,429 1,988,806 423,892 433,819,384 1969 385,721 416,841,574 23,936 29,642,334 7,794 13,786,016 4,458 1,962,519 421,909 472,232,443 1970 400,706 496,618,035 23,103 43,175,666 7,693 15,722,674 6,039 3,284,130 437,541 558,800,505 1971 446,942 606,763,492 22,461 44,647,278 7,323 17,291,695 6,129 4,556,140 482,918 673,258,605 Average loan in 1971 1,358 1,987 2,361 743 1,394 Source: Central Bank of the Philippines, Department of Rural Banks ANNEX 11 Table 7 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 5: CONSOLIDATED COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEETS OF RURAL BANKS END OF YEAR, 1968-71 (In million of pesos) 1968 1969 1970 1971 ASSETS Cash & due from bank 42.3 70.8 72.8 76.0 Investment in bonds 6.8 7.8 12.9 17.0 Subtotal: reserve assets 79.1 7876 _1527 93.0 Preferred Stock Redemption Fund Securities - - - -4.2 Loans--current Agriculture - ordinary 268.8 307.8 373.5 439.7 Agriculture - AGLF 15.2 16.7 16.9 24.0 Agriculture - IBRD 12.8 15.2 17.4 21.4 Other 20.1 23.6 24.2 34.5 Subtotal: current loans 316.9 363.3 432.o 59 Loans--delinquent Past due 63.9 77.8 90.3 114.5 In litigation 9.4 11.6 12.5 13.3 Subtotal: delinquent loans 73.3 79. _1_._ 177 Total loans 396.1 5.3 Less: reserve for bad debts - 6.0 - 7.3 - 8.7 -10.2 Net loans 390.0 63. 2.1 6.0 Other assets - - - - TOTAL ASSETS 468.7 562.9 655.0 783.6 LIABILITIES AND NET WORTH LIABILITIES Deposits of public Savings 132.5 162.8 214.8 267.7 Time 8.4 10.6 15.0 20.2 Demand 4.4 .6 7.7 8.5 Subtotal 179.0 2377. Credit from official sources Special time deposit: AGLF 21.3 20.8 20.5 12.6 Special time deposit: CB/IBRD 1.3 1.8 2.4 3.6 Loan payable, CB/IBRD 17.2 16.9 17.1 20.5 Rediscounted by Central Bank 78.8 111.1 123.3 142.3 Loans payable, DBP 0.3 0.1 0.1 1.6 Due to RCA 1.8 7.7 2.2 0.4 Subtotal 120.7 1-7 _ 201.0 Unearned interest and discounts 12.9 15.2 18.3 20.9 Other liabilities 8.2 6.5 7.3 9.9 Total liabilities 2871 91 42-T7 527.2 NET WORTH Capital stock--common 76.2 85.3 94.4 107.2 --preferred (Central Bank) 58.5 63.3 66.1 69.2 Reserve for retirement of preferred shares 23.2 28.3 33.4 38.2 Surplus, undiv. profits and reserve for contingencies 23.7 26.9 32.5 40.7 Total net worth 11. 203.8 226.3 2.3 TOTAL LIABILITIES & NET WORTH 468.7 6629 6 783.6 Credit from official sources 120.7 158.4 165.6 201.0 Capital stock - preferred 63. 66.1 69.2 Total official financing: amount 179. 1 231 270.2 :% of total liabilities & net worth 38.2 39.4 35.4 34.5 Source: Central Bank of the Philippines, Department of Rural Banks ANNEX 11 Table 6 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 6: AVERAGE ASSETS OF 573 RURAL BANK BORROWERS IN 1965 AND PRESENT PESOS 1965 Present Percent Item Prices Prices of Total Land 15,918 27,865 71.7 Dwelling 4,227 7,397 19.0 Barns, sheds, etc. 159 296 0.8 Total real estate 20,314 35,5h9 91.5 Farm machinery, vehicles 655 1,146 3.0 Livestock and poultry 619 1,083 2.8 Crops, feed, fertilizer, chemical 538 943 2.4 Tools, and equipment 67 117 0.3 Total 22,193 38,838 100.0 Source: Romeo Aquino Muere, "An Economic Evaluation of a Decade of Rural Banking in the Philippines, in Relation to the Department of Agriculture" (Master's Thesis, Graduate School of Agriculture, University of the Philippines, Los Banos, 1965, page 120. Rural bank credits to these borrowers were used as follows: 33% for current farm expenses 12% for long-term farm investments 45% for farming 11% for other businesses 26% for family living expenses, payment of old debts, etc. 18% not classifiable ANNEX 11 Table 7 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 7: CONSOLIDATED COMPARATIVE INCOME AND EXPENSES OF RURAL BANKS, YEARS 1968-1971 (in millions of pesos) 1968 1969 1970 1971 INCOME Interest on loans Agriculture - ordinary 34.5 38.3 47.4 55.9 - AGLF & IBRD 2.1 3.0 3.6 4.5 Other 3.2 3.4 4.1 4.4 Subtotal Commision 1.9 1.6 0.2 0.4 Other earnings 3.7 4.3 6.0 7.9 Subtotal - interest, commisions, etc. 45.4 50.6 61.2 73.1 Interest on land investments 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.7 TOTAL INCOME 45.6 50.9 61.7 73.7 EXPENSES Interest expenses Deposit liabilities 6.9 8.0 10.6 14.0 Special time deposits 0.7 1.1 1.2 1.5 Borrowed money 2.4 2.6 3.3 3.6 Subtotal 1.1 19.1 Guarantee fee - AGLF 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 Salaries 10.1 11.6 13.8 16.1 Traval expenses 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.8 Depreciation & rent 1.5 2.3 2.7 2.9 Other - - - - TOTAL EXPENSES 31.0 7._. 2.9 NET INCOME 14.7 14.5 17.4 20.8 Net income as O of: net worth 8.1 : capita, stock 11.8 Earnings on private shares1/ 18.1 1I/Assuming 2% dividend on all preferred shares. Source: Central Bank, Department of Rural Banks. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8: REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF REDISCOUNTS GRANTED TO RURAL BANKS BY THE CENTRAL BANK CLASSIFIED AS TO CROPS OR PROJECTS JANUARY 1 - DECEMBER 31,1971 (In million pesos) Poultry & Live- -------Others-------- Total Palam Coconut Piggery Sugar Fish stock Corn Tobacco Abaca Agr 1 . Corm'l. Ind'1. GRAND TOTAL F224.392 P94.654 P52.857 P21.310 E14.267 P.7 . P2.382 P.052 g.jg g9.862 P2.65h P1.222 Total, Luzon F176,292 F75.580 P38.755 F20.81 6.686 F8.788 F7.054 P .972 1?.816 P.365 ?8.968 P2.320 P1.173 Northern Luzon 17.763 12.898 .013 .201 .001 .103 .043 .088 4.190 - .169 .039 .018 Central Luzon 64.783 41.480 .323 10.896 4.344 4.331 1.022 .178 .626 .024 1.117 .254 .188 Southern Luzon 81.555 18.153 29.992 9.656 2.336 4.346 5.989 .514 - .001 7.602 2.011 .955 Bicol Region 12.191 3.049 8.427 .062 .005 .008 - .192 - .340 .080 .016 .012 Total, Visayas P 33.070 P13.391 F 7.225 P .251 P 7.576 P .729 P .007 F2.966 P .119 P.110 P .660 P .006 P .030 Eastern Visayas 13.451 2.740 5.092 .084 1.663 .291 .004 2.877 .079 .110 .505 .004 .002 Western Visayas 19.619 10.651 2.133 .167 5.913 .438 .003 .089 .040 - .155 .002 .028 Total, Mindanao P 15.030 P 5.683 P 6.877 P .244 P .005 F .058 P .002 F1.44_ P .117 F.019 P .234 P .328 P .019 Northern Mindanao 7.384 .947 5.505 .208 .005 .026 - .440 .117 .005 .085 .027 .019 Soughern Mindanao 7.646 4.736 1.372 .306 - .032 .002 1.004 - .014 .149 .301 - Source: Central Bank of the Philippines, Department of Rural Banks oD ANNEX 11 Table 9 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 9: SECOND RURAL CREDIT PROJECT LOAN RELEASES BY PURPOSE AS OF JANUARY 25, 1972 Amount of Loans Loan from Percentage Made CB: IBRD of Total (Number) (P'000) Farm Development - Wheel Tractors 476 9,717 69 Power Tillers 195 976 7 Irrigation Pumps 130 509 4 Srray, Dust & Harvest Equipment 16 176 1 Storage & Processing Facilities 47 626 4 Wells & Distribution Works 2 26 1 Livestock Development Poultry Farms 61 689 5 Swine Farms 72 725 $ Fisheries Development Boats & Equipment 5 60 1 Fish Ponds 66 635 4 Total 1,070 14,139 100 Source: IBRD, "Loan No. 607-PH, Second Rural Credit Project, Full Supervision Report," March 27, 1972, Annex. 3. ANNEX 11 Table 10 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 10: COMPARISON OF COST OF MECHANICAL AND HUNAN POWER IN FOUR ASIAN COUNTRIES (1967) Price of Horsepower per Mechanical Ratio between agricultural Fvrm wages Power Vages and Country worker $ per day $ per Horsepower Japan 1.05 2.60 68 -26 Taiwan 0.70 1.04 112 108 Thailand 0.06 0.53 67 126 Philippines 0.05 0.88 129 1L7 Source: Amic U. Khan, Fred E. Nichols and Bart Duff, "Contract No. AID/csd - 2541, Research for Tropical Agriculture, Semi-Annual Progress Report No. 13, July 1 to December 31, 1971," IRRI, Los Banos, 1972, Table 10. ANNEX 11 Table 11 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 11: SALES OF TRACTORS AND POWER TILLERS (1961-1971) Nmber of Number Sold CB/IBRD Four wheel Two wheel Loans Year Tractors Tillers Total Released 1961 813 1962 994 1963 863 196h 950 1965 707 1966 760 1,932 2,692 19h 1967 1,568 3,058 h,626 1,27b 1968 1,575 1,873 3,h48 693 1969 1,353 910 2,263 196 1970 97h 475 1,109 192 1971 1,083 n.a. n.a. n.a. Source: Khan, Nichols and DuCf, op. cit., Table 12. ANNEX 11 Table 12 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 12: CONSOLIDATED OPERATING STATEMENT OF 104 FARMERS' COOPERATIVES 1969/70 AND 1970/71 1970/71 1969/70 Income Expense Margin Income xense Margin Sales: Finished Products 40810.2 34803.8 By-products 472.1 279.5 Total sales 122.3083.3 Cost of Goods Sold 38366.4 32290.0 Margin on Sales 2915.9 2793.3 Milling Fees & Expenses 1015.4 96h.o 51.4 553.8 653.6 -99.8 Warehousing Fees & Expenses 375.1 1070.6 -695.5 372.4 983.3 -610.9 Subtotal E272.8 70701.0 2271.8 36009.5 3392.7 20872. Service Fees 935.2 1069.9 Miscellaneous 617.4 553.0 Other income 518.1 593.2 Interest expenses 383.9 325.2 Ot:er expenses 929.1 761.4 Subtotal 2070.7 1313.0 757.7 2216.1 l0=3.o 1129.5 General & administrative Expenses 2080.0 -2080.0 177.6 -1747.6 Grand total h743.5 h265.5 478.0 38225.5 37229.1 996.5 Source: Agricultural Credit Administration ANNEX 11 Table 13 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 13: PROFITS AND LOSSES OF 104 COOPERATIVES IN 1970/71 (in pesos) Average per Number e Amount Total Cooperative a. Profitable 7 Best +477,656 +68,236 53 Good +605,298 +11,421 90 Profitable +1,082,954 +18,o49 b. Unprofitable 41 Poor -269,551 - 6,574 5 Worst -335,377 -67,075 4T Unprofitable - 604,925 -13,78 104 TOTAL + 478,026 + 4,596 Source: Agricultural Credit Administration. ANNEX 11 Tbih l 14 Page 1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 14: COMPARATIVE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET OF 104 FARMERS' COOPERATIVES AS OF JUNE 30, 1970 AND 1971 ('000 pesos) ASSETS 30 June 1971 30 June 1970 Cash on hand and in bank 2,738.3 2,023.0 Due from officers and employees 2,215.7 2,169.6 Loans receivable from members: Crop loans 43,147.7 37,621.8 Farm improvement loan 3,368.4 3,376.4 Commodity loans 2,290.9 4,567.5 Subtotal 48,807.0 45,565.7 Accounts Receivable Members 3,897.7 3,251.2 Non-Members 3 468.6 2,978.1 Subtotal 71366.3 6,229.3 Less: Allowance for Bad Debts -283.8 -225.8 Net Accounts Receivable 7,082.-5 ,0_.3 Inventories Palay 2,858.1 2,368.3 Rice 520.6 218.0 Other 4,352.4 3 693.3 Subtotal 7,731.1 6 ) .; Notes Receivable 143.2 116.3 Other Current Assets 1,145.8 1,053.2 Investments 421.9 326.8 Fixed Assets Land 1275.4 998.3 Land appreciation 707.8 761.0 Buildings A/ 2114.1 2052.3 Other Fixed Assets b/ 2665.8 2086.8 Subtotal 67631 75898.7 Other Assets 2517.6 2Lk.6 TOTAL ASSGPS 79566.4 71890.5 ANNEX 11 Table 14 Page 2 30 June 1971 30 June 1970 LIABILITIES AND NET WORTH LIABILITIES Loans Payable Crop Loans 49,320.8 41,901.0 Farm Improvement Loans 3,987.2 3,999.9 Commodity Loans 3,455.7 5,759.7 Subtotal 56,763.7 51,660.6 Merchandise Loans 1,492.7 Facility Loans - Sacks 1,341.6 1,458.6 Subtotal 23834.3 2,827.4 Facility Loans - Fixed 4,599.7 4,508.0 - Moveable 370.8 295.9 Subtotal 4,970.5 4,803.9 Interest due ACA Accrued 4,134.4 3,968.7 Payable 431.0 349.0 Other Current Liabilities 8,475.2 7,525.9 Other Liabilities 2,814.4 2,360.6 TOTAL LIABILITIES 80,423.3 73,496.0 NET WORTH Paid-in Capital 3,917.7 3,h7.6 Trust Fund Capital Formation 4l.9 Donated Savings 31.8 Appreciation Surplus 1,297.0 1,173.4 Net losses (loss) -6,145.0 -6,294.8 Treasury Stock 0.3 0.3 TOTAL NET WORTH -850.9 -16055 TOTAL LIABILITIES & NET WORTH 79,566.4 71,890.0 a/ Net of depreciation Acquisition Cost.: 4,290.7 and 4,167.2. b/ Net of depreciation. Acquisition Cost: 5,477,7 and 4,816.6. Source: Agricultural Credit Administration. ANNEX 11 Table 15 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table * CONDENSED COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR FISCAL YEARS 1969-1970 AND 1970-71 Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Increase or Particulars 1969-1970 1970-1971 Decrease (Adjusted) Loan Interest Income as % of Loans Outstanding 5.4 h.3 Bank Account Interest as % of Cash and Bank Deposits 9.0 4.9 INCOME Interest of Loans P3,073,959.39 P2,779,749.61 P 294,209.78 Intereston Bank Accounts, etc. 1,951,846.66 2,181,334.23 229,87.57 Income from Warehousing 239,878.23 269,48.10 39,569.87 Gross Income (Loss) from Sale of Stocks 1,264,584.62 242,606.06 1,021,978.56 Other Income 156,363.68 63,026.39 93,337.29 Total Income P6,686,632.58 P5,536,164.39 F1,150,468.19 EXPENSES Personnel Services P6,204,874.59 P6,761,947.31 P 557,072.72 Transportation Expenses and Per Diems 979,910.07 1,004,725.14 24,815.07 Sauplies and Materials 145,522.23 165,157.54 19,635.31 Repair and Maintenance 152,727.46 202,186.15 49,458.69 Interst Expenses 592,000.54 513,487-49 78,513.05 Other Expenses 875,665.06 731,291.78 144,373.28 Total Expenses P8,950,699.95 P9,378,795.41 P L28,095.46 Net Loss P2,264,067.37 P3,8h2,631.02 ?1,578,563.65 Source: Agricultural Credit Administration, "Annual Report 70/71, Buttressing the Nation's Base," Manila, 1972, Table 13. ANNEX 11 Table l6 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 16: LOANS RELEASED BY ACA, 1969-70 A27D 1970-1971 (Amounts in Millions of Fesos) ype of' Loan FY 1970-71 FY 1969-70 Number Amount Number Amount a. To Farmers Production Loan Land Reform 37,750 21.9 36,541 19.3 Food Production 12,969 10.3 19,934 11.6 Sub Total 50,719 32.3 56,482 30.9 1/ Commodity Loa- 4,881 4.2 5,996 6.6 Total to Farmers 55,600 36.5 62,478 37.5 b. To Cooperatives Marketing loan 26 5.7 n.a. 7.6 Operating capital loan 2 0.3 n.a. 0.1 Facility loan 5 0.3 n.a. 0.3 Total to cooperatives 33 6.3 n.a. 8.0 Grand Total 55,633 42.7 n.a. 45.6 1/ Usually replaces a production loan at the end of the harvest. Source: Agricultural Credit Administration "Annual Report 1970-71. The Nation's Base". Manila, 1972, Table 1. ANNEX 11 Table 17 Page 1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 17: COLLECTIONS OF ACA LOANS, 1968-1971 (In millions of pesos, as of December 31,1971) Crop year and type of loan Released Collected Percent collected Land Reform: production Through farmers' cooperatives 1970-71 8.9 4.4 49 1969-70 9.5 4.3 65 1968-69 b.6 2.4 53 1967-68 0.6 0.3 51 1966-67 0.6 0.3 50 1964-71 28.8 11.9 41 Direct to farmers 1970-71 3.8 1.1 30 1969-70 5.2 1.7 33 1968-69 2.7 1.2 43 1967-68 3.3 1.4 42 1966-67 1.3 0.9 71 1964-71 18.6 7.0 37 Food production program:production Through farmers' cooperatives 1970-71 11.0 5.9 54 1969-70 11.6 7.8 68 1968-69 13.4 9.2 69 1967-68 18.8 13.0 69 1966-67 11.0 8.5 77 1963-71 75.1 52.1 69 Direct to farmer 1970-71 3.2 1.4 44 1969-70 2.8 1.6 58 1968-69 5.4 2.6 48 1967-68 6.8 3.6 53 1966-67 4.2 2.9 70 1964-71 31.8 17.5 55 Commodity loan (to farmer, via cooperative) 1970-71 3.5 3.1 88 1969-70 5.7 5.2 92 1968-69 3.5 3.4 97 1967-68 6.3 6.0 95 1966-67 8.7 8.3 96 1963-71 37.2 35.6 96 Marketing loan (to cooperative) 1970-71 1.3 0.5 34 1969-70 0.9 0.7 82 1968-69 0.1 0.1 97 1968-71 2.4 1.1 6 Special Palay procurement 1969-70 0.1 0.1 51 1968-69 0.1 0.1 74 1967-68 0.2 0.2 85 1967-70 0.5 0.3 72 ANNEX 11 Table 17 Page 2 Facility loan (to cooperatives) NEC-AID 14.6 7.5 51 NEC-AID (GRAMOCOP) 10.3 8.3 81 GRAND TOTAL 1970-71 31.8 16.4 52 1969-70 35.8 21.4 60 1968-69 29.8 17.0 64 1967-68 36.0 24.5 68 1966-67 25.8 21.0 81 1963-71 194.4 125.5 63 Facility loans 24.9 15.8 63 Total 219.3 141.3 64 Source: Agricultural Credit Administration ANNEX 11 Page 18 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 18: COLLECTIONS OF ACA AND PREDECESSOR AGENCY CREDITS IN NUEVA ECIJA PROVINCE, 1953-1971 (in thousands of pesos) FPri Releases Collections Percent Collected 1953-1963, under predecessor agency (ACCFA) 16,893 11,075 66 1963-1968, under ACA, prior to declaration of Nueva Ecija as and reform area 16,893 11,3o 67 1968-1971, after declaration as lpnd reform area, and start of specil credit program for lease- hol ders 17,457 8,768 50 Sonre; Econcmic Development Foundation, "ACA Phase I, Evaluation of Total Operations of FC's in Nueva Ecija," Page 4.5 ANNEX 11 Table 19 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 19: CREDITS OUTSTANDING FROM COMMERCIAL BANKS (INCLUDING PNB) - END OF PERIOD, 1968-1971 1968 1969 1970 1971 1968 Sept. 1971 (Sept.) ---------------------in millions of Pesos-------------------------- Grand rotal Production 424o.9 4677.9 5436.6 5986.0 63.7 64.4 Trade 2415.5 2588.5 2997.2 3309.0 36.2 35.6 Total 6656.4 7266.h 8433.8 9295.1 100.0 100.0 Agriculture, Fisheries, Forestry Production 1469.6 1610.3 1714.7 1779.0 22.1 19.1 Trade 423.3 376,L 532.5 430.3 6.3 4.6 Total 1893.0 1986.7 2247.2 2209.3 28.4 23.8 Of which: Sugar Production 559.2 710.1 840.4 828.5 8.4 8.9 Trade 49.4 66.6 91.6 73.2 0.7 0.8 Total 608.6 776.7 932.0 901.7 9.1 9.7 Palay Production 310.4 295.4 282.7 274.1 4.7 2.9 Trade 90.3 114.0 138.4 95.5 1.3 1.0 Total 400.8 409.3 421.1 369.7 6.0 4,o Coconut Production 123.9 124.2 118.9 117.6 1.9 1.3 Trade 13.2 7.3 8.6 9.0 0.2 0.1 Total 137.1 131.4 127.5 126.6 2.1 1.4 Fisheries Production 60.2 64.6 67.2 70.7 0.9 0,8 Trade 12.6 13.0 15.5 13.9 0.2 0.1 Total 72.8 77.6 82.7 84.6 1.1 0.9 Forestry Production 163.8 172.0 174.6 225.1 2.5 2.L Trade 172.2 97.5 188.0 137.2 2.6 1.5 Total 336.1 269.4 362.6 362.3 5.0 3.9 Selected industries: Sugar Production 43.8 39.1 683 83.4 0.3 0.9 Trade 17.6 29.6 64.5 55.8 0.9 0.6 Total 61.3 68.8 1328 139.2 1.2 1.5 Rice Milling Production 8.3 9.5 14.2 13.0 0.2 0.1 Trade 18.4 31.5 27.7 26.5 0.2 0,3 Total 26.7 40.9 41.9 39.5 0.4 0.11 Coconut Products Production 31.5 4o.1 54.9 75.2 0.5 0.8 Trade 94.0 90.6 131.7 151.2 1.4 1.6 Total 125.4 130.8 186.6 226.3 1.9 2.4 Animal Feeds Production 10.9 6.2 5.4 4.9 0.2 0.1 Trade 2.9 3.2 2.2 3.2 0.0 0.0 Total 13,8 9.4 7.6 8.1 0.2 0.1 Lumber and Products Production 55.7 63.2 76.8 107.1 0.6 1.0 Trade 33.2 46.8 53.6 49.8 0,51 0.5 Total 88.9 110.0 130.3 156.9 1.3 1.7 Source: Central Bank,Departnent of Economic Research PHILIPPINES AGRICULTUJRAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 20: PN3 LOANS OUTSTANDING BY INDUSTRY: 1967-1971 AS OF DECEMER 31 OF THE YEAR INDICATED (in thousand pesos) Change 1967 1968) 1969 1970 1971 1969 to 1970 1970 to 1971 Sugar Agricultural 316,548 410,157 201,192 589,935 631,138 +88,763 +5,203 Industrial 35,685 7,160 5,939 15,595 21,127 + 9,696 + 0,532 Commercial 167 11,060 1,880 20 033 118 153 Total 3f 0)29L3j7 0;9.01 6,8 3.2 Palay Agricultural 233,776 215,666 206,59 193,285 176,837 -13,309 -18, 648 Industrial 10,107 1,730 1,759 1,566 921 - 193 - 665 Commercial Tot9 ____ 9 261,3B5j9 22241 -20,279 ___ Coconut Agricultural 76,819 90,389 93,221 83,320 71,259 -9,901 -12,061 Industrial 758 3,679 6,336 13,178 20,029 + 6,8)2 + 6,851 Commercial 1,182 7 610 8 720 12 126 13 163 + 3 406 + 1,037 Total :7K 7 ________tim______ '7- 1 Fisheries Fish Pond 14,068 17,956 16,409 1+,380 13,034 - 2,029 - 1,36 Deep-Sea 821 1,708 1,744 1,861 1,492 + 117 - 369 Pearl Fishing & Culture 12 )47 14 32 61 - 9 + 29 Total 1 1901 19,711 Corn 13,525 12,324 11,865 10,150 9,484 - 1,715 - 666 Forestry 1)4,812 18,)402 15,815 12,801 19,616 - 3,014 + 6,815 Ramie 4,818 1,610 1,727 1,745 1,659 + 18 - 86 Livestock & Poultry 28,976 45,492 43,833 38,912 3)4,853 - 4,921 - 4,059 Abaca 3,312 2,175 1,848 1,756 1,319 - 92 - 437 Tobacco 9,493 11,618 9,562 9,366 8,639 - 196 - 727 Citrus 680 3,900 3,279 2,625 2,218 - 654 - 407 Coffee & Cacao 2,37) 2,184 2,049 1,563 1,432 - 486 - 131 Cassava & Other Rdot Crops 459 273 176 568 1,399 +392 + 831 Miscellaneous 31 287 14 757 13 442 10,785 16 33 - 267 + 78 Total109, 112,3 10,59690,271 97,152 6,d3dl____ Total1/ Agricultural 751,780 848,658 922,792 973,066 988,973 +50,274 +15,907 Industrial 208,)460 171,747 187,969 203,160 205,035 +15,191 + 1,875 Commercial 868,834 804,062 926,708 923,675 812,785 - 3,033 -110,890 Others 35,180 h70o 557 669 429 741,925 815 001 +72 +73076 GRAND ToTAL 20254)4 9 3 126 2,621,791, 17,j923 1/ Does not include industrial and commercial loans for sugar, palay, and coconut, shown above. Source: PNB ANNEX 11 Table 21 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 21: PNB LOANS GRANTED BY INDUSTRY: 1967-1971 (in thousand pesos) 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Sugar Agricultural 270,724 323,495 391,917 505,o65 621,960 Industrial 45,666 12,616 9,592 24,033 30,202 Commercial 47,775 111,340 56 889 253,621 295,636 Total 364,165 47,451 8 782,719 9)7,798 Palay Agricultural 111,748 79,213 39,563 25,417 16,142 Industrial 4,718 897 240 41 24 Commercial - 50,272 22 360 22 976 6 210 116,)666 130,38 52iT5 EU ____ Coconut Agricultural 56,402 35,110 24,587 7,511 7,920 Industrial 299 2,447 3,956 6,659 19,625 Commercial 898 6,64 1,379 2 894 23 740 Total 77579 7,201 29,922 17o4 1,285 Fisheries Fish Pond 4,351 5,545 2,606 1,600 2,396 Deep-Sea 328 416 287 706 273 Pearl Fishing & Culture 70 57 145 - - Total 03020 Corn 7,938 2,918 1,983 557 958 Forestry 13,900 7,386 3,474 3,249 5,069 Ramie 2,858 2,749 1,626 1,715 980 Livestock and Poultry 18,997 19,138 8,727 3,096 2,425 Abaca 1,613 258 330 36 47 Tobacco 7,273 8,982 2,906 1, 466 8,038 Citrus 1,132 1,311 663 132 92 Coffee and Cacao 5,361 1,364 506 234 48o Cassava & Other Root Crops 543 158 61 43 36 Miscellaneous 189485 5,219 3.168 2,184 5 221 Total 78,100 )49,8 23,4) 12,712 AgriculturallJ 521,723 493,319 482,,li9 553,011 672,018 Industrial 140,056 132,105 167,069 132,967 153,738 Commercial 907,581 844,051 602,857 643,598 702,061 Others 143,366 273,788 451,507 500,465 465,025 Grand Total 712726 1,)3263 1,70382 1,830,041 1,992,82 1J Does not include industrial and commercial loans for sugar, polay and coconut, shown above. S PNB ANNEX 11 Table 22 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 22: PNB LOAN COLLECTIONS BY INDUSTRY: 1967-1971 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Sugar Agricultural 237,515 277,671 304,275 396,327 569,560 Industrial 43,540 10,442 10,342 13,766 28,832 Commercial 47 936 111,266 $7 141 235 891 301,116 Total 81 399,379 37i, 98 899,508 Palay Agricultural 78,334 $6,282 40,471 33,694 31,603 Industrial 1,166 365 155 172 181 Commercial - 27 849 17 985 28 445 20 151 Total 7,096 Coconut Agricultural 35,324 28,583 20,298 17,006 14,273 Industrial 290 1,661 1,671 4,607 17,986 Commercial 1 436 5 092 1 637 748 19 906 Total 37_35_36 23,606 Fisheries Fish Pond 3,916 4,173 2,994 2,149 2,416 Deep-Sea 134 376 387 318 116 Pearl Fishing and Culture 54 70 148 6 31 Total 7,107 4,619 2,473 Corn 6,767 2,800 2,367 1,683 1,701 Forestry 12,308 7,881 4,667 3,919 3,290 Ramie 3,321 2,353 1,508 1,697 1,135 Livestock and Poultry 10,024 11,564 8,681 7,315 4,972 Abaca 1,089 942 304 318 239 Tobacco 5,825 5,966 1,051 1,988 8,403 Citrus 1,087 1,320 654 347 461 Coffee and Cacao 2,406 1,093 726 230 $11 Cassava and Root Crops 54 49 69 $2 87 Miscellaneous 1$ 020 4 523 5 680 4 820 4 724 Total _ _ 22 Agriculturalli/ 409,074 405,646 394,280 471,869 643,513 Industrial 143,368 108,391 131,163 106,272 148,896 Commercial 591,571 761,192 474,282 609,839 '756,063 Others 97,812 291,233 309,116 364,464 _396,18 Grand Total 1,241,825 1,566,462 1,308,841 1,552,444 1,944,630 Loan collection as percent of loans granted Sugarg2 90.3 89.3 811 82.5 94.9 Palay2/ 68.3 64.8 94.3 128.7 232.1 Coconut2/ 64.3 79.9 78.9 131.0 101.7 Total Agriculture 78.4 82.2 81.7 85.3 95.8 Grand Total 72.5 89.9 76,8 84.8 97.6 1J Does not include industrial and commercial loans for sugar, palay and coconut, shown above. 2/ Includes agricultural, industrial and commercial loans. Source: PNB ANNEX 11 Table 23 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 23: BALANCE SHEET OF DEVELOMIENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES AS OF JUNE 30 (in million pesos) 1968 1969 1970 1971 ASSETS Cash and due from Banks 238.2 225.4 155.9 112.6 Investment in Bonds & Loans 169.9 252.7 247.9 300.7 Agricultural 329.5 374.3 407.5 409.- Industrial 962.5 1,111.3 1,437.8 1,994.2 Real Estate & Miscell. 117.8 151.9 200.6 249.6 Subtotal Stocks and Advances - Private Development Banks 47.4 48.9 48.4 50.4 Bank Premises & Furniture 38.2 47.2 51.2 53.7 Other 41.0 59.1 96.5 105.8 Trust Fund Resources 164.5 169.7 176.2 180.1 Total 2,108.9 2,ho.6 2,822.1 3,456.6 LIABILITIES Long-term liabilities 869.5 897.7 na 1/ 1,371.0 Progress Bonds payable 246.7 326.9 na 1/ 474.8 Savings & Time deposits 209.2 226.6 na 1/ 348.1 Other 170.1 351.3 na 1/ 579.6 Capital & Surplus h9.0 468.4 489.7 503.0 Trust Funds 164.4 169.7 176.2 180.1 Total 2,108.9 2,440.6 2,822.1 3,456.6 Contingent Liabilities for Guarantee Regular Guarantees - $ equivalent $ 354.9 Philippine peso guarantees P 37.8 CCC and CWB guarantees - $ equivalent $ 24.5 Peso equivalent 2/ P2,503.9 1/ Due totemporary change in form of balance sheets 2/ At P 6.50 per U.S. dollar Source: Development Bank of the Philippines, Annual Reports PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 24: NUMBER AND AMOUNT OF AGRICULtURAL LOANS APPROVED FY 1965/66-1970/71 (in millions of pesos) Year 1965/66 1966/67 1967/68 1968/69 1969/70 1970/71 Total Type Loan No.b/ Amt. No. Amt. No. Amt. No. Amt. No. Ant. No. At. N. % A. Crop Loans Falay 3,0 5 15.9 5,204 23.8 8,206 37.9 4,864 22.3 3,84 17.4 2,046 8.8 26,829 126.2 28.2 Sugal cane 155 4.1 215 11.9 221 12.2 217 5.0 455 9.7 184 1.4 1,447 4h.2 0.9 Corn & Other Staples 367 0.7 484 1.1 1,457 4.0 777 2.8 441 1.8 382 1.1 3,908 11.6 2.0 Coconut 2,494 9.1 3,406 15.8 5,321 33.7 5,108 38.3 2,968 16.8 1,493 6.8 20,790 120.5 27.0 Coffee 35 0.1 50 0.3 70 0.2 69 0-4 33 0.1 28 0.1 285. 1.3 0.2 Abaca & Other Fibers 193 0.8 275 1.2 235 1.3 42 0.2 34 0.1 16 0.1 795 3.5 0.8 Tobacco 100 0.1 171 0.3 356 0.6 246 0.6 162 0.3 82 0.2 1,117 2.1 0.6 Fruits & Veg. c/ 138 0.6 148 0.7 121 1.1 137 0.8 145 0.5 123 0.5 882 4.2 0.9 Other Food Crops d/ - - 13 0.1 12 0.1 6 0.01 2 g/ 2 g/ 35 0.1 P/ Other Commercial 57 2.1 93 5.2 65 1.7 31 0.5 26 0.6 23 0/2 295 10.4 2.3 Crops e/ _____________________________ Subtotal 6,564 33.5 10,059 60.3 16,134 92.Y 11,497 71.0 7,70 47.3 4,379 19.2 56,353 324.1 72.6 B. Other Types of Loans livestock & Piggery 703 3.8 884 7.8 1,191 19.7 937 12.5 871 14.6 493 2.7 5,079 61.2 13.7 Poultry 184 1.5 253 2.7 419 16.3 351 8.9 200 4.3 82 1.2 1,489 34.9 7.8 Fishery 214 2.9 279 5.4 349 6.4 224 4.9 128 3.9 77 1.0 1,271 24.4 5.5 Forest Products - - - - - - - - Others f/ and / - 0.3 10 0.7 13 0.2 12 0.4 5 0.4 - - 54 2.0 0.4 Subtotal 1,115 6.5 1,426 16.7 1,972 42.6 1,524 26.7 1,204 23.2 652 4.9 7,593 122.6 27.4 GRAND TOTAl 7,679 42.0 11,485 23.0 18,106 135.4 13,021 97.7 8,954 70.5 5,031 24.1 64,276 446.7 100.0 Average Loan in Pesos a! Data on loans released by different crops not available. Also, loans for production inputs no separable from loans for fixed assets or facilities except in aggregate terms. b/ Refers to nmer of-aoanapplications approved. Total number of farmers is approximately 90% of total number of loan applications. c/ Includes orchard, onions, vegetables, banana and citrus. j/ Includes watermelon and other food crops. 3/ Includes cacao, cashew, cassava, soy bean, rubber, and other commercial crops. f/ Includes Carabella Milk Processing, salt and miscellaneous. a/ Less than 0.1%. Source: Ad Hoc Committee on Agricultural Credit Systems Report on D3P, Table PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 25: DBP LOANS APPROVED FOR SELECTED AGRICULTURAL PROCESSING INDUSTRIES FY 1965/66 - 1970/71 (in million pesos) FY Ending 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Type of' Loan Total I. Food Manufacturing Rice and Corn Industry 5.25 35.83 51.72 62.00 60.91 3.33 219.o 53.2 Sugar Central Mills 0.03 12.00 0.78 8.72 30.21 - 51.74 12.6 Coffee Processing - 0.15 0.10 - - - 0.25 b/ Dairy, Livestock & Poultry 0.33 - - - - 0.33 b/ Poultry & Livestock Feeds Factory - 0.27 7.56 2.84 - - 10.67 2.6 Flour & Starch Factory 2.50 4.16 3.05 - - - 9.71 2.4 Miscellaneous 4.68 5.22 12.22 - 4.49 0.02 26.63 6.5 II. Cocoanut Products & Their Preparations - 4.29 0.02 2.53 - - 6.8L 1.7 III Tobacco Mfg. - - 2.34 - 17.00 - 19.34 4.7 IV. Lumber & Wood Products 0.54 7.11 18.06 1.65 4.79 - 32.15 7.8 Manufaabure of Paper & Eaper Products Q.12 - 9065 5.22 7.62 - 22.12 5. V. Others /.14 7.62 0.55 - 0.01 - 2.32 3.0 Total 17.26 76.98 105.85 82.96 125.03 3.35 411L.3 100.0 a/ Includes manufacture of native fibers and farm implements, and deep sea fishing. 57 Less than 1% Source: Ibid., Table 5. ANNEX 11 Table 26 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 26: DBP DISTRIBUTION OF AGRICULTURAL LOANS APPROVED BY SIZE, 1965/66-1969/70 (Amount in P r000) TOTAL (1965/66-1969/70) Number Percent Amount Percent P 500 and below 1,886 794 501 - 1,000 8,289 7,086 1,001 - 2,000 19,094 31,997 1/ 78.0 2h .0 2,001 - 3,000 6,349 17,090 3,001 - 4,000 4,582 16,706 4,001 - 5,000 5,982 23,381. 5,001 - 10,000 3,141 2h,529 10,001 - 20,000 1,859 27,316 2/ 22.0 76.0 20,001 - 50,000 1,65h 52,561. 50,001 -100,000 618 5 ,4o Over P 1.00,000 330 104,h98 Additional loans 5,461 66,306 1/ Average loan per loan application is P 2,210.00. 2/ Average loan per loan application is P 42,430.00. Source: Ibid, Table 1. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 27: DBP: ANNUAL OUTSTANDING LOAN VOLUME BY SECTOR, FY 1967-71 (P million) 1967 1969 1969 1970 1971 Sector %of $of % of % of % of Amount Total Amount Total Amount Total Amount Total Amount Total Agriculture 278 2L 330 23 374 23 08 20 410 15 Industry 767 67 963 68 1,111 68 1,438 70 1,99b 75 Real Estate & Misc. 101 9 118 9 152 9 201 10 250 10 Total 1,16 100 1,411 100 1,637 100 2,047 100 2,65h 100 Source: Ibid, Appendix 8. o' ANNEX 11 Table 28 PHILLIPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 28: DBP PAST DUE LOANS AND LOANS IN LITIGATION JUNE 30, 1971 (in millions of pesos) A. Past Due , of Total Direct loan Amount 10 Past Amount Sector Portfolio Past Due Due Past Due Agricultural 370 72 a/ 19.5 23.0 Industrial 1,200 229 19.0 73.h Real Estate 44 8 18.2 2.6 Government 514 3 5. 1.0 TOTAI 1,668 312 18.7 100.0 3. Loans in Litigation Amount in Amount 0 in Sector Litigation Outstanding Total litigation Agricultural b/ 11 370 381 2.9 Industrial 34 1,200 1,23 2.8 Real Estate 5 44 8.2 Government - '1 5 - TCTAI. 50 1,668 1,718 3.0 a/ P 29 million is reported. as past due for the Head Office loans and P 43 million was oast due in the branches. b/ Approximately 1,500 loans out of 55,000 active loans, or about 3j. Source: Ibid, Table 7. ANNEX 11 Table 29 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 29: COMPARATIVE COORDINATED BALANCE SHEET OF OPERATING PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT BANKS, END OF YEAR IN MILLION OF PESOS 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Assets Cash and due from banks 10.0 11.6 15.4 14.5 16.3 Loans 97.3 106.2 115.2 129.1 145.5 Investments in land 2.8 1.8 1.9 4.4 5.9 Bank premises & function 2.9 4.4 5.3 . 5.8 Other 6.2 5.2 5.7 7.2 9.4 Total costs 119.2 129.7 -173 160.6 182.8 Liabilities and Net Worth Liabilities Savings deposits 27.1 33.8 45.6 60.9 n.a. Time deposits 12.8 11.2 8.7 9.9 n.a. Sub Total 39.9 7 .0 5.- 70.8 R7. Notes Payable - DBP 27.2 24.9 24.8 23.9 27.4 Other liabilities 5.5 3.1 4.3 3.6 4.7 Total liabilities 72.5 73.0 73.T 9. 11.7 Net Worth 1/ Common stock 23.0 27.7 30.1 31.7 35.21/ Preferred stock 18.2 22.6 24.4 24.2 24.7 Surplus and reserves 1.5 2.1 2.3 2.3) 6.7 Undivided profits 3.9 4.1 3.4 4.1 Total net worth 0.7 0.2 6 Total Liabilities and Net Worth 119.2 129.4 143.6 160.6 182.8 Notes payable -DBP 27.2 24.9 24.8 23.9 27.4 Preferred stock 18.2 22.6 24.4 24.2 24.7 Total financing from DBP: Amount. 45.4 47.5 49.2 48.1 52.1 Peroent of total liabilities 371 _W.7 .7 30.0 2T.7 and net worth 1/ Estimated Source : Development Bank of the Philippines, "Private Development Banks, Annual Report," 1968, 1970, 1971. ANNEX 11 Table 30 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 30: LOANS GRANTED BY PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT BANKS, 1967-71 (in million of pesos) Agriculture Industry Miscellaneous Total Year Amount of total Amount $ of total Amount % of total Amount 1967 38.5 72.8 11.0 20.8 3.4 6.4 52.9 1968 24.8 64.5 9.9 25.8 3.7 9.7 38.4 1969 22.2 58.5 12.2 32.1 3.5 9.3 37.9 1970 30.1 58.0 15.1 29.1 6.7 13.0 51.9 1971 39.8 56.7 20.6 29.4 9.8 13.9 70.2 Source: Development Bank of the Philippines, "Private Development Banks, Annual Report," DecEnber 31, 1967, 1968, 1969 and 1970. ANNEX 11 PHILIPPINES Table 31 AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 31: COMPARATIVE CONSOLIDATED PROFIT AND LOSS STATEMENT OF OPERATING PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT BANKS (in million of pesos) 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Income Interest on loans 9.9 11.1 12.3 13.4 15.2 Other 1.2 1.5 1.5 2.1 2.6 Total Income 11.1 TT. 23. 17.7 Expenses Salaries 1.7 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 Interest on deposits 1.4 2.2 3.0 3.3 4.2 Interest on notepayable 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.L 1.8 Other 2.5 2.8 3.9 4.1 L.6 Total Expenses 7.2 T 10.9 11.8 13.7 Net Income 3.8 3.9 2.8 3.8 4.0 of which: DBP share 1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Private share 2/ 3.6 3.7 2.6 3.6 3.8 Private share in % of common stock 15.6 11.L 10.8 Net income as % of net worth 12.3 6.1 6.0 1/ Estimated at 1% of preferred stock. 2/ Estimated by deducting DBP share from total. Source: Development Bank of the Philippines, Private Development Banks, Annual Report, 1968, 1970, 1971. ANNEX 11 Table 32 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 32: MAJOR OFFICIAL INTEREST RATES IN PERCENT Notes Borrowing Deposits Savings 6% Time 6 months 6-1/2% 12 " 7 18 " 8 Bank bonds DBP Progress Bonds 9 Tax free; equivalent to 14.5% subject to tax for corporate buyers; repurchased by DBP at par on demand. Central Bank Certificates of Tax free; equivalent to 14.5% subject Indebtedness 9 to tax for large corporate buyers; 3 year terms, not repurchased at par. Government Securities Treasury Notes 5 years 10.75 Treasury Bills Annual equivalent interest as of April 49 days 10.2 1972; varies with market conditions. 63 "t 10.5 91 " 11.0 147 " 11.6 182 " 11.8 273 " 12.1 364 n 12.4 Lending ACA Loans to coops 8 Loans to farmers 12 DBP Low cost housing 9 Loans under 5,000 pesos 9 Loans over 5,000 pesos 12 Rural banks 12 Private development banks: PDCP 12 Commercial banks Secured by mortgage 12 Uhsecured 14 Source: Economic Research Department, Central Bank of The Philippines AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY PHILIPPINES ANNEX 12. TREE CROPS ANNEX 12 Page 1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY TREE CROPS TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. A. Coconuts .................................................. 1 Introduction and Overview ................................. 1 Production and Yield ...................................... 2 The Need for Rejuvenation ................................. 5 Projections of Coconut Production for 1971-1980 ........... 8 Size of Holdings and Tenure ............................... 9 Production Methods ........................................ 10 Pests and Diseases ........................................ 15 Copra Making .............................................. 16 Marketing at Farm Level ................................... 18 The Processing Industry ................................... 20 Institutions and Organizations ............................ 22 Research .................................................. 26 Extension ................................................. 28 B. Rubber .................................................... 29 Introduction .............................................. 29 The Rubber Financing Plan of the DBP ...................... 30 Development of Rubber Planting in the Makilala Area ....... 31 Extension Service ......................................... 32 Trends and Outlook ........................................ 33 Possibilities of Expansion ................................ 34 Conclusions and Recommendations ........................... 34 C. Other Tree Crops .......................................... 34 Abaca .................................................... 34 Bananas ................................................... 35 Cashews ......................... ........................ 36 ANNEX 12 Page 2 Appendix A. Method for Estimating Future Coconut Production Tables 1: Coconut Production in Copra Terms 2: Philippine Coconut Situation 3: Area Planted to Coconut by Region 4: Total Coconut Trees by Region 5: Coconut Bearing Trees by Region 6: Coconut Nonbearing Trees by Region Appendix B. Tables 1: Estimated Cost of Rejuvenating Coconut Plantation 2: Estimated Cost of Intercropping Cacao in a Rejuvenated Coconut Plantation in Climate Type II Appendix C. Tables 1: Cost of Abaca Production per Hectare for Fiber Production under Davao Conditions 2: Cost of Abaca Production per Hectare for Fiber Production under Bicol and Visayas Conditions Appendix D. Cashew Production Development Program ANNEX 12 Page 1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY TREE CROPS A. Coconuts Introduction and Overview 1. The Philippines ranks first in the world in production and export of copra, coconut oil, copra meal and cake, and desiccated coconut. Its share in the world production of copra and oil declined from 62% in 1967 to 53% in 1969; but the 1971 crop is estimated to have been almost 50% higher than the 1969 crop, equaling the 1963 crop (Appendix A). Coconuts occupy about 1.8 million ha or 21% of the total agricultural land. 2. About 80% of the production is exported: 41% as copra (including meal and cake), 52% as oil, and 7% as desiccated coconut. Copra meal has become important as cattle feed, with a strong demand in Europe. 3. The estimated FOB value of coconut exports was US$209 million in 1970, or about 20% of total merchandise export. 4. According to the 1960 census, about six million people were employed in coconut production. As the area planted has about doubled since, the number of people now employed in this industry must be quite substantial. 5. Coconut production is expected to increase considerably between 1970 and 1980. Increases will be due to expansion of area planted to coconuts between 1960 and 1970. Yields could be considerably increased by better management. Major constraints to the improvement of production techniques are a lack of extension services and lack of transport. 6. Fertilizer use is very low. Main constraints are the lack of knowledge among the farmers, the lack of capital, the long time for the trees to react and the lack of research data on fertilizing practices. Fertilizing should be done only in combination with cultivation and/or intercropping. 7. Cultivation and weeding is generally inadequate. Most farmers do not know how their yields are reduced by weed competition. 8. Intercropping is done frequently, mostly on only a part of the land, for subsistence farming. The main constraints for the development of rational intercropping and grazing under coconuts are the lack of economic ANNEX 12 Page 2 and technical data on intercropping under various ecologic conditions. A program of demonstration farms, using fertilizer and intercropping has been planned for the main coconut growing provinces. Although it is doubt- ful that the demonstrations will have a great impact on coconut growing practices, these farms will provide valuable information on the economic aspects. Sites of the pilot farms should be selected according to soil and climatic conditions to provide information on a range of ecological conditions. Inter-crops should be selected according to the ecological and marketing conditions. A similar program is needed for pastures. 9. Rejuvenation of coconut plantations is essential in several areas, such as Southern Tagalog and Western Visayas, to improve yields and reduce cost of production. Major constraints are the lack of improved plant material, the long duration of such a rejuvenation program, and the lack of funds. 10. Research and breeding would be more efficient if centralized in one organization. The PHILCORIN may be the best qualified institution to direct and coordinate research. Priorities for research should be estab- lished in coordination with PHILCOA and UCAP. It is strongly recommended that more funds be made available for coconut research. 11. Copra produced by the tapahan and sun-drying systems is usually of a bad quality. The improvement of the copra quality is strongly associated with marketing. Although the Moisture Meter Law was not a success at farm level marketing, PHILCOA has been able during several years to improve the quality of exported copra through quality control. Quality control should be intensified, especially in relation to aflatoxin content. The promotion of copra-making and marketing cooperatives is recommended. Cooperative copra kilns could produce a much better quality copra and handle larger volumes. Marketing through cooperatives could be done directly with town buyers, exporters or consuming processing factories. Production and Yield 12. Copra output reached a peak of 1.75 million tons in 1963, after which it declined to 1.2 million tons in 1969. In 1970 there was a slight increase to 1.3 million tons; the 1971 crop is estimated at about 1,750,000 tons. The area of bearing trees increased considerably after 1960, but produc- tion went down. ANNEX 12 Page 3 Table 1: COCONUT STATISTICS, 1961-70 Bearing Non- Total Total Coconut Bearing Area Area bearing Area Production Copra Yield Year Area in Copra ('000 ha) ('000 ha) ('000 ha) ('000 ha) (kg/ha) 1961 993 240 1,233 1,198 1,206 1962 1,114 203 1,324 1,533 1,376 1963 1,222 188 1,410 1,752 1,433 1964 1,276 272 1,548 1,638 1,283 1965 1,235 397 1,632 1,586 1,284 1966 1,234 370 1,604 1,663 1,347 1967 1,261 363 1,624 1,438 1,140 1968 1,240 443 1,683 1,429 1,152 1969 1,367 461 1,828 1,188 869 1970 1,434 382 1,816 1,312 914 1971-/- 2,048 1,753- /a Handbook of Philippines Agriculture and Natural Resources, p. 51, 1971. /b Philippines Agriculture Sector Survey, Statistical Annex, Table 3.2. Source: Computed from Appendix A, Table 2. 13. Table 1 shows the productive and nonproductive coconut areas, calculated by dividing the number of bearing and nonbearing trees by 150. Densities are higher in some of the older producing regions, and lower in some newer areas. But the greatest part of the coconuts seem to have been planted at 8x8m, or 156 trees per hectare. Allowing for some vacant spots in each hectare, the weighted average is probably close to 150. This method of computing the total area planted to coconuts gives somewhat different results from the United Coconut Association of the Philippines (UCAP) statistics. 14. Coconut production and copra yields declined sharply after 1963. The low output of 1969 and 1970 is explained by dry spells in 1968 and 1969, and heavy typhoons in 1970. The general decline after 1963 was mainly the result of ecologic conditions, partly old trees, and partly very young trees just coming into production. The decline was only temporary, as shown by the recovery of output in 1971 and 1972. Larger production is expected over the next several years. 15. The average copra yield (bearing trees) over the past decade was about 1,200 kg/ha. This compares favorably with the yields being obtained in other important coconut producing countries in the early sixties: Polynesia and Comores atolls 200-300 kg/ha India, New Hebrides, Thailand, Brazil, Togo, Dahomey 400-500 kg/ha Ceylon, Indonesia, Mozambique 600-700 kg/ha Ivory Coast, Solomon Islands 800-900 kg/ha Polynesian Volcanic Islands 1,100-1,200 kg/ha ANNEX 12 Page 4 The data are not strictly comparable, however, because the Philippine figure is for yield per bearing hectare and other countries are yields per planted hectare. Due to the large increase in nonbearing area during this period, the yield per planted hectare in the Philippines is 952 kg/ha; this also would be a misleading comparison. Whatever the specific figure, it may be concluded that average yield in the Philippines is among the highest in the world. This, without doubt, is mainly due to very favorable climatic and soil conditions in most of the producing regions. 16. In terms of nut yields, the average per hectare is not so impres- sive. But this is caused by the high number of trees per hectare and the large size of the nuts produced. The average number of nuts per ton of copra has been around 4,900, against 6,000 or higher often found in other countries. Overall, there appears to have been a significant drop in yield per tree from 45 to 36 nuts per tree (Table 2). 17. Between regions, yields per tree show great differences (Table 2). The Eastern Visayas show considerably higher production in 1970 than the 11-year average; in Southern and Western Mindanao, 1970 yields were about equal to the 11-year average. In that year the number of bearing trees in Southern and Western Mindanao increased by 31%, and in E. Visayas by 22% -- trees that had just come into production and were still low-yielding. Thus, yields of the mature trees in these regions probably did not decrease as much as the figures in Table 2 suggest. The proportion of young trees was much lower in the other regions. The most northerly regions (the first five regions listed) show 1970 yields which were below the 11-year average. These Northern regions were much more seriously hit by the typhoons in 1970 than the Southern regions. The regions of Ilocos, Central Luzon, part of Southern Tagalog and part of Western Visayas, are located in the area of climate type 11/, with a seasonal variation in rainfall of six rainy months and six dry months. Coconut production in these regions is influenced by these prolonged dry spells. Also, drought effects may have contributed to the relatively low yields of these areas in 1969. Table 2: NUT YIELDS PER TREE PER REGION, 1960 AND 1970 Region 1960 1970 11-year Average Philippines 45 36 40 Ilocos 41 22 33 Cagayan Valley 36 17 37 C. Luzon 53 32 41 S. Tagalog 55 18 33 Bicol 38 21 34 E. Visayas 37 44 36 W. Visayas 33 30 40 N.&E. Mindanao 47 38 44 S.&W. Mindanao 43 56 55 Source: UCAP statistics. 1/ See Annex 1 par 54 for delineation of climate types. ANNEX 12 Page 5 18. The higher nut yields in southern and western Mindanao are a result of new plantings in areas that had not been farmed before and still had their fertility. 19. There has been some shift in the distribution of production; before 1960, coconut production was concentrated mainly in Southern Tagalog, parti- cularly in Quezon and Laguna provinces. Since then large expansion of coconut production has taken place in Southern and Western Mindanao and Eastern Visayas. In 1970, Mindanao produced 48% of all nuts and it had 36% of all bearing trees and 39% of all nonbearing trees. Table 3: DISTRIBUTION BY REGION, 1960 and 1970 % of Total % of % of % of Total Nonbearing Total Nuts Total Area Bearing Trees Trees Produced 1960 1970 1960 1970 1960 1970 1960 1970 Cagayan 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 C. Luzon 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 S. Tagalog 25 17 33 22 18 16 40 11 Bicol 17 13 17 10 27 15 15 6 E. Visayas 17 20 14 22 21 21 11 27 W. Visayas 10 8 10 9 10 7 7 8 N. & E. Mindanao 17 18 15 14 10 19 16 14 S. & W. Mindanao 13 23 10 22 12 20 10 34 Source: Computed from Appendix Tables 2, 3, 4, 5 - Appendix A. 20. Sharp declines in the share of total production were experienced by Southern Tagalog and Bicol. Both areas were severely hit by the typhoons in 1970, and Bicol is also seriously affected by the cadang-cadang disease. This disease is also prevalent in Eastern Visayas and may be the reason for the relatively low number of bearing trees and the high number of nonbearing trees in the area. The Need for Rejuvenation 21. There is a general feeling in the Philippines that most of the coconut trees are over 60 years old. It is useful, therefore, to pursue the question of age. Table 4 shows the number of bearing trees in 1938 and 1970. 1/ Trees that were producing in 1938 were at least eight years old and therefore must have been planted in 1930 or earlier. Assuming that before 1930 the area planted to coconut had remained stable and that about 1% of the trees had died a natural death each year and were replaced, the number of trees that had been planted in 1910 or earlier must have been approximately 80% of the total number of bearing trees in 1938. Assuming 1/ Ramiro, M. P. "The Philippine Coconut Industry." The Philippine Economy, 8, 4, pp. 1-49 (1970). ANNEX 12 Page 6 that these trees also were replaced at the rate of 1% per year in the following 32 years, the number of trees planted before 1910 and still existing in 1970 would be estimated at 68/100x80, or 54% of the total number of trees in 1938. In the regions of Bicol and Eastern Visayas where the cadang-cadang disease prevails, this percentage must be much lower, as the susceptibility of the trees to the disease increases with age. The number of trees that was infected by the disease in some areas of Bicol had already reached an incidence of about 20% in 1931. 1/ (For this reason, no estimates are presented in the table for trees which are 60 years or older in these regions.) About 24% of all the trees in the Philippines, excluding Bicol and Eastern Visayas, are older than 60 years, although in some areas this number is as high as 50%. Table 4: ESTIMATE OF TREES OVER 60 YEARS OLD No. of Bearing Old Trees as No. of Trees Older % of Total Bearing Trees than 60 Years Bearing Trees Reg_ion 1938 1970 in 1970 in 1970 Philippines excluding Bicol and E. Visayas 64,665 146,164 34,921 24 Ilocos 226 333 122 37 Cagayan 312 669 168 25 C. Luzon 1,292 1,381 698 50 S. Tagalog 30,096 47,443 16,252 34 Bicol 13,836 22,109 - - E. Visayas 15,560 46,879 - - W. Visayas 17,972 19,553 9,705 50 W. & E. Mindanao 8,371 29,911 4,520 15 S. & V. Mindanao 6,400 46,874 3,456 7 Source: See footnotes to text. 22. These figures do not argue that the greatest part of the coconut trees in the Philippines have passed their economic productive age. This impression must have been induced by the fact that a high percentage of older trees can be found in the areas surrounding Manila in Central Luzon and Southern Tagalog. Also, rapid growth of trees in ecologically favorable areas such as Bicol, Eastern Visayas, and Mindanao may give trees an appearance older than they really are and thus contribute to the impression of a failing resource. However, an aged condition is true for some areas, and thus the economics of rejuvenation is of current interest. 1/ Price, W. C. Research on Cadang-cadang sponsored by FAO. Third session of FAO Working Party on Coconut Production, Protection and Processing, Djakarta, 1968. ANNEX 12 Page 7 23. Rejuvenation. Rejuvenation of the plantations will be justified only if there is a high percentage of old trees, and where ecological conditions are favorable for the cultivation of coconuts, preferably with the intercropping of a second group. Regions with a high percentage of old trees are Ilocos, Central Luzon, Southern Tagalog and Western Visayas. The climate of Ilocos and Central Luzon is less favorable for high returns from coconuts, especially for intercropping, because of the long dry season that causes moisture deficiencies for both crops. Also, the area and production are insignificant compared to other regions (Table 3). However, Southern Tagalog and Western Visayas are important coconut-producing regions with favorable growing conditions, although part of Western Visayas is located in Climate Zone I. Most coconuts probably grow in the Eastern part of this region with a Climate Zone III. The number of old trees in Southern Tagalog is estimated at about 16.3 million and in Western Visayas at 9.7 million (Table 4). 24. The cost of rejuvenating and interplanting a coconut plantation is estimated at ? 5,343 (Appendix B Table 1). A rejuvenation program is a difficult measure for farmers to accept, especially for smallholders. They are reluctant to cut a tree as long as it produces some nuts. In gene- ral, they also do not have the means to carry out such a program. Therefore, a rejuvenation program should offer sufficient incentives for the farmer to cooperate. The main incentive would be the expectation of a higher income. Such a higher income may be achieved by: (a) higher yields through improved techniques and using improved planting material; (b) a better quality product, bringing higher prices; (c) improvement of the transport and marketing systems to reduce handling and to give the producer a larger share of the value of the crop. 25. Essentials for the carrying out of such a program are: (a) An adequate financing system to help the farmer through a period of reduced income when older trees are cut down and young trees do not yet produce; (b) The availability of input requirements such as plant material, fertilizers, etc., at the right place and at the right time; (c) An adequate extension service to assist the farmers in the execution of their program. 26. To make the organization effective and to keep overhead costs low, it is important that a large number of farmers in each region join the program. It might be advisable to phase the program by dividing the region into districts and concentrate all the effort on one or more districts at a time. A massive action by the extension service, and eventually other agencies involved with the program, should be undertaken to persuade farmers to join the program. A 10-ha demonstration program is being planned by the BPI, and it may be of great value in providing data on the economic ANNEX 12 Page 8 results of fertilizer use and intercropping. A detailed study of the technical and economic possibilities should be carried out before a large propram is started. 27. The area of coconut planted to old trees in Southern Tagalog amounts to about 108,000 ha and 65,000 ha in Western Visayas, totalling 173,000 hectares. If owners of 100,000 ha would cooperate, the total cost would be on the order of P 530 million. 28. Recent data are not available on numbers of coconut farmers and sizes of holdings. A survey of coconut farms should be made before any rejuvenation program is carried out, but not until data from the 1970 census are available. Projections of Coconut Production for 1972-1980 29. The projection of coconuts between 1972 and 1980 will be determined by the area planted to coconut between 1960 and 1970. These estimates are shown in Table 5. (See Appendix A for explanation of projection method.) Table 5: COCONUT PROJECTIONS, 1972-80, TARGETS OF 4-YEAR PLAN 1972-75 Target Area of Copra Production /a /a Year Bearing Trees Production-- 4-Year Plan-- ('000 ha) ('000 tons) ('000 tons) 1972 1,540 2,200 1,691 1975 1,699 2,400 1,929 1980 1,964 2,800 /a In units of copra. 30. Projections after 1980 are difficult, but the hectarage planted to coconut probably will remain stable after 1980, due to a scarcity of land for new plantations and to competition from other products in oil markets. 31. Production in 1972 was already substantially higher than the plan targets for 1972-1975. A more serious problem is the poor price prospects for the additional 27% coconut products in view by 1980. ANNEX 12 Page 9 Size of Holdings and Tenure 32. Traditionally, coconuts have been a smallholders crop in the Philippines. The 1960 census showed that 68% of the farms were not larger than 4 ha, and coconut farms up to 15 ha comprised 99% of the total number of coconut farms (Table 6). Table 6: DISTRIBUTION OF COCONUT FARMS BY SIZE, 1960 CENSUS (% of total) 0.2-4.0 ha 5-15 ha 16-50 ha over 50 ha Philippines 68.3 30.7 0.9 0.1 Ilocos 94.5 5.1 0.2 0.2 Cagayan 91.2 8.1 0.5 0.1 C. Luzon 92.7 7.1 0.2 - S. Tagalog 65.1 33.9 0.8 0.1 Bicol 56.7 42.1 1.0 0.2 E. Visayas 80.8 18.7 0.5 - W. Visayas 83.2 15.9 0.6 0.2 N. & E. Mindanao 73.3 25.8 0.6 0.1 S. & W. Mindanao 53.3 44.6 1.8 0.3 33. According to the 1960 census data, 25% of the coconut farm operators were tenants, 56% were owners, and 18% part owners (Table 7). The percentage of tenants had not altered much since 1938. 34. The decisive factor in sharing arrangements is the method of crop disposal, by contract sale of nuts with husk, by husked nuts or by copra, as these systems determine the contribution of the tenant's labor to the production. 1/ When the tenant sells coconut as copra, his share may be as high as 50% of production. Where the tenant does not participate in the expense for harvesting and copra preparation, he is paid for his labor in addition to his share for guarding the farm, which is 1/7. For replanting coconut trees, tenants are paid on a per tree basis. Generally, little is done for the cultivation and upkeep of the plantation and tenants are not much more .than guards, except for some intercroppage for subsistence. Tenants have a share in secondary crops, depending on the contribution in plant material, equipment, working animals, etc., by the landlord, and in many cases are allowed to have all the products of annual intercrops that they can raise, especially vegetables. Usually the maximum plot for share operation is 4 ha because landlords believe tenants work more intensively on smaller units in order to increase their income. 1/ Castillo, E. T. "Who is the Filipino Farmer?" Paper presented at the symposium: In Search of Breakthrough in Agricultural Development, 1971. Citing Bernal, A. "A role of landlords in Philippine Agricultural Dev- elopment. An exploratory study." Unpublished M. S. thesis, U. P. College of Agriculture, 1967. ANNEX 12 Page 10 Table 7: TENURE OF COCONUT FARM OPERATORS 1939 1948 1960 No. % Area % No. % Area % No. % Area % Full Owners 61 62 68 68 56 59 Part Owners 17 12 12 8 18 15 Tenants 22 23 20 21 25 23 Others Less than 1 3 Less than 1 3 1 3 Source: Hicks, G. L. The Philippine Coconut Industry: Growth and Change, 1900-1965. Working Papers, National Planning Association, 1967. Production Methods 35. Although typhoons and dry spells may cause temporary setbacks in certain region, rainfall and soils are very favorable to coconut production in the most important producing regions. Without doubt, yields can be improved considerably in many areas by better management. Data are not available to compare soil fertility in the various regions. But, older trees show that the soil has been used for a long period and, even on originally fertile soils, soil-exhaustion may be as important as the age of the trees. 36. Very little weeding was observed under coconuts, except in the area of Tagaytay on the border of the provinces of Batangas and Cavite in the Southern Tagalog region, where commercial intercrops were grown and where clean weeding had been practiced in many fields. In general, the impression that generally little weeding is practiced was confirmed by most local authorities. 37. Barker and Nyberg conducted a survey of 1,230 coconut farms in 12 provinces in 1966. 1/ Although the study was not intended as a farm management study, some questions were asked regarding farm practices (Table 8). 1/ Barker, R. and A. Y. Nyberg. "Coconut-cattle enterprises in the Philippines." The Philippine Agriculturist 52, 1, pp. 49-60, 1968. ANNEX 12 Page 11 Table 8: FARM PRACTICES ON COCONUT FARMS Region No. of Frequency of and Farms Clearing Graze Cover Province Surveyed Plantation Intercrop Livestock Crop Fertilizer --------Percentage of Farms------------ S. Tagalog Laguna 277 1.43 84.0 11.9 6.5 7.9 Quezon 158 1.61 38.6 19.0 9.5 1.9 Bicol 182 2.31 74.8 24.7 24.7 1.6 E. Visayas Samar 192 2.29 72.4 22.9 1.5 0 Leyte 124 1.65 79.1 2.4 0.8 0.8 Cebu 118 1.58 74.6 28.0 0 0.8 N. & E. Mindanao Agusan 16 2.18 68.7 43.7 43.7 6.2 Misamis Occ 55 1.67 36.3 29.1 43.7 10.9 S. & W. Mindanao Davao 40 2.94 55.0 45.0 22.5 30.3 Cotobato 35 1.77 65.8 60.0 22.8 31.4 Zamboanga 33 1.45 36.3 48.5 36.3 9.1 Total 1,230 1.84 68.6 21.6 11.5 5.3 Source: Barker and Nyberg, 1966. 38. Farmers, on the average, cleared their plantation from 1.8 up to 2.9 times (in Davao) per year. However, no definition was given of "clearing." It may be no more than cutting some shrubs or cutting down some high grass to facilitate the collecting of fallen nuts. According to observations by the mission, the clearing of land in most places was not very intensive. Dead trees are usually left in the plantation, standing or fallen, and were not removed or burned (these trunks are excellent breeding places for coconut pests such as rhinoceros beetle). High grass and shrubs were also frequently observed in coconut groves intercropped with tree crops. The survey record of intercropping, 69% for the Philippines and 84% for Laguna, seems high, but usually only a portion of the coconut land was intercropped, and often part of the land was planted to corn!or rice for subsistence. Perennial intercrops mentioned by the authors are bananas, lanzones (lanzum domesticum), coffee, and abaca. Coconuts are very sensitive to root competition by other plants, especially where t:he supply of soil nutrients or soil moisture is deficient. In regions with poor or exhausted soils and/or with a seasonal climate with dry periois, coconuts will respond well to weeding and fertilizing. Where a second crop is grown under the coconuts, grasses and other weeds should be controlled as much as possible for the benefit of both crops; fertilizing will also be more effective where the land has been cleared of weeds. From Table 8, it can be seen that except in Davao and Cotabatu the percentage of farmers that fertilize their coconuts is very low. Even in Laguna, where a high percentage of intercropping is practiced, the percentage of farms ANNEX 12 Page 12 using fertilizers was only 7.9%. In Bicol and the Eastern Visayas, only 1.6% and less than 1%, respectively, was fertilized. The frequency of clearing plantations and of intercropping, as recorded by Barker and Nyberg, did not show much relationship to the size of the farm, but grazing, cover cropping and fertilizer-use were closely associated with farm size, being more commonly practiced on the larger farms. Table 9: MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS BY FARM SIZE % of Farmers Farm size Grazing Covercrop Fertilizer Under 2 ha 10.9 5.4 2.4 2 - 4.9 ha 16.6 9.3 2.5 5 - 9.9 ha 25.2 11.0 2.5 10 - 19.9 ha 39.0 14.3 7.6 20 - 49.9 ha 43.5 22.6 12.9 50 and over 52.4 44.3 36.1 Source: Barker and Nyberg, 1966. 39. Even on good soils, fertilizers may produce significant results, especially where such soils are relatively deficient in one or more elements. In these cases, relatively light applications of the deficient elements may produce considerable yield increases. This was demonstrated in experiments carried out at the experimental station in Davao on Tugbok clay loam soil with 15-year-old trees. The original yield of the trees was 40 nuts per tree per year. The nonfertilized trees increased their production after five years to 90 nuts per tree per year. The average production of all fertilized trees after five years was 115 nuts, but the plots treated with the best fertilizer combination -- 1.5 kg of ammonium sulphate and 2 kg of muriate of potash -- yielded 135 nuts per tree per year. Besides increasing the number of nuts, fertilizing also caused an increase in size of the nuts. As a result, copra production per tree in the best plots was almost twice as high as in the unfertilized plots, that already produced an average of about 2 tons/ha of copra, or almost twice the national average. The incre- mental net return of the treatment was V 990/ha/year. 40. Yield records of two individual members of the COCOMA cooperative in San Pablo, Quezon, showed that cultivating the land and fertilizing the trees with 10 liters of guano per tree caused output to increase from about 20 nuts to 42 nuts per tree per year, one year after treatment. However, this effect was not produced by fertilizer alone, but by the combina- tion of better management, better protection against theft, and loss of fewer nuts in the high undergrowth. 41. On one estate in Bicol, where pig-raising was introduced, coconut yields went up from about 450 nuts per harvest to 1,650 nuts per harvest, 1-1/2 years after treatment with one wheelbarrow of pig-manure per tree per year. With chemical fertilizers, the first yield increases usually ANNEX 12 Page 13 are produced only in the third year after treatment; but with organic fertilizers, especially on poor soils, the first effects are often produced in the second year after treatment especially when large quantities are used. 42. The combination of fertilizing, intercropping and grazing in a coconut plantation increases the income from the land. No general rule can be given as to where intercropping will be economic, as this depends on the crops used, the market value of the products, and the soil condi- tions. The density of the coconut plantation is also an important factor. Yields will not be influenced much by reducing the number of trees to about 120 trees per ha, or 9x9 m square (123 trees per ha), or 10x10 m triangle planting (the quincunx method, 115 trees per ha). Assuming that the inter- crop will not be planted nearer than 1.5 m to the trees and t at the tree- diameter is 0.5 m, there will be an intercrop area of 1,975 m /ha when the trees are planted 9x9 m square, and an area of 6,111 m where the 10x10 m quincunx method has been used. The quincunx method would provide a more even distribution of light and shade. 43. Although only few records exist on intercropping in coconuts, the profitability is generally confirmed. Or, as it is often said, intercropping pays for all expenses, the nut yield is the net return, but if the nut yield is reduced because of intercropping, the profits are reduced. 44. At the Tiaong Experiment Station in Quezon, in a transitional climate zone between Zones IV and I, intercropping experiments were carried out during 1952 - 1960 1/. The intercrops were Robusta coffee, Excelsa coffee, cacao, bananas and pineapples. Fertilizing was practiced. The average nut yield from intercropped coconuts ranged from 44.9 to 56.5 nuts per tree per year against 39.6 nuts for nonintercropped coconut trees. Once the intercrops attained their full bearing capacity, the gross income from them was higher than the income from coconuts (Table 10). Table 10: GROSS INCOME FROM COCONUTS AND INTERCROPS, 1952-6) (ha/year) Quantity Value Number Value Value la ntercrop IIntercrop-- Intercrop Nuts Nuts Total (pesos) ('000 nuts)(pesos) (pesos) Pineapple 9,660 2,987 7.09 424 3,411 Excelsa coffee 966 1,449 9.74 584 2,033 Cacao (Criollo) 435 1,349 11.70 664 2,013 Robusta coffee 545 1,090 8.80 528 1,618 Saba banana 426 213 9.27 556 769 Latundan banana 210 105 9.70 583 688 /a Pineapples - no. of fruits Coffee - dried berries, kg. Cacao - dried beans, kg Bananas - hundred fruits. 1/ Mangabat, G. B., and L. M. Marquez. "Intercropping in Coconut Plantation." UCAP, Coconut Production, Vol. I, pp. 80-91 (1970). ANNEX 12 Page 14 45. Intercropping reduces the risks of one-crop farming and provides more efficient use of the labor force. Intercropping will increase the farmers income and make him less dependent on credit supplied by coprabuyers; thus he will be in a stronger bargaining position, and may obtain better prices for his product. One of the main problems of intercropping is that it provides hiding places and facilitates stealing. 46. For grazing, the same principles can be applied as for intercropping, the intercrop this time being the grass. If the grass is kept short, its competition for water is greatly reduced, compared to fully grown grass. Grazing in areas with a dry season raises the problem of providing sufficient feed the year round. For grazing, Climate Zones II and IV are more suitable than Zones I and III. Grasses differ in their suitability. Cogon grass (Imperata cylindrica) should be eliminated, as it is a noxious weed. The more herbage is produced by the grass, the more fertilizer will be needed to maintain the soil fertility at a satisfactory level. Increased herbage production will provide a higher carrying capacity, which will reduce over- head costs per unit of beef produced. Barker and Nyberg analyzed costs and returns for three farming situations: (1) coconut-beef cattle breeding operation of 150 ha and approximately 1 animal unit per hectare using traditional or typical management practices; (2) coconut-beef cattle breeding operation of 150 ha of which 100 ha is improved pasture of an assumed carrying capacity of three animal units per hectare; (3) identical to Case 2 except for twice as many hectares and animal units. Cases 2 and 3 included improved techniques such as the use of fertilizers, tractor equipment, etc. The study does not include income from coconuts and the use of fertili- zer might have increased coconut yields considerably (Table 11). Table 11: RETURNS FROM THREE DIFFERENT TYPES OF COCONUT-CATTLE ENTERPRISES, 1966 (per grazed ha) Depreciation /a Capital plus Interest- Cash Grass Net Enterprise Investment on Total Capital Expenses Returns Return (V/ha) ---------------(/ha/year)----------------- 150 ha traditional 367 27 17 69 25 150 ha (100 ha improved) /b 1,979 194 241 513 78 300 ha (200 ha improved) /b 1,735 154 235 513 124 /a At 6% interest rate. /b Apparently only the improved pasture was grazed. Source: See text. ANNEX 12 Page 15 47. The cost of equipment and tools was 9% of total costs in Case 1. In Case 2, because a tractor and its equipment were used, the cost of machinery and equipment was 22%. In Case 3, the same machinery and equipment were used for twice the area, decreasing their cost to 12% of the total costs. For smallholders the use of machinery will be prohibitive, unless used cooperatively or custom hired. 48. Guzman studied 703 coconut-cattle enterprises in Mindanao in 1968. 1/ The average size of the farms was 107 ha, of which 76% was grazed at a stocking rate of 0.77 animal units per hectare. The net return was ? 152 per hectare. Cattle sales, P 50/ha, contributed 6% to the total cash income, coconuts 93%. Total income was f 865 per hectare and total expenses ? 713. No exact division in expenses between coconuts and cattle is presented. Management of the farms was far from satisfactory and apparently no ferti- lizers were used. Capital investment for pasture improvement amounted to less than 1% of the total capital investment. 49. There is a great scope for improvement in the cattle-coconut enterprises. Extension and credit for smallholders to finance cattle and fertilizers are the main requirements to improve the situation. Harvesting of the nuts is usually done at an interval of 45 days, but different systems are used in different areas. There are three methods of harvesting: (a) collecting fully mature nuts that have fallen; (b) climbing the trees; and (c) cutting the nuts with a sharp curved knife fastened to a long bamboo pole. The first method has the disadvantage that a certain percentage of the nuts fall only when they are overripe and sometimes they may have started germinating on the tree. Also, nuts that fall are stolen easier. When trees are climbed, a knife on a pole is used. Harvesting is usually done by hired teams at specified rates per thousand nuts. The team often includes huskers and haulers. Where nuts are scarce, the price per 1,000 nuts increases and vice versa. On larger plantations, harvesting is done conti- nuously throughout the year by the plantation's own labor force. Pests and Diseases 50. A recent nation-wide survey, carried out on 2,293 farms by the Bureau of Plant Industry, revealed that more trees are damaged by pests (43%) and diseases (12%) than by the forces of nature (44%). In support of this finding, the mission observed signs of pest attack on coconut trees over the entire coconut area, especially the clearly visible damage done by the rhinoceros or black beetle (Oryctus rhinoceros). However, the most destructive pest seems to be the Asiatic palm weevil (Rhynchophorus ferrugineus). Control of the rhinoceros beetle can be obtained by cleaning the plantation and its surroundings from heaps of decaying organic matter, such as manure piles and dead coconut trunks. Control of the palm weevil is a much greater problem. Seriously affected palm trees should be cut down and burned. Both pests must have natural enemies at work -- otherwise the coconut plantations would have been wiped out long ago. In fact, it is surprising that the damage is not much greater, considering the general neglect of the plantations. 1/ Guzman, M. R. de. "Economics of beef production under coconuts in Mindanao, 1968." Thesis submitted to the College of Agriculture, U. P., Los Banos, 1970. ANNEX 12 Page 16 51. The most serious disease is cadang-cadang, which has assumed epidemic proportions in the Regions of Bicol and Eastern Visayas. There are rumors that the disease recently has been observed in the provinces of Quezon, Batangas and Laguna, but these observations have not been con- firmed. The disease has been in the Philippines since 1926 and has killed millions of trees. In the four provinces of the Bicol region alone, an estimated 8 million trees, or more than one third of the bearing trees, were diseased in 1960. The cause of the disease is not known, but a virus is suspected. Cadang-cadang is rare in young trees and the susceptibility of the trees increases with age. Studies have shown that coconut can be grown profitably in spite of the cadang-cadang disease. A grower can expect an average of approximately 60% of his trees to be healthy and bearing at the end of 30 years. On the Experimental Station of Guinobatan, 7,000 trees were planted 15 years ago. Only 360 trees had become diseased by 1972, or about 5%. With normal management, the percentage of diseased trees in a grove is expected to be less than 3% at 10 years of age, less than 6% at 20 years of age, and about 40% at 30 years of age. The introduction of high- yielding, early-bearing varieties would be a great contribution in reducing the economic losses due to the disease. A breeding program to develop resistant varieties is an urgent requirement for the coconut industry in the Philippines. The disease could spread to other districts. Furthermore, behavior of an epidemic cannot be predicted when the cause of the disease and its method of transmission is not known. Copra Making 52. About 90% of all nutp produced in the Philippines are processed into copra. For making copra, the nuts are husked, cut into halves and dried. After the first drying, the nut is scooped out of the shell and then dried for a second time. In the Philippines, these methods of drying nuts are used: (a) about 88% in "tapahans," (b) about 10% in the sun, and (c) about 2% in combination of sun-drying and tapahans. An insignificant quantity is dried in improved kilns. 1/ 53. In tapahans, the nut halves are dried on a grill over an open fire. There are several types of tapahans. The smaller types have a capacity of about 400 nuts. A larger type, which is also a bit more sophisticated, has a drying capacity of about 3,000 nuts at a time. Coconut shells and husks are used as fuel. Due to burning characteirstics, the copra is often dried unevenly: the lower layers scorched and the upper layers insufficiently dried. Scorched copra is often more acid than good copra, more susceptible to insect attack. Often oil extraction, a part of the tarry deposit from the smoke, remains in the oil. Insufficiently dried copra should be reduced, but often this is not done. Usually the drying process is completed within 24 hours, sometimes in two days, by using a fire which is too hot to speed up the process. The resulting copra is dark brown, often black and scorched or leathery. 1/ Hicks, G. L. "The Philippine Coconut Industry: Growth and Change, 1900-1965." Working Paper, National Planning Association, 1967. ANNEX 12 Page 17 54. The humidity content of the copra is often 15% or more, and the free fatty acid (FFA) content is 3-5% or more. On such copra, moulds develop and insects are attracted by the odor of the decomposing copra. A good quality of copra should be dried for at least three days to a humidity content of not more than 6%. 55. Simple, inexpensive copra-dryins installations, producing good quality copra, are being used in other countries and could be used in the Philippines. Some years ago the Subramanyan process of copra making was tried in the Philippines. In this method, the coconut kernel is dipped in a chemical solution containing sodium carbonate, sulfuric acid or other chemicals, that penetrate a fraction of a millimeter into the coconut meat and protect the copra against fungus and insect attack. The cost is only about Y 1.20 per 100 kg of copra, and the yield increase about 1/.. The method is simple and needs no great skill or capital investment. The copra produced is of excellent quality and has low free fatty acid content. The treatments are all based on chemicals approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (USFDA). The use of this method would result in reduction of warehouse losses. 56. One of the great advantages of the Subramanyan, or other improved methods of copra-making, would be the prevention of aflatoxin contamination. It is toxic to many mammals, fish and birds. Although there is no direct evidence that humans are susceptible to it, contaminated products are prohi- bited in many countries. Aflatoxin was not reported in coconut products until recently. Arseculerantel/ in 1969 proved that copra is an excellent substrate for aflatoxin production. Armbrecht 2/ stated that aflatoxin was found in imported copra by the USFDA (San Francisco District) . This development may have serious repercussions on the export of Philippine coconut products, including copra, copra meal and cake, and oil. 57. There is a conflict of opinions on why better copra-making processes never caught in the Philippines. According to the National Institute of Science and Technology, trial shipments of 500 tons of copra prepared by the dipping method were not well received by importing countries. Processers claimed that they obtained 10% less oil than from the soft, spoiled quality. They also claimed they would have to change their grinders because the new copra was so much harder. However, shrinkage of the dipped copra during transport overseas is much less and the FFA content is negligible. The oil produced would be of much higher quality and need much less refining. 1/ Arseculerante, S. N., et al. Coconut as a medium for the experimental production of aflatoxin. Applied Vicrobiol. 18, 88, (1969). 2/ Armbrecht, B. H. "Aflatoxin residues in food and feed derived from plant and animal sources." Residence Reviews. 41 (1972). ANNEX 12 Page 18 Moreover, the copra cake recovery would be higher and also of better quality. According to a calculation by Emata, 1/ the value of 1 ton of dipped copra should be about 2.8% higher than that of ordinary copra. It is suspected that, by applying large discounts for lower grade copra, processers can earn more than by giving premiums for better copra. Although some price differences exist for various qualities of copra, based on FFA content, farmers often claim that they do not receive price premiums for better quality and, there- fore, have no incentives for making better qualities. Any improvement would mean an investment in more capital and/or labor. But the discovery of afla- toxin in Philippine copra and coconut oil makes the need for rapid improvement in copra-making urgent. Marketing at Farm Level 58. One of the main marketing problems for coconuts is a general lack of adequate transportation facilities. This increases the cost of production and reduces the price obtained for the product. The problem starts with the harvest. For instance, when nuts are sold to desiccated coconut factories, they have to be hauled to a distant road, where they are collected by the buyer. The cost of transport may be as much as 1 peso/km for 1,000 nuts. The poor road facilities also lead to multiple handling of copra by a large number of middlemen. 59. Generally, the farmers have no storage facilities, which weakens their bargaining position. This situation stimulates the extension of credit and advance agreement on prices, at the expense of the farmers. The complex- ity of buyer-seller relationships, embracing in some cases the advancing of goods rather than money, makes it difficult to analyze the operation of market forces in this sector of the economy. 2/ However, farm prices on the average are correlated with export prices (Figure 1). The average price received by the farmer is about 77% of the average export price. Farmers in regions near export harbors or local processing industries receive a better price than those in remote regions. 60. A law passed in 1955 requires the use of moisture meters to determine the moisture content of copra for every first domestic purchase of copra. A moisture content lower or higher than 5% would result in a corresponding premium or discount. It was hoped that the level of prices received by farmers would rise and that the quality of the copra would improve. The moisture meter has been used by the producer at the point of first sale. Apparently, however, its use has not been enforced. 1/ Emata, R. E., et al. "The Subramayan Process of Copra Making." Coconut Production, Vol. I, p. 28 - UCAP, 1970. 2/ Hicks, G. L. 1967. ANNEX 12 Page 19 61. At the barrio level, most copra, whether high or low grade, is sold on the buen corriente basis (Grade 5). Four classes of copra have been es- tablished for the domestic and export trade, each class divided into seven grades (Table 12). Table 12: CLASSES AND GRADES OF COPRA Classes Letter Designation Name Abbreviation Appearance Class A Hot air, kiln or h.a.d. Clean; whitish or pale; mechanizally dried free of smoked copra, mold and dirt Class B Sun-dried s. Dull white; low in dirt, mold, and decay; and free of smoked copra Class C Smoked or "Tapahan" sun Tinged with soot; low in mold, dirt, and decay; and not unduly charred or burned Class D Mixed mx Low in mold, dirt, soot, and decay Grades Max. Number Moisture Designation Name Initials Content Requirements Grade 1 Resecada Bodega RB 6 Free from noticeable mixture of copra from unripe nuts Grade 2 Rescada R 7.5 Free from notice- Grade 3 Semi-Resecada SR 9 able mixture of foreign materials Grade 4 Buen Corriente Mejorado BCM 12 Reasonably free of free of vermin, Grade 5 Buen Corriente BC 15 weevils, and other injurious insects Grade 6 Corriente Mejorado CM 20 No objectionable odor or Grade 7 Corriente C 22 putrefaction. ANNEX 12 Page 20 The Processing Industry 62. Most coconut oil plants were severely damaged during World War II, but the industry has been rebuilt and expanded since then, particularly over the past decade. The volume of copra crushed by the oil mills in- creased from 271,500 tons in 1960 to 760,600 tons in 1970. During the same period the share of coconut oil in the export of coconut products, in copra equivalent, increased from 9% to 52%. Most of the oil mills are located in the area of Manila, Southern Tagalog and Bicol, the older coconut pro- duction regions, but the largest is located in Cebu (Table 13). Table 13: COPRA PURCHASES BY OIL MILLERS, 1968-70 ('000 m tons) Companies Iocation 1968 1969 1970 Lu Do & Lu Ym Corp. Cebu 157 133 183 Legaspi Oil Co. Bicol & Davao 174 37 96 San Pablo Mfg. Corp. Laguna 61 61 78 Imperial Veg. Oil Co. Manila 55 44 77 Phil. Refining Co. Manila 67 52 68 Phil. Mfg. Corp. Manila 59 48 67 Nat. Investment & Dev. Corp. Leyte, Davao 43 68 60 Phil. Intern. Dev. Inc. Misamis Occidental 37 20 49 International Oil Fact Rizal 36 37 29 Central Vegetable Oil Co. Manila 11 13 23 Royal Mfg. Co. Quezon, Rizal 7 8 12 Total 707 521 742 Others 12 11 10 Source: UCAP Coconut Statistics, 1971. The use of solvent extraction after expelling is increasing. The minimum capacity of a solvent extraction plant is about 25 tons of expelled cake per day, but most plants have capacities of 50 to 200 tons per day. These quantities correspond roughly with 60, 120 and 480 tons of unexpelled copra per day. Such capacities are not suitable for small industries. After expelling, the copra cake often contains 6% of oil, but in rural industries the cake sometimes contains over 10% of oil. By solvent extraction, the oil content can be reduced to 1% or less, increasing the yield of oil by almost 10% and improving the quality of the copra meal. The coconut oil industry is facing sharp competition from other oils and from synthetics. It will have to produce at low costs and improve the quality of its product in order to meet this competition. 63. There are eight desiccated coconut factories belonging to five different companies. Originally, the factories were all located in or near San Pablo in Laguna and Quezon, where four are still operating. More ANNEX 12 Page 21 recently, three plants have been established in Mindanao. The desiccated coconut market is rather stable and no great expansion is expected in this sector of the processing industry (Table 14). For the desiccated coconut process, husked nuts are bought by weight. Ripe nuts are preferred but in times of scarcity green nuts are used, especially in the Laguna and Quezon area. The price for nuts varies within the range of f 135-165 per ton. Table 14: DESICCATED COCONUT EXPORTS, 1960-70 Year Quantity ('000 tons) 1960 60 1961 59 1962 63 1963 70 1964 76 1965 73 1966 67 1967 60 1968 72 1969 51 1970 60 Rotrcc: UCAP Coconut Statistics, 1971. The Coconut Industrialization Law, in 1955, aimed at elevating the coconut industry to the agroindustrial level, developing proper utilization of its byproducts, and promoting diversification. Appropriations of P 30 million were to be financed from the sale of bonds. Only f 1.9 million has been released under the Act, and advances were made to Laguna Coconut By-products, Inc., the Quezon Coconut Central. 64. Coir is produced by 11 main.factories, none of them very large. Eight are located in Laguna and Quezon, one in Bicol, and two in Zamboanga. There are also numerous small plants located in various areas in Luzon (Table 15). The largest factory is Laguna Coconut By-products Inc., set up in 1960 as the first rubberized coir (used for mattresses) industry of the Philippines. In nine years of operation, it made profits only in 1966, after a reorganization. The following year both prices and sales declined, as new competitive synthetic products appeared. ANNEX 12 Page 22 Table 15: COCONUT COIR EXPORT, 1963-67 Year Export FOB Value Value per ton (tons) (pesos) (pesos) 1963 297 187,643 631.80 1964 273 143,561 525.90 1965 389 214,334 510.00 1966 191 123,715 642.50 1967 292 199,662 683.80 Source: Ramiro, M.P. (1970). 65. The shell charcoal industry is not highly developed. In 1970, only 8,000 tons of charcoal were produced. Charcoal exports in 1969 and 1970 were 3,800 tons and 7,250 tons, respectively. The theoretical production potential is over 500,000 tons. 1/ There is an increasing demand for charcoal in world markets, particularly Japan. There are also a number of activated- carbon plants planned for completion soon, and the present industrial policy encourages coconut shell charcoal production. This industry is included in the Board of Investment Export Priorities Plan and in the credit priority under the SSS-ISSI Supervised Credit Program for Small and Medium Scale Industries. 66. The charcoal industry is economically suitable for small or medium scale operation. For commercial operations, an economic size plant would require 10 kilns (PHILCOA-type), which would have an annual capacity of 1,300 tons. The capacity of each kiln is 15,000 coconut shells per loading and the cycle time is three days. The conversion rate from shells to charcoal is 25%. Total investment for a 10-kiln plant is ? 123,383. Net profit in the first year is estimated at f 53,400, and in the next years ? 68,300. Charcoal briquettes can also be made from coir dust. 67. Ground coconut shells are now being produced commercially by three Philippine firms. They are being used as plastic fillers and binder fillers for the plywood industry. One company is engaged in the manufacture of table tops and cement tiles and electrical line spacers using ground coconut shell putty as lamination. Its process and its machines are locally invented. Institutions and Organizations 68. The first government policy making for the coconut industry started with the establishment of the Philippine Coconut Administration 1/ Coconut Shell Charcoal. Export industry profile for small and medium enterprises. Board of Investments, Institute of Export Development, Series 1, No. 1 (1971). ANNEX 12 Page 23 (PHILCOA) in 1954. The new government corporation was given wide authority to recommend legislation and implement policies covering all aspects of the coconut induitry. Its funds are provided by a levy of V 0.50 per 100 kg or P 1.50 per m of exported coconut products. This levy is being reduced and will be phased out by 1974. PHILOA conducts research and promotion and gives assistance to all sectors of the coconut industry but does not do any financing. 69. First priority was given to "unfair" trading practices in copra, resulting in the Moisture Meter Law, passed in 1955. In 1956 control over the quality of exported copra was given to the corporation. Since 1956, copra that did not meet PHILCOA standards could not legally be exported. In 1955 the Coconut Industrialization Law was enacted, but of V 30 million appropriated only f 1.9 million was released. In 1959, the Coconut Financing Fund was established to provide financial assistance for coconut cooperatives and coconut producers (though the release of V 5 million was much less than the V 30 million appropriated). After this, no major act was passed until the Coconut Producers Cooperatives Law of 1965, which had the aim of creating cooperatives for production, processing, and trading of coconut products. The organization and supervision of these agroindustrial cooperatives is under the direct jurisdiction of PHILCOA. But this act has never been effective. In 1966 PHILCOA proposed a four-year development plan, primarily designed to establish and operate coconut seedling nurseries. Free seedlings of high quality were to be provided for replacement of over-age trees, but funds were not sufficient to meet the target of 200,000 seedlings per year. Its production was never higher than 80,000 seedlings/year. The plan also envisioned the control of cadang-cadang and other pests and diseases as priority projects. 70. The Philippine Coconut Research Institute (PHILCORIN) was founded in 1965. The purpose and objectives of the Institute are to conduct scientific research, to compile scientific information, and to train people for the development of the coconut industry. It has not achieved much because of a scarcity of funds. During the first years of its existence, it was financed by grants, on a project basis. Since 1968 it has been attached to the National Science Development Board (NSDB). In the near future PHILCORIN may have its budget again separated from NSDB. 71. PHILCORIN administers the coconut research station in Davao. A project is being planned, in cooperation with UNDP/SF, with the main emphasis on production of improved planting material and a new 500 ha plant breeding station. The UNDP will contribute US$854,000 to this project; the government counterpart contribution will be US$6,694,750. 72. An Executive Order was issued in 1967 creating the Presidential Coconut Action Group (PCAG), with the objective of providing overall direc- tion and supervision to the industry's development program. The PCAG was to be assisted by a Coconut Coordinating Council (COCOCO). The PCAG never got off the ground, due to conflicts of jurisdiction, although it did set ANNEX 12 Page 24 up a coconut rehabilitation program which was taken over by BPI. COCOCO now has the same umbrella-type organization as the PCAG, comprising members of the Executive and the private sector. The chairman is the Secretary of Agriculture. 73. The Coconut Investment Fund (COCOFUND) was established in 1971 with the aim of accelerating development of the coconut industry through the nrovision of adequate medium and long-term financing. The COCOFUND will be administered by coconut farmers through a Coconut Investment Company (CIC). 1/ Coconut farmers will pay a levy equivalent to V 0.55 per 100 kg of copra on the first domestic sale, for which they shall receive shares of stock in CIC. The levy is to be imposed until r 100 million authorized capital stock is fully paid, but collection of the levy is not to continue for longer than 10 years. The levy is to be collected by the PHILCOA and depo- sited in the DBP or one other government-owned or controlled banking institu- tion to the credit of the Fund. Of every V 0.55, three centavos (r 0.03) is to be set aside to be used exclusively to defray administrative and pro- motional expenses. Two centavos (r 0.02) is to be placed at the disposition of the recognized national association of coconut producers, as determined by the PHILCOA for the maintenance and operation of its principal office. The / 100 million will be invested to generate funds. Implementation is planned in three phases for the first 10 years. 74. Phase One calls for the infusion of V 60 million in 600 coconut towns to provide credit through the establishment of rural banks and other financing institutions, and to organize farmers through mass action in cooperatives. At the end of 1972, rural banks were being organized in 54 towns and membership in cooperatives was 12,700. The objective is to invest CIC funds in projects of proven profitability and, at the same time, to immediately organize and involve the maximum number of farmers. The strategy is improvement of the credit system for coconut farmers. Depending on the financial capability of the "working town unit," CIC will put up from V 50,000 to V 100,000 as equity in the rural bank. A corresponding counterpart investment will be pooled by all coconut farmers in the town. The Central Bank will match the total rural bank investment and provide rediscounting facilities to support banking operations. The coconut farmers, in their town associations together with the national organization of producers, will police the management and utilization of the bank's funds. Investments will be made in cooperative credit unions, saving and loan associations, and farmer savings banks. 75. It is stated that the establishment of financing institutions in the "working town units" will logically create the situation where the farmers will: 1/ Coconut Investment Act, January 27, 1971. ANNEX 12 Page 25 (a) necessarily be involved, since they raised the counter- part funding; (b) necessarily be organized, since they are bound by a common concern for common funds; and (c) necessarily be trained, since the financial institutions will become veritable centers of information and trade. With involvement, organization and competence, coconut farmers can venture into cooperative action through investment on cooperative farming, investment on cooperative marketing, and investment on cooperative processing. 76. Phase Two will have the objective of investing in accelerated development of a vertical integrated coconut industry. The coconut industry must grow from the raw-material state to the semi-finished and finally, finished-product state. This, however, must be guided by the principles of balanced growth and totality of involvement. f 40 million will be invested in Regional Commercial and Industrial Banks to be set up in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao. Counterpart funds will be generated by the coconut producers. The collection of the counterpart funds can be facilitated through the investments arms of the "working town units." The logical consequence of organization and training, together with the accumulation and formation of capital, is the transformation of the producers' economic status. Producers can then independently venture into long-range investments in which they are major participants and beneficiaries. Investments could be made on marketing enterprises, processing plants and collateral enterprises. 77. Phase Three calls for the infusion of 10% of the Fund earnings for the training and education of coconut producers to improve their levels of competence through scholarships, travel grants, and training courses. A support activity will be the funding of research studies. 78. These proposals for CIC appear unrealistic, in that they are not based on actual conditions in the coconut industry. It will not be possible to reach all the smallholders as planned. Furthermore, it is doubtful that smallholders who are informed will cooperate with the counterpart funding, because they will not be able to understand its objectives or its function. Massive action by a well organized extension service would be required before CIC could become effective. Poor communication will be a main constraint in the execution of such a program. The training of the farmers through the centers of information at the financial institutions probably will not work, as smallholders, particularly those in remote areas, will come to town only occasionally and many smallholders will never enter the office of a financial institute. Owners of larger plantations and estates may well become the group that will benefit the most from this set-up. 79. Even if the CIC were able to establish cooperatives in 600 towns, it is doubtful if it would be able to find the personnel to staff these cooperatives, as the farmers themselves would not be able to do so. The collection of the levy started in 1972. ANNEX 12 Page 26 80. The United Coconut Association of the Philippines, Inc. (UCAP) is a private organization representing the producing, industrial, and commercial sectors of the coconut industry. Its member organizations are: - The Philippine Coconut Producers Federation, Inc. - Philippine Coconut Oil Producers Association, Inc. - Philippine Copra Exporters Association, Inc. - Philippine Coconut Administration - Association of Philippine Desiccators - Federation of Coir Producers and Exporters of the Philippines - Shell Charcoal Producers It aims at the improvement of production, marketing and industrialization of coconuts. Within this organization the different sectors can meet and exchange their views, leading to a better understanding a healthy policy. One of the important achievements of the UCAP was the compiling of all information and statistical data on coconuts in five volumes. Most of the data in this annex are based on these statistics. UCAP also strives for a reduction of the number of middlemen in the marketing of copra. Research 81. The General Fund for Research disburses about 2% of its total con- tribution to the coconut industry. This is a small contribution considering, that 20% of the agricultural land is planted to coconut. 82. Research on coconuts is not centralized. The Philippine Coconut Administration (PHILCOA), the Philippine Coconut Research Institute (PHILCORIN) and the Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) are involved in research and they all suffer from a scarcity of funds. Research is also carried out by the College of Agriculture. 83. There are four places where agronomic research on coconut is being carried out: The Experiment Station in Guinobatan, Bicol - The Experiment Station in Tiaong, Quezon - The Experiment Station in Davao, South Mindanao - The College of Agriculture, Los Banos, Laguna ANNEX 12 Page 27 84. When PHILCORIN was established, it was intended that all research on coconuts would be concentrated in this institute, but because of a scarcity of funds PHILCORIN has not been able to do much. PHILCORIN's purpose and objectives are related to: research on botanical and genetic improvements, and on agronomical problems; the etiology and control of diseases; the biology and control of insect pests; compiling scientific information; and training people for development of the industry. 85. Research on coconuts at the Experiement Station in Davao was initiated as part of the general agricultural research of this BPI station. The coconut section of this station is being directed by the PHILCORIN. The work mainly has concentrated on fertilizer programs, and good results have been obtained. Fertilizer experiments have been carried out on various other BPI experiment stations, but the results obtained at Davao are the ones usually mentioned. 86. Research in Guinobatan is mainly dedicated to the cadang-cadang disease. FAQ sponsors the research and has maintained an expert at the station since 1956. Research at this station is on a high level. 87. BPI works on breeding and the agronomy of coconut. 88. The Experiment Station at Tiaong for a long time was the only Coconut Experiment Station besides Quinobatan. It deals with fertilizing, intercropping, breeding and selection. This station is maintained by the Bureau of Plant Industry. It suffers from a scarcity of funds. Besides a contribution of about f 10,000 per annum from the General Fund for Research, the Station has received about f 20,000 per annum for two years from the BPI. This money from the BPI was diverted from other funds in order to maintain the station. This budget is inadequate. There are no funds for fertilizing trees that do not belong to a specified experiment. The average nut yield of the station is 32 nuts per tree per year. The trees look worse than those in surrounding plantations. Theft of nuts is a serious problem. No nuts can be harvested from young trees of the breeding and selection program because they are stolen before they are mature. The station was greatly neglected during 1962-64. Because of this, the results of a fertilizer experiment carried out through this period have lost their value. Meaningful results from many experiments have been long delayed. For example, the first yield from 32 foreign varieties of coconuts introduced in 1959 was obtained in 1970, after 11 years. 89. In its four-year development plan, PHILCOA envisioned the control of cadang-cadang disease and other pests and diseases as priority projects. Through its Agricultural Service Division, PHILCOA has been undertaking special projects like fertilizer-irrigation experiments in the province of Batangas, the PHILCOA ESSO fertilizer experiments on old bearing coconut trees in San Pablo, and experiments on the Lumad disease in Oriental Mindoro, laboratory research on coconut byproducts, and improvement of copra pro- cessing. ANNEX 12 Page 28 90. Research at the Agricultural College of Los Banos is restricted to cultural management and physiological research in relation to production. A small collection of different varieties is also maintained. The main part of this program for the coconut industry will be basic research on the physiological aspects such as premature nut-drop, nutrient and water requirements, etc. The rest of the program is more for educational purposes. 91. Processing and utilization research on coconut is carried out at three institutes: - The National Institute of Science and Technology - The University of the Philippines, Department of Industrial Engineering - The Philippine College of Agriculture, Department of Agricultural Engineering 92. Technological research has had more attention than agronomic research and good results have been otained in various fields. Extension 93. Aside from the activities of the Agricultural Productivity Com- mission, the official Extension Service, additional extension services are provided by various institutions. 94. PHILCOA provides extensive services by its agriculturists in the field and by technical assistance on matters pertaining to the chemical and biological control of pests and diseases, applications of fertilizers, and the care and management of coconut plantations. 95. PHILCORIN wants to establish its Extension and Training Unit for training of extension workers. 96. The Development Bank of the Philippines provides some extension work through its field officers that are involved in supervised credit programs. 97. The Bureau of Plant Industry also is involved in extension work. One of its main projects was the Demonstration Plot Project. Under this program, 52 one-hectare demonstration plots were established using improved practices. The duration of the demonstration plots was to be 10 years. The program was a failure because the farmers who put these plots at the disposition of the BPI were subsidized during only one year and were expected to cover the expenses of the next nine years. The farmers did not invest any capital or extra labor in the plots after the first year, so there was nothing left to demonstrate. Had the farmers been subsidized for at least three to four years, they would have been able to see increased production, and the plots might have become a success. But there were no funds available for longer term subsidies. ANNEX 12 Page 29 98. A new project has been designed to promote the improvement of management. This is the Ten-Hectare Coconut Farm Management Pilot Project. This project will be carried out under the Coconut Rehabilitation and Development Program. The project will operate in 25 coconut growing pro- vinces. A 10-ha project site will be selected from each province, prefer- ably a coconut farm continguous to an area owned by a group of farmers. The objectives are to demonstrate to growers that coconut production can be increased through use of improved cultural practices. Improved practices comprise tillage, fertilizing, intercropping with perennial crops, bananas and annual crops (mungo beans), and pest and disease control. Approximately 25 pilot farms will be set up in the first year, 15 in the second, and 10 in the third; these 50 pilot farms are to be maintained for at least six years from the date they are established. Supervising agronomists and trained technicians will supervise and guide the pilots projects. Production inputs will be extended to growers free of charge. Growers in the project will be encouraged to form associations or cooperatives. Members of farmers asso- iation or cooperatives will be given seminars on coconut production and proper plantation management. A massive information campaign will be con- ducted in the project sites before the implementation of the project, to evolve awareness and interest among the growers. 99. It is surprising that banan4s have been chosen as a perennial intercrop in a demonstration pilot project, because: (a) it was the least profitable perennial intercrop in a trial carried out at the Tiaong experi- ment station; and (b) there are no indications of a market shortage of bananas. If farmers in remote areas grow this crop, they may have serious marketing problems. 100. The 10-ha demonstration pilot project will not have a large immediate impact on the coconut industry, except in its immediate environment, particularly where communication is difficult. But the data gathered on the economy of fertilizing and intercropping will be of great value. A wider choice of intercrops, with consideration to local ecologic and marketing conditions, is recommended. 101. Notwithstanding the number of institutions involved in the extension work, the coverage and intensity is insufficient and its effects are limited. B. Rubber Introduction 102. Basic statistics are set out in Table 1. Hevea rubber is grown mainly on Basilan Island and in the provinces of Zamboanga del Sur and Cotabato (Mindanao). Goodyear established its first hevea plantation in Zamboanga del Sur in 1930; in 1959 it planted an additional 1,000 ha in Basilan. Firestone planted 1,000 ha in the Makilala district of North Cotabato in 1957; by the end of 1971, small estates and smallholder enterprises had increased the Makilala acreage to 10,100 ha, of which 4,000 ha including the ANNEX 12 Page 30 Firestone plantation are tappable. Smallholders' rubber is usually planted on land that has been cleared and planted before to abaca, rice, corn and other crops for several years. 103. The total area planted to rubber in 1972 is estimated to be at least 29,000 ha, or about six times the area harvested in 1960 (Table 1). There was a sharp increase in the total area harvested after 1961; then temporary decline over 1965-68 (probably due to labor strikes and low prices); and another swing took place in 1969. Table 16: RUBBER STATISTICS, 1957-70 Import Import Export Area Natural Synthetic Natural Year Harvested Production Yield Rubber Rubber Rubber ('000 ha) ('000 tons) (kg/ha) ('000 tons) ('000 tons) ('000 tons) 1957 5 2 440 1958 5 3 520 1959 5 2 396 1960 5 3 596 1961 10 4 369 1962 14 5 312 1963 18 5 287 1964 20 6 304 1965 17 6 349 1966 16 6 406 5.4 7.4 1967 15 7 429 5.9 7.6 1968 15 14 942 2.5 7.9 1969 21 18 864 1.2 8.5 1970 22 19 870 1.1 10.0 0.6 1971 3 21905/a /a 1971 23 21 905 0.05-- 4.9-- 0.8 /a First half of the year. Source: Bureau of Agricultural Economics. 104. The value of rubber production in 1970 is estimated at almost US$2 million. Output is used mainly for the home industry. The Rubber Financing Plan of the DBP 105. The Rubber Financing Plan is operated by the Development Bank (DBP) as means of providing capital for developing rubber plantations to maturity. A citizen, corporation or partnership (with at least 60% of the ANNEX 12 Page 31 capital owned by Filipinos owning.not less than 1 ha of land suitable for the planting of rubber) can apply for loan from the DBP at the rate of r 1,500/ha for family-size farms. Additional amounts may be granted for the acquisition of fixed assets or permanent improvements such as smoke- houses, machines and equipment, and for roads, bridges, and fences, not exceeding 60% of the value of the plantation and other securities. 106. The financing covers the period from planting, to maturity of the trees, in accord with the cost of maintaining the plantation. Inter- cropping is permitted for the first three years. During the third year, a leguminous cover crop has to be planted in between. In the first stage, smallholders are financed for planting rubber on a part of their land, the rest is reserved for subsistance farming until the rubber comes into pro- duction. Then the rest of their land may be planted to rubber. The first payment on the loan is due in the eighth year after planting, after the trees have been tapped for about two years. The last payment is due in the 15th year after planting. In the Makilala area, where soils are very fertile, most farmers do not apply for new loans once their first planted rubber is tappable, because they can finance additional planting themselves. Development of Rubber Planting in the Makilala Area 107. The Rubber Financing Plan has strongly stimulated rubber planting in the Makilala area. The Firestone plantations were started in 1957 and the first smallholder plantations were started in 1960. In the beginning, Firestone and DBP provided planting material for smallholders and did the lining and staking, in order to encourage the planting of rubber trees. But soon the farmers became more enthusiastic. In 1969 alone, 1,500 ha were planted to rubber by smallholders in this area. 108. Rubber is an ideal smallholder crop. Once tapping starts, the labor requirement is very regular the whole year through. The labor is not ex- cessively heavy and is done in the shade of trees. The income from a rubber plantation is very regular. Once the plantation is established, the farmers need little financing. According to information from the local DBP office, some smallholders earn as much as V 150 to # 175 net per ha per month. 109. Yields. From average yields of 300-500 kg/ha before 1967, yields increased to an average of about 900 kg/ha in recent years. By comparison, Malaysian smallholdings in 1964 were producing only about 420 kg/ha per year, but the replanted areas of large estates were producing over 900 kg/ha, or similar to the current Philippine effort. The increase in Philippine yields was apparently due to the introduction of high yielding clones in the early sixties. 110. The Makilala area is of particular interest. The high yielding Malaysian clone RRIM 600 was introduced in 1964. Rubber production in this area may be responsible for most of the increase in average yields after 1967, but the one-year jump from 429 kg/ha to 942 kg/ha cannot be explained by this factor alone. Gross average yields in the Makilala are estimated ANNEX 12 Page 32 at about 0.8 lb/tree per month, or 1,725 kg/ha, at a planting density of 400 trees per hectare. This gross average yield is expected to rise in the coming years when the young trees of the high yield varieties will mature. 111. The RRIM 600 clone has several advantages. One of the greatest is that the production decline during the three wintering months is only 35%, against 50% for the old clones. In experiments conducted at the BPI Experimental Stations in Davao, RRIM 600 growing on Tugbok clay loam soil, without fertilizing, produced 9.7 kg of rubber per tree in the third year of tapping, as an average of 48 trees in four replications. The average monthly production in the first year was 400 g, in the second year 700 g, and in the third year over 800 g/tree. Although results in experimen- tal stations are always much better than on farms, these yields are very encouraging, particularly for the fertile soils in the Makilala area. Experiments carried out on the Firestone plantation in this area showed no significant results from NPK fertilizing. The trees in this area sometimes are tappable in the fifth year and seem to reach their maximum production capacity very early. After the third year, the girth increment is only 1/4 - 1/2 inch per year. Firestone trees tapped since 1964 are not beyond 32 inches of girth. The trees are tapped every other day, using the half-spiral system. 112. During a visit to the area, some deficiency symptoms, probably Mg-deficiency, were observed in the undergrowth at several places. Although rubber should not be given too much Mg -- due to its effect on the coagulation of the rubber -- some investigation of a possible deficiency is recommended. 113. Processing of the rubber is done almost entirely at the factories of the larger estates such as Firestone and Pamintuan. Smallholder rubber is brought up, either as cuplump or as coagulated rubber. The Dry Rubber Content (DRC) is determined in the factory's laboratory. Smallholders complain that their rubber is often graded too low, although there is no proof. The rubber is processed into crumb rubber and exported to Manila. 114. At present, only a few smallholders have their own processing plant. The DBP and the Rubber Farmers Association are urging smallholders to set up their own processing plants to obtain better prices for their product. However, most smallholders do not appear interested in the extra effort required to earn more per unit. One small estate is establishing a R.S.S. plant with a capacity of 5,000 lb/day and expects to be able to offer neighboring smallholders a better price than the large estates do now. Extension Service 115. Extension services are provided by DBP officers and by larger estates that are interested in buying rubber from the smallholders. Small- holders come to the estates for information and advice, and may purchase chemicals for disease and pest control. This situation is undesirable, as it makes the smallholders even more dependent on the estates. Also, support received by smallholders in this way is inadequate, especially for those in remote areas. ANNEX 12 Page 33 116. In view of the expansion of the rubber industry in Mindanao, the establishment of a more effective extension service in the rubber pro- ducing areas is urgent -- errors committed at planting are irreparable. As a tree crop, rubber can contribute considerably to erosion control in hilly and mountainous areas, if it is planted and managed in the right way. Also, since increases in output will have to be exported (discussed below), smallholders will need sufficient assistance to assure satisfactory yield levels. The assistance of an extension service will also be required to promote the establishment of processing and marketing cooperatives. Cooperative processing and marketing are imperative for a successful smallholders rubber industry. 117. Marketing and Prices. The estates employ buyers who purchase cup- lump or coagulated rubber from the smallholders. The finished product (crumb rubber) is sold directly to the rubber industries in Manila and Cebu. Ribbed Smoked Sheet is also bought by a merchant in Davao. At present, each estate has its own classification. Since this situation is not suited to selling on world markets, government standards are required to normalize the marketing. The Malaysian standards would be suitable for exported rubber. 118. Prices paid to farmers and prices in Manila and Cebu are shown below: Pesos per lb (DRC) Local price Price in Price in Manila Makilala Davao and Cebu Cuplump V 0.60 f 0.69 RSS V 0.604 r 1.05 V 1.15 Crumbrubber V 1.27 Trends and Outlook 119. The total world demand for natural rubber is expected to increase from 3 million tons in 1971 to about 5 million tons in 1980. Synthetic rubber could replace natural rubber under the existing conditions in the remaining uses, provided it could be produced more cheaply and/or the price of RSSI variety were to exceed 20 cents per pound. 120. Rubber yields in general are expected to increase considerably, due to the introduction of high yielding clones. In view of the expected larger supply and competition from synthetic rubber, plans for rubber planting should be based on a price no higher than the 1972 prices. Price projections for 1972 CIF New York were 16.5 cents. Based on a price of US$0.165/lb CIF New York and a cost of US$0.045/lb for marketing and pro- cessing, the factory price could be US$0.12/lb or about f 0.80/lb. ANNEX 12 Page 34 121. At 1972 price levels, smallholders in the Makilala region were earning more money with rubber than with many other crop. Yields are expected to increase when the high yielding varieties come to maturity. Thus it appears that rubber has a good future in this area, as a smallholder crop. Because of the labor supply situation, smallholder enterprises will be much more flexible under conditions of flucuating prices than large estates. Cooperative processing and marketing will be a decisive factor for the outcome of smallholders rubber in Mindanao. Possibilities of Expansion 122. Rubber in the Makilala area is grown on Kidapawan clay loam soil. The total area of this soil in a wide area around Makilala is about 56,000 ha. Information is not available for some provinces, but in the provinces of Agusan and Bukidnon soils suitable for rubber planting cover 59,000 and 139,000 ha available, respectively. Another soil series, very similar to the Kidapawan clay loam soil, is the Parang clay loam soil; there are about 90,000 ha of this soil in Cotabato. Another soil that might be considered is the Tupi fine sandy loam soil. 123. As it is not known what the present land use on these soils is, nor their accessibility or the population in the area, it is recommended that studies be conducted on their suitability for the expansion of the rubber cultivation. Conclusions and Recommendations 124. Rubber may hold some promise as a smallholder crop in Mindanao although the long term price prospects are not favorable. The establishment of an effective extension service is required to safeguard the future of the smallholder rubber industry as is the establishment of processing and marketing cooperatives. C. Other Tree Crops Abaca 125. As an indigenous plant, abaca has always been one of the Philippines main export crops. In 1938 over 500,000 ha were planted to this crop. Since World War II, due to higher returns from other crops, increasing com- petition from synthetics, other hard fibers and heavy damage by mosaic disease, there has been a gradual decrease in the area planted to an estimated 155,000 ha in 1971, producing 105,000 tons of fiber, or an average of 675 kg/ha. The value of production was about V 91 million, or V 87 per kg. The main producing regions are Bicol, E. Visayas (Leyte) and Mindanao. 126. There is now renewed interest in abaca-fiber for the pulp and paper industry, particularly for the high quality stripped fiber. Stripping ANNEX 12 Page 35 can be done by hand -- very hard labor -- or with machinery. Stripping machines are simple and do not require high investments. They improve quality. Several machines can be attached to one power plant (diesel or gasoline motor). This type of processing makes the industry very attractive for smallholders, preferably for smallholder cooperatives. With the stripping done at a cooperative plant, one smallholder with his family could handle up to 10 ha. 127. Appendix C presents the cost of abaca production per hectare under Bicol and Visayas conditions. The net return in 1970 from abaca under good management in Davao would amount to f 1,943 or about US$300 per ha, and in Bicol and Visayas to V 610 or about US$95.00 per ha. The difference between the profitability in the two areas is caused by higher yields in Davao (Mindanao), due to better soils and a more favorable climate (fewer typhoons). 128. In both calculations, the lease of land is included as a cost factor. This can be discounted for farmers who own their land. 129. Pest and disease control, and fertilizing, are key factors deter- mining yield. Without good management, returns per hectare will be much less. 130. The physical planning targets for 1972-75 are a growth rate for abaca production of 2.7%, with output increasing to 123,000 tons by 1975. In view of the recent increase in prices, the new outlet for the fiber, and the familiarity of this crop in the Philippines, these targets will likely be reached and probably surpassed. 131. It is recommended that the cooperative movement be encouraged and adequate extension services be provided to assist the smallholders industry. Bananas 132. Only one firm, Stanfilco, was engaged in banana exports in 1968. Hijo plantation joined in 1969, and soon others followed. There are now 14 private firms engaged in the banana industry, and more are planning to enter in the near future. All the export plantations are located in the provinces of Cotabato and Davao in Mindanao. Some 17,000 ha were planted to bananas in 1972, and it is expected that the dollar earnings will be twice as high as in 1971. The Bureau of Plant Industry expects the area planted to export bananas to reach 25,000 ha in 1974. 133. The bananas are exported to Japan. In 1971, the Philippines supplied 17% of the Japanese market; in 1972, this is expected to rise to 40/., and to over 60% in 1974. Ecuador and Taiwan are the other main com- petitors for the Japanese markets. An increased share for the Philippines will have to be at the expense of the other suppliers. 134. All growers, major and small, have a tie-in with Japanese and Anerican companies which ship and market the bananas in Japan. These com- panies also provide know-how, planting materials, financing, and packing ANNEX 12 Page 36 houses. Efficient production calls for banana plantations to be at least 250 ha in one solid block, enough to supply one packing station and to minimize costs of transport and aerial spraying. Investment cost per hectare (to harvesting) amounts to about V 10,000. 135. The laws which restrict corporations from owning and/or leasing public lands in excess of 1,024 ha, and joint ventures between private companies and smallholders have sprouted. In the Sto. Thomas Land Settlement Scheme in Davao, where some lands are suitable for commercial banana growing, smallholders have contracts with corporations to manage their lands for the purpose of growing bananas commercially over 10 years. Each smallholder is guaranteed a minimum profit of V 500/ha, or 5% of value of gross returns, with an option for him and his family to work as laborers at ? 4.80 per day. The average farmer planting cereals or coconut in the area often nets below P 500/ha, so the contract arrangements benefit both the smallholder and the company. Cashew 136. Recently, a Cashew Production and Development Program has been set up (see Appendix D). The justification of the program is based on an expected average yield of 1.5 ton/ha, each hectare containing 150 trees spaced at 8 x 8 m. This projected yield is very optimistic: with trees grown from unselected seed, such yields could only be achieved under very favorable conditions. The rainfall pattern and soils are important factors determining yields. There should be a dry season of at least four months, during which no heavy rains may occur. Soils should be light and deep. 137. No mention is made of the type of processing equipment. However, the cost phasing shows US$470,750 in foreign exchange for the first year, and this money could well be intended for a processing industry. 138. To ensure that suitable soils are selected for cashew growing in the planned areas, trials should be conducted before large scale planting is undertaken. In the meanwhile, yield performances of the mature trees existing on different soils should be recorded to provide more information on yielding capacities. From young trees of the trials, the best performers with desirable nut characteristics should be selected for vegetative propa- tion. From the V.P. materials, seed gardens should be established for future plantings. A processing factory should only be established when an adequate volume can be produced for its supply. In the meantime, raw nuts could be exported to India where the processing industry may face a shortage of basic material (due to increased processing of nuts in Mozambique, formerly India's main supplier). ANNEX 12 Appendix A PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY METHOD FOR ESTIMATING FUTURE COCONUT PRODUCTION For estimating the output of coconuts between 1971 and 1980 the following assumptions have been made: (a) A coconut tree produces its first yield seven years after planting; (b) Of the number of non-bearing trees (or the number of hectares planted to non-bearing trees) an average one-seventh will reach the productive stage seven years later because these young trees are of different ages, all younger than 7 years. From year to year these figures differ considerably because different rates of planting may have occurred in the past. (c) On average, 3% of the non-bearing trees will be used for substitution of trees which died prematurely. This figure is rather high because of serious damage by the cadang-cadang disease in some regions. (d) There will be no significant change in level of management. (e) Average yields of copra per producing ha between 1970 and 1980 will be the same as between 1960 and 1970; 1200 kg/ha. (f) Data on number of non-bearing trees exist only for the period up to 1970, but the same trend of area-increase can be used for 1977-1980. Using the same method to compute the increase of the area of bearing trees from 1963 to 1970 from the average area of non-bearing trees in the period 1957 to 1963, one derives a figure of 215,000 ha, comparing very well with the actual difference in Table 1: 212,000 ha. Thus, this method seems viable. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Appendix A, Table 1: COCONUT PRODUCTION IN COPRA TERMS, 19.6-1970 (in long tons/2240 lbs) EX P 0 RTED TOTAL OCALLY GOrBUMED Total TOTAL Coccnut Desiccated LOCALLY Manufactured Home-mide Foodnuts YEAR Productions EXPORTED Copra Oil / Coconut 2/ CONSUMED Oil d/ Oil c/ ./ 1946 796,893 637,254 573,141 2,949 61,165 159,639 67,229 6,436 85,974 1947 1,137,480 1,004,946 925,614 38,527 40,805 132,534 04,903 5,203 32,428 1948 865,148 747,846 614,094 68,272 65,480 117,302 89,33 5,297 22,642 1949 863,032 729,008 556,613 101,820 70,575 134,024 105,(30 4,655 23,739 1950 1,028,648 893,631 (91,222 110,9.0 91,469 135,017 111,763 4,827 13,427 1951 1,076,934 935,419 760,036 122,4C8 52,975 141,515 116,537 4,437 20,541 1952 928,152 825,270 651,764 126,292 47,214 162,832 119,254 7,265 36,361 1953 913,853 741,4% 592,267 92,998 56,231 172,357 124,713 7,811 39,333 1954 1,032.364 917,C(8 758,CO2 104,337 54,729 165,296 139,8C8 4,649 20,779 1955 1,155,356 981,862 819,070 114,434 48,358 173,494 146,889 5,595 21,010 1956 1,395,290 1,202,178 968,959 179,344 53,875 193,112 162,273 9,119 21,720 1957 1,416,237 1,205,324 9S5,744 153,388 66,192 210,913 172,247 9,111 23,555 1958 1,146,052 923,338 718,260 143,988 61,090 222,714 189,337 9,318 24,059 1959 1,C47 -345 831,943 662,751 105,017 64,175 215,902 183,059 9,248 23,595 1960 c/ 1,254,633 987,045 820,894 93,526 72,625 267,588 173,721 7,058 8(-809 1961 1,179,364 882,411 694,293 116,777 71,341 296,953 184,650 6,473 105,330 1942 1,508,699 1,182,349 865,898 240,253 76,198 326,350 206,710 8,209 111,431 1963 1,724,305 1,3(3,229 940,855 337,523 84,851 361,076 221,800 7,859 131,417 1964 1,612,028 1,290,549 839,C64 370,090 81,395 321,/479 222,265 8,250 90,964 1965 1,5(1,089 1,316,457 8',5,648 383,227 87,582 244,632 2C6,7C6 14,419 23,507 196 1,636,777 1,472,822 894,/434 497,101 81,286 163,955 123,378 14,589 25,988 1967 1,415.710 1,1-6,704 750,966 372,9(1 72 777 219,106 175,019 13,572 30,515 1968 1,4C6;(07 1,192,506 676,653 428,633 87,220 214,101 171,9C8 13,357 28,776 1969 1,169,064,/ 945,755 544,742 339,380 61,632 223,309 184,5372/ 12,200 26,572 1970 1,291,647 1,019,861 416,794 530,605 72,462 271,786* 218,014 5,215 48,180 Copra equivalent of 62 percent extraction rate for coconut oil. Conversion rate to copra at 83 per cent (other research offices use 0.891 percent ratio between copro and desiccated coconut. £/ 1960-1969 homu-mz-de oils and foodnuts computod from DAE coconut situation reports. d Since most of copra cake is exported, it would appear more preferable to convert cake to copra equivalent for purposes of gotting locally crushed copra and residual locally consumed oil. S1AL e/ Estimrated SOURCE: 1946-1959 BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMJCS * Includes 377 L.T. local consumption of desiccated coconut. Depirtment of Ariculture nnd Nntural R.esources C 1960-1970 THILCFINE C0CONUr ADI NIST?nTION Diliion, Q(uezon City PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Appendix A, Table 2: PHILIPPINE COCONUT SITUATION, 1953-1970 (in thousand units) YIR ,.REu T R E E S N U T S G A T HERED (has) Bearing Non-Bearing Total Coprn Des. Cocox-t Focdnuts Homo-Enado oil Ttoal 1953 990 115,197 34,099 149,296 3,771,923 272,228 i2. 000 3518j7 4,181,958 1954 990 126,774 37,526 164,300 4,239,000 233,750 95,000 ý5 20D 4,602,950 1955 990 126,813 37,537 164,350 4,963,050 220,000 96.057 42;350 5-32,457 1956 992 126,851 37 549 164,400 5,130.CCO 231,000 99,290 43,780 ,/34,070 195? 992 126,851 37,549 164,400 5,562,00J 242,000 106,0003 41,000 5,9511CC0 1958 <96 132,0CO 33,000 165,000 5,541,003 230,00" i10,000 i2,6000 5,973.CCO 1959 1,0C6 133.254 33,316 1 580 5.37.9-8 302,610 33,,/97 4,2,288 6,0/;i;-63 1960 1,059 133,759 33,350 167>109 5,3'/6,750 2o,000 3 i5,910 32.270 6,015.933 113 1,200 149,031 35,051 185,082 5,355,183 326,080 1:83,882 29,597 6.194,~:2 1962 1,284 167,133 30, 497 197 635 6,503>287 345 259 509,1428 37,535 7-Y395, 569 1963 1,392 183.357 28,3l1 211,668 6,6?,027 368,52 600.871 35,932 1964 1,483 191,392 40,744 232;136 6,508,230 260,302 415,910 37.722 7,222.,164 1965 1,605 185,300 59,610 240,864 6,619,083 259%3é2 107,180 65,925 7,051,853 1966 1,611 185,174 55,564 244,784 6,585,530 318,794 118,821 66,705 7,089.830 196~7 1,82.' 189,157 54,507 243,664 7,285,999 437,640 139,519 62,053 7,925,211 19(8 1,801 183,960 66,471 252,431 6,938,103 281,710 131,572 61,072 7,412,457 1969.r/ 1,845 195,205 69,258 264,463 6,819,963 246,817 121,491 55,784 7,244,055 1970 1,884 215,151 57,284 272,435 7,139,279 249,645 226,193 30,089 7,745,206 _/ RoviGod outimates / Proliminry SOUCE: 11ureu tf Ariculturn1 Economioa Dennrtmont of isgriculturo and NnturoJ Resourcos, Q.0. ou I r PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Appendix A, Table 3: AREA PLANTED TO COCONUT BY REGION 1960-1970 (in thousand hectares) REGI 0 N 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 19692-/ 1970Z/ 1IIIPINES 1"059 1,200 1,284 1,392 1,483 1,605 1,611 1,820 1,801 1,845 1,884 110cos 3 3 3. 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 Cngaynn Vnllay 4 4 5 5 6 6 6 6 12 10 12 Central lazon 12 18 18 17 15 10 10 9 9 9 9 Southern Togolog 262 285 282 277 278 273 275 264 318 319 330 ic0 179 156 172 181 218 232 239 354 308 268 241 Eastern Visnyos 178 216 253 265 306 390 383 429 387 385 387 Western Visayes 1c:6 119 123 126 124 127 125 130 143 143 143 Northern & Enstern Mindnnao 176 226 238 266 275 272 272 293 268 326 333 S-uthern & Westorn Mindanno 139 173 190 252 258 292 298 331 353 381 426 R Revised estimates Froliminary SOURCEi Bureau of Agricultural Economics Deportment of Agriculture and Natural Resouroas, Q.C. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Appendix A, Table 4: TOTAL COCONUT TREES BY REGION, 1960-1970 (in thousand trees) REGI 0 N 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 197 1968 1969 V 1?70.X FAILIPPES 167,109 185,082 197,635 211,668 232,136 240,864 244,784 243,664 252,431 264,463 272,435 Ilocos 432 515 530 539 456 517 536 692 552 554 552 Cagayan Valley 721 786 817 771 920 755 836 838 1,696 1,489 1,790 Central Lueon 1,253 2,429 2,424 2,752 2,753 1,616 1,622 1,608 1,608 1,532 1,597 Southern Tagalog 49,540 53,065 47,580 52,136 52,110 48,607 52,741 41,050 52,956 53,276 56,529 Bicol 31,815 27,557 24,981 25,965 38,746 39,354 40,306 41,004 37,828 34,087 30,712 Eastern Visayas 25,338 35,252 47,993 44,207 51,196 56,683 55,801 58,569 57,916 57,647 58,674 Western Visayas 16,188 15,920 20,032 21,022 20,637 21,464 20,703 21,466 23, 557 23,054 23,222 Northern & Eastern Mindanao 23,912 29,344 30,141 33,498 33,389 32,572 32,554 36,756 31,979 39,362 40,893 Southern & Western Mindanao 17,910 20,214 23,137 30,778 31,929 39,296 39,685 41,681 44,339 53,463 58,464 R Revisod estimates F Preliminary SOURCE: Bureau of Agricultural Economics Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Q.C. 01d K- C PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Appendix A, Table 5: COCONUT BEARING TREES BY REGION * 1960-1970 (in thousand trees) RNI 0 U 1960 161 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 196 197CL/ PHIIIFPl:Zs 133,759 149,031 167,138 183,357 191,392 185,300 185,174 189,157 185,960 195,205 215,151 Iocos 265 304 365 370 280 290 329 366 334 337 333 Cagayan Valley 475 522 526 527 567 496 503 530 468 420 669 Central .uzon 1,107 1,976 1,973 2,518 2,518 1,378 1,388 1,374 1,375 1,318 1,381 SoAhorn Tfga2og 43,494 47,589 47,553 49,426 48,475 44,618 42,470 36,357 42,964 45,266 47,443 Bicol 22,815 18,960 18,198 20,117 22,126 22,008 22,586 25,414 21,878 23,329 22,109 Eastern Visayas 18,229 24,473 35,391 35,744 41,212 42,241 41,251 40,535 41,136 41,728 a6,879 Western Visayas 12,693 12,801 16,556 17,848 17,561 16,712 16,684 16,704 18,833 19,547 19,553 Northern & Eastern mindanao 20,662 25,110 26,895 29,844 29,998 27,099 28,468 33,790 25,146 27,502 29,911 Southern & Western Mindanac 14,019 17,296 19,681 26,963 28,655 30,458 31,495 34,087 33,826 35,758 46,874 Revised estimates Froliminary SOURCE, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, 1'g Dopartmont of Agriculture and Natural Rosourcos, Q.C. co0k * Trade obsirvers beliove there have been many more new plantings in Mindanao than Lunon and Visayas. VI > ro PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Appendix A. Table 6: COCONUT NONBEARING TREES BY REGION (1960-1970) (in thousand trees) R E G I 0 N 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 19691/ 1970E/ FHliPPIWES 33,350 36,051 30,497 28,311 40,744 55,564 59,610 54,507 66,471 69,258 57,284 Ilocos 167 211 165 169 176 227 208 325 219 217 219 Cagayan Valley 246 264 291 244 353 259 332 309 1,228 1,069 1;122 Central Lazon 146 453 451 234 235 238 235 234 233 215 216 Southern Togalog 6,046 5,476 27 2,710 3,635 3,989 10,271 4,693 9,992 - 8,010 9,086 Bicol 9,000 8,597 6,783 5,848 16,620 17,346 17,720 15,590 15,950 10,758 8,604 Eastern Visayas 7,109 10,779 12,602 8,463 9,984 14,442 14,550 18,034 16,779 15,919 11,794 Western Visayas 3,495 3,119 3,476 3,174 3,076 4,752 4,018 4,762 4,723 3,507 3,670 Northern & Eastern Mindanao 3,250 4,234 -3,246 3,654 3,391 5,473 4,086 2,966 6,834 11,860 10,983 Southern & Western Mindanao 3,891 2,918 .3,456 3,815 3,274 8,838 8,190 7,594 10,513 17,705 11,591 R/ Revised estimates F/ Preliminary Cftl SOURCE: Bureau of Agricultural Economics, ED Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Q.C. C oN ANNEX 12 PHILIPPINES AppEX B Appendix B AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 1, page 1 Appendix B, Table 1: ESTIMATED COST OF REJUVENATING 1 HA OF COCONUT PLANTATION First year Cost Farmer's labor P 1. Cutting down 30% of old trees, on contract basis 150.00 2. Piling, burning, and clearing 4o.5o 40.50 3. Harrowing by disc-harrow, contract basis 60.00 4. Cutting and preparation of stakes, 1 man-day 4.5o .5o 5. Staking, 2 man-days, contract 12.00 6. Digging 123 holes (60 x 60 x 60 cm) 92.00 7. Handing and distributing seedlings, 1 man-day, laanimal day 7.50 7.50 8. Mixing fertilizer with soil in the plant-holes, planting, 6 man-days 27.00 27.00 9. Planting cover crops a. Making furrows, 1 man- and 1 animal-day 7.50 7.50 b. Sowing, 2 man-days 9.00 9.00 10. Cultivating and weeding 40 man-days 180.00 180.00 11. Fertilizer 0.5 kg/tree; 90 bb/kg o.oo 12. Covercrop seeds, 5 @ 7.25 125.00 13. Coconut seedlings from BPI P. o5. 61.50 81700 276.00 Net cost 541.o (cont'd) ANNE( 12 Appendix B Table 1, page 2 Cost Farmers'sown labor P Second Year 1. Cutting down 1Flo of old trees; 50.00 Piling, burning and clearing 13.50 13.50 2. Replanting 5% seedlings (0.5 man-days, 6 seedlings) 5.25 2.25 3. Hauling and applying fertilizer (1 man-day, 1 animal-day) 7.50 7.50 4. Cost of fertilizer 0.75 kg/tree of 14-14-14. Po. bb/kg 61.00 5. Weeding around young trees (2 x per year) 145.00 145.00 and in covercrop (30 man-days) 282.25 168.25 Net cost 114.00 Third year 1. Cutting down 10% of old trees; 50.00 Piling, burning, clearing 13.50 13.50 2. Hauling and applying fertilizer (2 man-days, 2 animal-days) i.00 15.00 3. Cost of fertilizer, 1L-14-14, 1.25 kg/tree, Po. 66/kg 101.00 4. Weeding (30 man-days) 145.00 1-45.00 32.50 1.73.50 Net cost 151.00 (conttd) ANNEX 12 Appendix B Table 1, page 3 Fourth year Cost Farmers Labor 1. Cutting down 10% old trees Piling, burning and clearing 50.00 13.50 2. Hauling and applying fertilizers (2 man-days; 15.oo 15.00 2 animal days) 3. Cost fertilizer, 14-14-14, 1.75 kg/tree, Po. bb/kg 142.00 4. Weeding and keeping trees free of vines (10 man-days) 45.oo 45.oo 265.50 73.50 Net cost 192.00 Fifth year 1. Cutting down 10% old trees; Piling, burning, clearing 50.00 13.50 13.50 2. Hauling and applying fertilizer (2 man-days, 2 animal days) 15.00 15.00 3. Cost fertilizer, 14-14-14; 2.25 kg/tree 183.00 Po. bb/kg 4. Weeding and cleaning trees of vines h5.co hs.o (10 man-days) 306.50 73.50 Net cost 233.00 Sixth year As for Fifth Year Net cost 233.00 (cont'd) ANNEX 12 Appendix B Table 1, page 4 Seventh year Cost Farmers labor P 1. Cutting down 10/o old trees; 50.00 13.50 Piling, burning, clearing 13.50 22.50 2. Hauling and applying fertilizer (3 man-days, 3 animal days) 15.00 3. Cost fertilizer, 14-14-14; 2 kg/tree, 70.66/kg 162.00 muriate of potash 1 kg/tree, P.o. 7.0 kg 86.00 4. Weeding and clearing trees of vines (10 man-days) 45.oo I5.o 379.00 71.00 Net cost 298.00 Eighth year As in 7th year Net cost 298.00 Ninth year 1. Hauling and applying fertilizers (3 man-days, 3 animal days) 22-50 2260 2. Cost of fertilizer, as 7th year 21i8.00 3. Weeding and cleaning (5 man-days) 22.50 22.50 292.00 6.00 292.00 6.00 Net cost 247-00 Tenth year and later, ? 2Li7.00 *Net cost is cost for smallholders who will do the main part of the labor themselves. PHILIPPINES ANNEX 12 Appendix B AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 2, page 1 Estimated cost of intercropping 1 ha of cacao in a rejuvenated coconut plantation, in climate type II, beginning 9th year of coconut plantation Cost Farmers labor P First year 1. Cutting and preparing stakes (3 man-days) 13.50 13.50 2. Staking (4 man-days) 18.00 18.00 3. Digging 740 holes (2 rows of caco between each 2 rows of coconut, at spacing of 3 x 3m) and at distance of 1 m from coconut rows (holes 50 x 5o x 50 cm) 333.00 L. Hauling and distributing seedlings 7.50 7.50 (1 man-day, 1 animal day) 5. Mixing fertilizers with soil and planting 36.00 18.00 6. Fertilizers 0.15 kg/plant; Po. 66/kg 73.50 7. Young plants Po. 25 each 185.00 8. Putting dry coconut leaves around young plants for shading 22.50 9. Weeding and mulching caco (16 man-days) 72.00 72.00 761.00 129.00 Net cost 632.00 Second year Fertilizing (3 man-days) 13.50 13.50 Fertilizers 0.25 kg/plant; Po. 66/kg 122.50 Weeding and mulching (16 man-days) 72.00 72.00 208.00 85.50 Net cost 122.50 ANNEX, 12 Appendix B Table 2, page 2 Third year Cost Farmers Labor Fertilizing (4 man-days) 13.50 13.50 Fertilizer 0.5 kg/tree at 80.66/kg 246.00 72.00 72.00 330.50 85.50 Net cost 245.000 Fourth year Fertilizing (4 man-days) 18.00 18.00 Fertilizers 1 kg/tree at 80.66/kg 49o.oo Weeding and upkeep 16 man-days 72.00 72.00 Disease and pest control (contract) 250.00 830.00 90.00 Net cost 740.00 ANNEX 12 Appendix C Table 1, page 1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Appendix C, Table 1: COST OF ABACA PRODUCTION PER HECTARE FOR FIBER PRODUCTION UNDER DAVAO CONDITIONS* (Open Land and Planted Square Method at 2.5 m. x 2.5 m.) Items of Expenditure Man-days Amount A. Development Cost (Two Years): 1. Land preparation ............................. 10.00 f 47.50 2. Preparation of stakes ........................ 1.25 5.94 3. Lining and staking ........................... 3.00 14.25 4. Digging of holes, distribution of seedpieces and planting .................... 13.50 64.13 5. Replanting 10% dead and unhealthy hills ...................................... 1.25 5.94 6. Planting shade trees ......................... 2.00 9.50 7. Furrowing for cover crop .................... 1.00 4.75 8. Planting of cover crop ....................... 2.00 9.50 9. Weeding 4 times at quarterly inter- vals during the first year ................. 37.50 178.13 10. Underbrushing and cutting of dried leaves 4 times at quarterly inter- vals during the 2nd year ................... 20.00 95.00 11. Application of fertilizer, 8 times at quarterly intervals ..................... 16.00 76.00 12. Pest and disease control ..................... 20.00 95.00 13. Cost of 1760 seedpieces including 10% for replanting @PO.08/piece and hauling from source to plan- tation at an average distance of 5 km. @PO.16/ton-km. or P1.88/1000 seedpieces .......... - 144.10 14. Cost of 120 shade tree seedlings @PO .20 ..................................... - 24.00 15. Cost of 10 kilos cover crop (Peren- nial mongo @P .50/kilo) .................... - 15.00 16. Cost of 12 bags ammonium sulfate & 4 bags of muriate of potash at P18.85 & P32.20/bag, respectively .......... - 355.00 17. Lease of land @250.00/ha./Yr. ............... - 500.00 18. Fixed investment (Based at an invest- ment of P15,000 for 20 has.) ............... - 750.00 19. Depreciation ................................. - 150.00 Total for Development Cost ................. - P 2,543.74 * Based at 100% stand, using recommended cultural practices and at a wage rate of P4.75/day except the stripper which is rated at P6.00/day. ANNEX 12 Appendix C Table 1, page 2 Items of Expenditure Man-days Amount B. Cperating Cost (Third and Succeeding Years): 1. Underbrushing and cutting of dried leaves, 4 times at quarterly inter- vals ..................................... 20.00 P 95.00 2. Applying fertilizer, 4 times at quarterly intervals ...........era....s. 8.00 8.00 38.00 3. Pest and disease control .............l0...... 10.00 47.50 4. Topping and tumbling of approximately 192 m. t. fresh stalks (1,600 hills x 4 stalks x 30 kl s.) ....................... 0.13/m.t. 119.04 5. Piling of 192 m. t. fresh stalks at an average distance of 12.25 m. ............... 0.095/m.t. 86.40 6. Preparation of 42.24 m.t. tuxies (22% of fresh stalks) ...................... 1.7/m.t. 351.12 7. Hauling of 42.24 m.t. of tuxies at an average distance of 25 m. within plantation to roadside .......ad......... 0.19/m.t. 38.12 8. Hauling of 42.24 m.t. of tuxies at an average distance of 1 km. at P1.50/ton ..... - 63.36 9. Spindle stripping of an estimated produc- tion of 45.5 piculs (192 x 1.5% recovery) . 273.00 10. Drying, sorting and bundling of 45.5 piculs ..................................... 22.8 108.30 11. Cost of 6 bags of ammonium sulfate & 2 bags of muriate of potash at P18.85 & P32.20/bag, respectively .....p........ - 177.50 12. Fuel and lubrication, 2 gallons diesel fuel/day and F0.20 oil and grease/day....... - 84.43 13. Land lease at P250.00/ha./Yr. ............... - 250.00 14. Depreciation ciation..... ................ - 75.00 15. Amortization of Development Cost ...o.st..... - 254.37 Total for Operating Cost ................... V2061.1 STATEMENT OF INCOME Gross income from 45.5 piculs of abaca fiber at P88.00/picul ................................... F,004.00 Less operating cost ................................. 2,061.14 Net Yearly Income per Hectare ....................... . 94286 Source: Garcia, A. C. Abaca Culture for fiber production. Abaca & other fibres Development Board. Manila, 1970. ANNEX 12 Appendix C Table 2, page 1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Appendix C, Table 2 COST OF ABACA PRODUCTION PER HECTARE FOR FIBER PRODUCTION UNDER BICOL AND VISAYAS CONDITIONS * (Open Land & Planted Square Method 2.5 x 2.5 m.) Items of Expenditure Man-days Amount A. Development Cost (Two Years): 1. Land preparation 10.00 P 47.5o 2. Preparation of stakes 1.25 5.94 3. Lining and staking 3.00 14.25 4. Digging of holes, distribution of seedpieces and planting 13.50 64.13 5. Replanting 10 percent dead and unhealthy hills 1.25 5.94 6. Planting shade trees 2.00 9.50 7. Weeding [ times at quarterly intervals during the 1st year 37.50 178.13 8. Underbrushing and cutting of dried leaves 4 times at quarterly intervals during the second year 20.00 95.00 9. Application of fertilizer, 8 times at quarterly intervals 16.00 76.00 10. Pest and disease control 7.00 33.25 11. Cost of 1760 seedpieces including 10 percent for replanting @ PO.08/piece and hauling from source to plantation at an average distance of 5 km. @ PO.16/ton-km. or P1.88/1000 seedpieces - 14.10 12. Cost of 120 shade tree seedlings @ PO.20 - 24.00 13. Cost of 12 bags ammonium sulfate and 4 bags of muriate of potash at P18.85 & P32.20/bag, respectively - 355.00 14. Lease of land @ P150.00 ha/year - 300.00 15. Fixed Investment (Based at an investment of P8,000 for 20 hectares) - 400.00 16. Depreciation - 80.00 Total for Development Cost P1,832.74 Based at 100 percent stand of plantation, utilizing recommended cultural practices and a wage rate of Ph.75/day except the stripper which is rated at P6.00/day ANNEX 12 Appendix C Table 2, page 2 Items of Expenditure Man-days Amount B. Operating Cost (Third and Succeeding Years): 1. Underbrushing and cutting of dried leaves 20.00 P 95.00 2. Applying fertilizer, 4 times at quarterly intervals 8.00 38.00 3. Pest and disease control 3.50 16.63 4. Identification, tumbling and topping of approximately 160 m.t. fresh stalks (1,600 hills x 5 stalks x 20 kilos) 0.13/ 99.20 m.t. 5. Piling of 160 m.t. fresh stalks at an average distance of 6.25 m. 0.0h75/ 36.80 m.t. 6. Preparation of 24 m.t. tuxies (15 percent of fresh stalks) 1.7/m.t. 193.80 7. Hauling of 24 m.t. taxies at an average distance of 25 m. 0.19/ m.t. 21.66 8. Hand stripping an estimated production of 25 piculs (160 m.t. x 1 % recovery) 50.00 300.00 9. Drying, sorting, bundling and hauling 8.00 38.00 10. Cost of 6 bags of ammonium sulfate and 2 bags of muriate of potash at P18.85 & P32.20/bag, respectively - 177.50 11. Land lease at P150.00/ha. yr 150.00 12. Depreciation - 40.00 13. Amortization of Development Cost 183.27 Total for Operating Cost P1389.86 STATEMENT OF INCOME Gross income from 25 piculs of abaca fiber at P80.0/picul 2,000.00 Less Operating Cost per Hectare 1,389.86 Net Yearly Income per Hectare P 610.14 Source: Garcia, A.C. Abaca Culture for fiber production Abaca and other fibres Development Board Manila, 1970 ANNEX 12 Appendix D Page 1 CASHEW PRODUCTION DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Project Objectives 1. To develop the local cashew industry through modern and scientific cultural methods. 2. To devise a system through which farmers will be encouraged to in- crease their cashew acreage. 3. To develop practical and feasible processing methods for the cashew apple, nuts and their by-products. 4. To study, improve and develop the marketing system of cashew nuts. Physical Description of the Project The project will cover approximately 5,000 hectares in Ilocos Norte under Region I and approximately 8,000 hectares in Palawan under Region IV. Project Cost Estimates A. Totals broken down to expenditures for: 1. Labor 303,360 2. Materials 114,500 3. Equipment 3,351,250 h. Miscellaneous 100,000 B. Totals broken down into: 1. Foreign exchange component $478,750 2. Local currency component Y517,860 C. Cost phasing on annual basis 1. Roreign currency - $478,750 (First Year) 2. Local currency component a. First Year Y326,400 b. Second Year 517,860 c. Third Year 517,860 d. Fourth Year 517,860 e. Fifth Year 517 860 Total V 237,0 Project Justification A. Economic benefits vs. costs: Benefit/cost ratio: The total cost of the program for five years is approximately 05,749,130. Nut production from 8,000 hectares would be 19,500 metric tons of raw nuts (each ha yielding 1.5 metric tons and each hectare containing 150 trees at 8x8 meters). For a guide, let us say that a ton would bring the farmer $100 ANNEX 12 Appendix D Page 2 although this is below the average sale price of nuts from East Africa to India but could be the above the price for nuts from local sources. Hence, 19,500 metric tons would gross $1,950,000 or some 113,650,000 at the end of the five years. B. Socio-economic impact on the following levels: 1. National government in relation to the h-year plan - This program would be in support of the fruit and vegetable program of the National Food and Agriculture Council. 2. This program would enhance the development of Ilocos Norte and Palawan where approximately 6,000 farmers would benefit from it. Furthermore, marginal lands in these two provinces would be utilized. It is also believed that growing this tree crop on the barren lands and hillsides of Ilocos Norte would prevent massive erosion from tak- ing blace in this province and, at the same time, remendously affect the micro-climate of this region. Project Status 1. A preliminary survey has been made on the cashew tree population of Palawan where it was found that 473,954 bearing and 534,102 nonbearing trees exist. 2. In 1970-71, the Bureau of Plant Industry launched a cashew-planting project in Ilocos Norte where 142,000 seedlings in plastic bags were distributed to interested farmers. 3. For FY 1971-72, 700 kilos of seeds or approximately equivalent to 112,000 seedlings were sown, grown and distributed in the second district of Ilocos Norte. 4. So far, only the Bureau of Plant Industry is involved in this project. Implementation Schedule 1. Implementing agency is Bureau of Plant Industry. 2. Timetable and phasing of project: a. Nursery establishment 1973 b. Seedling production 1970-1975 c. Research phase 1973-1978 d. Extension phase 1973-1978 AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY PHILIPPINES ANNEX 13. LAND REFOR4 AND SETTLEMENT ANNEX 13 Page 1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY LAND REFORM AND SETTLEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. A. Recent Developments ........................................ 1 B. Resource Base and Land Pressure ............................ 5 C. History, Institutions and Programs ......................... 8 History ............................................... 8 The Land Reform Program and its Organization .......... 10 D. Land Reform ................................................ 11 Mechanics of Land Reform .............................. 11 Land Reform Achievements .............................. 12 E. Land Settlement ............................................ 19 Mechanics of Land Settlement .......................... 19 Land Settlement Achievements .......................... 21 F. Problems and Issues in Land Reform and Land Settlement ..... 22 Administration of Land Reform and Land Settlement ..... 22 Marketing in Land Settlements ........................ 23 Credit ................................................ 23 The Economic Size Farm ............................... 25 Improving the Legal Process ........................... 25 Financing Land Reform ................................. 26 Private Sector Participation in Land Settlements ...... 26 Land Classification, Cadastral Surveys and Land Titling 29 Land Reform/Settlement and Peace-and-Order Problems ... 29 G. Improving Land Settlement .................................. 30 ANNEX 13 Page 2 Appendix 1: Land Availability in the Philippines Tables 1.1: Functional Land Classification, 1971 1.2: Alienable and Disposable Land Use 1.3: Public Forest Land Use 1.4: Sources of Available Land for Cultivation Appendix 2: World Bank 7087 - Organizational Chart of the National Land Reform Administration Appendix 3: World Bank 7086 - Organizational Chart of the Department of Agrarian Reform Appendix 4: Status of Settlement and Edcor Farm Projects, February 1972 (Table) ANNEX 13 Page 1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY LAND REFORM AND SETTLEMENT A. Recent Developments 1. Share tenants make up perhaps 40% of all farmers in the Philippines; most are engaged in rice and corn production. As a group they rank among the poorest in the nation. Since 1963, the expressed intent of government has been to convert them into owner-cultivators on economic family - size farms. On the whole land reform and land settlement programs have made very limited progress toward this end. By 1971, little more than 50,000 share croppers, only 5% or so of the total, had been converted to lease holders with secure tenure on the farms they cultivated and more favorable crop sharing arrange- ments, which increased their incomes although farm productivity was much the same as under share cropping. This was the first stage of the program. The second state of full-ownership has been accorded to only about 3,400 farm families (including those pending court approval). There has been little consolidation of holdings into "economic - size" farms. 2. Following the declaration of martial law, President Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 27 on October 21, 1972, which is reproduced below: By the President of the Philippines Presidential Decree No. 27 Decreeing the Emancipation of Tenant from the bondage of the soil, transferring to them the ownership of the land they till and providing the instruments and mechanisms therefore, Inasmuch as the old concept of land ownership by a few has spawned valid and legitimate grievances that give rise to violent conflict and social tension, The redress of such legitimate grievances being one of the fundamental objectives of the New Society, Since Reformation must start with the emancipation of the tiller of the soil from his bondage. ANNEX 13 Page 2 Now therefore, I Ferdinand E. Marcos, President of the Philippines, by virtue of the powers in me vested by the Constitution as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, and pursuant to Proclamation No. 1081; dated September 21, 1972, and General Order No. 1 dated September 22, 1972, as amended do hereby decree and order the emancipation of all tenant, farmers as of this day, October 21, 1972; This shall apply to tenant farmers of private agricultural lands primarily devoted to rice and corn under a system of sharecrop or lease-tenancy, whether classified as landed estate or not; The tenant farmer, whether in land classified as landed estate or not, shall be deemed owner of a portion consti- tuting a family-size farm of five (5) hectares if not irrigated and three (3) hectares if irrigated; In all cases, the landowner may retain an area of not more than seven (7) hectares if such landowner is culti- vating such area or will now cultivate it; For the purpose of determining the cost of the land to be transferred to the tenant-farmer pursuant to this Decree, the value of the land shall be equivalent to two and one- half (2-1/2) times the average harvest of three normal crop years immediately preceding the promulgation of this Decree; The total cost of the land, including interest at the rate of six (6) percentum per annum, shall be paid by the tenant in fifteen (15) years of fifteen (15) equal annual amorti- zations; In case of default, the amortizations due shall be paid by the farmers' cooperative in which the defaulting tenant- farmer is a worker, with the cooperative having the right of recourse against him; The government shall guarantee such amortizations with shares of stock in government - owned and government - controlled corporations; No title to the land owned by the tenant - farmers under this Decree shall be actually issued to a tenant-farmer unless and until the tenant-farmer has become a full- pledged member of a duly recognized farmers' cooperative; ANNEX 13 Page 3 Title to land acquired pursuant to this Decree or the Land Reform Program of the Government shall not be transferable except by hereditary succession or to the Government in accordance with the provisions of this Decree, the Code of Agrarian Reforms and other existing laws and regulations; The Department of Agrarian Reform through its Secretary is hereby empowered to promulgate rules and regulations for the implementation of this Decree. All laws, executive order, decrees and rules and regu- lations, or parts thereof, inconsistent with this Decree are hereby repealed and or modified accordingly. Done in the City of Manila this 21st day of October, in the year of Our Lord, nineteen hundred and seventy two. (Sgd) F. E. Marcos 3. At the time, this report was prepared, the development of the program was at an early stage and handicapped by lack of data on the numbers of tenants and landlords, and the size, distribution and location of their holdings. It was estimated that there are about one million tenants on approximately 1.8 million ha of rice and corn lands held by some 350,000 landlords. It is believed that about 80% of the landlords have holdings of less than 7 ha. If this latter group is exempted, a large number of the share tenants would not be under the program. Further, the exemption of all non-tenanted rice and corn land would place outside of the program an area larger than the tenanted area, although again these lands appear to be largely in small holdings and the extent to which these are in larger owner-operated units is not known. 1/ Thus, the Decree, narrowly interpreted would appear to offer little opportunity for land redistribution or to enlarge the size of tenant holdings which now average about 1.8 ha. 4. In any case, there is not enough rice and corn land to satisfy the criteria of economic farm units of 3 ha of irrigated land or 5 ha of non- irrigated land for all farms whether owner-operated or tenanted. The total number of rice and corn farmers probably exceeds 2 million whereas the total of rice and corn lands is not much more than 4 million ha, of which consider- ably less than 1 million ha are irrigated. While these criteria do not appear to be attainable, it should be noted that rice and corn yields are low and there is a large potential to increase production on present small holdings from HYV technology, expansion of irrigation and dry season crop- ping. In view of the slim prospects for effecting much in the way of larger sized units, the main priority for land reform appears to be in improving 1/ Landowners holding 100 ha or more have been directed to report their holdings by January 31, 1973, and those with lesser holdings by June 30, 1973. ANNEX 13 Page 4 the situation for tenants on lands which they presently occupy, although programs of land redistribution and new land settlements can help alleviate to some extent the situation for those with very small holdings. 5. Even if the land reform program is substantially limited over the next 4 or 5 years to transforming present tenants into owner-cultivators, the administrative and financial capacity of the Philippine government will be severely tested. To identify tenants, conduct the necessary land surveys, determine the normal yields to arrive at the value of land to be paid to landlords, and establish cooperatives (in which membership has been made a pre-condition for a certificate of title to be issued) will require a sharp expansion of government manpower concerned with these activities. Nor, as the government recognized, will it be enough to provide land titles without providing the means for the new owner to improve productivity of his holding. This will require production credit, partly to supplant that previously supplied by the landlord, effectively supervised to ensure its appropriate use and a large component of technical advisory extension services which may require perhaps 1 extension technician for 200 farms whereas the overall ratio for all farms in the Philippines is at present on the order of 1 to 1,400 and the ratio for share tenants even more inadequate. Moreover, the infrastructure program in land reform area, particularly irrigation, rural roads and market facilities where these are inadequate, will need to be substantially accelerated. 6. Presidential Decree No. 85 dated December 24, 1972 established an Agrarian Reform Fund of some 1 2 billion of government assets and guarantee funds to finance and guarantee payment to landowners for land acquired by tenants as well as to guarantee loans as to former tenants for production purposes made by credit institutions, primarily the rural banks but also by other institutions where rural bank services are not available or inadequate. 7. Preliminary plans of government are to offer landowners several payment options: (a) Straight 15-year payment at 6% interest. The Agrarian Reform Fund will guarantee payment in the event the tenant defaults; (b) Cash payment of 10% and balance in 25-year tax free bonds at 6% interest; (c) An annuity of up to 15 years at which time the full purchase price is paid. An insurance feature provides for immediate payment in the event of death of the landlord within the first 7 years. In the event of death of the tenant, optional insurance could provide relief for his heirs; (d) A leasehold plan similar to the existing program; (e) Exchange for shares in portfolio of assets held by the Agra- rian Reform Fund. ANNEX 13 Page 5 8. Based on experience with loans made by the Agricultural Credit Administration in land reform areas, government anticipates fairly high rates of default at least in the first few years of the program. Require- ments on the Agrarian Reform Fund for transfer of all tenanted land are expected to total some P 1.2 billion within the next 5 years. Production credit extended by rural banks and other institutions for tenanted lands is projected to require expansion of r 350 millions of institutional credit by the fifth year, again with high default rates anticipated in the initial years. In the event of continued defaults other than by reasons of forces beyond the control of the tenant, production credit will be cut off and government will take over the land. Whether high default rates actually materialize will depend substantially on the effectiveness of the supporting services of supervised credit and advisory extension activities. 9. By 1972, organized land settlement had covered only about 26,000 families, most of whom were already squatters on the land. Experience with land settlements has not been satisfactory, largely a result of limited supporting services provided by government, and because of location in remote areas, difficulties in marketing and transportation. By far most of the new lands brought under cultivation during the past decade has been developed by squatters, frequently on lands unsuitable for cultivation. There are perhaps a million ha or so of forest and other lands (exclusive of cogon lands) which can be made available for settlement, mostly in Cagayan Valley, Mindanao, Palawan and perhaps Mindoro. This would roughly approximate the area taken over by squatters in the past decade. Thus:, the major contribution of organized land settlement would be to offer better opportunities for those who are migrating while at the same time reducing the ills of erosion and loss of land to cogon grass which has attended the movement of squatters onto hillsides. Land settlement offers only a very limited potential to restructure Philippine agriculture into larger sized units. B. Resource Base and Land Pressure 10. The 1970 population of the Philippines, 36.7 million, represented an increase over the last decade of 9.6 million, or 35.4%. Population grew fastest in Southern Tagalog, Southern Mindanao and Sulu, Northern Mindanao and the Cagayan Valley (Table 1). Mindanao provinces, including Davao Orien- tal, Lanao del Sur, and Agusan del Sur, almost doubled their population. Bukid- non increased its population by 113%. These high rates of growth were mainly due to migration from areas which recorded below average population growth rates. These are both the Western and Eastern Visayas and the Manila area, including suburbs, and also Bicol and Ilocos. 11. The population density of 122 people/sq km is much higher than the Asian average of 86. The lowest density regions are Northern and Southern Mindanao and the Cagayan Valley. Despite its relatively low density, Mindanao is subjected to increasing land pressure resulting in dangerous Table 1 : IOPUIATION, LAND AREA, PERCENT CHANGE, DENSITY AND PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION BY REGION AND PROVINCE: 1948 TO 1970 Percent of total Poalation Land Area Percent CaLipe Density Population Region and Provinces 190 P lt ( 1948 SUE a of Pe 19t8C 1970 DNOy 198 1970 1 ita 198 ________________(may 6) (Feb 15) (Oct 1) total 1970 1960 _____________ Philippines 36,684,486 27,087,685 .9,234,182 300,000.0 100.00 35.4 40.8 123.1 90,8 64.1 100.oo loo.00 loo.oo Region I - Manila & Suburbs 1,330,788 1,138.011 983,906 38.3 .01 16.9 15.7 34,746.4 29,728.7 25,689.4 3,63 4.20 5.12 Region II - Ilocos and Mt- Province 1,833,154 1,469,753 1,129,793 25,765.6 8.59 2h.7 30.1 71.1 57.0 43.8 5.00 5.43 5.87 Region III - Cagayan Valley and Batanes 1,462,723 1,035,750 669,086 26,837.7 8,95 41.2 54.8 54.5 38.6 24.9 3.99 3.82 3.48 Region IV - Central Luzon 5,100,095 3,690,996 2.774,680 23,646.1 t.88 38.2 33.0 215.7 156.1 117.3 13.90 13.63 14.43 Region V - Southern Luzon and Islandq 6,827,377 4,231,973 2,543.602 46,118.7 15.37 61.3 66.4 148.0 91.8 55.2 18.61 15.62 11.22 Region VI - Bicol and Masbate 2,966,881 2,362,707 1,666,459 17,632.5 5.88 25.6 41.8 168.3 134.0 94.5 8.09 8.72 8.66 Region VTT - Western Visayas 3,785,408 3,209,963 2,639,334 21,579.1 7.19 17.9 21.6 175.6 148.8 122.3 10.32 11.85 13.72 Region VIII - Eastern Visayas 5,414,128 4,563,768 3,884,078 36,383.1 12.13 18.6 17.5 148.8 125.4 106.7 14.76 16.85 20.19 Region IX - Northern Mindanao 3,016,865 2,111,291 1,376,034 39,844.9 13.28 4p.q 53.4 75.7 53.0 34.5 8.22 7.80 7.16 Region X - Southern Mindanao and Sulu 4,947,067 3,272,873 1,567,290 62,153.9 20.72 51.2 108.b 79.6 52.7 25.2 13.48 12.08 8.15 1/ Suburbs are included in their mother Province. bource: Bureau of Census and Statistics. ANNEX 13 Page 7 conflicts over land ownership. These have involved difficulties between Christian settlers and Moslems or other non-Christian minorities, and loggers versus pasture leaseholders or landowners. The commander of the IV Military Zone of Mindanao estimates that more than four-fifths of "law-and-order" problems in his area stem from land conflicts. The bloody Christian-Moslem conflicts in Northern Cotabato, which contributed to the rice shortage, have their roots in the battle for land. 12. The assessment of land available for cultivation is imperative in light of the current situation. Of the 30 million ha land area, some 21.0 million ha has been classified (Table 2). Land classification of the rest of the Philippines is well underway, but results are not expected till 1974. Table 2: STATUS OF LAND USE Million Hectares Classified Land 21.4 Public Forest Land 8.8 Alienable and Disposable Land 12.6 Of Which: Cultivated Land (7.4) Forest (3.1) Open Land (1.7) Urban and Other (0.4) Unclassified Land 8.6 Total Land Area 30.0 13. Given the latest information from the Bureau of Forestry and the Bureau of Lands, a process of elimination (see Appendix 1, Table 1.3) gives some indication of the potential sources of available land for cultivation. Of the 7.5 million ha of dipterocarp forest, perhaps 0.5 million ha might be released for cultivation. Open land and land under regeneration brush would probably yield another 2 million ha, although some may already be occupied or otherwise disposed of, or require eradication of cogon grass. A rough estimate would yield in the range of 1.0-1.5 million ha of unused cultivable area; with an additional 1 million ha of cogon grass lands, providing these can be rehabilitated economically. Such information as is available indicates that most of these lands are in the Cagayan Valley, Mindanao and Palawan. An estimate of perhaps 500,000 ha for Mindanao would roughly conform to Huke's assessment of cultivable area in Mindanao (Table 3); 1/ coming from: (i) the 4.4 million ha of cultivable land, some of 1/ Robert E. Huke, Shadows on the Land: An Economic Geography of the Philippines, 1972. ANNEX 13 Page 8 which is not under crop; and (ii) open land (cogon), less than 10% slope, arising from portions of the area categorized by Huke as "areas made non- agricultural by nature". Table 3: MINDANAO: LAND CLASSIFICATION Area Made Nonagricultural Slope Total Area By Nature /a By Man /b Cultivable Area -------------------------------- Hectares --------------------------------- 0 - 2% 1,993,590 232,957 176,054 1,584,489 2 - 6% 1,440,912 288,182 115,273 1,037,457 6 - 10% 1,480,258 592,103 88,815 799,340 10 - 20% 2,843,078 1,705,846 113,723 1,023,509 Over 20% 22112,022 2,112,022 0 0 Total 9,869,860 4,931,110 493,865 4,444,759 /a Swamps, rocks, outcrops, thin or eroded soils or local surface iregularities. /b Populated areas, canals, schools, etc. C. Land Reform: History, Institutions and Programs (Prior to Presidential Decree No. 27) History 14. Spanish colonizers in the 16th century introduced a tenure system based on the encomienda, a feudal land holding granted to Spanish settlers which gave them extensive rights over the native inhabitants, who become bondsmen of the landlord. 1/ Spanish settlers intermarried with the local chiefs and created a landowner class and a well-established, crop-sharing system. Extensive land grants in the 17th century resulted in the establish- ment of church- and friar-owned estates. In the 19th century, considerable land accumulations were made by merchants (ranging from 50 to several hundred hectares each), mainly Chinese mestizos. 2/ In the 1920's and 1930's, there appeared a new class of landlords comprised mainly of middle-class wage earners, government officials (many children of former tenants), who bought land (usually up to about 40 ha each) from the larger landlords with their own savings. 1/ C. P. Fitzgerald, A Concise History of Southeast Asia, Frederick Praeger, New York, 1966. 2/ Edgar Wickberg, "The Chinese Mestizo in Philippine History", Journal of Southeast Asian History, Vol. 1, 1964, pp. 75-76. ANNEX 13 Page 9 15. Land reform measures began under American rule at the turn of the present century, when 153,000 ha of friar land was purchased by the Government and redistributed to peasants. The extent of public redistribution was, however, limited by the new Land Law later adopted. American political dependence on landlords for the rapid growth of Philippine exports dissuaded the colonial government from actively pursuing land reform, although it did promote homesteading and colonization. Various legislation was enacted between 1933 and 1954/55 (such as dividing the farm product between tenant and land owner), but there was no provision for implementation and enforce- ment. 16. President Magsaysay mounted a massive land reform program, starting with the creation of the National Resettlement Rehabilitation Administration (NARRA) and the Agricultural Tenancy Commission (ATC) in 1954, the Court of Agrarian Relations (CAR) and the Land Tenure Administration (LTA) in 1955. Nearly all of these programs have been marred by disorganization and inefficiency. NARRA for example was able to resettle only 15,000-30,000 farmers by 1958. 1/ The Tenancy Act provided that crops should be shared on the basis of prescribed rates reflecting the contributions of various productive elements (land, labor, farm implements, work animals, hired plowing operations, etc.). Takahashi 2/ found that actual rates of farm rents exceeded legal rates by as much as 7.5% in first class land and 12.5% in second class land. 17. The program lagged under the Garcia administration (1957-61). It was renewed with vigor under President Macapagal, who pushed through the Agricultural Land Reform Code (R.A. 3844) in 1963. This code, although watered down by landlord interests in Congress, represented "breakthrough" legislation. Not only did it provide the legal basis to convert the tenant to landlords, it sought to channel capital of hacienda owners into industrial shareholdings and entrepreneurial activities. 18. Reorganization and creation of implementing agencies was also covered by the 1963 Code. In September 1971, a new Land Reform Code (R.A. 6389) was enacted which modified and reorganized the land reform program even further. At the time of the mission's visit, the new organizational programs were yet to become operational. 1/ H. D. Koone and L. E. Gleeck, "Land Reforms in the Philippines," USAID Spring Review, June 1970, p. 42. 2/ Takahashi, Akira, Land and Peasants in Central Luzon, East-West Center Press, Honolulu, 1969, p. 71. ANNEX 13 Page 10 The Land Reform Program and its Organization 19. The overall objectives of the Agrarian Reform Program was to "uplift the members of the agricultural sector" and make them "partners in nation- building." 1/ The 1963 Land Reform Code was enacted basically to: 2/ (a) "Establish owner-cultivatorship and the economic family-size farm as the basis of Philippine agriculture and, as a consequence, direct landlord capital in agriculture to industrial use"; and (b) "Provide a more vigorous and systema- tic land settlement program and public land redistribution." The land reform component also was in the two stages: Stage 1 - All sharecroppers in corn, rice and other food grain crop producing areas were to be converted to leaseholders. Lease rental would be fixed at 25% of the average normal harvest of the preceding three crops after subtracting costs. Stage 2 - Conversion of tenants to amortizing owners with the acquisition of land from large landowners and redis- tributing it to tenants. The resettlement component consists of the opening and development of public lands. 20. A variety of institutions was made responsible for administering the program. 3/ The Land Authority (LA), which superseded the LTA and NARRA, was charged with establishing ownership, and the "economic family-size farm" through land redistribution and land settlement (with the power to expropriate and divide private agricultural lands). The Land Bank (LB) was created to finance the acquisition of landed estates for division and resale, and the purchase of the landholding by the agricultural lessee from the landowner. The LB was authorized to issue bonds and preferred shares to raise for payments to landholders. The Office of the Agrarian Council (OAC) was to represent farmers who were without counsel in agrarian dispute cases before the Court of Agrarian Relations (CAR). The Agricultural Credit Administration (ACA) was reorganized to align its objectives of stimulating the development and operation of farmer's production and marketing cooperatives. The Agri- cultural Productivity Commission (APC) was created, absorbing the Bureau of Agricultural Extension of the Department of Agriculture and the Agricultural Tenancy Commission of the Department of Justice, to accelerate the improvement of farm productivity through extension activities. The Court of Agrarian Relations (CAR) was to settle all agrarian disputes, violations of the Act and to hear expropriation cases brought to it by the LA. 1/ Basic Facts on Agrarian Reform, Department of Agrarian Reform (undated). 2/ Agricultural Land Reform Code, Republic Act 3844, Section 2. 3/ An organizational chart is given in Appendix 2. ANNEX 13 Page 11 21. The heads of LA, LB, ACA, APC, plus a member of the minority part in Congress constituted an ex-officio organization, the National Land Reform Council (NLRC), which formulates policies and provides direction to the organization of land reform. For implementation purposes, the same ex-officio members comprised the Land Reform Project Administration, which has the Gover- nor of the Land Authority as its administrator. The heads of the "incorpor- ated agencies" are designated as deputy administrators. At the national level, therefore, both for policy-making and for implementation, the support- ing functions of extension, credit and land financing were included in the Land Program. This pattern of administration is repeated through regional and provincial levels down to the Land Reform Project teams. Each team had a member of the Land Authority as team leader, an extension supervisor (APC), a credit supervisor (ACA) , and a legal officer (OAC). The municipal land reform teams included farm management technicians (APC) who reside in the barrios to which they are assigned. Officially, the ratio of farm management technicians to farmers is 1:75. In practice, the number of farmers per technician is usually much higher. These farm management technicians are assisted by one home management technician and one rural youth officer for every 300 farmers. There may be a cooperative officer and a legal officer assigned to each three to four teams. 22. Apart from the incorporated agencies mentioned above, the Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI), the Bureau of Soils (BS), under the DANR, as well as the National Irrigation Administration (NIA), the Irrigation Services Unit (ISU) and the Presidential Arm for Community Development (PACD) were designated as the "cooperating agencies" in the Land Reform Program. 23. With the amendment of the Land Reform Program in 1971, a reorganiza- tion of land reform organization was enacted (Appendix 3). The Land Authority was elevated to departmental status - the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR). The National Land Reform Administration and the National Land Reform Council were disbanded. DAR was constituted with more emphasis on field operations than in the case of LA. The central office unit of DAR is composed of the Office of the Secretary, the different staff services and four bureaus: Bureau of Farm Management, Bureau of Land Acquisition, Distribution and Development, Bureau of Resettlement, and Bureau of Agrarian Legal Assistance. The field arm of DAR comprises 10 regional offices throughout the country. The agrarian reform teams will now serve under subregions, each team covering a number of municipalities/cities depending on the number of farmers and the size of the farm areas to be covered. D. Land Reform Mechanics of Land Reform (Prior to Presidential Decree No. 27) 24. Stage I - Tenancy Conversion. When an area was declared a land reform area, sharecroppers have to take the initiative to indicate to their landlords their wish to shift to a lessee status. With the assistance of ANNEX 13 Page 12 the land reform team in the area, the status shift was ultimately formalized as a written contract between the landlord and the new lessee. Before then, an agreement had to be reached on the average normal yield from which future fixed land rent will be based. 25. Stage II - Conversion to Amortizing Landowners. Provisions were made for large landowners to either "voluntarily" submit their land for redistribution, or the Land Authority would expropriate land for the purpose. In practice, no landed estate under the Land Reform Code was expropriated. Most of the landlords who "volunteered" their lands for consideration in the landed estates program have mainly done so under "grassroots" tenant pressure, which has tended to be violent in some provinces of Central Luzon. Tenants usually petitioned the government (at least one-third of tenants was required by law) to buy the estate property; then the DAR sent out its field team to investigate the petition, the financial capability of the potential amortizing owners to repay loans, and the agricultural capability of the land. The purchase price of the estate was negotiated between the tenants and the land- lord and settled price should not be below the value appraised by the DAR teams. 1/ After court approvals of the sale, the title is transferred to the Land Bank. The LB paid the landlord 20% of the sale price in cash (10% under the 1963 Code) and the remainder in tax free, 6% redeemable Land Bank bonds. In the meantime, the Land Reform teams' function was to subdivide the estate into "economic size" farm lots which were distributed to tenants. The new amortizing owners agreed to repay the Land Bank the purchase price of their lot plus 6% to cover administrative and subdivision costs within 25 years. The government was responsible for providing needed infrastructure, credit, etc. Land Reform Achievements 26. Stage I - Tenancy Conversion. Tenancy conversion from sharecropper to lessee will be discussed at two levels - the achievements of the Land Reform Program on a national basis, and the impact of land reform at the farm level. 27. In terms of the achievements on a national basis, program coverage moved very slowly for the first three years but has picked up speed since FY 1968. By June 1971, some 182,000 share tenants (out of a country total of about 607,000) were covered by the program. The Land Reform Code (R. A. 6839) in September 1971, declared all foodgrain producing areas as land reform areas. The status of land reform accomplishments is given in Table 4. 1/ Two approaches used by DAR appraisers: (i) Comparative Sales approach - valuation based on recent sales on comparable lands in the area and (ii) Incomes approach - rental capitalized at 6%. The latter approach is almost exclusively used. ANNEX 13 Page 13 Table 4: LAND REFORM PROGRAM: COVERAGE AND REPORTED IMPACT /1 Status of Program Coverage- Reported Impact No. of % of Share Shifters No. of Share Total No. of Share Croppers as a % Tenants in Farmers in Tenant Shifted to of Share Covered Areas Covered Areas Coverage Lessee /1 Tenants /2 Year Ending (1) (2) (1)+(2) (3) (3)+(1) June 30, 1965 10,664 14,581 73% n.a. " 1966 11,639 16,994 69% n.a. " 1967 22,611 33,195 68% n.a. - f " 1968 54,716 75,836 72% 9,776 18% " 1969 113,990 167,800 68% 21,687 19% " " 1970 132,334 213,368 62% 29,677 22% " " 1971 182,203/3 315,032 58% 46,675 .26% /3 /3 Sept 10, 1971 606,876-- 1,443,891- 42% 53,420 9% /1 Cumulative. /2 At approximately the time of proclamation. /3 Data for corn and palay in total Philippines from the 1960 Census of Agriculture and updated by Department of Agrarian Reform in proclaimed land reform areas. Source: Adapted from: Dept. of Agrarian Reform, The Philippine Land Reform Program, Statistical Profile, and Narrative Brief of Operational Aspects as of June 30, 1971; and Land Reform Basic Facts and Projections. 28. With the number of share tenants covered by the Land Reform Program greatly increased, the proportion of share tenants in the total farmer population declined after countrywide coverage was proclaimed. Program impact have made steady progress from 1968 through 1971, when as much as 26% of total share tenants covered by the Land Reform Program had reportedly shifted to lessee status. Since the enactment of the new Land Reform Code, this figure dropped to 9%. 29. The impact of leasehold conversion was concentrated in the province of Nueva Ecija which accounted for 67% of all leasehold conversion (Table 5). Intensive efforts by government and foreign assistance (both in personnel and financial support) in Nueva Ecija succeeded in converting 85% of its share tenants to lessees. ANNEX 13 Page 14 Table 5: LEASEHOLD STATUS IN LAND REFORM AREAS (February 1972) Nueva Total Nueva Ecija Ecija Philippines as % of Total Number of Sharecroppers Converted to Leaseholders 35,962 53,420 67% of which: Written Contracts (15,738) (17,926) 88% Oral Contracts (20,223) (35,494) 57% Source: Nueva Ecija Land Reform Integrated Development Program. 30. The benefits of land reform at the farm level so far are difficult to evaluate. This is because a number of developments have taken place in land reform areas since proclamation, such as the increase in irrigation facilities and the availability of high-yielding varieties of palay, which cloud the impact of the Land Reform Program per se. Many studies which have reported the benefits of land reform have not standardized their assessment in terms of farm size, soil fertility, and available farm infrastructures. Two studies, however, come closest to doing this. 31. A study conducted in 1964 by Professor Sandoval, of the University of the Philippines College of Agriculture (UPCA), traced the productivity and economic status of share tenants who shifted to lessee status as well as those who remained as share tenants in seven land reform provinces in Central Luzon. From Table 6, a comparison of the two groups showed that the nonshifters had slightly higher average yields and gross returns than those who became lessees. Lessees spent slightly more than share tenants on fertilizers and hired labor, but cash costs per hectare incurred by the two groups were not significantly different. Net returns to labor were, however, about P 138/ha higher in the case of the shifters. This difference was due mainly to the larger share of production that nonshifters had to pay to the landlord. 32. Also, a 1971 study by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics (BAEcon) was conducted in 11 municipalities in the provinces of Pampanga and Bulacan covering a sample of 448 rice farm households. Table 7, showing the results for irrigated farms, illustrates the similarity with those obtained at UPCA. In fact, the average yields for share tenants were higher than those obtained by leaseholders, particularly for the group declared land reform in 1966 and 1969. Net incomes accruing to leaseholders in both groups were almost double those of the share tenants. The study reports that as many sharecroppers as leaseholders had adopted double- cropping even though there were five times as many leaseholders as share- croppers in the sample. ANNEX 13 Page 15 Table 6: LAND REFORM AND THE STATUS OF SHIFTERS AND NONSHIFTERS FROM SHARE TENANCY IN 7 LAND REFORM PROVINCES /1 CENTRAL LUZON, 1968-69 Share Tenant Difference between Shifted to Nonshifted Lessee and Share Lessee Share Tenant Tenant Farm Sample (No.) 205 115 Av. Effective Crop Area (ha) 4.4 3.2 1.2 Yield/ha (cavan) 51.1 52.3 -1.2 Cash Costs/ha (P) 152 145 7 of which: Hired labor (80) (76) (4) Fertilizer (40) (36) (4) /2 Noncash Costs!-/ha (P) 351 560 -234 of which: Landlord's share (172) (374) (-202) Total Costs/ha (P) 503 705 -202 Total Returns/ha (P) 819 883 -64 Net Returns/ha (P) 316 178 138 /1 These are provinces declared land reform areas in 1964-65. /2 Excluding imputed family labor. Source: P.R. Sandoval and B.V. Gaon, "An Economic Analysis of the Effects of Land Reform in Selected Areas in the Philippines", unpublished data, 1972. ANNEX 13 Page 16 Table 7: COMPARISONS OF YIELD, GROSS INCOME AND NET INCOME BY TENURE AND LAND REFORM GROUPS IN IRRIGATED FARMS IN CENTRAL LUZON, 1969-70 /1 Area Declared Land Reform in: 1964 1966 + 69 Share Lease- Share Lease- Tenant holder Tenant holder Average Yield (cavans/ha) 56.7 55.7 59.7 49.4 Gross Farm Income (P/ha) 2,318 2,275 2,410 2,018 Net Farm Income (P/ha) 637 1,169 658 1,158 /1 Selected land reform municipalities of Pampanga and Bulacan. Source: Calculated from: "Rural Levels of Living in Selected Land Reform Areas", Agricultural Situation, Vol. VIII, Nos. 2 & 3, April-Sept., 1971, and supplementary data provided by BAEcon. 33. These results imply that: (i) to that point in time, there was no correlation between productivity per hectare and the Land Reform Program; (ii) the main impact of the Land Reform Program has been one of income redis- tribution rather than productivity increase; (iii) the relative benefits of tenancy reform hinge on the previous share status of the lessee (which was usually 50:50); and (iv) shift in tenancy status does not appear to have resulted in significantly higher expenditures on inputs. In fact, as the BAEcon study shows, investments in off-season irrigation were higher in sharecropping farms than lessee farms. 34. The relative lack of productivity improvements and input invest- ments among lessees may partly be attributed to the breakdown of the tradi- tional relationships between landlord and tenant, particularly the provision of credit. 1/ The institutions created by government have not been able to fulfill a number of the functions served by the landlord. The Agricultural Credit Administration, for example, with its network of cooperatives has yet to become effective. The supervised credit activities in rural banks (a promising alternative to reach the small farm tenant) are still minute 1/ Vernon Ruttan in "Tenure and Productivity of Philippine Rice Producing Farms" (The Philippine Economic Journal, Vol. 5, No. 1, 1966, pp. 60-61) also had the same explanation for the relatively high productivity on small-share tenure farms in comparison with leasehold and owner-operated farms in Bulacan. ANNEX 13 Page 17 and have yet to pick up momentum. It is therefore not surprising to find that the dependence upon the landlord had not been significantly weakened in many cases. 1/ 35. These problems point out the priority need to make the supporting institutions effective, especially in the provision of timely credit and extension. 36. Stage II. The extent in which tenants have converted to amortizing landowners was even more limited than in the case of Stage I. As of December 1971, only 4,753 ha of landed estates had been officially acquired, benefitting 1,838 farm families. If the landed estates pending court approval are added to this total, the area acquired more than doubles. But the total beneficiaries (3,358) still only accounted for 0.5% of existing palay and corn tenants in the Philippines (Table 8). 1/ This is supported by a Bureau of Agricultural Economics study of land reform in 1970 which found that, of a sample of 448 farm households reported to have shifted to lessee status, 99 were still continuing as share-tenants. In addition, surveys by UPCA and the Institute of Philippine Culture show a reluctance among farmers to break the tenant-landlord relationships because tenants feel hiya (shame) at not being able to discharge utang-na-loob (moral indebt- edness) to the landlord for past service rendered. Professor Cas.- tillo of UPCA, however, observed that the relative "hold" of utang- na-loob becomes weakened as sources of reliable credit become more readily available. According to Professor Sandoval (UPCA), lessees did not increase their investment on inputs because (i) they found that, with the same efforts, they are now able to earn higher net incomes compared with their previous share-cropper status, and are therefore quite satisfied with the situation; and (ii) the increased difficulty of obtaining credit provided an additional disincentive. ANNEX 13 Page 18 Table 8: STATUS OF LANDED ESTATE ACQUISITIONS Status as of: Cumulative December December 1965 - Nov. 1969 1970 1971 Pending Pending Pending Actual Court Actual Court Actual Court Purchase Approval Purchase Approval Purchase Approval No. of Estates 14 9 28 15 40 23 Area Acquired (ha) 1,838 1,108 2,885 1,989 4,753 5,611 Average Estate Size (ha) 131 123 103 132 119 244 Beneficiaries (no.) of: Farm Lots- 871- 252 1,160-: 707 1,838L- 1,520 Home Lots 160 59 239 726 955 666 Total Purchase Price (P mil.) 4,235 3,821 7,991 9,869 17,241 25,234 Av. Purchase Price (P/ha) 2,304 3,449 2,770 4,962 3,627 4,497 /1 Estates purchased through redemption/preemption are included as farm lots. Source : Land Bank, Annual Reports (1969-1971). The pace of acquisitions increased in 1971, as witnessed by the doubling of beneficiaries pending court approval from the previous year (Table 9). 37. In terms of the impact at the farm level, no studies are available for assessing the benefits of land redistribution under the Landed Estates Program. 1/ Field trips made by the mission to landed estates in Pampanga and Nueva Ecija uncovered the similarity of problems facing the farmer whether his status was being changed to that of lessee or an amortizing owner. For instance, because of the lack of credit to invest in pumps to irrigate the land, many of the amortizing owners had to make do with the smaller yield on their land in comparison with the neighboring sharecropper whose landlord had made the investments in bringing water to the farm. The amortizing owner may get a hundred percent share of his small production but the share- cropper who may get only 50% of his large production could still be equally well off, if not better off than the former. 1/ Professor Sandoval's study had too small a sample of shifters to landowners. ANNEX 13 Page 19 38. The studies cited earlier have illustrated the impact of land reform on a relatively short-term basis (about five years). There may very well be a time lag for the incentives (obtained by security of tenure) to be manifested in increased productivity, but as of now the indications are not there. The increase in acquisitions has been attributed to the appropriation of an additional P 20 million from the proceeds of the stabili- zation tax under R.A. No. 6125, and the higher cash payments being made for purchased land. Undoubtedly, tenant unrest was another strong factor contribut- ing to the increased rate of acquisition. 39. Contrary to the expectations of the Land Reform Code, the re-- distribution of landed estates to tenants has not resulted in the consolida- tion of holdings into "economic size" farms to a significant degree. 1/ In practice, allocation of estates among tenants is on the basis of existing occupancy, which means that numerous tenants could still end up with 1 ha or less. The land reform teams already have some problems getting the tenants to even out their lots, let alone persuade the larger holding tenants to give up part of their lots to the small ones. What has taken place in effect is the preservation of the status quo with respect to tenant farm size and the loss of direct assistance from the landlord. There is virtually no opportunity for bringing in outside tenants into these landed estates. Reliance on the Landed Estate Program to take the slack off rural unemployment should be discounted. B. Land Settlement Mechanics of Land Settlement 40. Officially, land is allocated for development and settlement along the following lines. The Bureau of Forestry delineates the land which should remain under forests and, through the authority of the Secretary of Agricul- ture, releases the residual lands as alienable and disposable. The alienable and disposable land is turned over to the Bureau of Lands (BL) for allocation. BL undertakes preliminary surveys, subdividing agricultural land into family- size farm lots; these may be transferred to DAR for land settlement purposes or they may be allocated to private individuals or corporations. 41. The Land Authority which administers land settlement may also subdivide the allocated land and distribute it to qualified settlers. 2/ According to the LA, priority is given to farmers who are actually occupying 1/ A possible exception is the landed estate at Camarines Sur. 2/ To qualify as a settler, the applicant has to be a citizen, landless or a holder of uneconomic-sized farm land, capable of tilling the land, has not owned or secured rights to homesteads, and of good moral character. ANNEX 13 Page 20 and personally cultivating the land, qualified farmers in the surrounding area, share-tenants from land-pressured areas, tillers of uneconomic-size farms, graduates of agricultural schools and colleges, military trainees or veterans and members of guerilla organizations. Successful applicants are transported by the Department of Agrarian Reform to their main settle- ments and the distribution of lots is by raffle. Land is given free to settlers. Direct assistance is given to settlers in the form of subsistence payments, initial work animals, seeds, fertilizers, farm implements, and housing. The cost of subdivision surveys and subsistence payments are charged interest-free to the settlers to be repayable in 10 years after a three-year grace period. The LA also has the responsibility to provide for infrastructure, roads, bridges, waterworks, clinics, centers, schoolhouses, and administrative holdings. Land clearing assistance differs among different settlement schemes. In some settlements (e.g., Palawan), land clearing is left entirely to the settlers; whereas in others (e.g. Agusan del Sur) felling of trees and arrangement of logs into windrows are done by the Land Authority with the settlers assisting in the elimination of underbrush. Whatever the assistance on land clearing, the cost is not charged to the settler. 42. In addition to the conventional settlement schemes, the Department of Agrarian Reform (Land Authority) also administers four EDCOR Farms, taken over from the Department of National Defense (DND) in 1968. EDCOR and SEMPT farms are socioeconomic programs undertaken by the Philippine Armed Forces to assist recruits, veterans, and surrendered dissidents. DND still administers nine SEMP and one EDCOR programs. 43. The implementation of land settlement in practice (especially in Mindanao) is different from the official procedures outlined above. Land hunger, which has been responsible for movement of people from highly populated areas in the Visayas and Central Luzon these past years, has brought about a reversal in land settlement procedures, i.e., actual land settlement now precedes the initiation of land settlement procedures. For example, settlers/squatters usually move into a recently logged-out conces- sion and with the help of local political pressure and possibly that of the Federation of Free Farmers (FFF), petition the President to proclaim the squatter area for land settlement. Only after the settlement is proclaimed by the President are settlement procedures initiated, i.e., the Department of Agrarian Reform then comes into the area and undertakes the subdivision survey and an initial survey to assess who are the occupants of the land, the extent of their land, and its current use. This process is rather tedious and it is followed by an equally tedious process of screening and allocating the lots among existing farmers as well as farmers in the surround- ing area and the "self-propelled" settlers who have moved in since proclama- tion. By the time all these procedures are finished, there is usually relatively little land left for allocation to potential settlers from out- side the area through official channels. ANNEX 13 Page 21 Land Settlement Achievements 44. Official statements on land reform (the end of 1971) 1/ show establishment of 20 settlements covering 423,000 ha and four EDCOR Farms covering 12,000 ha. Of the 20 settlements, 16 were proclaimed before 1963. There are, however, varying time lags between a land settlement proclamation and actual acquisition, and development of these lags makes the assessment of achievements particularly difficult. From detailed project data and mission field observations, the present status of land settlements and EDCOR farms are summarized in Table 10. On the average, 82% of settlers were already in the settlements before allocation had been completed. It is quite apparent that there is a wastage of land utilization, with only 64% of all arable land developed. This is because land settlement as currently practiced is largely unplanned -- it has not been on the basis of true agricultural capability. Existing land settlement agencies cannot be blamed for this. Because farmers are usually ahead of them, there is usually insufficient time to incorporate adequate planning into the program of the agencies, nor do they have adequate staffing and logistic support for their operations. Table 9: EXISTING STATUS OF LAND SETTLEMENTS AND EDCOR FARMS (February, 1972) Land Settlements EDCOR Farms Number of Settlements 20 4 Area Reserved (ha) 423,000 12,000 of which: (i) Arable 272,000 8,200 (ii) Developed 176,000 5,300 (iii) Developed as a % of Arable 64% 65% Total Number of Settlers 25,159 829 of which: (i) No. of Moved-in Settlers /a 4,507 588 (ii) % of Moved-in Settlers 18% 71% (iii) % of Other Settlers /b 82% 19% /a Settlers who applied through the Land Authority and had their re- settlement paid for them. /b Other settlers comprised of squatters existing during proclamation and other "self-propelled" settlers who did not apply through the LA but moved in after proclamation on their own volition. Source: Appendix 4. 1/ DBP, "Accomplishments of Land Reform Project Administration, A Terminal Report", June 1964-Sept. 1971, p. 25. ANNEX 13 Page 22 F. Problems and Issues in Land Reform and Land Settlement Administration of Land Reform and Land Settlement 45. The logistics and technical support for land reform has been far from adequate, In landed estates and declared land reform areas, there were only about 100 land reform field teams serving the country. Since various agencies are involved in the land reform process, coordination is a problem at the municipal level, both among government organizations (LA, LB, APC, ACA, BPI) 1/ and between federal and provincial governments. Salary scales vary among agencies, and with different organizations paying salaries to land reform-associated personnel, there are divided loyalties. For example, in most provinces, APC personnel are paid by the provincial governments and work under the direction of the provincial agriculturist. Other farm management technicians also involved in extension are paid by the Department of Agrarian Reform. The cooperative efforts of these agencies therefore depend on the working relationships between provincial government officials and federal government officials at the municipal level. Under such conditions, the duplication of extension responsibilities is not sur- prising. 46. For land settlements, on average, there is one farm-management technician to about 300 farmers in land settlements. But as in land reform, the Land Settlement Program still greatly lacks logistic support in the form of vehicles for supervisors and field technicians, or, where there are vehicles, they are usually very old and in need of repair. Logistics are particularly important because land settlements are usually situated farther from the larger towns and transportation facilities are usually very poor as compared to the areas under landed estates or under the general Land Reform Program. 47. Irrespective of size, each of the seven settlements visited by the mission rely on only one jeep to transport the superintendent, run errands, procure supplies, etc. The running of the settlement is thus too dependent on a single vehicle. Extension personnel have to walk to perform their extension visits (motorcycles would seem to be the best vehicle). It is not surprising to find that many settlers living further away from settlement offices hardly see extension agents. 1/ Each of these agencies, with the possible exception of the Land Bank (LB), undertakes extension work. Mission field trips also found that records of the Appraisal Report Committee for landed estates, contain- ing useful farm data which could be used by DAR farm management tech- nicians, are usually kept in the Land Bank headquarters and not made available to these extension personnel. ANNEX 13 Page 23 Marketing in Land Settlements 48. Another of the weak links in the Land Settlement Program is the lack of designated responsibility for undertaking the marketing of settler produce and inputs. In most of the land settlements, the settlers have only one market outlet, i.e., the local merchant or middleman. With the exception of a few schemes, cooperative ventures in marketing have not become well developed. Considering the relative ease of supervision control provided by land settlement schemes, the conditions for effective cooperative marketing are better than in other land reform situations. Further efforts are needed towards this direction. 49. The marketing problem in settlement schemes is of course compounded by the lack of transportation facilities. In the extension to the Bukidnon Land Settlement, corn had to be transported for 12 km to the nearest feeder road by horses at a cost of 15 centavos per kg (close to half the price received of 35 centavos/kg). Credit 50. As has already been noted the shift from sharecropping generates an increased need for credit aid from government institutions to finance production costs. 51. ACA, in the land reform areas in Central Luzon (particularly Nueva Ecija), has increased its lending to farmers since land reform 1/ (Table 10). In the rest of the Philippines, where the Land Reform Program had made very little impact, small farmers still had to rely mainly on their landlords, private moneylenders, relatives, or merchants. 1/ Before Land Reform Program the predecessor of ACA was ACCFA (Agri- cultural Credit and Cooperative Administration). ANNEX 13 Page 24 Table 10: DISTRIBUTION OF LOANS BY SOURCE, CENTRAL LUZON, 1957 and 1969 Pre-Land Reform-- Post Land Reform Distribution Distribution of: of Fully or All All Partially Unpaid Loans Loans Paid Loans- Loans /4 ---------------------------Percent---------------- Landlord 40 9 11 3 Private Individuals 33 34 42 13 ACCFA 21 - - - ACA - 38 28 67 Relative 4 6 7 3 Banks 2 9 9 9 Other Sources /5 n.s. 4 3 5 Total 100 100 100 100 /1 1957, from a sample of 5,144 farms. /2 1967, from a sample of 473 farms in seven land reform areas. /3 Constituting 74% of the farm sample. /4 Constituting 26% of the farm sample. /5 Mainly rice millers and FaCoMas. Source: (i) 1957 - L.P. de Guzman, "An Economic Analysis of the Method of Farm Financing" used in 5,144 Farms, Philippine Agriculturist, Vol. 41, January, 1958. (ii) 1969 - P.R. Sandoval and B.V. Gaon, "An Economic Analysis of the Effects of Land Reform in Selected Areas in the Philippines," unpublished data, 1972. In most of the land settlement schemes outside Central Luzon, this is also the case. 1/ The Rural Banks are making some inroads in the field of lending to small farmers. 52. Although ACA has had some impact in the land reform areas of Central Luzon, the extension of credit has not been timely, particularly in the 1971 crop season. Much red tape was involved in securing a loan, so 1/ A farm management survey of Agusan del Sur landed settlements showed that 50% of loans were borrower from private money lenders and another third from merchants. ANNEX 13 Page 25 much so that when the loan was approved and the money made available to the farmer, the planting season was already well underway and many farmers had to resort to other sources of credit. 1/ An attempt is being made in the NELRIDP in Nueva Ecija to streamline the loan procedures. It is also interesting to note (from Table 10) the high percentage of unpaid loans for ACA, as compared with other sources. The Economic Size Farm 53. Although an "economic size farm" is one of the criteria used in the Land Reform Code, there have been no studies undertaken by the DAR to assess what an economic size farm is. The working definition of an economic size farm used by DAR is 3 ha for an irrigated farm and 6 ha for a non irrigated farm. (Under Presidential Decree No. 27, this latter was reduced to 5 ha.) The economic family-sized farm is defined in the land Reform Code as "an area of farm land that permits the efficient use of labor and capital resources of the farm family and will produce an income sufficient to provide a modest standard of living to meet the farm family's needs for food, clothing, shelter and education with possible allowance for payment of yearly installments on the land and reasonable reserves to absorb yearly fluctuations in income". An "economic size farm" depends on the size of the family, the fertility of the farm, the type of crops grown, and the type of services accessible to the farmer. Studies should be initiated to assess the economics of size as related to standard family sizes, various crops or crop combinations, and land capability. 54. Although provided for in the Land Reform Code, the consolidation of holdings has been difficult to effect. The acquisition of landed estates usually do not provide room for farmers other than those already farming on the landed estates. More emphasis should be placed in providing incentives for small farmers to relocate to areas where more land is available. This means that greater efforts should be directed towards opening new lands under resettlement schemes in an efficient manner. A difficult constraint in relocating farmers is their preference to remain in Central Luzon rather than be relocated to larger farms in places like Palawan. 2/ Improving the Legal Process 55. The slow conversion from sharecropping to leaseholding in pro- claimed land reform areas was due to a variety of causes -- problems of landlord-tenant relationships, the lack of logistic support, etc. The 1/ ACA credit when available later is then used to repay these other credit sources or is used for consumption purposes. 2/ Based on field trip discussions with DAR personnel and landed estate farmers. ANNEX 13 Page 26 legal process was also a factor. There was an acute shortage of legal officers assigned to field teams, and with the withdrawal of APC technicians from loan processing since the enactment of the 1971 Land Reform Code in September, also slowed down operations. 56. Disputes over the average normal yields of holdings have brought a large backlog of cases pending in the Court of Agrarian Reform. These disputes arise from the general lack of reliable records of past harvests. A more systematic method of evaluating average normal yields is required. The DAR has just initiated a move towards doing this. Financing Land Reform Programs 57. Land reform has suffered from inadequate financing in the past (Table 11). Over the past eight years only 31% of appropriated funds for all agencies involved in the Land Reform Programs have been released (Table 11). Sixty-four percent of appropriated funds have been released to the Land Authority, 68% to the Office of the Agrarian Council, and only 5% to the Land Bank. Private Sector Participation in Land Settlements 58. The Land Settlement Program has also worked under extreme financial constraint. The mobilization of the private sector to assist in the land settlement effort is particularly urgent. Two examples of successful private sector participation in land settlement activities may be found in i) the Sto. Tomas Land Settlement in Davao del Norte and ii) the Talacogon Land Settlement in Agusan del Sur. 59. In the Sto. Tomas Settlement scheme, smallholders have 10-year contracts with corporations to manage their lands for them for the purpose of growing bananas for exports. With a guaranteed minimum profit of r 500/ha annually and the option to earn supplementary incomes for himself and his family, the smallholder's income status has been raised above what he could normally hope to earn by planting cereals or coconuts. There is also the added advantage of a risk-free continuous income for 10 years. 60. If the applicability of the above case is limited by the availability of good banana lands, the experience of the Agusan del Sur scheme is more easily generalized as a model for future land settlements. The National Council of Churches in the Philippines (NCCP) embarked on a joint venture in 1970 with DAR through the formation of the Mindanao Agricultural Resettlement Agency (MARA) to organize and provide services like marketing, credit cooperative development, input supply, crop technology, and medical help to the Talacogon settlement. 61. This is probably the only settlement where fairly comprehensive preplanning has taken place. A soil and water resource survey has been undertaken by a U.S. consultant, and socioeconomic surveys have been under- taken by the University of the Philippines and Siliman University. Farm Table 11: APPROPRIATED AND RELEASED FUNDS FOR THE PROGRAM BY AGENCY, FY 1965 TO FY 1972 (in million pesos) Agricultural Agricultural Office of the Fiscal Land Productivity Credit Land Agrarian Year Authority Commission Administration Bank Counsel Total Appro- Re- Appro- Re- Appro- Re- Appro- Re- Appro- Re- Appro- Re- priated leased priated leased priated leased priated leased priated leased priated leased 1965 32.50 1.46 17.61 1.14 2.50 2.50 102.00 0.20 1.73 1.10 156.34 32.40 (44.49%) (80.30%) (100%) (0.20%) (63.58l) (20.72%) 1966 32.61 12.89 18.37 17.69 1.00 1.00 102.30 - 1.73 1.51 156.01 33.09 (39.53%) (96.30%) (100%) - (87.28%) (21.21%) 1967 19.07 12.69 18.62 18.17 17.58 16.58 103.00 2.00 1.77 1.32 160.04 50.76 (66.54%) (97.58%) (94.31%) (1.9%) (74.58%) (31.72%) 1968 16.75 15.51 20.13 12.58 13.96 12.96 102.80 - 2.23 1.43 155.87 42.48 (92.60%) (62.9%) (92.84%) - (6L.13%) (27.25%) 1969 25.35 17.79 13.69 12.93 36.37 15.oo 104.80 5.00 2.35 1.60 182.56 52.32 (70.18%) (94.45%) (h1.2h%) (4.77%) (68.09%) (28.66%) 1970 30.35 21.34 15.57 12.85 45.00 22.7h 11.80 9.12 3.35 2.30 209.07 68.35 (70.31%) (82.53%) (50.53%) (7.9%) (68.66%) (32.69%) 1971 31.20 22.56 17.19 13.63 24.79 6.00 104.80 - 4.11 2.hh 182.09 b.63 (72.31%) (79.29%) (2h.20%) - (59.37%) (2b.51%) 1972 46.16 33.21 1/ - - 1/ 30.00 22.00 1/ 25.00 20.00 1/ - - 1/ 101.16 75.21 (71.95%T (73.33%T (80.co%T (74.35%) Total 233.99 150.45 121.18 101.99 171.20 98.78 759.50 36.32 17.27 11.70 1,303.14 399.24 Average 29.25 18.81 17.31 1.57 21.40 12.35 9.94 4.54 2.47 1.67 165.37 51.94 (64.31%) (84.17%) (5771%) (-78%) (67-61%) (31-4%) Note: The figures in parentheses are the percentage of the released to that of the appropriated. 1/ Amount programmed for release. Source: DAR, "Accomplishments of the Land Reform Project Administration, A Terminal Report," June 196L-Sept. 1971. ANNEX 13 Page 28 development plans for each type of crops and their extent are also prepared for each settled farmer on the basis of these surveys. The amount of loans MARA provides to farmers depend on the area and types of crops planned for each farm and credit is released in sequence according to the operations required (Table 12). Where planting operations involve settlers' own labor the respective loans are released only after the work has actually been performed. Table 12: CREDIT PACKAGE PER HECTARE FOR VARIOUS CROPS IN TALACOGON LAND SETTLEMENT (Pesos) Crops Expense Item Rubber Abaca Banana Food Crops Land Preparation 100 100 100 250 Laying Out and Staking 16 - - - Planting 40 100 100 50 Planting Materials /1 120 100 100 - Weeding 440 300 300 100 Fertilizer /1 60 50 50 50 Miscellaneous 24 50 50 50 Total 800 700 700 500 /1 Items to be supplied in kind. Loans are repayable at the rate of 9% per annum with grace periods depending on the gestation period of the crop. The credit function will gradually be transferred to a rural bank which will be formed in the settlement. 62. DAR-MARA maintains nurseries to provide planting materials, and also runs extension classes and demonstration plots for the settlers. Cooperative development is taking place step-by-step. 11ARA assisted ini- tially in the formation of a Consumer Cooperative Store which is now self-sufficient. A small rice and corn mill in the central barrio has recently been formed and is operating on a self-sustaining basis. A Board of Directors composed of farmers and local leaders is expected to gradually assume full responsibility for the mill and bodega. Existing barrio farmers associations which are presently primarily socio-political in nature are being mobilized for training farmers and leaders with the intention of enabling them to grow into a functioning Farmers Marketing Cooperative. 63. The above approach is bearing fruit with improved crop performance and income for the farmers. Though the coverage of this activity is for about 1,000 settlers presently, the potentialities for expanding such participation should be further encouraged. Such arrangements are partic- ularly useful in the mobilization of private sector management know-how ANNEX 13 Page 29 to assist the land settlement effort. Existing laws 1/ which preclude private corporations or associations from owning 144 ha or leasing 1,024 ha of land for agricultural purposes 2/ tend to encourage private sector into joint venturship with the land settlement agencies. It may also be necessary to consider various fiscal measures to encourage their participation. Land Classification, Cadastral Surveys and Land Titling 64. After the enactment of the 1963 Land Reform Code, ambitious plans were made to accelerate the rate of land classification, cadastral surveys, and titling through the use of aerial photography. From 1965 to 1969, 12.9 mil ha (covering Central Luzon, Panay Island, Palawan and parts of Mindanao) were photographed in a scale of 1:15,000 at a cost of f 2.9 million. Due to a shortage of funds, administrative difficulties and insufficient technical personnel to evaluate and interpret the photographs, little use has been made of them. 65. There are at least three agencies involved in aerial photography work, i.e., Department of Agrarian Reform, the Bureau of Lands, and the Bureau of Forestry. Closer efforts should be made to coordinate this work so that the high expenses involved will be of benefit to all agencies concerned. 66. Although the Department of Agrarian Reform has been given the authority to issue titles to land formerly administered by NARRA, the pace of land titling is still slow. In addition to administrative problems involved in transferring title records from the Bureau of Lands to the Department of Agrarian Reform, poor performance in this respect also reflects poor repayment of direct assistance loans to the Loan Authority. A systema- tized procedure for collection of outstanding loans to settlers should be developed and implemented. Land Reform/Settlement and Peace-and-Order Problems 67. Peace-and-order conflicts in Central Luzon and Mindanao have their roots in the land problem. Tenant pressures have certainly been a factor in hastening the willingness of landed estates owners to sell their haciendas. The fact that Government's priority areas for land reform coincide with the provinces with the most tenant unrest attests to the political nature of the problem. DAR activities in the Nueva Ecija Land Reform Integrated Development Program (NEIRIDP) have helped to ease the situation there (albeit at a high cost). The problems in Mindanao are both 1/ Constitution of the Philippines, Article XIII, No. 1, Section 2. 2/ Lands adapted to grazing may be leased to an individual, private corporation or association if they are less than 2,000 ha. ANNEX 13 Page 30 cultural and political. Although these conflicts are exceedingly difficult to resolve a conscious effort to include cultural minorities into systematic approaches to land settlement and raising of their productivities and incomes will help. Experiences in land settlements in Northern Cotabato and related areas have shown that settlements which include significant numbers of Muslim minorities have not experienced as much conflict as other communities in the region. DAR is trying to give Muslims priority in allocation of farm lots under its Muslim Development Program. A large number of Muslims have already been resettled at Lanao del Sur, Northern Cotabato, Lanao del Norte and Bukidnon. G. Improving Land Settlement 68. In the past few years, the pressure for land in highly populated areas in the Visayas and Luzon have brought about a reversal of land settle- ment procedures in many parts of the Philippines (especially in Mindanao). Settlers or squatters have been moving into readily accessible areas much of which are logged-out concessions, leased pastures or public forest land. With the help of local political pressure, they petition the President to proclaim the squattered areas for land settlement. Thereafter, settlement procedures are initiated with the Department of Agrarian Reform. With few exceptions, therefore, land settlement as practiced has been largely un- planned and not on the basis of true agricultural capability. 69. Such pioneer methods of land clearing practiced by squatters with minimal participation from settlement agencies were perhaps adequate when pressure on land was not so great. As pressure for land increased, the Philippines can no longer afford such inefficient methods of land settle- ment. A strategy for land settlement in the Philippines necessitates surveys and identification of new areas which can be settled so that comprehensively planned settlement can be undertaken. Possible areas include the Cagayan Valley, Mindanao (notably North Cotabato and areas adjoining Bukidnon), Palawan, and perhaps Mindoro. The main source of available land for this purpose will probably have to come out of land demarcated as regeneration- brush or possible pasture land. 70. Since significant portions of this regeneration-brush lands are under cogon, the feasibility of cogon control and the economic use of these lands for cultivation, pulp and paper, tree production or livestock (or a combination of all these) should be assessed. These assessments should also help the government to decide whether it can afford to keep large tracts of arable land areas for pasture grazing under leases. 71. There is a great need also for the rehabilitation of existing schemes, especially in the provision of basic infrastructure such as roads and irrigation. The schemes in Lanao del Sur, Bukidnon, North Cotabato and Palawan should be considered. ANNEX 13 Page 31 72. In order to extend land settlements on a significantly large-scale government resources alone will not be sufficient. The private sector has to be mobilized to assist in this process. Some successful examples may already be found in the Philippines as can be seen in the Sto. Tomas land settlement in Davao del Norte where private sector and selected settlers are participating in a joint venture for the growing of bananas, and private foundations like the National Council of Churches of the Philippines (NCCP), are also participating in an effective way to improve the lot of the settlers. With restriction on the extent of land ownership and leases in the Philippines, the options available for private participation may be narrowed down to one of the joint government-private sector venture with the private sector pro- viding the management functions. 73. For a new settlement project total investment costs per farm (ex- cluding irrigation) is estimated at Y 22,000 (Table 13). Thus, a new settle- ment project covering 30,000 ha or 6,000 farms, would involve r 132 million or approximately US$20 million. Table 13: ESTIMATED INVESTMENT COST COMPONENTS FOR NEW SETTLEMENT Pesos/farm lot of 5 ha 1. Land Clearing /1 5,000 2. Subdivision Survey 200 3. Direct Assistance Loan (excluding above) 6,800 consisting of: Housing (2,500) Carabao (600) Subsistence at ? 250/month (3,000) Medical assistance at f 25/month (300) Initial Seeds and Seeding (200) Initial Chemicals and Fertilizers (200) 4. Roads and Bridges 10,000 5. Irrigation Development (where necessary) 7,500 Total Investment Cost/farm excluding irrigation = 22,000 US$3,400 /1 Average for mechanized at g 1,500/ha and semi-mechanized at Y 600/ha. 74. Many of the areas with potential for new settlement are best suited for growing corn. Since these are remote from markets it will be essential to have drying and shelling facilities on the settlements provided by the private sector, farmers' associations and marketing cooperatives may be necessary. This might involve: ANNEX 13 Page 32 (a) A sheller for every 160 ha of corn, handled by each farmers' association; (b) The formation of six farmers' associations into marketing cooperatives (1,000 ha) for setting up of dryer and storage facilities. 75. Bag storage is initially envisaged since transportation from the farm to the sheller would be at the farmer's initiative and will have to be in bags. This could be converted to bin storage as transportation improves. Assuming average yields in the area as 40 cavans per ha of corn, for 1,000 ha an estimated 30,000 cavans will be dried and stored if production is twice a year. Storage will therefore be required for 15,000 cavans if about 50% of the area is staggered planting. This would mean a 750 ton warehouse would be required per 1,000 ha. Estimated cost for warehouse and dryer all locally made except for the engine of the dryer is anticipated to be about US$35,000-40,000. ANNEX 13 Appendix 1 Page 1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY LAND REFORM AND SETTLEMENT Land Availability in the Philippines The availability of land for agricultural purposes in the Philippines is widely discussed but the data and empirical basis by which conclusions on land availability can be made is not complete. The only way an estimate of the availability of land for cultivation can be obtained is through a series of elimination processes using the available data from the different govern- ment agencies, and observation on field trips. This is the method used in this annex to assess the availability of land. At best the estimates are rough approximations. A functional land classification issued by the Bureau of Lands in May 1971 (Table 1.1) shows that of the 30 million ha of land in the Philip- pines, 21.4 million ha or 71% has been classified Public forest 1/ land (both classified and unclassified) comprise 17.4 million ha (57%) and the rest,-- 12.6 million ha has been declared alienable and disposable. 1/ The use of "forest land" among government agencies covers areas with "at least 10% stocking of forest trees, wild palm bamboo or brush". Conceivably extensive brushland can be designated "forest land". ANNEX 13 Appendix 1 Page 2 Appendix Table 1.1: FUNCTIONAL LAND CLASSIFICATION, 1971 Million Hectares Percentage Total Philippines Land Area 30.0 100% Classified Alienable and Disposable 12.6 42% of which: Claimed as Private Property or Occupied by Squatters (1.8) 6% Reservation (1.3) 4% Patented Land (3.8) 13% Awarded Leases (0.1) - Judicially Registered Land (2.5) 8% Others /1 (3.1) 11% Classified Public Forest Land 8.8 29% Unclassified Public Forest Land 8.6 28% Claimed as Private Property or Occupied by Squatters 0.8 2% Future Disposable Area 4.0 13% Expected Future Timberland 3.8 13% /1 Pending patents, land applications and residual available for alloca- tions and disposition. Source: Bureau of Lands Alienable and Disposable Land Available for Cultivation The Bureau of Forestry divides the utilization of the 12.6 million ha of alienable and disposable land as in Table 1.2: ANNEX 13 Appendix 1 Page 3 Appendix Table 1.2: ALIENABLE AND DISPOSABLE LAND USE Million Hectares Alienable and Disposable Land 12.6 Nonforest 9.5 Cultivated Land 7.4 Open Land 1.7 Marsh and Water 0.1 Urban and Other 0.3 Forest 3.1 Regeneration-Brush 2.2 Commercial Forest /1 0.8 Noncommercial Forest 0.1 /1 Consisting of young and old dipterocarp forests. Source: Bureau of Forestry. Of the 12.6 million ha of alienable and disposable land, except for scattered patches of unused nonforest cultivated land, the potential available for future cultivation will have to come from nonforest open land (1.7 million ha) and forest regeneration-brush (2.2 million ha). With 1.8 million ha claimed as private property or occupied by squatters (Table 1.1), only about 2 million ha of land might be available. Discounting slope limitations, probably only 1 million ha should be used for cultivation. Public Forest Land Available for Cultivation The remaining area of 17.4 million ha (Table 1.1) consists of 8.8 million ha of classified forest land and 8.6 million ha of unclassified forest land. Based on the Bureau of Forestry figures, the mission's estimate of land use of the 17.4 million ha of public forest land is as follows: ANNEX 13 Appendix 1 Page 4 Appendix Table 1.3: PUBLIC FOREST LAND USE Million Public Forest Land Hectares 1. Land likely to remain under Commercial 8.9 Forest of which: Regeneration-Brush likely to grow into Dipterocarp Forests (1.0) Commercial Dipterocarp (7.5) Mangroves and Pines (0.4) 2. Noncommercial Forests 1.7 3. Land likely to be Nonforest 6.7 of which: Regeneration-Brush (primarily under Cogon) (2.1) Open Land (1.3) Pasture (0.5) Marsh and Water (0.1) Cultivated (Squatter) (2.4) Urban and Other (0.3) Total Public Forest Land 17.4 Source: Forestry Annex. Possible sources of future cultivable public forest land would most likely be from the 2.1 million ha of regeneration-brush and 1.3 million ha of open land. These are primarily under cogon and the extent of topographic limita- tions is now known. Perhaps 1.0 million ha are within the slope limitation. Officials of the Bureau of Forestry believe that most of the land free of cogon grass is already occupied or alienated. The other potential source of cultivable land left is the 7.5 million ha of dipterocarp forest. The Bureau of Forestry indicates that most of this is unlikely to go into cultivation (comprising the bulk of commercial dipterocarp in the future) with perhaps 0.5 million ha coming out into cultivation, although the Bureau estimates that conservatively 1.5 million ha could be converted to cultiva- tion. Summary of Land Potentially Available for Cultivation A summary of the sources of available land for cultivation are derived in Table 1.4. ANNEX 13 Appendix 1 Page 5 Appendix Table 1.4: SOURCES OF AVAILABLE LAND FOR CULTIVATION (Million hectares) Possible for Public Forest Land Potential Cultivation Regeneration-brush unlikely to grow into Dipterocarp Forests 2.1) 1.0 /1 Open Land 1.3) Commercial Dipterocarp 7.5 0.5 Alienable and Disposable Land Open land and regeneration-brush 2.0 1.0 /1 Total 12.9 2.5 /1 /l Some may already be occupied or otherwise alienated and some may require eradication of cogon grass. A rough range of the additional lands suitable for cultivation might be 1.0-1.5 million ha; with an additional 1 million ha of cogon grass lands falling in this category providing they can be rehabilitated economically. ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF THE NATIONAL LAND REFORM ADMINISTRATION COOPERATING AGENCIES SUPPORTING AGENCIES BAE BAI BEF BL AFP BHS BPH BPS BPI BS ISU LRC ------- NATIONAL LAND REFORM -------------------- BPW BVE DRB NACIDA NIA PACD PC PFC ADMINISTRATION ABBREVIATIONS NAWASA PCSO POPCOM RA NATIONAL LAND REFORM COUNCIL 1- ACA Agricultural Credit Administration NATIONAL LAND REFORM APC Agricultural Productivity Commission - OTAC LA Land Authority ACA APC LA LB MPM LB Land Bank MPM Minority Party Member OTAC Office of the Agrarian Counsel ADMINISTRATOR COOPERATING AGENCIES BAECON Bureau of Agricultural Economics BAI Bureau of Animal industry BE = Bureau of Forestry DEPUTY ADMINISTRATORS2/ BL Bureau of Lands BPI = Bureau of Plant Industry BS Bureau of Soils ISU Irrigation Service Unit LRC Land Registration Commission NIA = National Irrigation Administration PLANS AND PROGRAMS PACD Presidential Arm on Community PLRCCE SECRETARIAT OFFICE Development PC Philippine Constabulary PFC Philippines Fisheries Commission LR RGIOAL CMMITEESUPPORTING AGENCIES LR REGIONAL COMMITTEE AFP Armed Forces of the Philippines BHS = Bureau of Health Services BPH Bureau of Public Highways PBS = Bureau of Public Schools BPW = Bureau of Public Works BVE = Bureau of Vocational Education LR BRANCH COMMITTEE DRB = Department of Rural Bank (Central Bank of the Philippines) NACIDA National Cottage Industry and Development Authority NAWASA = National Waterworks and Sewerage Authority LAND REF PCSO Philippines Charity Sweepstakes Office LAN RFOM ROJCTTEMSPOPCOM Commission on Population RA = Reforestation Admmistration DEPUTY ADMINISTRATORS 2/Heads of ACA, APC and LB Deputy Administrator for PLRCCE - Philippines Land Reform Center for Continuing their respective functions and operations. Education Source: Department of Agrarian Reform, Philippines. World Bank-7087 ORGANIZATION CHART OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM Office of the r- - - .- -- - - - -r - - - - - - - .. ..- - ... SECRETA RY -- -.. .. -RerNDERSECRETARY Agrarran Reform Agrcultura Other General Coordinating Land Bank Credir Cooperating Audtm-g Council Admmjstration Agencies Off ce Financial & Adminratiealo Agrarian Reform Seoice Managenent Services Educaton Seroice Med. & Denral Clinic Service Budget Diviin Peeroonel Di. - AcouOntirrg Div. Infoerraron Din. - - Managerment Dro. Gen. Seroins Dro. - Bureauit of B eaofD Aqi Bureau of Bureau of Agraran Farm anageen and Dejelopmnt Settfernent LegaM Ass-1anc D-ector Directr DirectorDieco Agrmc 'Dev. Div. --- Land Acq. Diision Census. Star Oro. -Jdicial Cases Oo. - .. Cocop. Orizaton Dnv. -- Land Suvy i.EgneigD-v -Lglifo e.Dv - -- Ln Cp &Cls DvSPecal Proj. Div. .- M . ed-i ,,,Reg 4na Oftices L Condenatmg Comm,ttee - r - o- er-t-d--a-- r fe-nes- -- -- - Agrar,an Reform .ResTtlret Teams, Lan Bank Cooerating A~genc-nt -Pr, Eecutive Order No. 347 Orgmzt- n Series f 1 971 Sorce- D,partment of Agraran Aform, Phliopms Worl BanK-7086 ANNE 13 Appendix 4 STATUS OF SETTLEMENT AND EDCOR FARM PROJECTS FEBRUARY, 1972 Total Reported Area Proclamation Arabe Aroa No. of Self-Propelled Rights Origtn of Self-Propelled Reserved Date Land Developed Settlers Poneer Settlers Settlers 3/ Hoved-in Settlern Transference and Moved-in Settlers (Ha) (Ha) Ila) (No.) (7.) (No.) (1) (No.) (%) Region II 1. loahela (Angandaoan-Echague) 8,920 2-11-53 7,000 6,500 1,121 699 62.4 157 14.0 265 23.6 12 Central Luzoo Region 111 2. Tarlac (Coepr io) 1,112 3-27-56 1,112 1,112 196 - - - - - - - Central Luoo 3. Tarlac (Clark Field) 10,725 5-5-69 6,500 2,000 879 379 400 Central Luzon Region IV 4. RIzal (Tanay> 25,475 12-2-52 13,000 9,000 1,164 31 2.7 1,129 97.0 4 0.3 4.3 Sannhern Tagalog 5. Central Palawan (NARRA) 25,381 6-29-50 20,000 16.000 2,666 1,937 72.6 42 1.6 687 25.8 - Northern Lozon, Central Luon & Western Visayas Region V 6. Coaaines Sar (Tirnbac-Sinua) 8,500 11-1-54 7,000 5,000 899 899 100.0 - - - - 7. Moehate (Uson-Mabate) 8,800 9-23-55 5,000 4,000 447 211 47.2 236 52.8 - - - Bicol & Eastern Visayas Reg1on VI 8. Capie (Dumarao) 25,000 5-6-55 6,000 5,000 368 339 92.1 27 7.3 2 0.6 3 Western Visnayans 9. Negres Occideanl (Cau.yan-Kabankalan) 33,000 9-23-55 20,000 18,000 1,424 477 33.5 947 66.5 - - 11 Westera Visayas Region VII 10. Negras Oriental (Santa CatalIna) 5,010 7-28-58 4,000 4,000 977 Regin VIII 11. Lanao del Norte (Tangkal-Magava,y) 13,943 10,000 9,000 1,250 1.250 100.0 - - - 12. Lana del Sar Northern uan & Central (Wa.) 18,000 6-28-50 17,000 16,500 2,043 513 125 297 Lon, Eastern visayas & Western Visayas 13. Sal.. 15,340 3-21-55 10,000 6,000 502 500 99.6 1 0.2 1 0.2 - Southern Tagalog Region IX 14. ldkidnon Eastern Visayns & (Maeamag-Pangantuka.) 35,399 6-29-50 30,000 27,500 3,444 615 17.9 43 1.2 2,786 80.9 - Western visay 15. Sorthern Cotahato 100,000 7-17-56 60,000 13,000 1,702 1,531 90.0 25 1.4 146 8.6 - Nohern Luzon & Central Luon, Western Visayas 16. Central Cotabata 52,468 6-29-50 30,000 18,000 2,292 1,270 319 Northern Luon & Central Luzo RegLona 17. Daao del Ne Eastern Visgyas 6 (Sto. Tomas) 11,278 3-9-55 11,000 11,000 1,341 783 58.4 558 41.6 - - 22 Westernt Viayas 18. Davo dal Norra (Laac-Asnc Ian) 8,221 8-25-70 5,000 2,000 1,240 1,240 100.0 - - - 09. ASgnsan dal Sar (Talacogon) 16,440 6-21-55 9,000 2,500 1,204 923 76.7 281 23.3 - - 2 'TOTAL 423,012 271,612 176,112 25 159 4.507 17.9 EDCOR FARMS Region 11 0. Isabela (Pererdo) 1,600 1,000 606 76 76 100.0 - - - Regi.n IV 2. Que-on (Catanauan) 1,700 1,200 1,000 196 67 34.2 - - 129 65.8 - Central Luzon and Southern Tagalog Region V110 3. Lnao del Norte (Arevalo) 3,000 2,500 1,700 219 - - - - 219 100.0 Northern Luon and Central Luon Eastern Visayas and Western Visaya Region IX 4. Cotabato (Gallego) 5,464 3,500 2,000 248 240 98.8 Northern Luzon and Central Luon TOTAL 11,764 8,200 5,300 829 143 588 70.9 Northern Luzn and Central Luzon 1/ Zambonga Del Naore (Lila5 - Sondangan) and South Caoaato (Sarallah) are eluded. 2/ Pioneer selers -are settlera whaoaro already till Ing the nal prlor to tho proclamation of tho argo a aenttleant projart. 3/ Self-propelled settler - ar those who went to the sertlement with their own volition. 4/ Moved-lo settlers - are thase brought to by the governaetto the settlement. 5/ Mach, 1972 6/ Includes new areas proclatmd in March 1971. L,goo, SolIs and Duaalin. Sourec: The Phtlippine Land Reform Progran: Statistial Profile, June 30, 1971, p. 28 and supplemetal dong by DANR. AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY PHILIPPINES ANNEX 14. PRODUCTION ECONOMICS - RICE AND CORN ANNEX 14 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY PRODUCTIVE ECONOMICS - RICE AND CORN TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Productivity Effects and Input Use ........................ 1 HYV's and Labor Use ....................................... 3 Costs and Returns in Corn ................................. 9 Relative Costs and Returns, Corn and Upland Palay ......... 9 ANNEX 14 Page 1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY PRODUCTION ECONOMICS - RICE AND CORN Productivity Effects and Input Use 1. The introduction of high yielding varieties (HYV) has definitely resulted in a very significant increase in yield per hectare (see Tables 1 and 2). Even without an increase in fertilizer application (see Table 1), case studies in Laguna show that about 20% increase in yield is possible in the shift from the traditional variety (PETA) to an HYV (C-18). With more than quadrupling in the amount of fertilizer applied, IR8 yields increased by about 37% (Table 1). Table 1: PRODUCTIVITY AND INPUT USE WITH TRADITIONAL AND IMPROVED RICE VARIETIES IN LAGUNA, 1965/66-1966/67 Unchanged Fertilizer Increased Fertilizer Application Application PETA C-18 % Change PETA IR8 % Change (1965/66) (1966/67) (1965/66) (1966/67) Total man days/ha 48 79 65 62 89 44 Seeding rate (cavans/ha) 0.8 0.8 - 1.8 1.8 - Kg N per ha 15.6 15.6 - 13.2 74.9 467 Yield 74.4 90.2 21 82.4 112.5 37 Source: R. Barker and E. Quintana, Farm Management Studies of Costs and Returns in Rice Production, IRRI (mimeo), undated. 2. Cost of production surveys conducted in Laguna tracing farm practices from 1966 to 1969 showed that with the virtual take over of the area planted to HYV rice, fertilizer, herbicide and insecticide use were very substantially increased (Table 2). Crop operating expenses consequently increased substan- tially. Table 2: CO,T AND RETURNS PER HECTARE FOR RICE FARMS IN LAGUNA, WET SEASOW, 1966 AND 1969 Input Use _Def£Lted La-nd Ferti- N Herbi- Insect- Deficit in lizer cide icide Paly Pe.lay Gross N8t Net Size HTV isers Arnlied U,ers Uz?rs Yild Trice Returns Returns Return l (hýa) ýT)~ -4 k/a ()'T)~mtnh)i/g) (Ph)¯/a) (h) Binan (h5 Farms) 3.3 0 80 8 71 38 1.93 0.40 772 525 525 1969 3.4 80 98 h7 100 96 2.5h 0.h1 1,Q2 565 509 increase % 487 32 3 35 8 -3 Cabouyao (36 Frms) 966 2.5 2 75 16 75 52 2.23 0.40 892 625 625 969 2.h 68 91 51 96 8. 4.25 C.h5 1,914 1,357 1,223 _ncrease % 219 35 10 115 117 96 e~ returns deflated by the consumer price indx of all ite,s includin rice (Jn 1967 = 100, Jan, 1970 - 11). Source: Corput,d from: R. Earker and R. Cordova, The Imact of New Technology on Rice Production-- A Studr of Change in Three Philippine ,unicipalities from l966 to 1969, IRRI, 1966, Tables 3, 4, and 5. (D ANNEX 14 Page 3 3. The productivity increases shown in Table 1 favor the use of high yielding varieties, but an analysis of the incremental costs and returns show that the improved varieties need not generate as high a net revenue as the traditional varieties (Table 3). This is particularly applicable to the introduction of IR8. IR8 has lost its popularity since 1967 mainly because of lower prices received by farmers for it. 1 It has inferior eating quality and reportedly low milling quality, part of the latter problem being due to the rice being sold wet in the field because of its early maturity. 4. A cross sectional analysis of the costs and returns in Rizal (Table 4) also shows similar results for the 1967 and 1968 seasons. The newer varieties IR5 and C4 were sufficiently high yielding and palatable (despite high levels of input expenditure) to generate substantially higher net incomes compared with both the traditional and older HYVs. High-Yielding Varieties and Labor Utilization 5. Short-term effects as seen in the early years of the introduction of HYVs (1966 and 1967) resulted in significant increases in total labor use. In the better rice production area of Laguna, Barker and Quintana 2/ found, for example, that total man days employed in rice growing increased by an average of 55%. Increased labor demand arose from (a) the increased incentive to intensify labor inputs for crop care, and (b) the increased demand for harvest and post harvest labor. Increased labor input for crop care is mainly for weeding operations. Increased labor requirement for preharvest tasks however do not appear to be very significant. 6. As the experience of HYVs has progressed through the years, a different trend in actual labor use has emerged. In the case of Laguna, the impact of HYV in the medium-term, with the introduction of mechanization, has not materially changed total use of labor (Table 5). Mechanization displaced labor in the task of land preparation by about 40-45% from 1966 to 1970. However, increased crop care virtually offset the reduction. Har- vesting and threshing labor did not increase significantly. Mechanical threshing has been introduced only to the extent that it has not significant- ly displaced the harvesting labor previously used. There is considerable community pressure on the farm operator from his landless neighbors who are usually hired for harvesting and threshing tasks. It appears that few of the landless laborers are involved in land preparation and there-is less resistance to the mechanization of this task. Labor's resistance to mechanic- al threshing is understandable because harvesting and threshing wages are paid in kind, and the sharing arrangements were institutionalized at a time 1/ The prices for the initial two seasons were gcod because a large proportion were sold for seed purposes. 2/ See Table 1. ANNEX lh Table 3 : 0STS AlD RKtURNS OF PRDUCING TRADITICNAL ANTD IPROVED VARIIEIIS GF RICE, DRY SES0l, LAGJNA, 1965-67 Unchangcd Inlcressed Item Fer tiälizer A-lncation Fertilizer fioljicatinn Tradit iiono Lmorov Variety Peta C-18 pcta In8 Crop year 1965-66 1966-67 1965-66 1966-67 Sason Dry Dry Dry Dry Number of farms 1 1 2 2 Area per farm (ha) 1.21 1.21 1.96 1.96 Total man days per ha 48.00 79.00 62.00 89.00 Rate of seeJing (cav/ha) 0.83 0.83 1.78 1.78 Kg N per ha 1/ 15.62 15.62 13.21 74.92 Production per ha (cavans) 74.38 90.24 82.40 112.55 Price per cavan (output) 2/ 16.0 16.0 16.0 12.8 Total Revenue (P./ha) 1,190 lhh4 1,318 1,440 Cash Cost (P/na) CusLom work 17.36 20.25 23.h7 37.50 Hired labor: Man 37.60 80.16 29.34 47.19 Tractor - - - 19.13 Food 11.05 36.36 13.90 32.56 Fertilizer 24.79 26.45 20.46 99.23 Insecticides and weedicides - 3.47 1.12 45.66 Fuel and oll 17.36 19.83 6.12 9.57 Seeds bought 15.70 20.66 9.69 44.6h Hauling and transport 37.19 59.50 16.43 37.0U Irrigation Le3 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.0 Total Cash Cost 170.05 272.68 126.53 378.52 Non-Cash Cost (PAia) Landlords' shPre 3/ 256.20 347.11 413.20 539.67 Hrvesters--threshers' share 192.15 315.87 215.49 340.28 Seeds (other than boughu) 12.81 - 16.53 - Unraid labor h/ 34.09 70.r4 48.60 56.34 Hired labor in kind: Xan - 17.36 0.43 23.21 Tractor 19.77 - Interest and depreciation 12.88 33.05 9.12 23.42 Total Non-Cash Cost 508.13 783.43 763.lk 982.92 Total Costs (P/ha) 890 1,361 890 1,361 Net Revenue (P/a) 512 388 h28 79 1/ Primarily from arnonium sulfato, urea and corplete (12-24-12) fertilizer. 2/ IR8 price is assuned to be 20% lo;er than the other varieties. 3/ Landlords' share is the net share for land alone. Al1 cash expenses hu r by th nrd r-e ducted 1r1i then gr- shre of th,e landlord. b/ Unnaid labor includes family, exchange, and operator l pbor and is valaeo on actual days of labor input at the wage rate of P 3.00. Source: Caleulated froi R. Barker -ncd E. Quintana, Farm ianacent Studies of Costs and Roturns in Ricc roduction, Tab1es 3 and 4, IRdI, undated. ANNEX 14 Page5 Tablc > PER 19ECTARE COST AND RETURNS OF PALAY FOR SELEcTED iYV AND TRADITIONAL VAR.EITIES, RIZAL, 1967-1968 3967 Wet seascrn 1968 Dry ,eason d~~B?Ï-76 J:r:j IR8 1ý5 CL Binato No. of Farms 102 26 38 179 16 93 1,0 Physical Inputs Average 2rca of variety (ha/farm) 0.82 0,80 1.07 0.70 0.60 .80 0.60 Cash Costs and Costs in Kind (Ps os) Fertilizer 62 20 26 89 138 103 35 Chemicals 15 3 6 18 28 25 14 0ther Costs Land Prenaration 1/ 52 58 30 50 45 56 26 Pulling of uedlings 1/ 26 16 25 23 13 21 1) Transplanting 1/ ~3 38 45 31 11 23 9 Weeding J/ ~ 16 25 7 49 46 52 36 Harvesting, threshing, + seeds 2/ 303 165 192 267 347 274 210 Total Variale Costs 517 325 331 527 628 554 3>42 Yield of Palay in: Kg/ha 3,608 2,772 2,820 4,660 7,130 4,310 3,920 Cavans/ha 82 63 64 106 162 98 89 Standard Deviation (cavans/ha) 57 42 32 71 86 60 40 Price of Palay 3/ P/kg 0.28 0.35 0.35 0.29 0.33 0.36 0.29 P/cavan 12.314 15.43 15.43 12.83 1.44 16.01 12.83 Oross Returns 1,012 972 988 1,360 2,339 1,572 1,1L2 Net Returns over Variable Ccsts 495 647 657 833 1,711 1,018 800 1/ Other cash costs. OKher costz in kind. 3/ II8 and BuaLo (Thailand) variotico were as3-sume3d to bo 205 below the CL, BPI-76 and Intai variety prices receivd by farmrs. IR5 varicty were assumed to b? 10` below those varitiOO. Sourco: Comiputd from: a) 1RRI, Anua Report, rgricultural Economics: , .967, Tabl 2 1968, T,-jbL½, b ' & 5. b>) BftEcon, Prices3 R'eceived by Farmors, by Mocnth, 1966 -68. ANNEX 1 Page6 Table 5: CHANGE, IN TOTAL AND HIRED LADOR UPSE PATTERNS IN THE WET SEASON AND CONCURRENT CEANGES IN TECHNOLOGY BEfWEEN 1966 AND 1970 IN SELECTED AR2AS OF TE PHILIPFPINES WITH HIGH RATES OF MECHANIZÉT ION CHANGE IN LABOR USE 1970 Survey Area 1an day.si Perce Man dcysnf,11i2 Percent Total Hircd Hired Total Lired uirAd Central Luzon-Laguna(76 farms) Land preparation 17 3 18 10 2 23 Pulling e. transplanbing 15 14 96 17 16 99 Weeding 5 2 36 11 3 31 Other pre-harvost 8 2 19 8 1 Haivestirng & threshing 18 16 86 21 18 85 TOTAL 64 37 58 67 4i 62 Laguna (153 farms) Land preparation 20 18 11 37 Pulling & transplanting 10 9 95 10 10 99 Weediig 16 2 16 18 10 56 Other pre-harvest 8 1 10 10 1 14 Harvosting & threshing 32 32 100 31 31 100 TOTAL 86 48 57 80 57 72 CHANGE IN TECHNOLOGY i9T6 19 7 Central Luzon--Laguna Tractor users (-) 114 48 Area planted to 1117s ( ) 0 67 Yield (mt/ha) 1.9 2.7 Laguna Tractor users (A) 37 76 Area planted to HYVs (f) 1 93 Yiold (mt/Iha)1 2.4 3.å Source: R. Barker et al, Employment and Technological Change in Ph:lippine Agricult.uro, paper presented at ILO, -TS ea, OcL. 1911. ANNEX 14 Page 7 when yields and rice prices were both low. As a consequence, the effective wage for this task now makes it the highest in the rice cropping sequence and no laborer will give it up easily. 1/ 7. The introduction of high yielding varieties although not signifi- cantly changing total labor requirements has resulted in a substantial increase in the proportion of hired labor used on the farm. Barker, et al., 2/ showed that, on the average, percentage of hired labor increased from about 57 to 67% on the basis of two sample surveys in Central Luzon and Laguna. Fortuna, et al 3/, showed similar percentage changes in the use of hired labor from about 53% in crop years 1965-66 to 62% in crop year 1970. Manuel and Lopez 4/ in a cross sectional survey of 144 farms in Rizal found that of the total man hours required to plant traditional varieties, 52% were in the form of hired labor whereas for improved varieties, the corresponding figure was 69%. The introduction of high yielding varieties has therefore also placed an additional financing burden on the farmer in terms of the payment of hired labor. 8. In the medium-term, there is little prospect that labor will be displaced rapidly in the Philippine rice sector. The longer run outlook for labor displacement is however less certain. The new rice technology results in relatively smaller amounts of labor per ton of rice produced. When self-sufficiency in rice is achieved, Philippine agriculture will have to diversify if the use of labor is to increase. The prospects of the Philippines producing rice for export are not favorable compared with other countries (see Table 6). 1/ In fact, in Calamba, Laguna, the effective wage for harvesting arid threshing is so high that many laborers are willing to weed and plot without wages in return for the privilege of harvesting and threshing the same plot. 2/ R. Barker, et al, Employment and Technological Change in Philippine Agriculture, paper presented at ILO, Geneva, Switzerland, October 1971, Table 9. 3/ Fortuna, et al., The Impact of Technology on Small Farmers and their Families, unpublished data presented at Department of Agricultural Economics Seminar, UPCA, February 22, 1972. 4/ Computed by the authors from Table 3 of P. C. Manuel and M. P. Lopez' "Productivity of Farms Using Traditional and Improved Varieties in Rizal and Laguna". Seminar on Economics of Rice Production in the Philippines, December 1969, IRRI. Table 6: ESTIMATE OF DIFFERENCES IN CERTAIN FACTOR AND PRODUCT PRICE RELATIONSHIP FOR RICE PRODUCTION FOR SPECIFIED VILLAGES IN ASIA a/ r , Urca nri_ r Wagr in termn of Village, Province wage Nitrogen HYV Best Trad. N/,j'YV N/Trad. rice or Statr ($/djy) ($/mt N) ($/nit rough rice) HYV Trad, Indiä Barain, U.P. 0.34 123 64 84 1.9 1.5 5.3 4.0 Dhanpur Vijaipur, U.P. 0.60 123 64 114 1.9 1,1 9.4 5.3 T .P. 0.34 123 64 84 1.9 1.5 5.3 4.0 Indonesia.c Sidcmulj,o, E. Java 0.11 160 48 - 3,3 - 2.3 - Tjidahu, W. Java 0.20 166 48 51 3.5 3.3 4.2 3.9 Ngandjat, C, Java 0.21 167b/ 64 75 2.6 2,2 3.3 2.8 KahumCn, C. Java 0,36 167 / 61 76 2.7 2.2 5,9 47 Pluneng, C. Java 0.26 167 53 63 3.2 2.6 4.9 4.1 West Pakistan Årcop, Gulianwala 0.84 261 56 124 4.7 2,1 15.0 6.8 -a-3liwala, Cujmnwala 0.63 261 63 124 4.1 2.1 10.0 5.1 Philippines Canipa, Leyte - 218 104 80 2.1 2.7 - - 11prcos, Leyte 0.47 218 104 80 2.1 2.7 4.5 5.9 Tabang, Leyte 0.47 218 104 80 2.1 2.7 4.5 5.9 Thailand Ral Rot. Suphan Buri 0.38 307 44 45 7.0 6.8 8.6 8.4 Nong Sarai, Suphan Buri 0.38 307 46 44 6.7 7.0 8.3 8.6 Sa Kracho-m, Suphan Buri 0.34 307 44 39 7.0 7.9 7.7 8.7 Vietnam Khanh Hau, Long An 1.50 73 140 160 0.5 0.5 10.7 9.4 Thol Thuan, An Glang 1.50 73 135 150 0.5 0.5 11.1 10.0 a/ Data gathered in latter part of 1971 and carly 1972. r otrcgcn price is $140/mt and price ratio are accordingly lower. Soure R.Barker, un m p rubied tata r.. I Source: R, Barker, tinpublished data, 1972. ANNEX 14 Page 9 Cost and Returns Associated with Improved Husbandry Measures in Corn 9. Table 7 presents a picture of the relative cost and returns associated with varying degrees of improved husbandry measures postulated in the Annual Crop Annex. The method which could give rise to the higest yield (Case VII) is not the one which gives the highest net revenue. Highest net revenue is obtained from Case VI, i.e., nitrogen application of 45 kg combined with the use of disease-resistant certified high yielding varieties. Incremental net benefit cost ratios in Table 8 show that at present costs, it definitely pays to switch to the HYVs. Even though certified HYV seeds have a rather high price of ' 56/cavan, the incremental yield of 15 cavans/ha in comparison with the old uncertified HYV (Case II) is highly economic since only 0.25 cavan is required per hectare. Increased use of fertilizer in addition to the use of HYVs is also profitable as can be seen in Cases V and VI (items 2a and 2b in Table 8) where incremental net benefits are more than the cost of fertilizer. The present cost of chemical control of insects at the recommended rates, does not appear to provide sufficient incentives even at currently high corn prices. Relative Costs and Returns between Corn and Palay 10. Competing use for land between corn and palay arises mainly in the case of upland palay. The comparative costs and returns under average Phil- ippine conditions are given in Table 9. With total labor costs valued at the average minimum wage for the Philippines, only corn at 1971 high prices gave positive net revenues. It is very interesting to note that with zero family labor costs, the net returns obtained for upland palay and corn, at existing average yields and input investments, are approximately the same. The in- centive for farmers to go into either upland palay or corn will therefore depend on the relative product/factor price ratios and the potential yield improvements from better varieties. 11. Regional differences in competitiveness will depend on the regional costs of labor. 1/ Upland palay appears to require more hired labor at current levels of technology and in regions where labor costs are high, corn may have a competitive edge over upland palay. 1/ R. Barker and E. Quintana, Farm Management Studies of Costs and Returns in Rice Production, p. 6 show that a) land values and b) labor values explain most of the regional variations in cost of production on farms. Table 7: CORN: COST AND RETURNS ASSOCIATED WITH IMPROVED HUSBANDRY MEASURES i/ Case I Case II Case III Case IV Case V Case VI Case VII (Tra- (Old (Disease (Certi- (Adjusted (High (V High Ferti- dition- HYV) Resis- fied Harvesting) Ferti- lizer and al) tant HYV) Seeds) lizer) Insect Control) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Pesos/a - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1. Farm Operations a. Field preparation 2/ 140.00 140.00 140.00 140.00 140.00 140.00 140.00 b. Planting 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 c. Crop care 3/ 60.00 60.00 60.00 70.00 75.00 80.00 105.00 d. Harvesting / 60.00 70.00 90.00 105.00 120.00 140.00 160.00 2. Materials Seeds (0.25 cav/ha) 5.00 6.00 8.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 Fertilizers (Pl.50/kg of N) - - - 15.00 30.00 67.50 135.00 (10)8/ (20) 8/ (45) 8/ (90) 8/ Chemicals - - - - - - Total Variable Costs 275.00 286.00 308.00 354.00 389.00 451.50 750.00 Fixed Costs 5/ 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 Total Costs 315.00 326.00 348.00 39h.00 429.00 491.50 790.00 Yield (cavan/ha) 15 25 35 40 45 55 65 Total Revenue I(@ P26/cav) 6/ 390.00 650.00 910.00 1,040.00 170.00 1,30.00 1,690.00 Total Revenue II (@ P17.50/cav) 7/ 263.00 437.50 612.50 700.00 787.50 962.50 1,137.50 Net Revenue I -52.00 324.00 562.50 646.00 741.00 938.50 900.00 Net Revenue II 75.00 111.50 264.50 306.00 358.50 471.00 347.50 1/ See Crop Annex 7 for detailed explanation on each case. 7/ Includes clearing of fields, land preparation and furrowing. '/ Includes cultivation, weeding, replanting (thinning), fertilizing, and spraying. / Includes harvesting, husking/shelling, drying and cleaning. / Includes depreciation, interests on capital investment and charges for use of land or land tax. / Av. price for 1971 crop year. / Av. price for 1967-71 crop year. 8/ Kg of N fertilizer applied. l Source: Mission estimates based on BAEcon and BPI data. O), Table 8: INCREMENTAL NET BENEFIT COST RATIOS1/ AT ALTERNATIVE CORN PRICES AND HUSBANDRY PRACTICES 1. Improved Seed Use: P 26/cav P 17.50/cav a) Traditional to Old HYV (Case I to II) 34.2:1 3.3:1 b) Old HYV to Disease Resistant HYV (Case II to III) 10.8:1 6.9:1 c) Old HYV to Certified Disease Resistant HYV and 10 kg. N fertilizer application (Case II to IV) 4.7:1 2.9:1 2. Improved Husbandry methods for certified seeds: a) With adjusted harvesting and 20 kg N fertilizer (Case IV to V) 2.7:1 1.5:1 b) With high (65 kg N) fertilizer use (Case IV to VI) 3.0:1 1.7:1 c) With very high (90 kg N) fertilizer use and recommended rates of insect control (Case IV to VII) 0.6:1 0.1:1 1/ Increase in net revenue divided by increase in total cost. Source: Table 7. 0'4Q ANNEX 14 Page 12 Table 9 COMPARISONS OF COSTS AND RETURNS FOR CORN AND UPLAND PALAY UNDER AVERAGE PHILIPPINE CONDITIONS 1/ 2/ Case 1 Case II Palay Corn Palay Corn .............Pesos/ha............... Variable Costs 430 275 125 59 - Farm operations (395) (270) (90) (54) - Other operating costs (35) (5) (35) (5) Fixed Costs 75 40 75 40 Total Costs 505 315 200 99 Yield (cav/ha)2/ 20 15 20 15 Total Revenue I-/ 360 263 360 263 Total Revenue II 488 390 488. 390 Net Revenue I -15 -52 16 6/ 1646/ Net Revenue II - 17 7 288- 2916/ 1/ Human labor costed at 0./ha 2/ Only hired labor costed at 15/ha. Variable cost for corn is based on the assumption that 80% of total man hours is family labor. Expected yields under input use corresponding to the operating costs cited in this table. - At average 1967-71 farm prices (i.e. palay =0 18/cavan, and corn =0 17.50/cavan) 5 At average 1971 farm prices (i.e. palay =7 24.h0/cavan, and corn = 26.0/cavan) Net returns to family labor Source: Mission Estimates. AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY PHILIPPINES ANNEX 15. STATISTICAL ANNEX ANNEX l Page 1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY STATISTICAL ANNEX TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I AREA, POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT Table 1.1 Population, 1945-1970, 1975 and 1980 Table 1.2 Population, Land Area, Percent Change, Density and Percent Distribution of Population by Region and Province, 1948-1970 Table 1.3 Labor Force, Employment, Underemployment and Unemployment, October 1956-1971 Table 1.4 Percentages of Underemployed Persons at Work in Agriculture and Non-Agricultural Industries, by Region, FY 1969 Table 1.5 Distribution of Full-Time Employment Equivalent and Employed Persons at Work by Major Industry Group, FY 1959-69 SECTION II NATIONAL INCOME ACCOUNTS AND FISCAL DATA Table 2.1 Gross National Product by Expenditure Shares, and Net Domestic Product by Industrial Origin, 1960-71, (at current prices) Table 2.2 Gross National Product by Expenditure Shares, and Net Domestic Product by Industrial Origin, 1960-71, (at constant 1967 prices) Table 2.3 Gross National Product by Expenditure Shares, FY 1970-75 Table 2.4 Net Domestic Product by Industrial Origin, 1971-75 Table 2.5 Gross Value Added in Agricultural Crops, 1960-71 (at constant prices) Table 2.6 Gross Value Added in Agricultural Crops, at current prices, 1960-1971 Table 2.7 Net Value Added in Agriculture, CY 1960-71 Table 2.8 National Government Fiscal Operations: Sectoral- Functional Classification, 1971-75 Table 2.9 Four-Ye(ar Infrastructure Program, FY 1971/72 to FY 1974/75 ANNEX 14 Page 2 SECTION III AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION, AREA AND YIELDS Table 3.1 Area Harvested by Kind of Crop, 1955-1971 Table 3.2 Production of Selected Crops, Fish, Livestock, and Forest Products, 1955-1971 Table 3.3 Physical Targets of Planned Agricultural Production, FY 1972-75 Table 3.4 Selected Crop Yields, 1955-1971 Table 3.5 Palay: Area Harvested, by Region, 1956-1971 Table 3.6 Palay Production, by Region, 1955-1971 Table 3.7 Palay Yield, by Region, 1956-1971 Table 3.8 Palay: Area and Production, by Region, 1971 and 1972 Table 3.9 Palay: Percentage Distribution of Harvest, by Season and Region, 1969-70 Table 3.10 Corn: Area Harvested,by Region, 1956-1971 Table 3.11 Corn Production, by Region, 1955-1971 Table 3.12 Corn (Shelled): Production, by Variety and by Region, 1970-1971 Table 3.13 Corn Yields, by Region, 1956-1971 Table 3.14 Abaca: Production, by Region, 1961-1971 Table 3.15 Soybeans:Production, by Region, 1960-1971 Table 3.16 Sugarcane: Production, by Region, 1955-1971 Table 3.17 Banana: Production, by Region, 1955-1971 Table 3.18 Livestock on Farms: Animal Population, by Kind, 1960-1970 Table 3.19 Livestock on Farms, by Region, 1966-1970 Table 3.20 Poultry on Farms, by Region, 1966-1970 Table 3.21 Palay and Corn: Monthly Stocks in Commercial Warehouses, 1971-72 Table 3.22 July 1 Palay and Shelled Corn Stocks in Farm Households, by Region, 1969-1971 Table 3.23 Palay: Quarterly Commercial Stocks, by Region, 1969-1971 Table 3.24 Rice and Palay Stocks in Commercial Warehouses by Ownership, by Region, July 1, 1971 Table 3.25 Shelled Corn: Quarterly Commercial Stocks, by Region, 1969-1971 SECTION IV LAND USE AND TENURE Table 4.1 Average Farm Area for Major Crops, 1960 Table 4.2 Number and Area of Farms, by Type of Land Tenure, 1960 ANNEX 1 Page 3 Table h.3 Number and Area of Farms, by Type of Tenancy, 1960 Table h.4 Number and Area of Palay and Corn Farms, by Type of Land Tenure, 1960 Table 4.5 Number and Area of Palay and Corn Farms, by Type of Tenancy, 1960 Table 4.6 Number and Area of Farms by Tenure and by Crop SECTION V FOREIGN TRADE Table 5.1 Balance of Payments of the Philippines, 1960-1971 Table 5.2 Major Agricultural Exports, Volume and Unit Value, 1960-1971 Table 5.3 Value of Principal Exports of Major Agricultural Commodities by Countries, 1960-1971 Table 5.4 Selected Imports - Value, 1960-1971 Table 5.5 Selected Imports - Quantity, 1960-1971 Table 5.6 Imports of Livestock Products, 1965-1971 SECTION VI CONSUMPTION Table 6.1 Gross Available Food Supply, Calendar Years 1968 and 1969 Table 6.2 Net Available Food Supply for Human Consumption, Calendar Years 1968 and 1969 Table 6.3 Income Elasticities for Selected Products, 1960 Table 6.11 Expenditure Elasticities of Demand for Rice Producers and Non-Rice Producers in Regions of the Philippines SECTION VII INPUT USE Table 7.1 Total Investments, FY 1960-1971 Table 7.2 Actual and Recommended Rates of Fertilizer Application for Major Crops Table 7.3 Average Price per Bag of Fertilizer Paid by Farmers from Private Sources (as of February 28, 1971) Table 7.4 Estimated Fertilizer Consumption by Food Crops, 1968-69 Table 7.5 Summary of Domestic Fertilizer Production, 1960-70 Table 7.6 Estimated Fertilizer Supply-Demand Situations, 196 5-1970 Table 7.7 Estimated Fertilizer Consumption, by Region from 1966 to 1969 ANNEX 15 Page 4 SECTION VIII PRICES Table 8.1 Consumer Price Index, 1960-1971 Table 8.2 Retail Price Index of Foodstuffs in Manila, 1960-1971 Table 8.3 Consumer Price and Related Indices, 1960-1971 Table 8.4 Wholesale Price Indices, 1958-1971 Table 8.5 Price Indices, 1962-1971 Table 8.6 Wage Indices, 1961-1971 Table 8.7 Prices Received by Farmers, Selected Crops, 1960-1971 Table 8.8 Prices Received by Farmers of 2nd Class Palay (Macan Ordinario or Equivalent), by Region, 1960-1971 Table 8.9 Prices Received by Farmers of Yellow Corn, by Region, 1960-1971 Table 8.10 Prices Received by Farmers of White Corn, by Region, 1960-1971 Table 8.11 Government Support Price for Palay as Compared to Prices Received by Farmers, 1966-1971 Table 8.12 Average Wholesale Prices in Manila for Cereals and Fruits, 1965-1971 Table 8.13 Average Wholesale Prices in Manila for Sugar, Tobacco and Ramie, 1965-1971 Table 8.14 Average Wholesale Prices in Manila for Logs and Lumber, 1965-1971 Table 8.15 Average Wholesale Prices in Manila for Fresh and Dried Vegetables, 1965-1971 Table 8.16 Average Wholesale Prices in Manila for Meat and Fish, 1965-1971 Table 8.17 Average Retail Prices in Manila for Cereals and Fruits, 1965-1972 Table 8.18 Average Retail Prices in Manila for Beverages, Sugar and Coconuts, 1965-1971 Table 8.19 Average Retail Prices in Manila for Fresh Vegetables, 1965-1971 Table 8.20 Average Retail Prices in Manila for Fish and Fish Products, 1965-1971 Table 8.21 Average Retail Prices in Manila for Meat and Poultry, 1965-1971 SECTION I: AREA, POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT ANNEX 15 Table 1.1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 1.1: POPULATION, 1945-1970, 1975 AND 1980 Population as of Population on Population as Year July 1 Census Dates Census Dates of January 1 a/ 1945 18,089,600 17,591,500 1946 18,34,400 18,262,000 1947 18,785,700 18,610,050 1948 19,143,800 October 1, 1948 19,234,182 18,964,750 1949 19,674,000 19,409,000 1950 20,275,000 19,975,000 1951 20,894,000 20,585,000 1952 21,533,000 21,21h,000 1953 22,191,000 21,862,000 1954 22,868,000 22,530,000 1955 23,568,000 23,238,000 1956 24,288,000 23,928,000 1957 25,030,000 24,659,000 1958 25,7952000 25,413,000 1959 26,584,000 26,190,000 1960 27,387,000 February 15, 1960 27,087,685 26,985,500 1961 28,211,000 27,799,500 1962 29,062,000 28,637,000 1963 29,937,000 29,499,500 1964 30,839,000 30,388,000 1965 31,768,000 31,303,500 1966 32,725,000 32,246,500 1967 33,711,000 33,218,000 1968 34,726,000 34,218,500 1969 35,772,000 35,249,000 1970 36,849,000 May 6, 1970 36,684,486 36,310,500 1975 b/ 42,718,000 42,093,500 1980 c/ 48,804,500 48,o91,ooo a/ Population as of January 1 computed as follows for 1945-1972: Population January 1, year 2 = P 1 + P2 2 Where P1 = population in year 1 (July 1) P2 = population in year 2 (July 1). b/ Assuming an annual population growth rate of 3% from 1970-75. c/ Assuming an annual population growth rate of 2.7% from 1975-80. Sources: Population on Census dates: Handbook of Philippine Statistics 1903-1959, Manila, Bureau of Printing, 1960, 144 pages, p. 5, 1970 Preliminary, BCS, (mimeo). Population July 1st: 1903-1948, Ibid. 1949-1959, Bureau of the Census and Statistics, Handbook of Philippine Statistics, 1963, Manila, Bureau of Printing, 1964 where estimates were interpolations as follows: 1909-1959, from 1948 Census, using growth rate of formula, Pt = Po (1 + r)t, where r = 3.05%. 1960-70, Bureau of Census and Statistics, (based on the census count of May 6, 1970, using r = 3.01 in above formula with 1960 as base year). PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 1.2. POPULATION, LAND AREA, PERCENT CHANGE, DENSITY AND PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION BY REGION AND PROVINCE, 1948-1970 Percent of total Population Land Area Percent Change De!sity Population Region and Provinces 1970 1960 1948 Sq/ki a of 1960- 1970 1960 1948 1970 1960 19W8 (May 6) (Feb 15) (Oct 1) total 1970 1960 Philippines 36,684,486 27,087,685 19,234,182 300,000.0 100.00 35.4 40.8 123.1 90.8 64.1 100.00 100.00 100.00 Region I - Manila & Suburbs/ 1,330,788 1,138,011 983,906 38.3 .01 16.9 15.7 34,746.4 29,728.7 25,689.4 3,63 4.20 5.12 Region II - Ilocos and Mt. Province 1,833,154 1,469,753 1,129,793 25,765.6 8.59 24.7 30.1 71.1 57.0 43.8 5.00 5.43 5.87 Region III - Cagayan Valley and Batanes 1,462,723 1,035,750 669,086 26,837.7 8,95 41.2 54.8 54.5 38.6 24.9 3.99 3.82 3.48 Region IV - Central Luzon 5,100,095 3,690,996 2,774,680 23,646.1 7.88 38.2 33.0 215.7 156.1 117.3 13.90 13.63 14.43 Region V - Southern Luzon and Islands 6,827,377 4,231,973 2,543,602 46,118.7 15.37 61.3 66.4 148.0 91.8 55.2 18.61 15.62 11.22 Region VI - Bicol and Masbate 2,966,881 2,362,707 1,666,459 17,632.5 5.88 25.6 41.8 168.3 134.0 94.5 8.09 8.72 8.66 Region VII - Western Visayas 3,785,408 3,209,963 2,639,334 21,579.1 7.19 17.9 21.6 175.6 148.8 122.3 10.32 11.85 13.72 Region VIII - Eastern Visayas 5,414,128 4,563,768 3,884,078 36,383.1 12.13 18.6 17.5 148.8 125.4 106.7 14.76 16.85 20.19 Region IX - Northern Mindanao 3,016,865 2,111,291 1,376,034 39,844.9 13.28 42.9 53.4 75.7 53.0 34.5 8.22 7.80 7.16 Region X - Southern Mindanao and Sulu 4,947,067 3,272,873 1,567,290 62,153.9 20.72 51.2 108.8 79.6 52.7 25.2 13.48 12.08 8.15 Suburbs are included in their mother province Soureet Bureau of Census and Statistics. 3 > 03 1 (D X t',t- ANNEX 15 Table 1.3 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 1.3: LABOR FORCE, EMPLOYMENT, UNDEREMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT, OCTOBER 1956-1971 (In thousands) Underemployed 2/ Unemployed Percent Percent October Labor of Labor of Labor Year Force Employed 1 Total Force Total Force 1956 8,561 7,702 n.a. n.a. 859 10.0 1957 8,829 8,199 n.a. n.a. 630 7.1 1958(Nov.) 8,976 8,329 585 6.5 647 7.2 1959 9,116 8,575 196 5.4 Sho 5.9 1960 9,116 8,539 601 6.6 577 6.3 1961 9,713 9,095 625 6.4 618 6.4 1962 10,266 9,603 663 6.5 662 6.5 1963 10,233 9,764 620 6.1 469 4.6 19642/ 6- - - - - 1965 10,764 10,101 611 5.7 663 6.2 1966 11,757 10,936 552 4.7 821 7.0 1967 11,776 10,867 n.a. n.a. 909 7.7 1968 11,371 10,471 690 6.1 900 7.9 19693/ - - - - - 1970 3/ - - - - - - 1971(Mar.) 12,288 11,627 572 4.7 661 5.4 1/ Fully and partially. 2/ Wanting additional work and worked less than 30 hours per week. 3/ The October round of the survey of households was not taken during this year. n.a. = not available. Source: Bureau of Census and Statistics. Unless otherwise indicated in the table, the figures refer to the month of October and are based on the results of the Bureau of Census and Statistics Survey of Households (BCSSH). ANNEX 15 Table 1.4 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 1.4 : PERCENTAGES OF UNDEREMPLOYED PERSONS AT WORK IN AGRICULTURE AND NON-AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES, BY REGION, FY 1969* (In thousands, except percentages) TOTAL ALL INDUSTRIES AGRICULTURE NON-AGRICULTURE WANTING WANTING WANTING NO. OF ADD'L NO. OF ADD'L NO. OF ADD'L REGIONAL GROUPING PERSONS WORK PERSONS WORK PERSONS WORK AT WORK (PER CENT) AT WORK (PER CENT) AT WORK (PER CENT) PHILIPPINES ..................... 10,476 24.2 5,808 27.0 4,668 20.8 1. Manila & Suburbs ............... 977 13.0 13 15.3 964 12.9 2. Ilocos-Mt. Province .............. 605 29.9 395 34.6 210 20.9 3. Cagayan Valley & Batanes ........ 315 8.2 241 6.6 74 13.5 4. Central Luzon ................... 1,356 27.6 614 26.3 742 28.4 5. Southern Luzon & Islands ....... 1,221 29.1 554 35.0 667 24.2 6. Bicol ........................... 992 25.6 683 28.8 309 18.4 7. Western Visayas ................ 1,294 26.5 832 29.5 462 21.2 8. Eastern Visayas ................ 1,626 29.1 1,004 33.4 622 22.1 9. Northern Mindanao ............. 782 27.5 485 28.6 297 25.9 10. Southern Mindanao & Sulu ...... 1,308 14.4 987 13.8 321 16.1 * Average of October 1968 and May 1969 figures. Source: Bureau of the Census and Statistics. AN NEX c5 Table 1.5 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 1.5: DISTRIBUTION OF FULL-TIME EMPLOYMENT EQUIVALENT AND EMPLOYED PERSONS AT WORK BY MAJOR INDUSTRY GROUP, FY 1959-69 MAJOR INDUSTRY GROUP FULL TIME EQUIVALENT EMPLOYED PERSONS AT WORK FY 1959-69 FY 1959 FY 1969 FY 1959-69 FY 1959 FY 1969 AVERAGE AVERAGE 1. Agriculture, forestry, hunting and fishing ..... 57.4 60.8 53.5 59.4 63.0 55.4 2. Mining and quarrying ....................... .4 .4 .4 .3 .4 .4 3. Construction ................................ 2.9 2.1 3.3 2.7 2.0 3.2 4.M anufacturing .............................. 10.9 10.6 11.3 11.5 11.1 11.7 5. Electricity, gas, water and sanitary services .... .3 .3 .3 .3 .3 .3 6. Commerce .................................. 10.6 10.0 10.7 10.2 9.5 10.4 7. Transport, storage and communication ........ 3.7 3.0 4.0 3.2 2.7 3.4 8. Gov't., community, business and recreational services ................................... 5.8 5.4 7.6 5.3 4.9 7.5 9. Domestic services ..... 5.4 4.8 6.3 4.1 3.5 4.9 10. Personal services other than domestic ......... 2.2 2.3 2.3 2.1 2.2 2.3 11. Industry not reported ........................ .2 .2 .3 .3 .3 .3 Source: Bureau of the Census and Statistics. N.B. Due to rounding, the figures may not always add up to 100.0 per cent. SECTION II: NATIONAL INCOME ACCOUNTS AND FISCAL DATA PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 2.1: GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT BY EXPENDITURE SHARES, AND NET DOMESTIC PRODUCT BY INDUSTRIAL ORIGIN, 1960-71 (In million pesos at current prices) 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1966 1966 1967 1968 19649 197u 1971 Personal Consumption Expenditures 10,492 11,430 12,2S6 13,737 15,525 16,582 13. L11 20,318 22,63S 23.998 28,479 35,483 Czneral Government Consumption Expenditures 1,038 1,175 1,380 1,637 1,829 1,974 2,180 2,378 2,657 3,265 3,154 4,301 Cross Domestic Capital Formation 1,340 2,688 3,082 3,767 4,426 4,658 5,031 5,975 6,694 6,660 8,131 10,42S N.t Exports 119 (381) (1,133) (93) (578) (211) (385) (570) (1,172) (1,264) (87) (10) Exports of Goods and Services 1,552 1,668 1,982 2,894 3,073 3,691 4,546 4,703 4,474 347 7,930 8,742 Less: Imports of Goods and Services 1,433 2,029 3,115 2,987 3,651 3,902 4,161 5,273 5,66 5,611 8,017 8,752 Expenditures on Cross Domestic Product 13,390 14,912 15,615 19,048 21,202 23,003 25,707 28',101 30,613 32,59 39,677 50,199 Npt Factor Income from Abroad (158) (115) (80) (68) (92) (123) (143) (298) (384) (306) (6j9) (o19) Ststistical Discrepancy (232) (588) (186) (81.5) (1,651) (1,810) (2,313) (1,773) (257) 730 875 (1,470) Ex.en,ditures on Gross National Product 13,000 14,209 15 721 18S135 19,459 21 070 21 26 29,972 33,083 3 9 , Arriculttre, Fisher' and Forestry 3.626 3,916 4,175 4,980 5,209 5,729 6,393 7,447 8,977 10.148 11.934 14,525 MIning and Qvarrving 132 137 175 182 188 235 311 346 419 534 838 941 Ma Lact uring 2,141 2,349 2,592 3,084 3,146 3,213 3,472 3,832 4,610 4,941 6,185 7,792 Construct ion 394 446 448 584 661 759 759 856 842 902 817 1,054 Transportation, Communication, qt-rage and Itilities 560 587 625 671 712 "83 S65 925 995 1,068 1,236 1,391 ,7Mnm rc e 1,785 1,898 2.111 2,316 2,537 2,7!1 3,01, 3,261 3,800 4,013 6.946 5.390 Scrv i :es 2,690 3,116 3,431 3,796 1.19 4,487 4.887 5 343 5 868 6,402 7,205 8,190 No( Dones:io Product at Factor Cost 11,528 12,449 13,557 15,613 16 598 17,917 19,705 22.006 25,511 28,008 33,181 39,283 14 National Product or National Income 11.370 12,334 13,477 15.545 16,506 17,794 19,562 21,705 25,127 27,702 32,522 38,664 Irdircct Taxes net of Subsidies 981 1,102 1,282 1,426 1.,501 1,552 1,750 2,016 2,204 2,356 3,353 4,254 Capital Consumption Allowance 649 /73 962 1,164 1.452 1.724 1,939 2,300' 2 ,641 3.025 4.,18 5,192 Gross National Product at Market Prices 13000 16,209 7 Q5 1 21 7 2_5 6 024 2 33,083 110 CN' on FY basis 13,605 14.965 16,928 18,797 20,234 22.161 24,638 27,998 31,528 36,488 44,002 bource : OSCAS - :!IC 1960 - 1965 August 30, 1968 Edition 1966 April 15, 1969 Edit4on 196/ April 17, 1970 Edition 1963 September 1971 Edition r/ Revised. 1969 - 1971 December 1971 Edition p/ Preliminary. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 2.2: GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT BY EXPENDITURE SHARES, AND NET DOMESTIC PRODUCT BY INDUSTRIAL ORIGIN, 1960-71 (In Million Pesos at constant 1967 prices) TYPE OF EXPENDITURES 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1964 1970 1 1971p' Perscnal Coasumption vxpenditures 15,206 15,853 16,558 17,150 17,784 18,445 19,153 19,601 22,497 23,495 24,573 25,666 General Government Consumption 1,469 1,622 1,804 2,008 2,091 2,203 2,310 2,378 2,628 3,191 2,609 2,977 F xpend Ltures Gross Domestic apital Formation 2,337 3,041 3,223 3,691 4,129 4,338 4,510 6,239 6,414 .6,477 6,625 7,203 Net Exports 715 143 (852) 40 (319) 21 825 (569) (1,633) (1,440) (469) 772 Exports oF Goods and Services 2,524 2,579 2,564 3,129 3,422 3,999 5,015 4,703 3,989 4,066 6,760 8,005 Less: im-ports of Goods and Services 1,809 2,436 3,416 3,089 3,741 3,978 4,190 5,272 5,622 5,506 7,229 7,233 Expenditures on Gross Domestic Product 19,727 20,659 20,733 22,889 23.685 25,007 26,798 27,649 29,906 31,723 33,338 36,618 Net Faccor Income from Abroad (192) (132) (85) (68) (90) (120) (135) (298) (387) (299) (514) (504) Statistical Discrepancy (1,612) (1,548) (461) (1,061) (1,424) (2,027) (1,802) (948) (1,027) (<74) (841) (2,063) Expenditures on Gross National Product 21.760 22.1 71 261 26,403 230450 31, 83 3..051 Agriculture, Fishery and Forestry 5,544 5,827 6,068 6,544 6,360 6,247 7,235 7,667 8,019 8,513 8,780 9,218 Mining and Quarrying 226 241 244 248 257 281 314 346 408 461 540 655 Manufacturing 2,788 2,904 3,057 3,305 3,361 3,393 3,651 3,832 4,465 4,760 5,041 5,400 Construction 519 568 524 640 693 782 763 892 824 869 663 725. Transdortation, Communication, 677 706 732 769 796 843 882 928 967 983 1,027 1,092 Storage and Utilities Coimwrce 2,330 2,424 2,606 2,772 2,837 2,966 3,134 3,358 3,697 3,896 4,125 4,372 Services 3,644 3,871 4,129 4,419 4,636 4,893 5,107 5,358 5,697 6,045 6,251 6,492 Net Domestic Product at Factor Cost 15,728 16,541 17,360 18,647 13,940 19,405 21,086 22,378 24,077 25,527 26,427 27,954 Net National Product or National 15,536 16,409 17,275 18,579 18,850 19,285 20,951 22,080 23,690 25,228 25,913 27,450 IndirecltDus nout of Subsidicr 1,386 1,533 1,685 1,776 1.727 1,7L2 1,857 2.016 2,197 2,297 2,803 2,944 Capital Consumption Allowance 1,001 1,037 1,227 1,405 1,594 1,833 2,053 2,307 2,605 2,925 3,267 3,657 oro.. Naiooal Product at Market 17,923 18,779 20,187 21,760 22,171 22,860 24,861 26,403 28,492 30 31983 34,051 'r ices rowth Rat v 4.8 7.5 7.8 1.9 3.1 8.8 6.2 7.9 6.9 5.0 6.5 S,urce: OSCAS - NEC 1960-1965 August 30, 1968 Edition 1966 April 15, )969 Edtion 1967 April 17, 1970 Edition 1966 Septe-ibe, 1971 Edicion 1969-1971 Lecember 1971 Edition r/ Rcvised / Prl Ininary ANNEX 15 Table 2.3 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 2.3: GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT BY EXPENDITURE SHARES, FY 1970-75 (In million pesos at 1967 prices) ANNUAL AVERAGE ACTUAL ESTIMATE TARGETS GROWTH RATE FY 1970 FY 1971 FY 1972 FY 1973 FY 1974 FY 1975 Fy 1972-75 Gross National Product' ................ 31,320 33,042 35,190 37,653 40,290 43,110 6.9 Personal Consumption Expenditures .....24,007 25,180 25,930 27,546 29,271 31,049 5.4 Per Cent Share to GNP .............. 76.6 76.2 73.7 73.2 72.6 72.0 General Gov't. Consumption Expenditures . 3,038 2,835 3,158 3,298 3,446 3,600 6.2 Per Cent Share to GNP .............. 9.7 8.6 9.0 8.8 8.6 8.4 Gross Domestic Capital Formation (GDCF)- ............................ 7,041 6,78 7,995 8,680 9,445 10,271 11.4 Per Cent Share to GNP .............. 22.5 20.2 22.7 23.1 23.4 23.8 A) PRIVATE ............ ............ 6,359 6,223 7,313 7,827 8,379 8,939 9.6 Per Cent Share toGDCF ..... ...... 90.3 93.2 91.5 90.2 88.7 87.0 B) GOVERNMENT ...................... 682 455 682 853 1,066 1,332 31.2 Per Cent Share to GDCF ............ 9.7 6.8 8.5 9.8 11.3 13.0 Exports of Goods and ServiceS ........ 4,482 5,921 6,582 7,240 7,964 8,761 10.3 Per Cent Share to GNP .............. 14.3 17.1, 18.7 19.2 19.8 20.3 Less: Imports of goods and Services ..... 5,669 6,272 7,293 7,914 8,625 9,399 10.7 Per Cent Share to GNP .............. 18.1 19.0 20.7 21.0 21.4 21.8 Net Factor Income from Abroad..... (337) (467) (633) (678) (713) (746) Per Cent Share to GN .............. (1.4) (1.8) (1.8) (1.8) (1.7) I The difference between GNP and sum of personal and government consumption expenditures, gross domestic capital formation, and exports minus imports are accounted for by statistical discrepancy. The latter item remains in the pro- jections since the macroeconomic model utilized national i ncome data as they are available officially. Work is in progress now at the Office of Statistical Coordination and Standards, National Economic Council, to reduce and account for this discrepancy. 2 Additions of P132 million, P198 million, and P330 million (at 1967 prices) to Gross Domestic Capital Formation for FY 1973, FY 1974 and FY 1975, respectively, which represen ts anticipated additional imports of investment goods financed by concessionary loans through the consultative group. 3 Exports and Imports are as defined in the National I ncome Accounts, i.e., trade and non-trade transactions in- goods and services, including payments and receipts. Source: Four Year Development Plan, 1972-75. ANNEK 15 Table 2.4 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 2.: NET DOMESTIC PRODUCT BY INDUSTRIAL ORIGIN, 1971-1975 (In million pesos at constant 1967 prices) ANNUAL AVERAGE ACTUAL ESTIMATE TARGETS GROWTH RATE FY 1970 FY 1971 FY 1972 FY 1973 FY 1974 vY 1975 Fy 1972-75 Gross National Product ................ 31,320 33,042 35,190 37,653 40,290 43,110 Growth Rate (/.) ................... .4 5.5 6.5 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.9 Population as of January 1 (In Millions) . 36.624 37.760 38.931 40.138 41.383 42.660 Growth Rate () ................... 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 Per Capita GNP (In Pesos) ............ 855 875 904 938 974 1,010 Growth Rate (% ) ................... 3.1 2.3 3.14 3.19 3.19 3.19 3.8 Net Domestic Product ................. 26,053 27,112 28,739 30,607 32,596 34,715 Growth Rate () ................... 5.1 4.1 6.0 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.4 Agriculture ........................... 8,682 9,058 9,572 10,106 10,610 11,125 Growth Rate (%) ................... 3.0 4.6 5.7 5.5 5.0 5.0 5.3 Per Cent share to NDP .............. 33.2 33.4 33.3 33.0 32.6 32.0 Mining ............................... 513 582 681 838 1,034 1,276 Growth Rate (%) ...................5 18. 13.4 17.0 23.0 23.5 23.5 21.8 Per Cent share to NDP .............. 2.0 2.1 2.4 2.7 3.2 3.7 Manufacturing ........................ 4,893 5,144 5,467 6,000 6,600 7,250 Growth Rate (% ) -................. 4.7 5.1 6.3 9.7 10.0 10.0 9.0 Per Cent share to NDP .............. 18.8 19.0 19.0 19.6 20.2 20.9 Construction ........................... 839 634 824 890 961 1,038 Growth Rate (%) ................... 13.4 (24.4) 30.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 13.5 Per Cent share to NDP .............. 3.2 2.3 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Transportation 999 1,062 1,114 1,183 1,253 1,327 Growth Rate ( ................... 1.8 6.3 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 5.8 Per Cent share to NDP .............. 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.8 3.8 Commerce ............................. 3,981 4,255 4,434 4,676 4,949 5,233 Growth Rate (%).) ................... 8.9 6.9 4.2 5.5 5.8 5.7 5.3 Per Cent share to NDP .............. 15.3 15.7 15.4 15.3 15.2 15.1 Services ............................. 6,166 6,377 6,647 6,914 7,189 7,466 Growth Rate (% ) ................... 4.9 3.4 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Per Cent share to NDP ............... 23.7 23.5 23.1 22.6 22.1 21.5 Source: Four Year Development Plan, 1972-75. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 2.5: GROSS VALUE ADD, IN AGRICULTURAL CROPS 1960 TO 197 AT CONSTANT PRICES 1955 Prices in Million Pesos 1967 Prices in Million Pesos Name of Crop 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Palay 667 682 706 701 702 723 750 1,426 1,484 1,595 1,771 1,776 Corn 154 161 165 166 169 175 186 325 351 392 423 421 Fruits 72 89 106 123 135 143 145 250 248 269 285 295 Pineapple 17 17 20 21 23 25 27 40 42 44 44 48 Citrus 15 17 19 19 20 22 23 28 28 26 26 26 Tubers and root crops 10 10 10 11 11 11 10 29 29 29 30 32 Cassava 22 23 21 24 28 28 26 71 68 65 61 62 Canote 40 37 37 39 39 36 35 92 94 98 101 107 Vegetables 34 35 35 36 38 41 42 91 95 107 146 159 Beans and peas 23 20 20 19 18 17 17 32 32 18 19 20 Coffee 37 48 48 46 53 55 56 95 94 100 lo9 116 Cacao 9 9 9 9 10 11 10 10 11 11 11 12 Coconut 275 306 340 350 337 334 340 916 897 886 866 921 Sugarcane 132 135 146 155 151 145 150 386 391 429 449 594 Fiber crops 4 4 4 4 5 5 4 7 6 25 19 19 Abaca 32 36 38 4o 41 41 39 54 51 57 64 72 Tobacco 51 54 56 55 44 43 45 60 63 61 72 77 Rubber 4 4 5 6 7 7 7 9 14 16 16 16 Other crops 58 62 66 68 69 80 81 159 310 328 360 389 TOTAL 1,656 1,749 1,851 1,892 1,900 1,942 1,993 4,080 4,308 4,556 4,872 5,162 Calender Year > PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 2.6, GROSS VALUE ADDED IN AGRICULTURAL CROPS AT CURRENT PRICES, 1960-1971 Y Name of Crop 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 69 1970 1971 Palay 723 837 860 975 1104 1181 1290 1426 1662 1821 2206 2770 Corn 163 173 173 218 258 281 319 325 362 456 549 797 Fruits 72 81 97 104 106 133 172 250 482 606 755 929 Pineapple 14 14 15 16 18 19 22 40 54 71 96 92 Citrus 12 13 13 14 15 16 17 28 32 35 42 61 Tubers and root crops 15 17 18 20 20 19 22 29 39 54 81 108 Cassava 31 36 34 44 54 59 64 71 79 84 86 115 Cam,,te 50 56 42 66 70 83 92 92 116 145 161 215 VeFetables 39 43 44 42 47 53 60 91 120 165 251 267 Beans anA peas 25 21 20 20 19 19 19 32 37 43 55 65 Coffee 32 32 41 49 55 57 59 95 136 176 231 254 Cacao 10 10 9 9 10 11 10 10 13 15 15 22 Coconut 549 578 585 654 668 736 852 916 930 1105 1313 1670 Sugarcane 114 118 129 136 132 141 155 386 400 508 616 761 Fiber crops 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 7 7 10 17 15 kbaca 57 57 56 64 71 65 56 54 56 72 91 109 Tobacco 66 63 63 60 52 46 49 60 82 102 137 77 Hubber 4 4 6 7 7 7 9 18 34 58 71 Other crops 73 83 87 96 104 125 129 159 187 226 310 377 'OTAL 2052 2239 2314 2597 2814 3055 3398 4080 4812 5728 7070 8775 1/ Calendar year. Source: National Economic Council. N: PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 2.7: NET VALUE ADDED IN AGRICULTURE CY 1960-1971 (In Million Pesos) 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 a) At Current Prices Agricultural Crops 2,052 2,239 2,314 2,597 2,814 3,055 3,398 4,080 4,812 5,728 7,070 8,775 Livestock and Poultry 716 795 782 897 1,100 1,250 1,406 1,582 1,592 1,561 1,855 2,176 Fishing 362 361 412 493 575 595 611 714 1,018 1,092 1,298 1,523 Forestry and Logging 595 628 781 1,129 862 986 1,153 1,501 1,801 2,049 2,063 2,454 Gross Value Added 3,725 4,023 4,289 5,116 5,351 5,886 6,568 7,877 9,223 10,130 12,286 14,928 Net Value Added 3,626 3,916 4,175 4,980 5,209 5,729 6,393 7,667 8,977 10,148 11,954 14,525 b) At Constant Prices At Constant 1955 Prices At Constant 1967 Prices Agricultural Crops 1,656 1,749 1,851 1,892 1,900 1,942 1,993 4,o80 4,,308 4,556 4,872 5,162 Livestock and Poultry 730 775 746 778 867 961 1,080 1,582 1,417 1,513 1,555 1,624 Fishing 310 316 331 362 390 427 452 714 901 911 956 1,005 Forestry and Logging 528 546 602 773 542 612 658 1,501 1,613 1,769 1,640 1,683 Gross Value Added 3,224 3,386 3,530 3,805 3,699 3,942 4,183 7,877 8,239 8,749 9,023 9,474 Net Value Added 3,138 3,296 3,436 3,703 3,600 3,837 4,071 7,667 8,019 8,513 8,780 9,218 Source: BAEcon, DANR. ANND, 15 Table 2.8 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 2.8: NATIONAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL OPERATIONS: SECTORAL-FUNCTIONAL CIASSIFICATION, 1971-1975 (All funds combined, in million pesos, at current prices) ESTIMATE I PROJECTED EXPENDITURE CLASSRIFICATION FY 1971 FY 1972 FY 197:3 rY 1974 FY 1975 A. Cuirrcit Expenditures 1. Economic Deveepnnent ..................... 605 699 755 794 832 Agriculture & Natural Resources ........... 200 264 221 229 236 Transportation & Communication ........... 243 252 311 326 341 Commerce annd Industry ................... 54 62 69 71 73 Other Economic Devclopmet ............... 108 121 154 168 182 2. Social Deveepnnent ........................ 1421 1499 1584 1686 1789 Education ................................. 1122 1226 1288 1872 1455 Public Health .............................. 16 213 222 235 249 Labor and W elfare .....................- 103 60 74 79 85 3. Debt Service .............................. 348 426 331 364 390 4. General Government and others ............. 1098 1187 1262 1350 1435 TOTAL CURRENT EXPFNDITURES ................. 3472 3811 3932 4194 4452 B. Capital Expenditures 1. Economic Deveepunent ..................... 561 696 734 807 923 Agriculture & Natural Resources ............ 1u. 142 135 162 185 Tranportation & Communication ........... 3 J 411 450 476 545 Commerce and Industry .................... 15 32 24 40 46 Other Economic Development ............... 104 111 125 129 147 2. Social Devekonnent ........................ 37 51 73 90 105 Education ................................. 25 35 54 62 72 Public Health and Medical Care ............. 3 12 16 21 24 Labor and Welfare ........................ 9 4 3 7 9 3.General Government and other ............. 13 16 48 61 74 Total Capital Expenditures ................... 611 763 855 958 1102 ToTAL EXPENDITURES (A-8) ................ 4083 4574 4787 5152 5554 ISource: Budget Commission ANNEX 15 PHILIPPINES Table 2.9 AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 2.9: FOUR-YEAR INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM FY 1971/72 TO FY 197h/75 ANNUAL INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS 1/ (In million P/$ at current prices) FOUR-YEAR ANNUAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS PROJECT CATEGIRY C1RENCY TOTAL fY 1972 FY 1973 FY 1794 -Y 1975 A. TRANSPORTATION ........ P 2,035.76 440.80 461-39 551.90 581.37 $ 166.95 38.40 39.55 44.55 44.45 1. Highways ....P............ P 1,604.10 340.80 365.80 447.50 450.00 $ 77.29 19.90 15.63 19.06 22.70 2. Airports ................... P 126.80 24.00 22.80 30.00 50.00 $ 27.88 1.00 8.92 10.23 7.73 3. Air Navigation ..... P 63.30 30.00 11.40 9.90 12.00 $ 12.72 4.50 4.98 3.24 - 4. Railroad .................. P 116.56 13.10 34.59 34.50 34.37 $ 19.16 7.20 1.82 4.12 6.02 5. Portworks ................. P 125.00 32.90 27.10 30.00 35.00 $ 29.90 5.80 8.20 7.90 8.00 R. COMMUNICATIONS ........ P 107.50 16.50 26.00 30.00 35.00 $ 46.47 5.80 12.90 12.04 15.73 1. Telecom ................... P 107.50 16.50 26.00 30.00 35.00 $ 46.47 5.80 12.90 12.04 15.73 C.WATER RESOURCES ....... P 814.20 232.30 175.60 181.30 225.00 $ 118.15 11.04 24.70 37.00 44.51 1.Gravity Irrigation ......... P 434.50 134.90 109.30 95.30 95.00 $ 44.58 11.14 10.10 8.50 14.84 2. Pump Irrigation .. ......... P 18.40 5.50 4.40 4.50 4.00 5 20.10 - 6.00 5.50 8.60 3, Wnt,'. Si,pplv andi Sewerage .... ............ P 361.30 91.90 61.90 81.50 126.00 $ 53.47 .80 8.60 23.00 21.07 D. POWER ELECTRIFICATION P 455.70 86.50 98.94 152.01 118.25 $ 129.42 32.20 24.62 41.76 30.84 1. Power Plants & Transmission Lines ..................... P 363.74 68.54 79.94 127.01 88.25 $ 96.02 3.80 24.62 36.76 30.84 2. Rural Electrification ....... P 92.00 18.00 19.00 25.00 30.00 $ 33.40 28.40 - 5.00 - E.SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE P 444.90 103.70 96.90 116.90 127.40 $ 25.29 5.20 5.41 7.42 7.26 1. Bldgs./Hospitals ........... P 57.50 15.50 12.00 15.00 15.00 2. Pre-fab Schools ............ P 173.40 47.60 27.90 38.70 49.20 $ 21.39 5.20 5.41 5.52 5.26 3. River control ............. P 69.00 16.60 15.00 18.20 19.20 $ 3.90 - - 1.90 2.00 4. Shore Protection ........... P 15.00 4.00 2.00 5.00 4.00 5. Misc. Pub. Works ........... P 130.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 40.00 F. PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING ......... P 57.40 15.40 12.00 15.00 15.00 $ 12.70 2.70 3.00 3.50 3.50 TOTA L ............... P 3,915.46 895.20 871.13 1,047.11 1,102.02 $ 498.98 96.24 110.18 146.27 146.29 Only peso requirements are included in the budget of the National Government. The Program includes the capital expenditures of major government corporations. SECTION III: AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION, ARFA AND YIELDS PHILIPPINES ACRICULTORAL SECTOR 50RVEY 'faбle Э.1: ААЕА HARVESTED 8У kIND OF CROP, 1955-1971 ('000 На) 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1910 1971 PHILIPPINES 6,434 6,817 7,004 6,807 7,910 7,596 7,8Э4 7,918 7,9Э4 7,956 8,252 8,296 В,511 8,ВОЬ 8,919 8,94б 9,097 Food Croys 4,891 5,276 5,+49 5,288 6,351 6,008 6,118 6,073 5,977 5,869 5,996 6,062 6,090 6,401 6,440 o,4U6 6,Э45 Ра1ау (rough rice) 2,656 2,743 2,768 3,154 3,329 3,306 3,198 3,179 Э,161 3,088 3,200 3,109 3,096 3,Э04 3,Э32 Э,11Э Э,11Э Согп 1,Э88 1,675 1,787 1,Э81 2,107 1,846 2,046 2,016 1,950 1,898 1,923 2,016 2,158 2,248 2,256 2,420 2,Э92 Fruit апд nuts 3Э2 ЭЭ2 345 366 349 320 359 Эб7 366 365 Э72 353 354 370 36В 380 361 Citrus 20 21 21 22 22 23 28 29 29 28 29 29 29 28 25 21 19 Root crops 273 280 292 300 300 289 28Э 261 264 288 274 263 252 250 254 252 246 VegeCaбes ехсерС onions алд potatoes 91 92 94 96 92 72 54 55 48 47 46 47 48 46 49 51 46 Oniorts 4 4 4 4 5 7 6 6 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 9 8 Potatoes 3 3 Э 4 2 2 2 2 3 Э Э 3 Э 3 Э 3 Э Beans апд peas 68 70 75 81 82 78 63 б7 69 61 56 55 47 48 45 50* 49* Coffee 19 20 22 23 26 31 Э9 50 42 42 44 46 50 49 52 54 54 Сасао 7 6 7 7 7 7 10 9 10 9 10 9 9 9 9 8 7 Peanuts 28 29 29 31 27 24 22 20 19 25 24 26 29 30 Э1 Э2 3Э А11 other food crops 2 2 2 3 4 4 11 11 12 12 11 12 11 11 11 13 14 Со®егсlаl СгооS 1,544 1,541 1,555 1,519 1,559 1,588 1,715 1,845 1,957 2,087 2,257 2,235 2,421 2,405 2,419 2,540 2,752 Coconu[ 990 992 992 996 1,006 1,059_ 1,200 1,284 1,392 1,48Э 1,605 1,611 1,820 1,800 1,846 1,884 2,048 Sugarcane 268 240 235 2Э1 252 242 2Э2 255 259 270 Э51 Э15 Э09 318 34Э 366 442 АЪаса 217 217 232 193 193 175 175 184 182 211 199 198 186 171 17Э 173 155 ТоЬассо (Virginia) 16 Э5 ЭВ 49 49 52 45 47 41 35 29 25 25 29 32 33 29 (Natlve) Э7 40 4Э 36 42 44 46 5Э 56 61 47 60 58 65 57 54 47 Ramie 3 Э 3 2 2 2 2 3 Э Э 3 3 3 1 1 2 2 АиЪЪег 5 5 5 5 5 5 10 14 18 20 17 16 15 15 21 22 23 Maguey Э Э Э 2 4 Э Э 3 3 3 3 Э 3 3 3 3 3 Rapok Э Э 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 Э 3 3 3 Э 2 Со[ton Э Э Э Э 4 2 1 1 - - - - - - - - - • lncluding sovбeaпs. 5оигсе: BAEcnn� ПРмR. Н 9 ы 'г Р 2 т Х :- й PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Та61е 3.2: PRODUCTION OF BELECTED САОР8, FIBH,LIVEBTOCK AND POREST PRODUCTS� , 1955-1971 � ('000 т tons) 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 19Ь0 1961 1962 196Э 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 £оод Сгорв �/ Ра1ау (rough гlсе) 3,202 3,27Э Э,346 Э,203 Э,684 3,739 3,704 Э,910 3,967 3,842 3,992 4,07Э 4,094 4,561 4,445 5,Т33 5,343 Corn 770 907 895 852 1,016 1,165 1,210 1,266 1,27Э 1,29Э 1,313 1,380 1,490 1,619 1,733 2,008 2,005 Fгиlгв апд пи[в 596 615 638 678 655 675 701 934 1,006 1,219 1,214 1,2Э8 1,Э53 1,372 1,37Э _1,569 1,66Э С1[гиа Э2 33 34 ЗЬ 37 4Э 54 62 62 61 71 75 79 78 75 71 ЬЗ Аоо[ сгора 1,200 1,261 1,292 1,Э30 1,Э40 1,412 1,445 1,334 1,360 1,55Э 1,537 1,472 1,368 1,Э05 1,Э38 1,316 1,221 Vege[ables ехсерС олlопв апд ро[а[оеа 164 167 168 174 171 162 147 167 152 170 185 192 200 201 215 255 245 Onlons 13 l1 9 10 13 17 18 -20 15 13 15 16 16 15 15 31 3Э Pota[oea 7 8 10 10 7 7 10 11 15 18 16 17 17 12 18 20 22 Beane апд peas 40 42 44 46 49 42 Э3 33 31 27 26 24 21 22 20 23 1/ 24 1/ Coffee 7 7 8 10 11 26 Э2 43 ЭЗ Э9 44 43 44 44 49 50 Сасао 2 2 2 2 2 Э 4 Э Э 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Ocoundnuts (unshelled) 18 8 18 19 16 15 13 11 11 14 1Э 14 14 ' 15 15 17 19 А11 ocher food crops 5 5 5 5 5 В ЭО 36 45 45 50 52 54 46 49 68 g4 Е ort Сгорь °/ Сорта - (1,174 1,148 1,439 1,164 1,065 1,275 1,198 1,5Э3 1,752 1,6Э8 1,586 1,663 1,4Э8 1,429 1,288 1,312) 2,75Э Сорга в-/а/ (1,103 1,140 1,Э19 1,29Э 1,072 1,075 1,071 1,Э56 1,489 1,487 1,471 1,4К5 1,577 1,542 1,515 1,656) 1,574 Сосопиг -(m111ion пи[а) 5,Э21 5,504 5,951 5,974 6,041 6,016 6,195 7,396 7,704 7,222 7,052 7,090 7,925 7,412 7,244 7,745 7,814 Dеавlса[ед с conut 40 42 54 5Ь 50 42 59 63 67� 6Э 63 72 8Э 51 44 70 106 Sugar, centrifugal апд тивсоvадо 1,304 1,16Э 1,10Э 1,268 1,443 1,439 1,354 1,506 1,600 1,690 1,Ь21 1,460 1,622 1,658 1,663 1,987 2,109 Моlавsее 242 250 245 275 364 369 Э56 Э97 4Э0 442 414 368 406 503 504 608 870 АЬаса 105 120 129 125 111 95 115 116 128 1Э4 134 135 118 10Э 106 122 105 ТоЬассо(Virginla) 10 20 Э1 Э1 30 34 28 29 25 21 17 15 15 17 20 22 20 (Natlve) 20 19 20 18 22 30 32 41 42 44 29 4Э 36 48 Э7 Э9 ЗЬ Ram1e 2 1 2 2 Э 2 2 4 5 5 6 5 4 1 2 3 Э АиЬЬет 2 2 2 3 2 3 4 5 5 6 6 6 7 14 18 19 21 Llveetock S1дuRhtered а/('000 heads) ?/ Са[[1е 257 275 279 300 264 298 146 189 171 187 1Э0 189 160 177 137 СагаЪаа 21 Э5 5Э 65 7Э 7Я 7i 95 84 50 22 28 26 25 19 Hogs 2,727 3,016 3,306 3,328 3,296 3,517 3,966 3,682 3,722 3,627 3,59Э 6,612 4,698 3,725 4,664 Рои1[гу 2Э,225 25,005 26,741 26,833 27,201 28,876 27,251 23,157 26,372 30,605 27,743 25,779 22,914 21,090 25,667 Dгеввед We1дhC (т Сопв) ?/ Cattle 36,181 38,792 33,018 Эб,916 Э1,47Э 39,425 19,554 25,126 22,817 24,536 16,297 28,758 24,3Э5 26,152 21,415 СагеЬао 3,105 5,297 8,bОЧ 10,2b3 11,55b 12,796 11,799 14,224 13,981 7,696 3,664 5,0Э7 4,595 4,450 3,307 Hogs 119,972 132,704 138,56Э 143,68Э 143,658 L53,243 158,29Э 161,096 165,388 158,449 155,465 Т97,527 211,Э99 167,421 225,985 Рои1[гу 25,470 27,429 Э1,В67 Э2,014 Э2,Ь95 32,766 30,В10 26,185 30,145 32,974 31,171 30,816 27,414 25,413 23,247 Fisheтv Тоеа1 quantlty а/ 363 Э94 387 427 437 445 455 484 547 604 667 705 746 938 941 989 То[а1 value (т реьоь) 322 349 366 406 451 464 471 541 665 785 807 826 963 1,352 1,457 1,725 Со®етс1а1 flвhing: Vеььеlв - Quantlty 107 107 94 112 118 120 126 150 209 258 300 315 ЭЭ1 407 Зб9 ЭЬ2 Va1ue 75 71 69 78 87 94 101 138 277 Э90 372 366 424 548 557 61S Flshponda - Qивп[1[у 37 38 Э9 58 58 60 61 61 62 6Э 63 64 64 87 95 96 Va1ue 46 50 63 91 93 96 99 108 104 104 106 130 1Э5 182 191 Z53 Мипсlраl fieherleв апд � suetenance flshing: Quantity 219 249 254 257 261 264 268 272 277 283 Э04 327 J51 444 477 511 Va1ue 202 229 234 2Э7 271 275 271 295 284 291 328 330 404 631 710 858 Forestry Products °-/ Logs ('000 т) 4,304 4,631 4,826 5,452 6,315 6,596 6,772 7,668 6,536 6,175 8,U45 I,84s ii,i14 ii,5n4 ii,ййS Lumber (million Ьд. ft.) 379 479 499 434 Э84 441 406 482 500 5Э1 37Ь Э22 43Э 621 56В Plywood (т1111оп aq. ft.) 81 105 1Э5 169 298 Э24 260 317 400 470 597 540 522 695 524 573 Veneer (mi111on вq, ft.) 127 198 205 296 454 254 239 399 738 610 742 786 8Э1 1,206 627 305 ' Сгор years епдlпg June 30. т а 1/ Including saybeans. ° � 2/ Livescock slaugheer anL dresaed welgh[ оп Еагтs оп1у, 10 ц - w 5ources: а/ РАЕсоп, DANA. �' � Ь/ ReKceseion eseima[es, ВАЕсоп, DAhR. г/ Philippine Forestry 8ta[istics, 1971, Вигеаи of Foreetry UA21R. д/ Сосопи[ StaclsClcs, 1971. Vo1. VI, No. 2, United Coconut Associa[ion о£ the Philipplnes. ANNEX 15 Table 3.3 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3-3: PHYSICAL TARGETS OF P LANNED AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION, FY 1972-75 (Thousand units) (PER CENT) BASE YEAR ESTI'MATED TARGET AVERAGE LNrT FY 1970 FY 1971 FY 1972 vy 1973 Fy 1974 FY 1975 GROWTH RATE FOOD CROPS .................... MT Palay ....................... 5,233 5,343 5,853 6,301 6,633 6,982 6.1 Corn, white .................. 1,823 1,919 2,035 2,155 2,290 2,411 5.9 Corn, yellow .................. 185 153 257 279 302 325 8.2 19orghum ................... 1 3 10 30 69 97 133 70.0 Soybean ..................... 1 2 11 22 43 96 100.0 Vegetables 21 ................ 1,650 1,624 1,850 1,970 2,098 2,234 6.5 Bananas & 5-ther fruits ....... 1,641 1,725 1,866 1,989 2,120 2,260 6. 6 FIS11 ......................... NIT 1,424 1,512 1,599 I'C'91 1,799 1'gq: 5.9 COMMERCIAL CROPS ............. MT Ccconut, copra ............... 1,657 1,707 1,691 1,753 1,815 1,929 4.5 Coconut oil .................. 205 400 460 529 609 15.0 Coconut, desiccated & others . . 70 66 200 230 265 304 15.0 Su ar, centrifugal ........ I ... 1,926 1,938 2,176 2,286 2,335 2,367 3.8 Abaca, raw fiber ............. 110 109 114 117 120 123 2.7 Alwtca, cordalre ............... 12 12 14 14 15 15 3.1 Tobocco, native .............. 39 42 46 50 55 60 9.7 FonE 'rny (Logs) ............... Cubic 10,785 11,005 11,225 11,449 11,678 11,912 2.0 LIMSTCCK AND POULTRY 31 Meter (Population) .............. U nits p oulti-N . ..................... 5.6 94,400 95,000 102,500 108,400 113,600 130,800 Hogs .......... I ............ 10,300 11,100 12,400 14,000 15,600 17,500 12.0 Cattle ....................... 2,100 2,100 2,200 2,300 2,400 2,500 3.8 Carahaos .................... 4,700 4,800 4,900 5.100 5,300 5,500 3.6 NLAUGHTERFD (Dressed)) 31 Wei ht, metric ton Poultry ..................... 88 89 100 107 112 121 6.7 Fork ...................... 374 391 423 4 .5) 6 493 532 8.0 Beef ........................ 36 37 39 40 44 47 6.8 Carabeef .................... 89 91 95 98 112 120 9.3 EGCS (metric 'Lon) .............. 104 106 113 124 128 13"1 6.9 I/ BAEcon Data gives a figure of 1.2. '7/ including root crops, onion, ginger, Irish potato and beans. 3/ 1970 figures for Livestock and Poultry are estimates, with the Inventory figures adjusted using BAEcon data and BAI estimates of number of animals in non-farms, and number of animals slaughtered outside the Greater Manila area, Source: Four Year Plan, 1972-75. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY ТаЫе Э.4: SELECTED CROP YIELDS, 1955-1971 (Kg/На) 4/ 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 196Э 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Food Ра1ау (aacks of 44 kg) 27.4 27,1 27.5 2Э.1 25.2 25.7 26.Э 28.0 28.5 28.Э 28.4 29.8 Э0.1 Э1,4 30.Э 38.2 39.0 Согп (sacks of 57 kg) 9.7 9.5 8.8 10.8 8.5 11.1 10.4 11,0 11.5 12,0 12.0 11.5 12.1 12.6 1Э,5 14.6 14.7 Pruits апд nuts 1,792 1,850 1,850 1,854 1,877 2,11Э.0 1,954.6 2,547.4 2,747.6 Э,Э43,4 Э,261.6 Э,507.4 Э,82Э.5 3,707.7 3,731.5 4,127,4 4,610.0 Citrus 1,599 1,600 1,603 1,638 1,683 1,893.0 1,939.9 2,169.0 2,1Э7.1 2,164.4 2,476.Э 2,642.6 2,740,0 2,769.Э 2,961,7 3,322 3,322.9 Root crops 4,401 4,504 4,429 4,4Э8 4,461 4,88Э.1 5,113.3 5,104.0 5,144.9 5,392.0 5,615.7 5,600,2 5,424.7 5,213.5 5,276.? 5,216 4,963.0 Vegetaбlea 1,798 1,815 1,799 1,820 1,860 2,240.4 2,729.0 Э,012.2 3,184.8 3,648.1 4,034.2 4,072.7 4,183.7 4,Э79.4 4,432.7 4,989 5,355.9 Опlопв 3,125 3,034 2,657 2,803 2,451 2,626.2 3,240.0 3,321.0 3,128.5 3,127.7 3,157.1 3,1Э2.1 3,165.8 Э,17Э,3 Э,161.Ь 4,143 Э,898.7 Paratoes 2,577 2,691 3,000 2,861 2,928 3,116.4 4,638,8 й,722.6 6,029.7 6,873.4 6,Э31.5 6,688.9 6,62Э.6 4,862.7 6,0В5,1 6,746 7,571.6 Beans апд peas 591 600 585 589 602 540.7 529.0 492.3 454.4 449.0 459.6 4Э7.б 4Э2.3 455.5 442.4 449 * 480.2 * Coffee 365 359 386 410 416 849.2 828.0 855.7 782.8 936.7 995.8 9Э5.8 884.2 88В.Э 850.Э 908 912.2 Сасао 2Э3 234 242 239 251 46Э,2 380.3 359.1 347.6 Э62.2 43Э.7 427.2 400.1 452.9 479.4 512 477.7 Peanucs 620 622 621 610 618 629.8 588.3 55-s.6 574.2 566.2 547.Э 528.1 500.7 504.6 480.4 536 58U.4 Со¢¢ve гс 1а 1 Coconuts (nuts рег бearing Стее) 1/ ,1k1 4Э 46 46 46 44 41 44 42 Э7 98 Э8 42 40 37 =/ 36 =/ 32.8 Сорга 2/ (1,186 1,429 1,451 1,169 1,058 1,204 999 1,194 1,259 L,104 988 1,0Э2 790 794 643 697) - Сорта 1/ (1,114 1,11Э 1,Э29 1,298 1,066 1,015 893 1,056 1,069 1,003 917 922 866 857 821 8�N ) 766.4 Deslccated сосопиСв 40 42 54 56 50 40 49 49 48 42 39 48 46 28 24 Э7 51.Э Sugarcane 5,777 5,882 5,743 6,676 7,165 7,468.6 7,Э59.5 7,469.6 7,845.2 6,261.5 5,805,8 5,799.0 6,567.9 6,790.2 6,317,1 7,085 6,748.4 АЬаса 482 555 555 646 579 539.3 657.2 6Э6.8 702.5 637.8 672.4 662.9 632.0 605.9 612.3 707 67Э.5 ТоЬассо (Virginia) 653 559 817 641 610 661.9 626.2 606.8 614.5 606.0 595.7 585.2 594.3 606,1 616.9 659 692.1 (Native) 540 46В 468 510 520 674.8 689.8 770.5 752.9 72Э.3 604.1 717.7 6Э1.1 731.7 647.2 726 767.1 Ramie 586 414 759 1,333 1,449 1,315.8 1,040,7 1,468.4 1,697.0 1,652.7 1,746.8 1,60Э.8 1,597.6 1,631.2 1,466.8 1,291 1,295.5 Rubber 409 406 440 520 396 596,Э 369.3 Э12.0 286.7 303.7 Э49.3 406.5 428.7 942,9 867.3 870 905.5 Maguey 67 67 1,000 7Э9 696 725.8 851.1 818.1 823.3 961.9 937.2 884.5 90Э.9 967,8 871.7 86Э 879•3 л Inc1 �ding so��beяns. 1/ Аппиаl sCatistics. � 2/ СосолиС Sta[isClcs 1Ч71, Vo1. VI, No. 2, United СосопиС Associa[iоп of Che Philippines. 3/ Revised estlmate. 4/ Preliminary. Source: ВАЕсоп, DANR, о�г •r11I сл PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3-5: PALAY: AREA HARVESTED, BY REGION, 1956-1971 Cagayan Central Southern Western Eastern N & E S & W Year Philippines Ilocos Valley Luzon Tagalog Bicol Visayas Visayas Mindanao Mindanao II III IV V VI VII VIII Ix x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (Ha) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1956 2,742,480 95,500 234,010 588,800 320,800 253,870 547,450 294,98o 169,730 238,060 1957 2,768,120 102,400 236,96o 602,170 337,120 26o,81o 531,070 285,400 169,590 242,6oo 1958 3,154,073 105,503 249,78o 698,180 399,210 293,230 508,870 294,680 215,010 389,61o 1959 3,329,410 115,420 260,880 769,630 480,030 302,990 569,840 323,080 198,100 309,440 196o 3,306,460 104,750 344,380 682,520 377,080 239,650 569,080 428,98o 252,070 307,950 1961 3,197,750 lio,630 453,890 545,730 363,850 317,800 414,310 377,940 172,380 441,220 1962 3,179,190 104,620 370,620 513,550 408,860 290,540 400,96o 283,770 254,490 553,780 1963 3,161,320 119,920 313,250 520,76o 398,410 310,530 415,95o 289,760 243,350 549,390 1964 3,087,450 120,080 289,710 495,700 414,080 305,370 396,310 274,600 226,100 565,500 1965 3,199,670 139,220 344,180 510,240 433,280 299,26o 383,680 299,470 218,6oo 571,740 1966 3,109,180 144,710 354,390 519,310 467,290 366,91o 377,870 323,480 145,090 410,130 1967 3,096,120 132,290 265,520 602,o6o 466,990 300,98o 333,200 346,850 180,850 467,380 1968 3,303,660 140,950 296,760 628,010 529,740 314,56o 376,210 349,780 207,630 46o,020 1969 3,332,150 136,16o 265,010 6o8,840 538,080 300,320 384,900 382,940 248,650 467,250 1970 1 3,113,440 144,820 314,040 634,75o 345,370 357,960 397,B10 256,580 194,330 467,780 1971 3,112,630 127,410 361,170 641,490 387,030 498,48o 420,570 252,950 212,96o 410,570 Crop years ending June 30. Preliminary estimates. cr Z Source: BAEcon, DANR. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.6: PALAY PRODUCTION, BY REGION, 1955-1971 Cagayan Central Southern Western Eastern N & E S & W Year Philippines Ilocos Valley Luzon Tagalog Bicol Visayas Visayas Mindanao Mindanao II III IV V VI VII VIII Ix X - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - '000 mtonsT --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1955 3,203 114 310 863 365 240 474 302 229 307 1956 3,273 109 292 946 355 227 486 304 229 321 1957 3,346 122 296 967 371 228 485 310 237 329 1958 3,203 103 269 987 388 245 417 211 179 404 1959 3,684 116 333 1,163 484 295 489 270 211 322 1960 3,739 104 475 948 400 265 609 387 233 317 1961 3,704 141 494 859 382 326 523 337 146 497 1962 3,910 140 449 922 484 319 499 254 214 629 1963 3,967 150 402 950 451 382 484 258 200 700 1964 3,8h2 145 328 923 458 369 h71 234 202 711 1965 3,992 164 415 9;8 476 366 491 252 201 699 1966 4,073 210 537 1,031 553 551 412 224 122 432 1967 4,094 203 374 1,039 602 399 511 281 165 518 1968 4,561 251 481 1,160 670 434 551 297 186 530 1969 4,445 263 347 1,129 620 450 505 332 248 551 1970 5,233 230 514 1,412 615 555 601 280 279 748 1971 5,343 201 700 1,465 641 378 334 662 621 341 Note: Assumption.:- 1cavan =*44 kilos. Source: BAEcon, DANR. l (U1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.7: PALAY YIELD, BY REGION, 1956-1971 Cagayan Central Southern Western Eastern N & E S & W Year Philippines Ilocos Valley Luzon Tagalog Bicol Visayas Visayas Mindanao Mindanao II III IV V VI VII VII IX X - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (m tons7a7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1956 1.19 1.1L 1.25 1.61 1.11 0.89 0.88 1.03 1.35 1.35 1957 1.21 1.19 1.25 1.61 1.10 0.86 0.91 1.08 1.39 1.36 1958 1.02 0.97 1.08 1.41 0.97 0.83 0.82 0.72 0.83 1.03 1959 1.12 1.00 1.28 1.51 1.01 0.97 0.86 0.84 1.60 1.04 1960 1.13 0.99 1.38 1.39 1.06 1.11 1.07 0.90 0.92 1.03 1961 1.16 1.28 1.09 1.57 1.05 1.03 1.26 0.89 0.92 1.13 1962 1.23 1.33 1.21 1.79 1.19 1.10 1.2h 0.89 1.84 1.14 1963 1.25 1.25 1.28 1.82 1.13 1.23 1.16 0.89 0.82 1.26 196h 1.24 1.21 1.13 1.86 1.11 1.21 1.19 0.85 0.89 1.26 196$ 1.25 1.17 1.21 1.82 1.10 1.22 1.28 0.84 0.92 1.22 1966 1.31 1.45 1.52 1.98 1.18 1.50 1.09 0.70 0.85 1.0$ 1967 1.32 1.54 1.41 1.72 1.29 1.32 1.54 0.81 0.92 1.11 1968 1.38 1.78 1.62 1.8$ 1.27 1.38 1.47 0.85 0.89 1.15 1969 1.33 1.93 1.31 1.86 1.15 1.50 1.31 0.87 0.99 1.18 1970 1.68 1.58 1.64 2.22 1.78 1.5$ 1.50 1.09 1.43 1.60 1971 1/ 1.72 1.58 1.94 2.28 1.66 1.27 1.58 1.32 1.60 1.51 Note: Assumption: 1 cavan = 44 kilos. 1/ Preliminary estimate. Source: BAEcon, DANR. ANNEX 15 PHILIPPINES Table 3.8 AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.8: PALAY: AREA AND PRODUCTION, BY REGION, 1971 AND 1972 1971 1/ 1972 Area Production Area Production Hectare Sack of Zh kg. Hectare Sack of 44 kg. Philippines 3,112,630 121,429,900 3,184,490 117,012,900 Ilocos 127,4lo 4,571,600 128,260 4,629,200 Cagayan Valley 361,170 15,920,100 366,490 16,395,100 Central Luzon 641,490 33,291,400 581,640 23,235,800 Southern Tagalog 387,030 14,573,900 411,870 15,636,700 Bicol 298,480 8,587,300 318,84o 9,785,300 Eastern Visayas 252,950 7,596,4o0 269,590 8,382,700 Western Visayas 420,570 15,042,300 461,090 15,983,800 N & E Mindanao 212,960 7,742,100 227,190 8,154,800 S & W Mindanao 410,570 14,104,800 419,520 14,809,500 1/ Preliminary estimates. 2/ Forecast as of January 1, 1972. Source: BAEcon, DANR. ANNEX 15 PHILIPPINES Table 3.9 AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3,9 : PALAY: PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF HARVEST, BY SEASON AND REGION, 1969-70 July-December January-June Total Region 1969 1970 Philippines 69.80 30.20 100.00 Ilocos 82.68 17.32 100.00 Cagayan Valley 39.65 60.35 100.00 Central Luzon 80.07 19.93 100.00 Southern Tagalog 68.83 31.17 100.00 Bicol 60.20 39.80 100.00 Eastern Visayas 44.27 55.73 100.00 Western Vi8ayas 78.27 21.73 100.00 Northern & Eastern Mindanao 69.79 30.21 100.00 Southern & Western Mindanao 77.84 22.16 100.00 Source: BAEcon, DANR. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.10: CORN: AREA HARVESTED BY REGION, 1956-1971* Cagayan Central Southern Western Eastern N & E S & W Year Philippines Ilocos Valley Luzon Tagalog Bicol Visayas Visayas Mindanao Mindanao II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X (1000 hectares) 1956 1,674.6 20.9 109.2 98.5 90.3 64.3 303.9 Uh2.3 173.8 371.2 1957 1,786.7 18.7 110.3 95.6 11L.6 60.5 357.9 484.1 174.4 370.6 1958 1,380.5 18.2 128.8 b1.5 63.h 121.5 161.9 243.0 238.1 364.1 1959 2,107.0 24.9 172.1 59.7 84.8 171.2 310.3 50.9 225.2 553.9 1960 1,845.5 21.2 128.6 71.5 80.5 76.3 302.7 446.2 269.3 449.3 1961 2,045.4 2h.0 151.1 77.h 107.7 86.8 337.8 3L5.0 328.6 586.9 1962 2,016.4 20.6 133.7 71.5 105.2 77.5 272.2 421.7 283.5 630.3 1963 1,949.6 19.3 126.3 63.7 96.9 72.4 257.4 393.6 234.9 685.1 1964 1,897.6 16.5 118.1 57.1 9.9 68.9 272.2 366.6 215.6 687.5 1965 1,922.7 16.5 121.8 58.6 93.3 70.2 275.2 367.6 210.6 709.1 1966 2,106.1 16.1 102.6 55.0 118.6 87.1 251.0 419.7 223.7 832.2 1967 2,158.0 16.2 90.4 58.7 119.8 90.9 196.0 123.6 265.0 897.5 1968 2,247.9 15.1 133.5 58.5 117.8 96.0 271.5 402.6 253.3 899.6 1969 2,256.1 17.3 157.1 81.2 127.4 97.2 293.8 309.0 264.0 909.0 1970 2,419.6 20.9 201.1 79.3 161.4 101.5 304.0 333.2 260.7 957.5 1971 1/ 2,392.2 21.6 238.5 82.3 161.5 99.4 324.6 301.7 896.9 262.7 Crop years ending June 30. 1/ Preliminary. Source: BAEcon, DANR. I0 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.11: CORN PRODUCTION, BY REGION, 1955-1971 Cagayan Central Southern Western Eastern N & E S & W Year Philippines Ilocos Valley Luzon Tagalog Bicol Visayas Visayas Mindanao Mindanao II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (00 m n) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1955 770 9 96 28 47 37 114 194 148 97 1956 907 12 98 51 49 30 141 173 263 90 1957 895 10 95 52 50 30 137 168 264 89 1958 1,016 13 93 20 22 68 59 84 334 159 1959 1,165 13 113 32 49 82 122 152 314 139 1960 1,165 11 87 48 54 48 151 233 187 346 1961 1,209 11 138 38 44 41 182 178 201 376 1962 1,266 6 101 32 70 37 212 192 184 489 1963 1,273 7 119 32 73 42 141 165 152 543 1964 1,293 7 112 30 77 42 1-47 155 154 569 1965 1,313 7 116 30 79 44 158 150 167 582 1966 1,380 8 65 30 65 59 122 191 157 682 1967 1,490 9 56 33 68 62 108 199 181 774 1968 1,619 9 117 36 72 72 156 204 178 776 1969 1,733 9 120 39 95 65 179 167 172 887 1970 2,008 10 201 42 150 68 192 182 169 994 1971 2,005 11 224 49 162 71 210 179 160 940 Crop years ending June 30. Source: BAEcon, DANR. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.12: CORN (SHELLED): PRODUCTION, BY VARIETY AND BY REGION, 1970-1971 (Sack of 57 kilograms) 1 9 7 0 1 9 7 1 Region White Yellow Others Total White Yellow Others Total Philippines 31,121,300 3,251,500 859,000 35,231,800 31,244,400 3,670,100 260,500 35,175,000 Ilocos 70,400 77,600 30,500 178,500 140,900 44,000 3,100 188,000 Cagayan Valley 2,995,400 96,300 433,500 3,525,200 3,799,900 33,800 96,300 3,930,000 Central Luzon 539,100 163,600 33,600 736,300 653,700 173,400 25,900 853,000 Southern Tagalog 734,200 1,711,300 179,700 2,625,200 783,300 2,021,800 35,900 2,841,000 Bicol 781,700 387,300 16,400 1,185,400 1,003,700 236,300 - 1,240,000 Eastern Visayas 3,170,400 18,100 900 3,189,400 3,114,400 6,300 29,300 3,150,000 Western Visayas 2,713,600 551,700 96,400 3,361,700 2,915,800 754,600 8,600 3,679,000 N & E Mindanao 2,966,900 1,000 25,200 2,993,100 2,751,200 50,800 - 2,802,000 S & W Mindanao 17,149,600 244,600 42,800 17,437,000 16,081,500 349,100 61,400 16,492,000 Source: BAEcon, DANR. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.13: CORN YIELDS, BY REGION, 1956-1971 Cagayan Central Southern Western Eastern N & E S & W Year Philippines Ilooos Valley Luzon Tagalog Bicol Visayas Visayas Mindanao Mindanao II III IV V VI VII VIII Ix X -~~~ - - - - - - - - - - - - Kg/Hia) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - ----- 1956 541 564 895 419 548 458 463 391 521 709 1957 501 558 858 538 439 498 384 348 509 712 1958 617 694 722 485 350 557 364 316 916 670 1959 482 539 657 529 576 479 395 301 61 567 1960 633 513 678 678 673 627 496 524 695 770 1961 593 473 912 490 405 473 536 513 616 638 1962 627 308 758 445 667 479 570 456 650 775 1963 656 336 946 496 741 581 542 422 650 798 1964 684 410 952 530 809 610 542 422 713 827 1965 684 399 929 573 849 627 570 410 701 821 1966 656 519 638 547 547 678 485 456 701 821 1967 690 542 621 559 570 678 553 473 684 861 1968 718 570 878 621 616 747 576 507 701 861 1969 770 502 764 479 747 673 610 542 650 975 1970 830 478 1,000 529 929 670 632 546 648 1,038 1971 838 496 939 591 984 711 695 553 607 1,048 Note: Assumption: 1 cavan = 57 kilos. > Source: BAEcon, DANR. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.14: ABACA: PRODUCTION, BY REGION, 1961-1971 Cagayan Central Southern Western Eastern N & E S & W Year Philippines Ilocos Valley Luzon Tagalog Bicol Visayas Visayas Mindanao Mindanao II III IV V VI VII VIII Ix x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - (m to'- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1961 114,755.1 /- - 57.4 29,968.4 29,642.6 1,488.0 12,945.0 40,653.7 1962 116,289.5 - - 41.9 20,517.7 35,587.0 2,404.4 14,917.4 42,821.1 1963 127,781.1 - - 44.2 37,701.7 28,386.5 1,720.2 13,770.1 46,158.4 1964 134,284.6 - - - 57.6 35,393.9 40,114.2 1,296.3 20,125.8 27,296.8 1965 134,002.5 - 6.7 - 58.7 41,298.2 27,805.8 1,498.9 21,411.9 41,922.3 1966 135,250.5 - 6.7 - 59.8 42,413.4 19,938.0 1,746.3 20,198.1 50,888.2 1967 117,614.9 - - - 104.0 39,442.9 25,521.4 1,921.2 17,816.8 32,808.6 1968 103,435.4 - 132.6 - 444.1 35,936.0 25,918.3 1,932.1 16,926.9 22,785.4 1969 105,896.2 - - - 309.5 35,809.8 25,418.8 2,136.7 17,452.4 24,796.0 1970 122,380.3 - - 126.0 45,226.0 33,224.0 1,889.3 17,404.2 24,510.8 1971 104,591.1 - - 8.9 32,488.4 35,170.1 1,788.8 13,947.3 21,187.6 a/ Less than 0.1 metric ton. Source: BAEcon, DANR. E5 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.15: SOYBEANS PRODUCTION, BY REGION, 1960-1971 Cagayan Central Southern Western Eastern N & E S & W Year Philippines Ilocos Valley Luzon Tagalog Bicol Visayas Visayas Mindanao Mindanao II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X --(metric tons- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1960 981.3 31.5 126.0 - 32.2 1.2 257.3 7.4 437.0 88.o 1961 1,899.3 24.2 11.3 46.5 48.5 1.2 1,316.0 7.8 378.5 65.3 1962 2,066.9 15.5 10.3 50.5 52.7 5.8 1,363.8 26.5 456.6 85.2 1963 1,762.5 8.3 8.5 52.8 64.9 5.1 1,323.2 7.5 139.2 153.0 1964 1,490.1 18.6 12.1 58.4 90.2 0.6 1,087.9 10.7 92.0 119.6 1965 1,h04.8 10.5 10.6 57.2 94.6 2.8 1,071.4 15.7 25.6 116.4 1966 1,131.5 1.0 12.5 72.2 94.4 2.8 789.2 13.9 28.7 116.8 1967 1,102.7 1.6 12.5 71.0 96.9 2.8 779.0 16.4 28.7 93.8 1968 1,251.2 1.5 20.6 77.h 150.4 0.7 861.0 25.2 28.7 85.7 1969 1,194.8 1.3 2.9 2.2 127.6 0.8 861.0 25.3 158.1 15.6 1970 1,195.3 3.9 2.9 3.0 127.6 0.5 861.0 29.9 81.7 84.8 1971 1,376.2 88.7 3.8 80.0 109.0 - 861.0 25.9 76.0 131.8 Source: BAEcon, DANR. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.16 : SUGARCANE: PROLUCTION, BY REGION, 1955-1971 Egion 12a 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . - - - .- . - - - - - - - - - - - (1000 m tons) -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Philippines 1,546.6 1,413.3 1,347.8 1,593.5 1,806.7 1,808.7 1,709.1 1,902.5 2,030.1 2,132.2 2,034.8 1,828.3 2,027.4 2,161.3 2,166.5 2,594.6 2,980.2 Ilocos 4.4 4.1 4.3 4.7 3.0 2.4 1.7 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.4 0.9 Cagayan Valley 234.9 208.7 195.9 2.3 2.3 2.3 1.7 1.2 5.1 1.5 8.9 8.7 4.4 7.3 2.5 2.4 2.0 Central Luzon 181.0 169.6 163.5 307.7 282.7 362.3 294.9 325.0 416.7 417.1 395.7 321.1 339.4 293.2 307.4 303.6 368.0 Southern Tagalog 69.9 65.9 63.8 14L.1 149.7 13.5 142.9 171.8 176.7 178.4 175.4 167.8 186.0 195.9 198.0 244.6 340.6 Bicol 853.6 758.4 711.5 3.9 4.0 3.4 1.L 1.3 3.5 5.3 6.4 5.7 5.8 5.7 6.4 5.9 5.0 Eastern Visayas 13.5 13.6 14.0 73.6 87.8 72.4 74.7 91.2 90.5 117.5 82.2 92.9 129.0 155.4 152.7 165.6 185.4 Western Visayas 177.7 181.8 181.9 1,043.1 1,262.6 1,213.9 1,189.8 1,308.0 1,333.9 1,106.7 1,360.6 1,226.5 1,358.3 1,499.4 1,495.0 1,867.6 2,075.4 N & E Mindanao 1.4 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.2 0.7 1.0 0.5 0.2 1.1 1.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.5 S & W Mindanao 10.2 9.9 11.3 12.5 12.9 7.3 1.3 1.7 2.0 4.3 3.5 3.3 3.1 3.3 3.3 3.0 2.4 a/ Preliminary estimates. Source: BAEcon, DANR. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.17: BANANA: PRODUCTION, BY REGION, 1955-1971 a/ Region 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 ('000 m tons) Philippines 294.8 303.1 319.1 340.6 335.9 307.3 349.0 524.8 556.9 754.9 684.8 682.7 765.4 780.5 746.9 896.0 1,034.8 Ilocos 10.3 10.6 11.1 11.9 11.7 10.3 11.1 12.9 14.1 12.8 14.6 12.4 12.5 10.0 10.5 17.8 16.5 Cagayan 10.9 11.2 11.8 12.6 12.6 15.2 49.5 15.6 23.8 42.7 71.8 62.3 64.8 85.2 61.3 52.1 67.3 Central Luzon 27.8 28.9 30.5 32.5 32.6 35.7 34.8 39.8 24.9 27.5 24.0 33.0 32.2 33.1 27.8 34.1 33.2 Southern Tagalog 45.3 46.6 49.1 52.4 52.1 41.9 47.4 67.6 91.4 62.1 55.5 63.0 63.1 81.1 76.8 82.0 62.7 Bicol 22.1 22.7 23.9 25.5 21.2 26.8 16.9 37.1 37.4 39.8 59.5 67.4 46.9 24.7 32.0 39.0 20.8 Eastern Visayas 51.7 52.8 55.6 59.4 58.9 40.6 50.5 202.8 203.7 348.7 226.7 188.7 257.5 177.1 151.7 157.6 263.4 Western Visayas 42.0 43.1 45.4 48.4 49.0 39.6 51.5 75.1 76.0 101.4 97.0 105.5 118.0 169.3 167.4 277.9 238. 5 N & E Mindanao 41.6 42.8 45.0 48.1 48.5 48.2 40.5 42.7 46.6 86.4 95.5 96.8 104.4 112.5 120.9 123.5 149.2 S & W Mindanao 43.1 44.4 46.7 49.8 49.3 49.0 46.8 31.2 39.0 33.5 40.2 53.6 66.0 87.5 98.5 112.0 183.2 a/ Preliminary estimates. Source: BAEcon, DANR. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.18: LIVESTOCK ON FARM: ANIMAL POPULATION, BY KIND, 1960-1970 (Number) Year Carabao Cattle Horse Hog Goat Sheep 1960 3,696,300 1,110,500 217,400 6,572,600 617,100 14,800 1961 3,452,000 1,054,700 197,300 6,191,400 532,300 20,100 1962 3,471,800 1,094,400 210,000 6,725,700 628,300 22,500 1963 3,323,100 1,197,200 220,200 6,233,700 483,500 13,600 1964 3,190,700 1,382,900 242,100 6,616,400 557,500 4,400 1965 3,345,600 1,559,900 264,300 6,938,500 605,500 3,300 1966 3,633,000 1,582,500 256,900 6,914,100 616,400 2,000 1967 3,926,100 1,574,800 243,800 5,496,700 599,000 1,700 1968 4,173,400 1,643,800 281,700 6,090,200 623,500 - 1969 4,368,700 1,628,900 295,300 6,349,700 698,300 - 1970 4,431,500 1,678,700 294,500 6,455,600 771,600 - NOTE: The reference date of animal population on farm from 1960 to 1966 is March 1; as of January 1 for the years 1967 to 1970. The series of data on sheep has been discontinued since 1968. Source: BAEcon, DANR. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.19: LIVESTOCK ON FARMS, BY REGION, 1966-1970 Cagayan Central Southern Western Eastern N & E S & W Ilocos Valley Luzon Tagalog Bicol Visayas Visayas Mindanao Mindanao Philippines 11 III IV V VI VII VIII IX X__________ No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % (thousands) a) Carabao on Farms 1966 147 4.10 380 10.5 401 11.0 260 7.2 403 11.1 559 15.4 485 13.3 288 7.9 711 19.6 3,633 100.0 1967 134 3.4 365 9.3 485 12.4 302 7.6 482 12.3 585 15.0 541 13.7 289 7.4 742 18.9 3,926 100.0 1968 124 2.9 412 9.9 496 11.9 312 7.5 492 11.8 620 14.9 575 13.8 302 7.2 840 20.1 4,173 100.0 1969 130 3.0 423 9.7 524 12.0 364 8.3 502 11.5 632 14.2 579 13.3 307 7.0 916 21.0 4,369 100.0 1970 137 3.1 419 9.5 517 11.7 403 9.1 490 11.1 632 14.2 567 12.7 322 7.3 945 21.3 4,431.5 100.0 b) Cattle on Farms 1966 70 4.4 46 2.9 224 14.2 174 11.0 136 8.6 147 9.3 140 8.8 143 9.0 504 31.8 1,583 100.0 1967 83 5.2 52 3.3 165 10.5 175 11.1 145 9.2 138 8.8 131 8.3 144 9.1 543 34.5 1,575 100.0 1968 90 5.5 57 3.b 185 11.3 201 12.3 147 8.9 156 9.4 142 8.6 166 10.1 500 30.4 1,644 100.0 1969 73 4.4 105 6.3 210 12.8 209 12.7 160 9.7 149 9.1 120 7.4 176 10.8 437 26.8 1,629 100.0 1970 73 4,4 96 5,7 208 12.4 224 13.3 163 9.7 159 9.5 118 7.1 175 10.4 463 27.5 1,678 100.0 c) Hogs on Farms 1966 158 2.3 599 8.7 571 8.3 791 11.4 717 10.4 658 9.5 1,445 20.9 1,421 20.5 553 8.0 6,914 100.0 1967 141 2.6 480 8.7 621 11.3 626 11.4 623 11.3 530 9.6 892 16.2 1,147 20.9 438 8.0 5,497 100.0 1968 97 1.6 551 9.0 666 11.0 738 12.1 737 12.1 677 11.1 966 15.9 1,199 19.7 459 7.5 6,090 100.0 1969 109 1.7 623 9.8 725 11,4 776 12,2 700 11.0 734 11.6 1,074 16.9 1,065 16.9 54 8.6 6,350 100.0 1970 125 2.0 609 9.4 713 11.0 925 14.3 756 11.7 753 11.7 1,083 16.8 985 15.3 506 7.8 6,457 100.0 d) Goats and Sheep on Farms 1966 35 5.6 15 2.4 111 17.9 61 9.9 31 5.1 110 17.7 22 3.5 45 7.3 189 30.7 618 100.0 1967 34 5.7 9 1.5 138 22.9 60 10.0 30 5.0 89 14.8 29 4.9 37 6.1 175 29.1 602 100.0 1968* 29 4.6 11 1.8 144 23.1 54 8.7 32 5.1 109 16.7 32 5.1 37 5.9 181 29.0 624 100.0 1969* 34 4.9 14 2.0 102 23.3 58 8.2 38 5.5 119 17.0 38 5.4 43 6.1 193 27.6 698 100.0 1970* 41 5.3 26 3.3 187 24.2 64 8.3 38 4.9 121 15.6 33 4.3 38 5.0 225 29.1 772 100.0 * Data for sheep discontinued Source: BAEcon, DANR. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURkL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.20: POULTRY ON FARMS, BY REGION, 1966-1970 ('000) Cagayan Central Southern Western Eastern N & E S & W Ilocos Valley Luzon Tagalog Bicol Visayas Visayas Mindanao Mindanao 3rp ines II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X No. 11 No. o.No. % N No. N.No. N. a) Chicken on Farms 1966 68,122 100.0 664 1.0 3,502 5.1 7,796 11.4 9,674 14.2 3,965 5.8 10,867 16.0 9,564 14.0 5,907 8.7 16,181 23.8 1967 66,489 100.0 678 1.0 1,676 2.5 11,317 17.0 12,181 18.3 3,531 5.3 11,895 17.9 7,088 10.7 5,120 7.7 13,005 19.6 1968 68,403 100.0 506 0.7 1,856 2.7 12,486 18.3 13,874 20.3 3,705 5.4 10,866 15.8 6,686 9.8 4,430 6.5 13,994 20.5 1969 62,528 100.0 546 0.9 2,001 3.2 10,906 17.4 10,524 16.8 3,531 5.7 10,032 16.0 6,469 10.3 14,181 22.8 4,338 6.9 1970 56,999 100.0 568 1.0 1,748 3.1 9,761 17.1 11,720 20.6 2,991 5.2 9,228 16.2 6,324 11.1 1,158 20.3 3,087 5.4 b) Duck on Farms 1966 2,034 100.0 25 1.2 48 2.3 125 6.1 392 19.3 332 16.3 99 4.9 144 7.1 131 6.5 739 36.3 1967 2,328 100.0 21 1.0 63 2.0 217 9.3 645 28.0 403 17.3 53 2.3 175 8.0 258 11.0 493 21.1 1968 2,403 19 0.8 74 3.1 213 8.9 641 26.7 352 14.6 58 2.4 213 8.9 295 538 1969 2,279 100.0 19 0.8 74 3.2 208 9.2 530 23.2 346 15.2 58 2.5 213 9.4 537 23.6 295 12.9 1970 2,132 100.0 22 1.1 73 3.4 230 10.8 401 18.8 351 16.5 70 3.3 237 11.1 520 24.4 227 10.6 c) Goose on Farms 1966 70 100.0 n.s. 0.3 5 6.8 10 14.5 5 7.3 17 24.2 14 20.5 2 2.7 8 12.0 8 11.7 1967 150 100.0 n.s. 0.2 4 2.8 18 12.0 2 1.2 27 18.0 40 26.5 5 3.3 36 24.0 18 12.0 1968 128 100.0 n.s. 0.3 4 2.8 13 10.7 1 0.9 30 23.3 43 33.6 7 5.2 15 11.9 15 11.3 1969 124 100.0 1 0.4 3 2.7 13 10.8 2 1.2 27 21.8 55 44.0 3 2.7 20 16.4 - 1970 133 100.0 1 0.5 - 15 11.6 n.s. 0.2 11 8.6 70 52.4 6 4.6 17 13.0 12 9.1 d) Turkey on Farms 1966 127 100.0 n.s. 0.2 6 4.7 19 14.6 23 18.4 3 2.6 32 24.9 14 10.7 6 4.0 25 19.3 1967 119 100.0 n.s. 0.2 2 1.8 20 16.7 29 24.2 3 2.5 32 26.7 7 5.7 4 3.5 22 18.7 1968 130 100.0 1 0.4 2 1.6 28 21.6 34 26.0 4 3.3 33 25.0 7 5.1 5 4.0 17 13.0 1969 124 100.0 1 0.6 3 2.0 30 24.2 19 15.2 4 3.5 41 33.0 6 4.7 21 16.8 a/ - 1970 141 100.0 1 0.6 n.s. 0.3 34 24.1 33 23.3 5 3.3 41 28.7 5 3.7 22 15.7 1 0.3 / Less than 100 heads. n.s. not significant. Source: BAEcon, DANR. ANNEX 15 Table 3.21 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.21: PALAY AND CORN: MONTHLY STOCKS IN COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSES, 1971-1972 Month/Year Pala 1/ Corn 2/ (th kg/sackT (57 kg/sack) 1971 May 5,908,900 140,700 June 5,874,h00 323,700 July 4,761,000 156,800 August 3,453,800 423,700 September 1,907,600 438,400 October 1,668,900 397,300 November 1,780,200 178,100 December 3,105,700 135,600 1972 January 3,906,500 181,800 February 5,011,500 304,500 March 5,550,100 458,000 April 6,089,600 228,300 1/ Includes milled rice converted to palay equivalent. 2/ Includes milled corn converted to shelled corn. Source: BAEcon, DANR. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.22: July 1 Palay and Shelled Corn Stocks in Farm Households, by Region, 1969-1971 Palay Household Stocks Shelled Corn Household Stocks Region 1969 1970 1971 1969 1970 1971 - - - - - -(Sacks of 44 Kg)- - - - - - - - - - - - - (Sacks of 57 Kg) - - - - - - - Philippines 14,524 19,434 18,268 1,410,800 1,815,700 2,353,300 Ilocos 909 1,185 927 3,700 10,900 6,900 Cagayan Valley 1,679 3,859 3,590 54,700 138,200 148,000 Central Luzon 3,639 4,088 4,645 8,400 4,100 23,000 Southern Tagalog 1,117 1,227 2,015 43,600 43,700 122,600 Bicol 2,172 2,351 1,281 104,000 152,800 82,900 Eastern Visayas 901 1,312 1,053 133,500 265,700 290,500 Western Visayas 2,151 2,498 1,649 62,200 102,700 152,900 N & E Mindanao 1,130 985 1,409 437,700 354,900 894,100 S & W Mindanao 826 1,929 1,699 563,000 742,700 632,400 Source: BAEcon, DANR. (x PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.23: PALAY: QUARTERLY COMMERCIAL STOCKS, BY REGION, 1969-1971 (In sacks of 44 Kg) Cagayan Central Southern Eastern Western N & E S & W Philippines Ilocos Valley Luzon Tagalog Bicol Visayas Visayas Mindanao Mindanao 1969 a/ October 1 5,263,300a/ 47,200 424,000 2,077,100 413,700 71,000 92,200 114,600 305,700 1,717,800 July 1 11,210,100a/ 197,300 521,300 7,897,800 747,100 314,200 107,200 453,000 177,000 795,200 February 24 15,981,700 237,600 723,000 9,326,800 1,658,300 372,300 168,800 734,900 306,700 2,453,300 1970 a! October 1 5,070,500a/ 64,500 542,000 2,241,900 435,700 107,700 174,300 305,500 134,800 1,064,100 July 1 7,426,500a/ 91,900 653,300 3,751,100 1,032,300 290,800 195,200 644,600 163,200 604,100 April 1 10,451,700a/ 112,200 870,200 5,311,700 1,372,500 245,600 79,100 998,100 146 L600 1,315,700 January 1 7,729,200 123,900 196,000 3,311,800 796,600 381,800 212,800 835,100 281,200 1,589,100 1971 October 1 1,869,10o/ 2,200 301,300 623,500 294,300 193,200 56,400 91,000 92,600 214,600 July 1 4,782,800A/ 110,400 1,245,500 2,289,300 442,500 258,700 70,600 185,700 111,200 68,900 January 1 5,566,800.J 44,200 278,800 2,990,800 893,700 190,800 160,000 320,900 275,300 412,300 a/ Includes milled rice converted to palay equivalent. Source: BAEcon, DANR. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.24: RICE AND PALAY STOCKS IN COMMERCIAL WAREHOUSES BY OWNERSHIP, BY REGION, JULY 1, 1971 Rice Stocks Palay Stocks Total Operator RCA Farmer Total Operator RCA Farmer Region - - - - - - (Sack of 56 Kg) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (Sack of 44 Kg) - - - - - - - - Philippines 223,300 137,900 62,500 22,900 4,361,400 2,940,100 29,000 1,392,300 Ilocos 57,600 1,100 56,500 - 1,700 1,500 - 200 Cagayan Valley 13,100 10,600 2,200 300 1,220,800 1,033,400 11,400 176,000 Central Luzon 63,000 48,900 3,200 10,900 2,170,400 1,367,200 13,900 789,300 Southern Tagalog 11,300 8,500 - 2,800 421,200 231,900 - 189,300 Bicol 12,700 8,300 - 4,400 234,700 142,600 - 92,100 Eastern Visayas 18,700 17,800 500 400 35,300 32,400 - 2,900 Western Visayas 19,100 15,900 - 3,200 149,700 38,400 - 111,300 N & E Mindanao 18,700 18,600 100 - 75,900 53,200 - 22,700 S & W Mindanao 9,100 8,200 - 900 51,700 39,500 3,700 8,500 Source: BAEcon, DANR. 41 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 3.25: SHELLED CORN: QUARTERLY COMMERCIAL STOCKS, BY REGION, 1969-1971 (In sacks of 55 Kg) Cagayan Central Southern Eastern Western N & E S & W Philippines Ilocos Valley Luzon Tagalog Bicol Visayas Visayas Mindanao Mindanao 1969 a/ October 1 1,315,200a/ - 15,900 8,400 10,400 10,800 207,700 38,400 150,000 873,700 July 1 534,000a/ - 11,600 73,500 6,700 7,600 118,800 22,600 20,400 272,800 February 24 1,145,300 - 6,300 4,600 4,200 12,500 529,000 28,300 28,900 531,500 1970 a/ October 1 1,458,500a/ 300 9,000 600 4,400 13,000 272,000 85,000 198,500 875,700 July 1 2,140,600a/ 400 200 800 17,100 16,300 654,000 137,900 98,100 1,215,800 April 1 811,000a/ - 3,000 - 1,200 800 143,700 50,900 73,000 538,400 January 1 1,851,900 500 55,400 21,600 5,900 15,700 464,300 42,900 102,400 1,143,200 1971 a/ October 1 220,ooa/ - 11,100 100 200 4,000 66,500 19,000 49,200 69,900 July 1 245,ooa/ - 10,300 - 1,200 3,000 45,000 14,700 69,400 101,400 January 1 426,100 300 22,700 1,300 8,500 2,000 66,100 17,400 134,500 173,300 a/ Includes milled corn equivalent to shelled corn equivalent. Source: BAEcon, DANR. L L SECTION IV: LAND USE AND TENURE PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 1.1: AVERAE PARM AREA POR MAJOR CROPq , 1960 Percent of Total Aroa in Farms of Farms Average 10 Larger Size of Hectares Than 200 Crop Farms Area Farm and Over Hectares (number) (hectares) (hectares) (percent) All Farms 2,166,200 7,772,500 3.6 33 8 Sugar Cane 17,800 249,400 13.9 80 43 Abaca 36,000 209,000 5.8 49 8 Coconut 44U,300 1,938,600 4.4 38 3 Palav 1,041,900 3,112,100 3.0 20 2 Corn 378,800 949,300 2.5 20 1 Tobacco 22,900 38,400 1.7 8 0 Source: 1960 Census of Agriculture. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 4.2: NUMBER AND AREA OF FARMS, BY TYPE OF LAND TENURE, 1960 Type of Land Tenure Land Area Number of Percent of Area in Percent of Tenure Farms Total Hectares Total Full Owner 967,725 44.67 4,133,276 53.17 Part Owner 310,944 14.36 1,139,956 14.67 Tenant 864,538 39.91 2,000,201 25.73 Manager 2,487 0.11 365,309 4.70 Other Forms of Tenure 20,522 0.95 133,742 1.73 PHILIPPINES TOTAL 2,166,216 100.00 7,772,484 100.00 Source: Census of the Philippines: 1960 - Agriculture, Vol II, Summary Report, pp. 8-9, Bureau of the Census and Statistics, Republic of the Philippines, Manila. Q I PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table h.3: NUMBER AND AREA OF FARMS, BY TYPE OF TENANCY, 1960 Type of Land Tenure Land Area Number of Percent of Area in Percent of Type of Tenant Farms Total Hectares Total Cash 13,506 1.56 47,008 2.35 Fixed Amount of Produce 34,145 3.95 88,911 4.45 Share of Produce 745,426 86.22 1,677,857 83.88 Cash & Fixed Amount of Produce 693 0.08 3,676 0.18 Cash & Share of Produce 10,847 1.25 34,083 1.70 Rent Free 29,816 3.46 55,918 2.80 Others 30,105 3.48 92,748 4.64 TOTAL 364,538 100.00 2,000,201 100.00 Source: Census of the Philippines: 1960 - Agriculture, Vol. II, Summary Report, pp. 8-9, Bureau of the Census and Statistics, Republic of the Philippines, Manila. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 4.h: NUMBER AND AREA OF PALAY AND CORN FARMS, BY TYPE OF LAND TENURE, 1960 Palay Corn Type of Tenure Land Area Type of Tenure Land Area Tenure of Number Percent Area in Percent Number Percent Area in Percent Farm Operator of Farms of Total Hectares of Total of Farms of Total Hectares of Total Full Owner 385,170 36.97 1,399,590 44.97 136,626 36.07 481,697 50.74 Part Owner 164,557 15.79 528,215 16.98 47,835 12.63 144,611 15.23 Tenant (all types) 479,143 46.00 1,089,274 35.00 191,733 50.62 303,133 31.93 Manager 781 0.07 49,615 1.59 170 0.04 7,454 0.80 Other Forms of Tenure 12,231 1.17 45,437 1.46 2,439 0.64 12,371 1.30 Philippines 1,041,882 100.00 3,112,131 100.00 378,803 100.00 949,266 100.00 Source: Census6of the Philippines: 1960 - Agriculture, Vol. II, Summary Report, Bureau of Census and Statistics, Republic of the Philippines, Manila, pp. 13. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY! Table 4.5: NUIBER AND AREA OF PALAY AND CORN FARMS, BY TYPE OF TENANCY, 1960 Palav Corn Type of Tenure Land Area Type of Tenure Land Area Number Percent Area in Percent Number Percent Area in Percent Tenancy Type of Farms of Total Hectares of Total of Farms of Total Hectares of Total Cash 5,058 1.03 13,543 1.24 856 0.45 2,136 0.70 Fixed Amount of Produce 25,728 5.37 60,011 5.51 1,911 1.00 4,025 1.32 Share of Produces 417,741 87.18 940,589 86.35 173,476 90.48 270,472 S9.25 Cash and Fixed Amount of Produce 225 0.03 932 0.09 48 0.03 165 0.05 Cash and Share of Produce 4,205 0.87 11,990 1.10 1,523 0.79 3,502 1.15 Rent Free 12,115 2.53 23,656 2.17 8,214 4.27 11,835 3.90 Other Tenants 14,071 2.94 38,553 3.54 5,705 2.98 10,998 3.33 Philippines 479,143 100.00 1,089,274 100.00 191,733 100.00 303,133 100.00 3 Source: Census of the Philippines: 1960 - Agriculture, Vol. II, Summary Report, Bureau of Census and Statistics, Republic cr I of the Philippines, Manila, pp. 13. on-, PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 4.6: NUMBER AND AREA OF FARMS BY TENURE AND BY CROP Other Forms Total Owner-Operator Lessee Share-Tenant Other Tenants of Tenure Number Area Number Area Number Area Number Area Number Area Number Area (Has) (Has) (Has) (Has) (Has) (Has) Palay 1,061,333 3,038,502.1 536,641 1,844,268.1 41,319 96,418.1 432,474 942,485.8 29,893 70,126.4 21,006 85,203.7 Corn 382,558 952,970.4 184,222 624,681.9 1,945 4,151.0 174,402 274,512.0 17,182 29,276.8 4,807 20,348.7 Sugarcane 17,779 249,398.9 5,291 150,488.5 425 2,384.4 10,366 37,487.9 1,341 10,867.9 356 48,170.2 Abaca 35,991 209,049.8 28,978 170,763.9 349 1,290.2 5,220 17,669.6 1,059 4,509.4 385 14,816.7 Tobacco 22,877 38,373.1 13,426 25,521.9 182 227.2 8,478 11,271.6 641 876.9 150 475.5 Vegetable 5,520 10,257.1 3,156 6,673.8 73 113.1 1,706 2,396.3 481 648.6 104 425.3 Root Crops 36,137 69,875.9 27,258 58,356.0 193 339.8 5,634 7,016.1 2,213 2,359.3 839 1,804.7 Total 1,562,195 4,568,427.3 798,972 2,880,754.1 44,486 104,923.8 638,280 1,292,893.3 52,810 118,665.3 27,647 171,244.8 Note: Data for corn and palay were updated through 1971 in proclaimed land reform areas. Source: DAR and 1960 Census of Agriculture. SECTION V: FOREIGN TRADE PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 5.1: BALANCE OF PAYMENTS OF THE PHILIPPINES, 1960-1971 (In Million US Dollars) 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Goods, Services and Transfer Payments Receipts: 1 Merchandise Exports 560 500 556 727 742 768 828 821 858 855 1,062 1,122 2 Non-Monetary gold 14 15 15 13 15 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 3 Freight and insurance 4 7 9 12 12 14 16 17 17 18 29 20 4-5 Travel and other transportation 3 4 4 11 15 28 70 95 56 54 103 90 6 Investment income 6 5 9 9 12 19 18 15 15 7 10 15 7 Government, n.i.e. 22 32 32 34 43 68 81 106 126 89 68 83 8 Other services 34 48 93 86 103 179 158 151 76 80 48 56 9 Private transfers 81 77 83 70 97 77 71 124 93 108 95 107 (U.S. Veterans Aid Pensions) (60) (55) (46) (42) (72) (50) (43) (87) (59) (62) (64) (69) 10 Reparations 39 10 8 9 11 22 33 60 27 35 13 26 Other government transfers 20 10 6 5 6 5 12 13 17 15 16 11 Total 3 - 10 209 193 244 236 299 412 459 581 421 406 382 408 Total I - 10 783 708 815 976 1 056 1,195 1.303 1 419 1,303 1 1 465 1 552 Disbursements: 1 Merchandise Imports 604 611 587 618 780 808 853 1,062 1,150 1,131 1,090 1,186 3 Freight and insurance 56 54 56 53 69 66 71 95 104 96 107 102 4-5 Travel and other transportation 13 26 47 35 33 59 57 66 69 82 48 47 6 Direct investment income 73 41 20 12 13 17 26 55 79 47 24 26 Other 8 2 6 17 25 33 29 36 33 38 116 86 7 Government, n.i.e. 7 4 7 7 12 8 7 13 16 15 16 24 8 other services 26 38 57 50 34 63 79 106 100 103 88 38 9-10 Transfer payments 1 2 5 6 5 5 19 11 3 3 5 10 Total 3 - 10 185 167 198 180 191 251 288 382 404 384 404 333 Total 1 - 10 788 778 785 798 971 1,059 1,141 1,444 1,554 1 515 1J44 1519 Net 1 - 10 - 5 -70 +30 178 85 136 162 -25 -251 -234 -29 + 33 Capital Account, Net 11 Direct Investment 29 -48 - 3 -10 - 4 -10 -15 - 9 - 3 6 -29 - 6 12 Other private long-term capital 19 60 -23 -24 14 - 4 14 57 189 127 175 -31 13 Private short-term capital - 1 4 2 29 -107 -117 -13 12 178 67 77 89 14 Government 24 -15 8 16 39 54 - 7 -28 35 23 35 70 15 Allocation of SDR's 18 17 Total it - 1S net 71 1 -16 11 -58 -77 -21 32 399 223 276 Total 1 - 15 net 66 -69 14 189 27 59 141 7 148 -11 247 172 Net Errors and Omissions -40 -70 13 -150 -150 -74 -83 -72 -196 -125 -224 -165 m 16-19 Monetary Movements -26 139 -27 -39 123 15 -58 65 48 136 -23 - 7 (Increase f Reserves - IJ r/ Revised figures as of March 1972. p/ Preliminary. Source: Central lank of the Philippines PHILIPPINES ANNEX 15 Table 5.2 AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 5.2: MAJOR AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS, VOLUME AND UNIT VALUE, 1960-1971 (Quantity in '000 m tons, Unit Value in dollars per metric ton) 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 COCONUT PRODUCTS Copra Volume 805.5 627.5 779.4 1,032.7 910.0 883.5 950.5 775.2 640.2 598.8 445.1 680.3 Unit Value 172.4 140.5 144.9 162.9 171.5 192.4 167.1 167.0 192.2 171.6 175.0 167.7 Coconut Oil Volume 59.7 74,4 157.6 195.3 229.5 235.8 309.6 230.3 255.6 202.5 338.9 397.5 Unit Value 262.5 215.3 213.9 239.2 261.2 288.8 250.7 257.5 302.5 219.8 282.3 260.3 Desiccated Coconut Volume 58.8 59.2 62.6 70.3 69.5 67.7 67.2 60.9 62.0 5.1 67.5 72.7 Unit Value 320.5 25.6 250.8 261.8 281.0 301.9 263.7 280.0 396.8 298.5 288.5 285.5 Copra Meal or Cake Volume 81.2 88.6 155.1 168.1 192.5 181.6 239.1 185.0 188.6 177.5 231.5 288.0 Unit Value 59.9 57.5 63.2 69.9 56.6 65.0 72.1 59.o 58.5 53.0 60.2.. 56.4 SUGAR Centrifugal Volume 1,089.8 1,071.1 960.7 1,026.6 1,094.2 1,017.5 980.2 975.5 965.3 979.5 1,227.6 1,344,7 Unit Value 122.5 126.1 127.0 152.7 135.5 130.2 135.7 155.5 149.5 151.9 152.9 157.9 Molasses Volume 335.6 263.7 226.5 321.2 286.9 552.3 277.3 261.8 245.8 312.3 581.1 486.2 Unit Value 15.8 16.7 22.3 6.3 30.4 22.5 20.9 25.6 28.0 22.5 17.3 17.2 ABACA Fiber, Unmanufactured Volume 101.2 83.5 92.5 112.8 104.5 89.3 78.9 67.5 56.8 61.5 55.2 59.2 Unit Value 513.0 355.7 267.2 280.3 290.7 271.5 237.0 218.5 197.5 232.0 277.8 399.4 Rope Volume 5.7 8.1 7.3 6.9 7.0 4.6 7.7 5.0 4.2 5.4 5.5 4.9 Unit Value 565.2 518.0 397.6 379.5 393.3 501.7 391.8 406.8 510.7 357.5 365.5 399.4 TIMBER AND TIMBER PRODUCTS Logs and Lumber / Volume 1,515.4 1,623.1 1,815.5 2,362.6 2,381.2 3,013.5 3,609.8 3,550.6 3,579.6 3,665.2 4,018.8 3,655.8 Unit Value 6e.5 56.9 62.1 65.8 60.1 53.8 56.7 59.8 60.5 61.7 62.2 62.0 Plywood Volume 28.0 39.2 57.3 69.3 98.1 81.3 86.7 85.1 92.5 75.1 85.5 71.6 Unit Value 231.7 202.6 236.3 230.5 232.5 216.2 205.2 216.0 232.5 262.9 229.9 Veneer & Dry Corestock- Volume 15.8 15.9 18.5 27.3 38.7 33.7 35.6 52.9 71.1 63.8 47.5 55.6 Unit Value 305.7 293.0 322.5 351.2 297.0 310.3 296.2 163.8 161.3 170.5 152.9 135.5 FRUITS Pineapples canned Volume 55.8 53.4 39.6 32.5 3h.5 55.3 55.2 56.5 99.2 109.2 100.0 100.5 Unit Value 165.0 251.7 287.6 225.3 225.1 197.5 197.2 178.8 173.6 157.5 214.0 195.9 Bananas Volume 0.1 0.1 - - 0.1 - 0.3 0.5 0.1 23.3 82.0 225.7 Unit Value 137.7 239.1 - - 10.2 - 54.9 87.9 65.5 57.7 60.4 60.0 2/ Pineapple juice- Volume 12.5 25.0 22.1 27.7 28.3 17.0 14.1 15.6 10.5 11.9 15.2 11.9 Unit Value 109.1 108.3 97.2 100.0 100.0 159.5 100.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.5 TOBACCO unmanufactured Volume 13.1 19.0 24.3 25.5 33.4 28.3 22.6 24.2 42.6 33.0 38.6 45.2 Unit Value 521.7 53.9 570.0 492.2 490.6 533.0 h80.8 455.4 355.3 589.9 352.4 312.4 1/ Volume inMillion boardfeet; unit value in US$/1,000 bd. ft. 2/ VolumeinMillion liters; unit value in US$/1,000 liters. Source: Central Bank ANNEX l5 Та61е 5.3 P1iILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Та61е 5.3: VA:,UE OF PAINCIPAL ЕКРОRТS OF гццОR AGRiCIfLTORAL COMAbDITICS ВУ COUNTRIES, 1960-1971 (т1111оп us$) 1960 1961 1962 t963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 - - - - - - - - - - - - Ci) сосоиит еео0истs СО➢Уа 138,6 8у2 11Э.0 j�1@,� 1�¢.1 jjQ.Q ` 2 125..4 123..Il 87.Э 8�_1 114,0 100.0 Necherlande 43.з 31.4 32 2 61,Э 5Э.8 45.8 50,Э Э2.8 26.3 20.8 29,1 42,7 37,5 OSA 49.6 Э0.9 39,3 45.2 44.3 51.8 44.0 4G.9 61.4 47.0 Э4,6 33.7 29.6 Сегтапу 14.3 1Э.1 20.5 40.5 41.0 Э1.5 32.6 21.7 12.0 9.3 Э.4 11.Э 9,9 Japan 0.6 0.5 2.2 6.5 5.8 9.4 9.7 11.Э 9.5 5.9 7.4 8.5 7.5 Sнедеп 2,2 2,9 3,5 3.5 - 9,8 Ь.Ь 5.5 5.2 1,7 2,5 6.5 5.7 I[а1у 2,8 0.6 l.3 1,1 1.2 1.8 0.6 1.6 L 2 - 0.6 Э.9 3.4 Nагнау 1.6 0.4 0,9 1.1 - 1.6 0,Э 0.7 0.8 1.2 0.7 3.2 2.8 сосопи[ о11 ц_7 1у9 з1,_ь 4�7 �2,2 4.@..1 7_4.5. 5.9_3 ZL3 5д..,5. 95J.fi 10з._i 1дд..п USA 15.6 15,8 30.6 40,Э 47.8 54.3 58,1 51.9 68.4 44,7 83,7 76.В 74.2 Netherlands - - - 2,7 4.6 Ь.б 3.7 2.8 4.7 2.7 5.8 21.0 20,Э Germany - - 1.0 2.4 5,7 5.0 8.8 1.9 З.О 0.7 5.1 Э,Э 3,2 Dевlсса[ед coconut 18i_В 14,__5 15.1 19.4 19.5 �0.4 17.7 17.0 24•Ь L6.1 19.4 20,7 100,0 ц5А 17.4 L3.5 13.2 15.6 16.7 15.8 12.7 12.6 2L.3 12,0 15.0 13.9 67.1 Сегтвпу 0.9 0,1 0.4 0.6 0.2 0,8 1.0 0.2 0.4 0,4 0.6 1.5 7.2 Свпадв 0,1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0,7 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.2 5,8 Ne[herlaпds 0.2 - - O.l - 0.3 0.Э 0.4 0.5 0.4 0,6 1.0 4.8 Сорга теаl о cake 4,9 4.2 9.1 11.8 10.9 11,8 17.2 10.9 11.0 9,4 1Э.9 16.2 100.0 Netheтlanda 0.7 0.6 1.8 2,5 Э,8 3,9 6.4 4.4 4,5 4.0 5,1 9,7 59,9 Gennany 2,9 1.5 4.3 6,2 5.0 5.7 8.2 4.8 5.0 4.8 5.7 6,5 40.1 sucAe Cen[rifuдel 13Э.5 135.1 122,0 146,5 148.Э 1Э2.4 133,0 141.7 144.0 148.8 187.7 212.3 100.0 USA 128,В 1Э4,9 122.0 146,5 148.Э 132.4 1Э3,0 141.7 144.0 148.8 187,7 212,3 100.0 lарап 4.0 0.2 - - - - - - - - - - Molassee 4. В 4_4 5_0 8_4 12_4 10.0 5� 8 Ь_7 6;9 7_0 8_З 8_4 100.0 Japan Э.1 3.4 Э,3 5.7 10.5 9.0 5,3 Ь.5 6.6 5.7 6.1 6.5 77.4 Котев 1,3 0.5 - - - - - - - - 0.8 1,1 11.9 USA 0,4 0.5 1.7 2.6 1,8 0.9 0.5 0.1 0.Э 1.2 1.5 0.8 Э.5 АНАСА Unmanufeccured 41•8 28.8 24•7 31•6 3_�4 24•2 18.7 1� 1�_2 14,-3 15.3 12,9 10J_0 U5A 11.1 11,0 8.3 8.9 8.5 9.7 7.5 5.Э 3,9 5,6 4.7 4.5 Э4.9 Japan 11.8 6.4 5.9 8,9 7.9 5.4 4.0 Э.З 2,6 Э.2 Э.В 3,2 24.В UK 6,5 4.5 3,9 5.2 5.4 3,8 З.О 2.4 2,0 2,3 3,2 3.0 2Э,3 Етепсе 1.3 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.В 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.6 Сеттапу 1,7 0.7 0,6 0.7 0.8 0.3 0.Э 0.3 0,2 0.2 0.Э 0.2 1.6 Denmerk 1.0 0,6 0.8 0.7 0,7 0.6 0,Э 0.3 0,2 0.2 0,1 0.1 0.8 копе 2i 3�4 � 26_0 � 1у 3у � � у,9 2�0 1�9 100�0 и5А 1.4 1.2 1.1 О,Ч 1.0 0.8 1.2 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.9 1,1 57.9 5ingnpore 0.4 0.5 0,4 0.Э 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.Э 15.8 Hongkong 0,3 0,Э 0.Э 0,2 0.4 0,2 0,3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0,1 0.1 5.3 Germany - 0,1 0.1 0.1 0,1 0.1 0.1 - - 0,1 0.1 0.1 5,Э 'ГIMBER AND TIMBER PRODUCTS Lодв апд Lumber 91,6 92.4 112.8 152,9 143.1 162.0 204.7 212,2 216.G 226.0 249.8 225,9 100,0 дарап 72.8 74.2 87,6 123.9 110,3 L2Ь.б 16 L 2 � 163,6 L74,1 192,Э 174,9 77.4 Когеа 6,Э 4.0 11.L 5.7 Ь.б 8.2 14.8 16,1 20,0 22,7 24.0 21.9 В.7 Chinд 2,8 4.1 5.9 10.4 11,9 11.9 12.4 13,4 16.7 11.1 18.0 16.Э 7.2 usA 6.1 4,7 4,а 5.2 6.z 6.г 5.6 4.5 5.7 7.5 3.8 з,о 1,Э Okinawa 0.8 0.8 0,9 - 1.5 - - - - - - 2.5 1.1 Nongkoпg - 0.1 - 0,4 0.6 0,2 0.4 0,1 0.2 0.2 1,2 2,3 1,0 Auetralia 0.1 0,3 0.Э - - - - - - - - 1,8 0,8 Plywood Ь_5 8_0 11.2 16_0 22_8 17.б 17_7 18,2 21.5 19.5 19,7 1Ь.4 100.0 U5A 6.4 7.9 11.2 15.9 22.1 17.2 17.2 17.6 21.1 19.0 17.8 Т3.0 87.8 }iongkong - - - - 0,2 - 0.3 0.2 0.Э 0,3 1.1 0.9 5.5 Japan - - - - 0.1 - - 0.1 - 0.1 0.2 0,7 1.8 Сатда - - - - 0.4 - - 0.1 - - 0•2 0.2 1.2 V епеет 2� 9 4у б� а 9i 1�_5 1�_5 10,_0 }6 11,_8 11,_3 10 • 1 у9 10�0 05А 2,9 4,Э 5,9 9.2 10.9 11.1 9.2 7.1 10,7 9.7 8.5 5,9 74.7 Japan - - - - - 0.1 0.3 0,8 0.5 1.3 1.3 0.В 10.1 Canada - 0.1 - 0.1 0.4 0,1 0.1 0.1 - - 0.1 0.3 3,8 АивСгаца - - - - - - 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 2.5 Okinaыa - - - - 0.1 - 0,1 0,Э 0.1 0.1 0,1 0.1 1.Э FRUITS Plneapples, саппед j� 10.5 11.4 ]� 7�7 §,,j Q,Q 1�_1 18,_9 1�_2 2�_4 1�7 10J_0 USA 5.7 6.1 4,9 З,О Э.Ь 4.4 3.0 4.0 11.5 11.1 12.4 11.8 59.9 Garmnn;� 0.7 0.8 2.0 1.2 0.9 1.0 1.Э 1.5 1.9 0.7 1,0 0,9 4.6 Neeherlendв 0,5 0.6 1.4 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.7 0,9 l.0 0.7 0.6 0.7 3.6 5недеп 0,2 0.1 0.4 0.Э 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0•5 0.4 1,0 0.Э 1.5 Ввпапав - - - - - - - - - 1.,,3 �,Q 1Э.5 100i0 Jврап - - - - - - - - - 1.3 5.0 13,3 9В.5 Hongkong - - - - - - - - - - - 0.2 1.5 Рiпеаррlе julce t_4 2_5 i1 ?у 2у � }� 1.S- 1.1L 1.Z 1 4 .1.:. 39Q.SL 11gq 1_Э 2_5 2_0 2_7 2_7 2у6 1у2 1`2 0_7 0_Э 0_6 0.5 4 L 7 Т08АСС0 Аан [оЪассо 1( 7 8 11 12 16 15 11 11 15 16 14 14 Сlдагs апд Othera 1/ - 1 1 1 1 1 1 - 1 1 1 1 TOTAL MAJOR AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS 2/ 478 42=1 47�9 6Э1 Ьв45 65�7 682 64Э 686 62В 740 776 OTHER ЕКРОКТS 2/ 82 79 77 96 97 111 146 178 172 228 Э2�2 346 TOTAL PHILIPPINE EКPORTS 2/ 560 500 556 727 742 768 828 821 В57 855 1,062 1•122 1/ Deselnatlonв not availaбe, values гоипдед ео [he nearesC millioп US$. 2/ Values гоипдед Со Che nearese m111ion U5$. Source: Сеппаl Bank. ANNEX 15 Table7-4 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 5.4: SELECTED IMPORTS - VALUE, 1960-1971 (1000 US$) 196o 1961 1962 1963 1964 1 U96 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 TO TAL 102,602 127,218 120,092 130,163 158,735 186,220 149,219 212,aO7 185,195 166,137 151,457 195,6o4 Meat & Meat Preparation 5. F9 4,P7 1, PO I. 9L2 7 , OEL 1. 46M3 2. 6R ', 7 '.621 __ 2. '.14a 5,524 03 31 27 9 1, 9 1'n l'S 2.2. 2,822 2, Meat, fresh 7 2"13 2 275 Me at, canned 5,571 3,614 8,3o6 2,921 4,534 3,967 6,628 3,642 6,731 6,152 3,033 3:249 Meat, salted - 2 11 9 3 32 101 10 48 2 - - Others 3 - - 1 - - - - - - - - Dairy Products 24,38 24,2125 31,131 18,7121 23,98234 25,959 28,636 29,19 O 34,908 37,2726 32,403 38 476 Milk & cream, fresh 2 10 121 3U 139 18 12 47 Milk & cream, canned 22,932 22,422 28,187 15,582 20,8o6 22,505 24,566 25,588 30,798 33,355 28,107 31,018 Butter 451 448 865 1,707 1,o6l 948 1,057 1,376 1,407 1,616 2,165 3,989 Cheese 1,002 1,31.1 2,037 1,270 1,972 2,h96 2,892 2,042 2,564 2,215 2,119 3,422 Eggs & Honey ho 29 4 14 9 5 4 9 30 1 4 19 Eggs - - - - - - - - - - - - Honey 2 5 2 - 3 - - - - 1 - - Others 38 24 2 14 6 5 4 9 30 - 4 19 Fish & Fish Preparation 21,L82 15,41 9,063 12,201 11, 93 13,;08 15,66 9 1915 6 22,ZO3 18,126 16, 16 20,527 17 117 JU Fish, fresh 101 lg 3 192 7 114 131 Fish, canned 21,655 15,461 a,961 12,084 12,549 13,380 15,485 19,392 22,511 18,142 16,502 20,396 Other fish preparation 10 - 1 - - - - - - - - Cereal & Cereal Preparation 24,538 48,715 21,103 '2, 9 5 2,7L9 1.148 0,73h )8,054 32,52L 09 Rice 1'003 21, 205? '797 33,ffl ;.'991 JE 13 3' 1 - - 27,769 Corn 416 192 1,021 550 130 53 42 455 29h 1,727 22 2,625 Wheat & wheat products 20,344 25,105 23,995 24,931 28,554 29,312 33,661 34,680 32,539 29,398 26,394 28,04 Others 1,895 2,129 3,084 388 4,546 4,429 4,653 6,402 7,901 6,929 6,iio 6,657 Fruits & Vegetables 2. jL4 2, 1. 693Z 4 8 6, 2 1. 3 9,931 9,12 12,911 7. 3 8 3 531 3,;2 L L 7 6 3 2 4,1 1,19 - 1, 19 1,7 '3 2 0 '793 '3 'E2; 7' 7 ffi Fruits & vegetables, fresh 2 297 3 3T 0 1 2, 17 1,603 Fruits & vegetables, canned 955 1,199 1,640 1,472 2,193 2,o65 1,597 1,422 1,762 1,793 996 1,581 Others 227 263 277 482 607 735 767 953 1,277 786 445 347 Sugar & sugar preparations 571 406 297 344 262 321 199 195 239 376 271 219 Feedingstuffs for animals 1,894 2,810 2,583 2,253 2,641 2,595 3,G66 5,176 7j174 7,202 8,109 8,143 Corn. - - - - - - - - - - - Mixed feeds 17 io 26 29 33 22 15 35 - 30 - 6 Other feed grains 212 238 86 99 125 145 203 122 196 1,32 164 lh6 Protein concentrates - - - - - - - - - - - - Others 1,665 2,562 2,471 2,125 2,483 2,428 2,848 5,019 6,978 7,040 7,945 7,991 Pulp & Waste Paper 2,457 4,034 2,948 3,836 2,958 3,404 2,050 4,378 4,573 4,421 7,477 6,402 Agricultural 9, w 14,23 17.01 20, LL1 35,7 32.7 2 Z 17,716 24,2 O 22,21 2U 96 1'.'53 31.1 5 1 814 7 99 930 13 9 7,2 6 2,2r Machinery & implements 173 2 3 1 9 1,37 4 9 Pumps, including tractors 5,739 8,221 10,837 16,411 15,714 10 604 11 785 23,952 20,982 22,43o 20,309 19,121 Other agricultural machinery 3,431 5,612 6,706 7,633 6,16o 6:321 7:964 11,136 11,219 8,834 9,302 .11,738 Fertilizers, Manufactured 9 3 2.& 15,,5349 1.n978 131,6 2 1 1,7776 4.9491 10 93 1, 0 9, 19 14,388 Sulphate of ammonia 2,NP '892 '3 '3 2,251 71, C3 1,971 Other nitrogeneous fertilizers 1,233 2,378 4,089 897 3,365 1,875 1,969 4,211 3,249 4,192 5,994 9,246 Phosphate of ammonia 1,380 2,046 2,724 671 1,638 1,887 8 352 224 247 - 858 Other phosphatic fertilizers 63 404 254 25 964 60 54 203 1,201 239 547 3 Other potash fertilizers & Matls. 736 1,154 - - - - - - - - - - Mixed fertilizers 836 408 793 27 17 75 2 6 - 7 - 34 Others 313 488 2,535 934 1,776 2,698 1,308 1,096 1,682 2,334 1,445 2,276 Insecticides and Herbicides n.a. n.a - n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 3,62i 1,jlO Insecticides and rodenticides n:a: n:a: n:a: n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 7 Agricultural insecticides n a n a n a n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 2,193 2,024 Herbicides & similar preparations n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 603 529 Machinery for: 1. L23 lq 6 1. F 2, 1M 1 2. 1 1,5410 1,02 2 6 2 1, 82 1,417 73 76 33 '1 3, 4 gg 4, . 1 354 gi '4 Sugar 1,97 53 16, 3 , 03 372 Rice 196 285 970 735 1,002 948 1,044 3,476 2,338 1,151 1,435 1,045 Source: Central Bank. ANNEX 15 PHILIPPINES Table 5.5 AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 5.5: SELECTED IMPORTS-QUANTITY, 1960-1971 Units t_ 1961 1962 1963 1904 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1979 1971 Mear & Mear Preparatton 8,601 6.371 12.919 7.00 11,129 9,907 12,920 10,187 15.46 13.145 6,907 9.299 SMeat, frnsh n tons 592 1,322 1,373 2,037 2,517 2,164 2,729 3,491 4,765 4,095 2,372 3,639 Meat, canned I tons 8,000 5,048 11,419 4,948 8,602 7,712 10,034 6,650 10,450 9,039 4,535 4,660 MeIat, salted n tons - 1 25 14 9 31 157 45 191 10 - - Others 9 - 1 1 1 - - - - 1 - Dalry Products 78,700 78,978 111,178 62,796 80,347 7j.311 84.821 94 9?4 116.75 3 419 107 341 7n1 597 Milk & oream, frnsh n tons - 35 144 498 221 30 290 1,011 400 642 15 182 Mlk & cre aa, canned s tons 76,432 76,693 107,089 58,284 75,062 70,313 74,517 78,274 108,662 125,099 98,085 88,519 Butter m tons 644 531 1,076 2,082 1,552 967 1,327 1,670 2,008 2,959 4,168 6,218 Ch.ese i tons 1,624 1,719 2,869 1,932 3,512 4,001 8,687 3,969 5,105 4,759 5,073 6,662 Eggs & onny 33 24 7 8 10 5 1 20 2 1 2 14 Eggs 2 -- - - - - - - Honey . tos 6 12 6 - 7 - - - - 1 - - Others 25 12 1 8 3 5 1 20 2 - 2 - Fish & Fish Preparation 71,873 57.482 33.559 46.468 48,·07 49,781 60.666 72,558 82784 73.922 68,420 75,147 FIsh, fresh n tons 122 42 389 470 695 1,912 847 606 702 646 367 537 Fish, canned n tons 71,497 57,440 33,169 45,998 47,362 47,869 59,819 71,952 82,082 73,265 68,053 74,610 Othnr fish preparation m tons 54 - 1 - - - - - - 11 Cereal & Cereal Preparation 284.680 520.445 375,288 698.030 735,316 1,038,762 664,046 840,186 559.362 537.899 485,063 846,772 Re i tons 12,900 186,436 52 256,300 303,530 569,381 108,821 289,434 - - - 303,447 con s tons 5,464 2,169 11,529 5,407 1,471 359 177 6,994 4,728 24,937 65 39,190 Wheat & wheat products m tons 252,449 315,387 338,226 386,322 396,274 435,472 522,560 500,337 504,301 466,276 435,592 454,010 Others n tons 13,867 16,453 25,481 50,001 34,041 33,550 32,488 43,421 50,333 4b,686 49,406 50,125 Fruits & Vegetables 10,206 18,083 15,663 29,481 7,478 34,559 49.083 42,143 42.782 31,18 21.34 13,764 Fruits 6 Vegetables, fresh 1 tons 7,576 6,485 11,155 24,497 21,245 27,164 41,457 33,629 32,655 22,707 17,722 8,344 Fruits & vegetables, caonned m tons 2,142 10,968 3,914 3,928 4,873 5,707 5,993 6,309 7,165 6,575 2,516 4,740 Fruits dried 0 tons 488 630 594 1,056 1,362 1,688 1,653 2,206 2,962 1,888 1,096 680 Others - - - Sugar & Sugar Preparation . tons 1.344 1,285 942 1,334 872 1,029 706 716 782 1.269 920 679 Feedtngstnff Fnr Animals tons 23.109 30,910 29,545 24,214 24,044 20.939 25,591 48,756 71,799 69,153 73,698 71,119 Corn ntons- - - - - - - Mixd feeds s tons 109 132 96 174 143 191 64 142 - 49 2 63 Other feed grans M tons 2,046 2,267 858 925 1,059 1,057 1,077 794 1,273 1,018 1,329 916 Proteln conntrates - - - - - - ,- Other m tons 20,954 28,511 28,591 23,115 22,842 19,691 24,450 47,820 70,525 68,086 72,367 70,131 Pulp & Waste Paper o tons 22.552 38,222 31,112 42,432 37,249 23,740 39,378 42,871 44,279 43,234 60,481 52,604 Agricultnral 10,292 47,964 31,157 35,217 92,111 65,758 87,667 93,084 105,618 109,017 173,022 80 Marhinory & implents Number 669 2,361 4,219 11,261 14,697 3,684 21,509 18,421 7,973 4,772 8,601 17 Pumps, incloding tractors Number 9,623 45,603 6,938 23,956 81,314 62,074 66,157 75,063 97,645 144,245 164,201 51 Other agricultural machy. - - - - - - 1 - - - 220 12 Fertilizers, Manufotured 135,524 173,176 282,374 80,524 213.083 207,961 85,220 190,379 179.597 206,534 193,520 276,960 Sulphate n o a noiam tons 58,296 60,554 105,812 38,437 91,950 85,828 34,689 96,763 53,743 43,922 30,236 60,896 Other nitrogeneons fortilizers n tons 17,825 36,698 65,222 11,521 45,736 23,656 22,677 56,415 44,116 69,994 101,232 146.,56, Ph-sphatn of aonnla n tons 21,730 25,914 41,072 9,321 32,002 26,138 47 5,948 4,038 4,709 - 11,115 Other phosphatic fertilizers m tons 1,914 8,065 6,275 532 22,065 18,813 2,059 4,900 32,809 11,301 18,824 73 Other potash fertilizers & Mats. . tos 19,960 27,095 - - - - - - - - Mixed fertilizers i tons 10,916 4,972 12,469 742 186 1,273 25 91 - 102 11 214 Others tons 4,883 9,878 51,524 19,971 31,144 53,053 25,723 26,262 44,891 76,506 43,217 58,098 Insecticides and Herbicides 0.a. n., ... n. : [...a. r..1. nia. -.. n.a. 1. 3,761 4,294 Innseticiden and rodenticides m tons n.a, n.a. no. na. n.a. na. n.a. 0,a. n.. n.a 1,050 791 Agri,ultural insectieides n tons no, n.a. n.a. n.a. na. n.a. n., n.a. n.a. a. 2,082 2,836 Herbicid-on onthnr similar preporations n tonn n.. n.a n.a. n.a. n.. n. n.. n.. n. . 629 567 Source: Centrol Bank. PFIILIPPINPS AGRICULIURAL SF1;1C1R SURVEY ТаЫе .Ь: II4POн1S OF LIVF510CR Pfй1IAC15, 196$-1971 РОIцМЕ OF IMPORIS VAI176 OF IMPORIS (C.I.F.) 19Ь5 1966 1967 19Ь8 1969 197о 1971 1965 1966 1967 1ЭЬ8 1969 197о 1971 - - - - - - - - -Numbers- - - - ` - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (U5$ 'OW) - - - - - - - - - ' - - - - - А. Livestock Ап1та1 chiвfly for Food 1. CaLt1e, live Ь,058 п.а. 689 170 120 п.а. 23 787.7 105•Ь 16В.Ь 66.7 27.1 - 15.9 2. Sheep anд goaLS 94 1.1 - - Э. 5vine 1z zz 1о zЬ 35•4 - 5•о 9•5 - 7•1 4. сьiсквп 1zo г.б 1а.б о.2 8.2 8.1 5• Other г,15Э - - о.3 1.4 б.о 45.9 - тоtаl а 11о 824.z 1о5•Ь 1'п•5 вз•7 зб.е 55•з з1_� - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' - -т bone- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' - - - �U5$ '�) - - - - - - - - - ' - - - - - - В. Meat апд Meat Preparations 1. Heat, fresh, сЬ111ед ог frozen , а. Meat оТ cattle 1,7з 9•4 1,625.2 2,360.$ 2,793.Ь 2,861.2 1,77о.9 1,59о.о 1,Э71.7 1,Э49•5 1,755•1 2,382.7 2,487.7 2,001.Э 1,727.6 ь. Meat о£ sbeep ог lambs 41.1 124.Э 175•1 399•г Зо5.8 95•7 233.9 г9•4 82.Э 113•8 145•5 131.7 71.Э 104•Ь с. Meat от sxine рогк 62.3 385•Ь ЫЬ.8 1,022.2 547.9 192.о 1,396.7 34.9 195•Ь г9г•7 388.2 205•3 70.8 543•1 д. спlсквп 1.4 1з.9 z.6 1о1.4 з.г - z•z .z ц.з 1.ь гь.4 1.6 1.г е. other 320.0 579•Э Э3Ь.5 8.1 Э77.0 313•1 416.3 18о.В 585•0 17о.д 304.7 г82.б 216.1 229.1 гоtаl 2,1Ь4.2 2,728.3 3,491.5 4,7Ь4•5 4,о95•6 2,371.7 1,639.1 1,617.о 1,19Э.7 2,334•о 3,247•5 Э,108.9 2,359•S 2,Ьоб.1 2. Медt, dried, salted, amoked ог cooked а. Smoked, дгlед от salted ЬеаТ 16.8 35•7 - 4.8 о.9 - - г5.8 9•9 0.6 - - ь. Meat оЛ sиlпе ротк 9.7 1о4.о ц.9 35•4 г.9 - - 4•5 75.4 5•з 16.о 1.1 - - с. Other 4.1 17.2 Э3•3 15о.7 б.г - - 2.В г4.о 6.4 35.6 1.7 - - ToLa1 зо.б 15Ь•9 45•2 19о.9 1о.о - - 33•1 1о9.Э 11.7 52.2 2.8 - - 3. Meat, саппед, апд meat preparations а• вевг 6,723•Э 9,129.3 5,30Э•Э 8,8Э1.1 8,015•$ 4,44о.о 4,579.8 Э,9о1.б 6,795•1 Э,579.5 6,83о.б 6,195.4 3,о11.б Э,22о.7 Ь. Poultry ы.9 4в.е 17.7 1об.о 4z.9 .з - 7.1 в.5 4.7 гг.з 15•7 .г .з с. 5ц1пе 328.5 182.9 255•2 282.0 149•5 241.6 53•Ь 130.2 1о2.4 - д. Other 598.4 Ь73•5 1,о74.1 1,231.Э 727.2 69•3 Во.S 163•9 29Ь•9 359.3 5Ы.8 251.9 342.3 Э71.1 чьtаl 7,71г.1 1о,оЭ4•5 6,65о.3 1о 4 о.4 9.о39.4 4,5з5.б 4,ЬЬо•3 4,Э14.2 7 1 4.1 4,о73.7 7,522.1 6,84о.7 3 3 4.1 Э 91.8 4. Dairy producLS, eRga anд hопеу а. М11к anд сгеат i. дту а�ат тilк 17,63о.5 19,2о4.4 18,175•1 2о,оц.1 15,821.4 2о,487.7 25,ЬЭЭ•7 6,474.9 8,166.4 7,2об.2 5,780.8 Э,999.1 5,733•1 9,о37•5 ii. �aporated т11к 35,999•5 28,811.7 39,922.4 5Э,850•4 ЬЭ,079.Э 37,о94•5 28,25г•0 9,846.6 В,2о7.8 7,742.о 14,ооб.4 1Ь,02о.4 8,329•6 7,935•4 iii. Condensed milk 5,946.5 4,885•3 3,Эо2.7 6,251.2 8,91о.1 7,721.9 5,5Ь9•7 2,оо4•о 1,7оЭ.8 995•3 1,762.5 2,ЭЬ0•Ь 2,о98.Э 1,75г•б iv Po.rered milk 8,998•5 1Э,142.4 11,974•3 2о,98о.7 29,181.9 28,5Ь2.2 24,799•1 6,45Ь•7 7,389•0 7,898.4 1о,599.8 12,9ЬЬ•L 1Э,5оЭ.2 14,948.Ь v. оtьег milk 1,767.8 5,817.4 5,91о.9 7,9Ь8•8 8,697.2 4,218.7 4,445•9 1,о95•7 г,559•2 5,51Ь.5 3,18о.9 3,264•6 2,878.г 1,864•0 тоtаl 70,Э42.8 71,8Ы.г 79,285•L 1о9,об2.2 12 689.9 98,о85•0 88,7оо.4 25,877•9 28,о26.2 29,358.4 Э5,330.4 38,Ы1.1 32,542•4 35,538.1 ь. Butter эы•3 1,зz7.з 1,ыо.4 z,оое.з z,958.7 4,1ь8.4 6,z17•6 1,о11.о 1,1з4.з 1,469.1 1,5ое.1 1,г51.о z,395•1 4,з35•1 с. Cheese ситд 2,5г9.5 4,5Э1.б 3,423•4 Э,916.1 3,В72.7 Э>79Ь.9 4,511.5 1,551.3 1,9оо.9 1,925•9 2,о43.1 1,869•Ь 1,549•1 2,469•7 д. Eggs 4.9 1.6 г0.2 0.8 2.4 1Э.7 4.9 4•0 10.3 30.1 2.1 L•2 21.7 а. OLher даlгу products п.е.а. � 1,466.2 4,151.4 5г$•1 1,165•9 885•5 1,27Э•Э 2,139•1 1,196.5 1,Э10.$ 324.7 793•5 621.7 875•5 1,435•Э mcr�i _ g- - 35,�'п75.9 4i,7гw".2 3ч",L92:Ь >"�,>'27.й >'2,807.9 i�,j,0"l9.У Lч,УУ7•3 тотаг гrtPCнt5 OF LI� тск РноwСчS 36,4Эо.1 41,768.2 Э9,ЬЬ4.1 50,Ы0.7 5г,е44•7 43,135•г 5о,о28.4 1/ Including honey. Source: Central Bank. Ф б в in SECTION VI: CONSUMPTION ANNEK 1 PHILIPPINES Table AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 6.1 : GROSS AVAILABLE FOOD SUPPLY, CALENDAR YEARS 1968 AND 1969 (In 1,000 metric tons (A.P.) or as Purchased Basis) : : :Gross AvailaMle : Production :Net imoortsa : F'>od Supply:, Food Groups CY CY : Percent: CY : y CY : ti CY : Fercent :968: 1969 :increase 1968 : 1969 : 1968 : 1969 :he-ase Philippine s 12,83 1 1 1 1. Vegetable origin 1084 134 4.6 "9_ 11,292 112733 3.9 1. Cereals L7O I.M 7. U 5.292 5,617 6.3 a. Rice (milled)3,114 3,262 4.7 (41) 3/ 3,073 3,262 6.1 b. Corn(shelled)1,676 1,871 11.6 3 28 1,679 1,899 13.1 c. Wheat flour - - - 530J 4569' 530 456 (14.0) 2. Starchy roots & tubers 1,340 1,376 2.7 3/ 23 1,340 1,376 2.7 3. Sugar & Syrups 668 711 6.4 T14) (15) 654 696 6,4 4. Dry beans & nuts (no coconut) 47 49 4.3 13 6 60 55 (8.4) 5. Vegetables 1,033 1,063 2.9 (1) 2/ 1,032 1,063 3.0 6. Fruits 1,759 1,796 2.1 (50) (94)V 1,709 1,702 (0.4) 7. Fats & Oils 110 110 - 3 5 113 115 1.7 8. Coconuts for food 429 424 (1.2) - - 429 424 (1.2) 9. Miscellaneous 667 680 1.9 6 5 673 685 1.8 II. Animal Origin 1.996 2,101 L W L23 2,850 5.8 1. Meat & poultry 573 566 (1.3) 14 12 587 578 (1.6) 2. Fish & other marine productsl,299 18408 6 1.366 1.466 7.3 a. Fish 1,097 1,195 8.9 61 53 1,153 1,248 7.7 b. Crustaceans 73 78 6.8 / / 73 78 6.8 c. Mollusks 129 135 4.6 6 5 135 140 3.7 3. Milk (whole) 9 10 11.1 616 679 625 689 10.2 4. Eggs 115 117 1.7 - - 115 117 1.7 1 Total import minus export. 2/ Production plus net import. 3/ Less than 500 metric tons. ?/ Imported wheat flour plus wheat flour manufactured locally from imported wheat grains. / Fresh fruit equivalent of exported canned fruits and other fruit preparations after deducting the amount of imported fruits. Source of basic data: Food Balance Sheet of the Philippines, calendar years 1968 and 1969. ANNEX 15 Table 6.2 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 6.2: NET AVAILABLE FOOD SUPPLY FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION CALENDAR YEARS 1968 AND 1969 (In 1,000 metric tons (A.P.) or as Purchased Basis) :Gross available: !Jon-fo'd Net available food suPly2/:CY 1969 fod sui : utilitation': for huan consumaticn :percent Food Groups CY CY : C1 : of : CY : CY :Percer. :distri- 1968 : 1969 : 1968 1969 : 1968 a 1969 sincrease :bution a : : :: or : a :::(decrease) Philippine a I, 11482 11240 - 12.'1?!5 02 L,2 I. Vegetable Origin 11.292211,733 L8 1.310 10.084 10,423 3.3 78.7 1. Cereals 52P2 163. 87 2 2 a. Rice (rnilled) 3,0?3 3,262 113 117 2,955 3,1-5 .4 23.8 b. Corn (shelled) 1,679 1,899 733 823 946 1,076 13.7 8.1 c. Wheat flour 530 456 6 4 524 452 (13.8) 3.4 2. Starchy roots & tubers 1,340 1,376 201 211 1,139 1,165 2.3 8.8 3. Sugar & Syrups 654 696 - - 654 696 6.2 5.2 .4. DrS bcn & niuts (no coconuts) 60 55 3 4 57 51 (10.6) 0.4 5. Vegetables 1,032 1,063 52 53 980 1,010 3.0 7.6 6. Fruits 1,709 1,702 88 89 1,621 1,613 (0.5) 12.2 7. Fats & Oils 113 2115 3 4 110 111 0.9 0.8 8. uoconuts for food 429 424 4 4 425 420 (1.2) 3.2 9. Miscellaneous 673 685 - - 673 685 1.7 5.2 II. Animal Origin 2 693 3 2 2 2 162/ 1. Meat & poultry 587 578 - - 587 578 (1.6) 4.4 2. Fish & other marine products 1 366 1 66 24 26 1,342 1 440 7.3 10.2 a. Fish 1, 1,248 22 24 1,Y 1,2 7.7 9.3 b. Crustaceans 73 78 1 1 72 77 6.9 0.6 c. Mollusks 135 140 1 1 133 139 4.5 1.0 3. milk (whole) 625 689 - - 625 69 10.2 5.2 4. Egs 115 117 9 9 106 108 1.9 0.8 1/ Includes animal and poultry feeds, seeds, waste, non-food manufacture and other by-produfts in the milling of corn. 2/ Gross a-ailable food supply minus non-food utilization. I/ Details do not add up to total due to rounding. Source of basic datas Food Balance Sheets of the Philippines, Calendar years 1968 and 1969. ANNEX 15 Table 6.3 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 6.3: INCOME ELASTICITIES FOR SELECTED PRODUCTS, 1960 Area Other urban Product Manila areas Rural areas Rice .001 .120 -.149 Corn cereal -.642 -.144 -.101 Wheat bakery products .367 .396 .605 Root crops .211 .233 -.069 Fresh milk and milk products .649 .899 -.022 Canned whole milk 1.588 1.277 .h06 Canned filled milk .6h .317 .303 Margarine .265 1.530 .077 Pork .380 .413 .212 Fresh beef .555 .388 .124 Poultry .176 .393 .258 Fish, fish products .153 .272 .329 Source: "The Philippines, Long-Term Projection of Supply of and Demand for Selected Agricultural Products," U.S. Department of Agriculture. ANNEX 15 Table 6.4 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 6.4: EXPENDITURE ELASTICITIES OF DEMAND FOR RICE PRODUCERS AND NON-RICE PRODUCERS IN REGIONS OF THE PHILIPPINES 1965 PSSH Regions Rice Producers Non-Rice Producers Metropolitan Manila - 0.13 Ilocos 0.059 2/ 0.06 2/ Cagayan Valley 0.47 0.57 Central Luzon 0.39 / 0.60 Southern Tagalog 0.40 2/ 0.44 2/ Bicol 0.58 2/ 0.12 Western Visayas 0.14 0.08 Eastern Visayas 0.17 0.17 N. & E. Mindanao 0.27 0.04 2/ S. & W. Mindanao n.a. 0.11 Philippines 0.14 (0.0149) 3/ 0.087 (0.0117) 1/ 1/ Rice producers refer to those who reported income from the production of rice, it can include both farm workers and landlords. 2/ Elasticity calculation not statistically significant at 5% or 1% levels. 3/ Figures in parenthesis are standard errors. Source: Reynaldo En. de Sagun, "Regional Differences in the Income Elasticity of Demand for Rice in the Philippines", to be published by the International Rice Research Institute, Los Banos, Laguna. (Cited in Mears, L.A., Rice and Corn Consumption Statistics, IRRI Discussion Paper No. 71-3, February 1971). SECTION VII: INPUT USE ANNEX 1 Table 7.1 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 7.1: TOTAL INVESTMENTS, FY 1960-1971 (In million pesos, at current prices) 1960 1961 1962 1963 196 1965 1966 197 '1968 1969 1970 1971 total Investments 1,754 2,214 2,885 3,424 4,056 4,5L2 4,845 5,503 6,5oo 6,669 8,182 8,587! Public Inv6stmentA 16LY 250 178 255 192 207 182 L20 761 942 671 810 Fconomic Serv3ces Agriculture & Natural Resources h9 21 13 37 15 13 29 25 36 57 n.a. n.a. Iransport & C-mu- nication 90 112 86 147 119 159 86 234 324 307 n.a. n.s. Co,nmrce & Industry 1 3 5 3 3 2 2 60 60 37 n.a. . Other Economic Development 24 23 3 6 5 8 9 5 7 6 n.a. n.a. Others - 94 71 63 50 25 56 96 154 189 n.a. n.a. Privata Investmenta 1.90 1,964 2,707 3,169 2Ln 4,335 4,663 5,083 5,739 ,7 7,511 8,177 1/ Excludes ite.s included under other services (Ginaral. Administration, Social Sorvices) but includes capital transfers and direct lendIng. Public investments exclude local Government investment. p/ Prelimina-y. 302e: FY 1960-66 data exclude foreign-financed capital expenditures. £.c'rce: Presidential Economic Staff. ANNEX 15 Table 7.2 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 7.2: ACTUAL AND RECOMMENDED RATES OF FERTILIZER APPLICATION FOR MAJOR CROPS Recommended rate (kg/ha) Actual rate (kg/ha) Crops N P25 K2 Total N P225 120 Total FOOD CROPS Fa UY30 15 5 50 HYV's 80-100 30-50 0-50 110-200 Local varieties 20 0 0 20 Corn 45-60 0-45 0-45 45-150 30 15 5 50 Vegetables 60 30 30 120 Onion 90-120 60 60 210-240 Cabbage 135-180 80 80 295-340 Garlic 135-200 80 80 295-360 Pechay 90-135 60 60 210-255 Tomato 60-90 60 60 180-210 Potato (Irish) 75-100 60 60 195-320 Others 30-60 30-60 30-60 90-180 Fruits & nuts 30 60 120 Pineapple 100-180 90-135 160-240 350-555 30 30 60 Coconut 30 30 60 Most soils 75-150 30 45-90 150-270 Red & lime- stone soil 75-150 75 90-180 240-405 Root crops 10 10 30 60 Others COMMERCIAL CROPS 120 60 65 145 Sugarcane 120 120 240 408 60 30 60 150 Tobacco 60 30 60 150 Abaca 60-100 60 45 165-205 Rubber 100 50 100 250 Ramie 80-150 45-75 45-75 170-300 15 15 15 45 Coffee & cacao 56 28 56 140 Others Improved pasture 50-70 30-50 30-50 110-170 Fish ponds 160 200 30 390 60 30 5 95 Brackish 90 90 60 240 Fresh water 50 grams N (each year of growth) Citrus 50 g;ams N (each year of growth) up to 0 to 4 years old. 100-200 grams 4 years old. 100-200 grams N (each year N (each year of growth) up to p of growth) up to 8 years and maintain until 15 years or renewal orchard. Most years and maintain until 15 years Profitable Method-Fertilize the entire or renewal orchard. Most Profit- crop up to 8 years and maintain until able Method-Fertilize the entire 15 years or renewal, crop up to 8 years and maintain until 15 years or renewal. Sources: Recommended rate: Report of Subcomittee No. 1, Technical Working Committee, Presidential Fertiler Commission, 1971. Actual rate : Adopted from the report on the amount of ferti- lizer applied to major crops, NFAC, 1966-1967. PHILIPPINES ANNEX 15 Table 7.3 AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 7.3: AVERAGE PRICE PER BAG OF FERTILIZER PAID BY FARMERS FROM PRIVATE SOXJRCES (AS OF FEBRUARY 28, 1971) Region 14-14-14 12-12-12 12-24-12 16-20-0 Ammosul Urea 18-12-5 Ilocos Abra 32.00 21.00 31.00 Benguet 30.00 25.00 33.00 28.50 19.00 32.00 Ilocos Norte 28.50 23.75 32.50 28.00 18.50 28.50 Ilocos Sur 28.00 29.00 La Union 34.00 30.00 Cagayan Valley Cagayan 28.00 Isabela 33.00 29.50 19.00 31.00 Apayao-Kalinga 35.00 Nueva Visaya 28.00 27.00 Central Luzon Bataan 29.00 24.00 35.00 28.50 19.50 27.00 Nueva Ecija 29.00 29.50 32.50 28.00 29.00 27.50 Pangasinan 29.50 25.00 32.00 19.50 Tarlac 27.50 32.00 27.00 Zambales 32.00 26.00 35.00 32.00 35.00 Southern Tagalog Batangas 25.35 23.35 30.00 25.60 18.35 Cavite 30.00 35.00 30.00 30.00 Marinduque 35.00 Mindoro Occ. 34.00 33.00 Mindoro Or. 30.00 27.00 35.00 29.50 18.50 28.50 30.00 Quezon 29.50 28.50 33.00 29.00 19.50 28.50 Rizal 27.65 Bicol Albay 34.00 Camarines Norte 32.50 28.50 36.50 32.00 20.00 35.00 CamarinesSur 32.00 25.00 35.75 31.00 22.00 36.65 Masbate 36.00 30.00 40.00 35.00 41.50 Sorsogon 38.00 36.00 29.00 Eastern Visayas BOhWl 28.00 22.00 31.00 Cebu 30.00 23.56 32.50 30.00 20.00 33.50 42.00 Leyte Norte 33.75 33.75 35.00 32.00 33.75 35.00 Southern Leyte 30.00 24.00 33.00 19.00 35.00 Northern Samar Western Visayas Aklan 28.00 26.00 33.00 29.00 18.50 28.00 Antique 29.00 17.50 28.00 Capiz 28.50 28.00 18.00 26.50 Iloilo 27.50 31.50 27.50 18.50 25.00 Negros Occ. 24.75 24.50 Negros Or. 32.00 23.00 18.75 Northern & Eastern Mindanao Agusan del Norte 35.00 30.00 25.00 Bukidnon 25.50 34.50 21.00 Lanao del Norte 31.00 25.85 34.00 30.50 37.80 Misamis Or. 29.50 24.00 29.00 19.00 37.00 Southern & Western Mindana > Northern Cotabato 28.00 23.00 Davao del Sur 34.00 Zamboanga del Norte 31.50 25.50 35.00 21.50 37.50 Zamboanga del Sur 33.00 28.00 38.00 32.00 22.00 37.00 ANNFI 15 PHILIPPINES Tables 7.h,7.5 & 7.6 AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 7.L,:Estimated fertilizer consumption by food crops 1968-69, (mt) Area Percent Area harvesteda areab fertilized Nutrients usedc Crop (ha) fertilized (ha) N P205 K2 0 Total Rice 3,332,200 24 799,728 55,981 23,992 11,996 91,969 Corn 2,256,100 9 203,049 12,183 6,092 3,046 21,321 Fruits& nuts 368,000 6 22,080 1,325 663 1,325 3,313 Citrus 25,200 21 5,291 476 317 476 1,269 Vegetables 101,800 43 43,774 3,937 1,312 1,312 6,561 Coffee 51,900 6 3,114 93 93 93 279 Cacao 9,200 3 276 8 8 8 24 Root crops 253,600 1 2,536 76 76 152 304 Peanut 31,000 7 2,170 65 65 130 260 Other crops 11,200 7 784 47 24 24 95 Total 6,440,200 17 1,082,802 74,191 32,642 18,562 15,395 aData from DANR, BAEcon. bBased on the reports of provincial directors (weighted aveiage) and ACA. cBased on recommended nutrients on table 28 by various agencies. Taole 7.5: Summary of domestic fertili-er production (mt) 1960- 12970 60 -960 1961 1962 1963 1964 Type of fertilizer Capacity Actual Capacity Actual Capacity Actual Capacity Actual Capacity Actual Ammonium sulfate 59,400 24,488 59,400 30,134 59,400 35,539 59,400 39.142 59,400 41,237 Complex fertilizer 105,400 13,463 105,400 36,785 105,400 55,792 105,400 50,813 105,400 54.135 Superphosphate 42,200 16,794 42,200 700 42,200 500 42,200 2,500 42,200 1,800 Urea - - - - - - - - - - Mixed fertilizer - - - - - - - - - - Aqua ammonia - - - - - - - - - - Total 207,000 54,745 207,000 67,619 207,000 91,831 207,000 92,455 207,000 97,172 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 Type of fertilizer Capacity Actual Capactiy Actual Capacity Actual Capacity Actual Capacity Actual Actual Ammonium sulfate 89,400 48,642 150,000 42,449 174,000 80,426 174,000 43 ,586 174,000 77,446 77,063 Complex fertilizer 105,400 49,570 242,000 46,580 242,000 77,800 242,000 180,255 371,000 161,247 141,011 Superphosphateb 42,200 2.000 42,000 2,400 42,000 1.000 42,000 2,000 42,000 1,963 2,147 Urea - - 60,000 3,000 60,000 10,229 60,000 17,948 67,500 27,045 21,647 Mixed fertilizer - - 165,000 19,703 165,000 38,701 165,000 -- - - - Ammonia - - - - 36,624 8,447 36,624 c 36,624 14.289 10,706 Total 237,000 100,212 659,000 113,132 719,624 216,603 719,624 243,789 691,124 281799( 252,952 aLow production due to prolonged strike at Maria Cristina. bAtlas production o(.other superphosphate utilized in complex fertilizer. cUsed in ammonium sulfate. TabLe 7.6: Estimated fertilizer supply-demand situations (mt), 1965-70 Total Year-end inventoriesd Productiona Totalb available Effective Local Year (domestic) importations supply demandc producers Imports Total 1965 100,212 207,931 (210) 308,143 286,785 18,239 (18.2) 3,119 21,358 1966 140,769 15,720 (128) 286,489 265,108 19,195 (16.8) 2,186 21,381 1967 231,374 105,540 ( 45) 336,914 259,015 54,930 (23.7) 1,584 77,899 1968 243,789 131,710 ( 54) 375,499 279,316 76,207 (31.3) 1,976 78,183 1969 281,990 172,955 ( 61) 454,945 356,798 95,553 (33.9) 2,594 98,147 1970 252,952 193,054 ( 76) 446,006 367,225 75,885 (30.0) 2,896 78,781 Sources: apertilizer Institute of the Philippines. bStatistics Central Bank of the Philippines (Imports to crop sector and independent of domestic producer and includes only fertilizer used for direct applications). clmplies total domestic consumption, differential between inventories and t:>tal supply. These estimates differ slightly from previous projections since they are computed on the basis of supply minus inventor-s. dEither held for future domestic sale or export. Estimates are for December of each reporting year. ()= Percent odomestic production. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 7.7: ESTIMATED FERTILIZER CONSUMPTION BY REGION FROM 1966 TO 1969 (In Metric Tons) REGION 1966 1967 1968 1969 4-Year Average b/ Estimated % N P205 K20 N P205 K20 N P205 K20 N P205 K20 N P205 K20 Distribution Ilocos Region 2,186 865 654 4,952 1,105 966 9,316 2,360 878 6,485 2,151 1,896 5,734 1,620 1,349 8 Cagayan Valley Mt. Province 573 227 171 1,296 290 253 2,440 618 492 1,699 563 497 1,502 424 353 2 Central Luzon 4,659 1,844 1,393 10,545 2,355 2,059 19,852 5,029 4,003 13,320 4,584 4,041 12,219 3,453 2,874 18 Southern Tagalog 9,891 3,915 2,957 22,385 5,000 4,372 42,146 10,675 8,498 29,338 9,731 8,579 25,940 7,330 6,101 38 Bicol Region 339 134 101 7,658 171 150 1,442 365 291 1,004 333 293 887 251 209 1 Eastern Visayas 755 299 226 1,708 382 334 3,216 815 649 2,239 743 646 1,980 559 464 3 Western Visayas 5,935 2,349 1,774 13,431 3,000 2,623 25,287 6,405 5,099 17,603 5,839 5,147 15,564 4,398 3,661 33 N & E Mindanao 781 309 233 1,767 395 345 3,327 843 671 2,316 768 667 2,048 579 479 3 S & W Mindanao 911 361 272 2,062 461 403 3,882 983 783 2,702 896 790 2,389 675 562 3 Total 68,264 19,291 26,052 Sugarcane 41,275 20,638 22,357 a/ Established utilization of fertilizer nutrients for sugarcane from all sugar centrals (Philsugin). b/ Assumed that all produced and imported materials for the four years were utilized. Left on stock was not included. Source: Report of Sub-Committee No. 1, The Technical Working Committee, Presidential Fertilizer Commission, NEC, April 26, 1971. H > rb>x SECTION VIII: PRICES PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.1: CONSUMER PRICE INDEX, 1960-1971 (1955 = loo) Year All Items Food Clothing House Rent 1/ Fuel, Light & Water Miscellaneous 1960 111.5 116.0 128.4 102.6 104.7 103.5 1961 113.2 118.9 128.7 104.3 106.0 104.0 1962 119.8 137.9 138.9 107.0 107.9 107.5 1963 126.5 140.4 140.2 110.2 109.4 108.8 1964 136.9 158.4 140.9 112.3 120.4 111.9 1965 140.4 161.3 144.5 116.0 132.4 114.9 1966 149.1 176.4 146.8 120.4 130.4 118.3 1967 157.6 190.6 153.1 126.4 130.8 121.0 1968 158.1 187.0 156.2 134.8 134.5 124.2 1969 160.4 190.2 158.0 137.7 133.5 126.0 1970 188.2 222.1 199.2 149.7 158.6 148.2 1971 22L.0 275.1 241.5 160.L 179.9 164.7 1/ Data gathered twice a year - every January and July. Source: Bureau of Commerce, public markets, private firms and residential houses. Cited in Statistical Bulletin, Department of Economic Research, December 1970. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.2: RETAIL PRICE INDEX OF FOODSTUFFS IN MANILA, 1960-1971 (1955=100) Eggs & Fats & Miscell- Year All Items Cereals Fish Meat Vegetables Fruits Milk Oils aneous 1960 116.0 109.6 113.5 108.3 156.3 129.6 113.1 113.5 115.2 1961 118.9 118.2 121.0 113.3 119.7 145.4 116.9 110.5 120.2 1962 127.9 113.5 141.8 126.8 127.5 153.4 155.4 117.4 122.9 1963 140.4 127.5 153.5 145.8 126.0 168.5 176.6 124.2 129.7 1964 158.4 152.4 157.6 163.1 172.1 181.2 183.4 129.4 144.7 1965 161.3 149.3 174.7 167.4 164.0 191.6 185.5 146.1 142.9 1966 176.4 173.8 183.0 182.1 184.3 191.7 188.6 149.5 156.4 1967 190.6 190.3 204.6 187.3 225.3 203.4 187.2 150.7 160.9 1968 187.0 172.9 199.3 194.5 192.2 274.2 190.9 176.7 169.6 1969 190.2 175.6 212.5 195.7 180.4 243.0 190.2 172.7 185.6 1970 222.1 190.3 253.0 223.0 238.8 264.4 236.2 243.4 217.2 1971 275.1 243.2 332.3 286.4 291.7 345.1 268.1 267.1 236.8 1/ Food component of the consumer price index. Source: Bureau of Commerce, Public Markets, Private Firms cited in Statistical Bulletin, ro Department of Economic Research, December 1970. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.3: CONSUMER PRICE AND RELATED INDICES, 1960-1971 Consumer Food Price Rice Consumer Rice Consumer Consumer Corn Consumer Corn Consumer Price Index Index Price Index Price Index Price Index Price Index Price Index Year Manila 1/ Manila 1/ Manila East Visaya excl. Rice Manila East Visaya (1955=100) (1955=100) (1955=100) (1957=100) (1955=100) (1955=100) (1957=100) 1960 111.5 116.0 109.5 95.7 111.7 122.0 93.3 1961 113.2 118.9 120.4 115.7 112.4 136.6 109.0 1962 119.8 17.9 114.2 107.7 120.4 126.3 103.2 1963 126.5 140.4 131.9 133.2 125.9 156.5 139.3 1964 136.9 158.4 162.0 154.1 133.7 168.7 120.2 1965 140.4 161.3 157.4 150.0 138.3 188.9 144.0 1966 149.1 176.4 189.8 165.4 144.2 209.7 146.1 1967 157.6 190.6 212.3 176.3 150.9 193.3 129.7 1968 158.1 187.0 188.9 172.8 154.2 195.3 137.8 1969 160.4 190.2 192.2 177.7 155.8 195.0 132.9 1970 188.2 222.1 208.4 197.2 185.7 214.2 177.5 1971 224.0 275.0 272.2 276.0 218.1 364.4 324.6 Source: 1/ Bureau of Commerce, public markets, private firms and residential houses. Cited in Statistical Bulletin. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.4: WHOLESALE PRICE INDICES, 1958 - 1971 (1955 = 100) A. General Wholesale Price Indices in Manila 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1 Food 110.6 103.7 110.8 119.5 122.7 139.0 148.3 150.3 165.8 174.5 175.9 178.3 208.3 259.8 Beverages & Tobacco 106.4 107.0 108.3 111.3 113.0 118.2 120.1 123.0 124.0 133.5 138.2 138.8 149.2 158.4 Crude Materials (inedible) 117.4 138.1 137.1 135.2 151.5 168.9 179.0 192.3 181.3 197.1 222.8 218.9 274.9 287.2 Mineral Fuels 110.5 112.3 114.8 127.5 135.4 140.5 140.5 142.2 146.9 147.6 147.6 149.2 175.7 200.3 Animal & Vegetable Oils & Fats 134.6 164.6 145.3 138.1 163.7 183.0 197.2 230.0 201.3 225.3 267.0 234.4 347.9 313.2 Chemicals 109.7 113.6 110.9 115.4 131.4 138.5 141.0 142.4 141.2 143.8 147.0 147.8 183.9 209.8 Manufactured Goods 112.9 119.6 123.0 126.6 130.9 135.3 140.0 143.4 146.3 146.7 147.3 151.3 192.3 205.3 Machinery & Transportation Equipment 115.4 128.3 147.6 163.5 174.7 189.2 188.5 188.7 190.8 193.0 196.0 202.1 248.8 292.1 Miscellaneous Manufactured Art. Nec. 103.9 110.8 116.5 116.2 123.4 130.6 131.7 128.5 131.0 132.2 132.6 133.5 151.4 162.3 All Items 111.2 112.7 117.4 123.2 129.4 142.0 148.6 151.9 158.5 165.9 170.7 171.9 205.4 237.7 B. Wholesale Price Index of Domestic Products in Manila 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Food 110.2 102.1 109.0 117.7 119.6 136.4 146.0 147.8 163.9 173.1 174.5 176.6 204.2 256.5 Beverage & Tobacco 103.1 103.0 104.0 107.0 107.9 113.1 114.7 117.5 120.1 129.4 134.5 134.5 143.0 152.0 Crude Materials (inedible) 118.0 138.8 137.4 134.8 151.5 169.2 179.5 193.0 181.7 197.7 224.0 219.9 276.6 288.8 Mineral Fuels 109.3 111.0 113.4 122.6 129.4 133.9 134.0 136.5 139.6 140.5 140.5 141.4 164.2 180.1 Animal & Vegetable Oils & Fats 135.4 166.5 145.8 138.4 164.6 184.5 199.0 232.8 202.7 227.1 270.1 236.3 350.7 314.4 Chemicals 102.8 104.1 103.9 112.1 126.8 131.7 135.3 138.0 135.9 139.0 143.3 143.6 176.9 203.6 Manufactured Goods lo9.6 114.3 116.5 120.4 120.6 122.7 128.8 134.6 138.0 138.4 138.2 143.4 190.8 202.5 Machinery & Transportation Equipment 113.9 121.8 144.1 171.5 181.4 194.4 196.1 200.1 202.2 207.4 212.6 227.9 298.6 368.1 Miscellaneous Manufactured Art. Nec. 102.2 108.4 114.2 113.5 120.0 127.4 128.8 125.4 127.0 129.1 129.6 130.2 144.8 156.4 All Items 109.9 109.9 114.1 119.7 124.7 137.7 145.2 149.0 156.3 164.6 170.0 170.8 202.8 236.4 - C- Source: Central Bank of the Philippines 41 u PHILIPPINES AGRICLIJRAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.5: PRICE INDICES, 1962-1971 (Twelve-monthly Averages) 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 General wholesale price index for Manila (1955 = 100) 129.4 142.0 148.6 151.9 158.5 165.9 170.7 171.9 205.4 237.7 Percentage rate of change 5.0 9.7 4.6 2.2 4.3 4.7 2.9 0.7 19.5 15.7 Sectoral Components: Locally produced for home consumption 119.6 130.1 139.2 142.8 151.2 158.4 161.2 163.3 190.5 226.1 Import products 158.2 167.8 169.b 170.2 172.3 173.5 174.6 178.3 220.9 245.6 Export products 167.1 200.0 194.2 199.6 197.7 216.2 243.0 233.3 304.8 321.3 Consumer price index for the Philippines (1957 = 100) 1/ 113.6 122.6 133.5 137.6 144.5 153.0 154.1 156.7 180.7 222.4 Percentage rate of change 3.0 7.9 8.9 3.1 5.0 5.9 0.7 1.7 15.3 23.1 Individual Components: Foodstuffs 116.6 132.5 151.2 156.3 167.0 180.8 179.9 181.o 207.3 268.1 Clothing 121.4 125.3 129.6 136.1 142.1 150.3 155.7 160.2 187.0 224.5 Rent and Repairs 103.2 104.8 105.7 107.1 109.0 111.1 114.3 115.3 120.9 126.1 Fuel, etc. 108.8 111.2 116.9 121.7 123.0 123.1 123.1 124.2 144.8 175.7 Miscellaneous 2/ 109.4 111.6 114.5 117.0 120.0 122.7 125.7 130.4 154.2 176.4 GNP price deflator r/ r/ t/ r/ (1955 = 100) j/ (calendar years) 123.8 133.0 139.3 143.0 148.7 158.3 166.2 172.7 197.3 n.a. Percentage rate of change - 7.4 4.7 2.7 4.0 6.5 5.0 3.9 14.2 n.a. 1/ Constructed from ti-e consumers price indices for Manila and for regions outside Manila. The weighting pattern was developed on the basis of surveys conducted in 1953-54. This iniex is intended to reflect changes in the retail prices (including indirect taxes) of a "fixed basket of goods and services" purchased by an average household. This can be interpreted as a cost-of-living index. This is also regarded as an indicator of price stability by the monetary authorities. 2/ Consists mostly of various services (such as education and medical care), transportation, beverages and tobacco, etc. 3/ Ratio of Gross National Product in current prices to the same in constant 1955 prices multiplied by 100. Figures revised as of 15 April 1971. r/ Revised. Source: Department of Economic Research, Central Bank of the Philippines, OSCAS, NEC. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.6: WAGE INDICES 1/, 1961-1971 (1965 = 100) 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Nominal Wages Skilled labor 91.6 92.7 95.5 97.2 100.0 105.0 109.9 118.7 125.0 132.8 139.7 Unskilled labor 85.2 87.8 92.6 93.4 100.0 107.3 112.3 125.0 130.9 145.2 155.0 1/ Real Wages7 Skilled labor 113.6 108.7 106.0 99.7 100.0 99.6 98.1 102.8 106.9 99.6 91.3 Unskilled labor 105.7 102.9 102.8 95.8 100.0 101.8 100.3 108.2 112.0 108.8 101.3 1/ Money wage rate index deflated by the consumer price index (1965 = 100) in Manila. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.7: PRICES RECEIVED BY FARMERS; SELECTED CROPS, 1960-1971 (Pesos) Food Crops 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1st class, Palay 2/, per sack of 44 kg (new harvest) 9.21 10.92 10.33 12.54 14.56 13.34 15.06 15.12 14.57 14.95 15.67 2 39 2nd class, " , (old harvest) 8.60 10.18 9.65 11.80 13.66 14.91 16.52 16.72 15.55 15.88 17.50 lst class, Palay " " " 9.89 11.34 10.94 13.29 15.15 14.39 15.79 16.63 16.16 16.82 18.75 ) 26.35 2nd class, " , " 9.19 10.82 10.30 12.50 14.54 16.11 17.69 18.08 17.13 17.88 20.63 ) Shelled yellow corn, per sack of 57 kg 9.75 11.04 10.25 13.38 14.04 14.57 16.08 14.79 1-4.79 15.02 18.77 27.66 Shelled Ahite corn , 1 "1 I " 9.73 10.96 10.22 13.56 13.52 14.64 16.08 14.73 14.17 15.02 16.98 26.69 Banana (latundan), per 100 pieces 1.07 1.05 1.11 1.31 1.55 1.45 1.58 1.62 1.66 1.89 1.90 2.27 Banana (bongulan), " " " 1.15 1.15 1.22 1.45 1.70 1.55 1.69 1.66 1.72 2.02 2.06 2.43 Banana (lakatan) , " " i 1.34 1.28 1.33 1.59 1.87 1.85 1.79 1.71 1.95 2.19 2.15 2.71 Export Crops Copra resecada, per 100 kg 31.70 30.16 36.72 43.18 43.28 52.65 46.24 48.26 54.53 50.94 73.74 70.81 Abaca fiber, per picul 41.22 41.52 44.97 .38 46.34 45.83 46.39 34.36 34.79 44.75 50.60 54.4o Livestock Mature hog (8 months old or over), per kg liveweight 1.06 1.14 1.2h 1."1 1.56 1.83 1.86 1.95 1.93 81.712/110.18 132.63 Improved bred hog (8 months old or over), per kg liveweight 1.13 1.20 1.34 1.48 1.69 1.95 2.02 2.06 2.04 124.90Y/174.73 195.87 Chicken (inahin, 6 months old or over), per live bird 1.71 1.82 1.98 2.26 2.51 2.83 2.67 2.91 3.04 3.12 3.42 4.29 Chicken (tandang, 6 months old or over), per live bird 1.90 2.02 2.17 2.53 2.77 3.25 3.22 3.46 3.41 3.54 3.93 5.10 a/ Macan ordinario or equivalent. / Wagwag or equivalent. / Per live animal. Source: BAEcon, DANR. PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.8: PRICES RECEIVED BY FARMERS OF 2ND CLASS PALAY(MACAN ORDINARIO OR EQUIVALENT) BY REGION, 1960-71 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 -------------------------pesos per sack-7 44 kg- --------------------------------------- Philippines 8.60 10.18 9.65 11.80 13.66 14.91 16.52 16.72 15.55 15.88 17.50 24.39 Ilocos 9.09 10.81 9.49 10.53 12.07 17.37 18.15 20.92 17.74 17.65 15.83 24.10 Cagayan Valley 7.77 10.00 8.80 10.51 12.19 14.19 14.37 15.41 13.86 15.68 16.98 24.76 Central Luzon 9.38 11.12 10.45 12.43 15.32 15.56 18.62 18.88 17.17 17.53 19.52 26.71 Southern Tagalog 8.86 10.67 10.16 12-58 14.77 14.99 16.46 17.02 16.87 17.33 18.80 20.15 Bicol 8.37 9.29 9.15 11.04 12.12 13.78 16.16 16.01 l.16 15.15 16.81 21.90 Eastern Visayas 8.99 10.21 9.82 12.16 13.11 l.28 15.64 17.21 15.89 16.13 17.12 23.54 1stern Visayas 8.40 10.4 9.87 12.41 14.4 15.86 16.09 16.22 lo4l 16.04 16.73 24.17 N & E Mindanao 8.30 9.79 9.27 11.65 13.09 1h.90 16.03 1h.49 15.22 14.32 18.23 24.32 S & 1 Nindanao 8.39 9.30 9.38 11.24 12.37 13.75 15.36 16.27 lt.83 13.02 16.35 21.92 Source: BAEcon, DANR COU M L-. PHILIPPDIES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.9: PRICES RBEIVED 3Y FARMERS OF YELLOW CORN, BY REGION, 1960-71 -------------------------- pesos per sack of 57 kg ---------------------- 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Philippines 9.75 11.04 10.25 13.38 14.04 1b.57 16.08 14.79 14.79 15.02 18.77 27.66 Ilocos 11.72 13.72 13.78 16.87 16.39 20.48 19.36 22.60 15.77 18.83 24.58 32.50 Cagayan Valley 8.83 9.59 8.67 11.34 12.31 13.59 15-58 11.41 12.88 15.26 21.65 30.25 Central Luzon 10.55 12.32 11.68 14.69 16.43 17.38 18.28 17.91 20.39 16.43 21.35 - Southern Tagalog 11.38 13.2h 12.26 16.89 16.36 13.72 15.46 13.14 14.64 15.65 18.85 27.36 T3icol 10.27 10.52 9.90 11.89 12.98 14.33 15.27 16.10 16.39 15.28 16.99 30.53 Eastern Visayas 9.89 10.61 10.54 14.64 16.35 14.13 14.02 14.71 13.82 14.65 16.44 - estern Visayas 9.37 10.86 9.70 13.27 13.58 1L.65 15.6 14.29 12.98 15.32 17.32 27.88 N & E Mindanao 9.00 9.83 9.27 12.60 12.05 17.84 15.59 17.92 10.03 12.67 19.20 36.17 S & W Mindanao 8.64 9.49 8.89 12.70 10-91 10.07 13.18 10.00 11.69 11.54 17.26 27.75 Source: BAEcon, DANR !4 0 o 0 L PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.10: PRICES RECEIVED BY FARMERS OF WHITE CORN, BY REGION, 1960-1971 Cagayan Central Southern Western Eastern N & E S & W Year Philippines Ilocos Valley Luzon Tagalog Bicol Visayas Visayas Mindanao Mindanao II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X -------------------Pesos per sack of 57 kg -------------------- 1960 9.73 11.15 8.25 10.60 10.49 10.15 9.41 10.86 9.96 8.50 1961 10.96 11.72 10.18 12.27 12.42 10.59 11.09 11.33 10.44 9.64 1962 10.22 13.28 9.22 11.46 11.11 10.03 9.78 11.47 10.25 9.42 1963 13.56 16.35 11.28 14.28 16.73 12.56 13.57 15.26 13.94 12.97 1964 13.52 16.15 12.13 16.56 16.41 12.45 13.64 14.27 12.10 11.41 1965 14.64 20.11 14.26 17.56 12.64 14.05 14.67 15.70 15.49 12.72 1966 16.06 18.24 15.96 18.58 14.86 15.49 16.62 16.63 14.54 12.74 1967 14.73 19.69 12.01 15.84 13.04 16.00 14.16 16.05 16.11 10.62 1968 14.17 16.03 11.83 19.77 14.06 15.70 13.10 15.19 11.70 12.56 1969 15.02 19.20 15.12 17.57 15.53 14.48 14.52 15.97 12.26 11.90 1970 16.98 20.00 16.7 18.39 14.95 11.87 17.69 18.05 16.45 15.42 1971 26.69 29.38 29.96 27.25 27.91 26.70 27.79 27.12 27.74 26.82 Source: BAEcon, DANR. 9> Ob ANNEX 15 Table 8.11 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.11: GOVERNMENT SJPPORT PRICE FOR PALAY AS COMPARED TO PRICES RECEIVED BY FARMERS, 1966-1971 Government Support Price for Palay Price received by Year Central Luzon Visayas & Mindanao Farmers for Palay 1/ (Pesos per sack of (Pesos per sack 46 kg, gross) of 4h kg) 1966 17.00 16.00 16.52 1967 17.00 16.00 16.72 1968 17.00 16.00 15.55 1969 At current price prevailing in the market 15.88 1970 20.00 20.00 17.50 1971 20.00 20.00 24.39 1/ Macan 1st class or equivalent. 2/ Reflects the only buying which took place in March. In April the support price was raised to P 22 and the 1972 price is now P 25. Sources: NARIC, RCA and BAEcon, DANR. ANNEX 15 Table 8.12 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.12: AVERAGE WHOLESALE PRICES IN MANILA FOR CEREALS AND FRUITS, 1965-1971 (Pesos) 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Cereals Rice Wagwag/56 kilos 36.36 43.44 47.10 42.43 42.83 49.31 60.21 Elon-E1on/56 kilos 33.84 38.38 42.01 39.24 40.95 47.50 58.86 Macan/56 kilos 30.91 36.00 38.26 35.68 33.62 40.31 $1.27 Palay Catanduanes "Naric Buying"/44 kilos 14.20 16.95 17.87 16.16 16.63 17.97 26.73 Corn White and red whole grain/ 56 kilos 19.42 19.86 17.52 18.00 17.94 20.36 35.87 Fruits Bananas Latundan, 1,000 pcs 21.69 23.17 24.04 29.46 36.12 30.02 31.87 Lakatan, 1,000 pcs 27.15 27.89 28.54 32.72 41.02 37.3$ 38.51 Papayas 62.54 $8.29 59.89 95.96 74.79 59.10 96.04 Kalamansi, assorted/"kaing" 24.39 27.35 30.34 43.43 $7.35 65.95 130.33 Groundnuts (unshelled, fresh buying) per sack of 25 gantas 15.22 13.27 16.17 17.55 15.75 23.73 30.37 Source: Bureau of Commerce ANNEX 15 Table 8.13 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.13: AVERAGE WHOLESALE PRICES IN MANILA FOR SUGAR, TOBACCO AND RAMIE, 1965-1971 (Pesos) 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Sugar Centrifugal (970 + 990)/picul 22.09 27.68 27.00 27.74 35.09 40.79 42.31 Panocha (white)/kilo 0.31 0.47 0.52 0.51 0.56 0.56 0.67 (Refined)/picul 29.11 25.16 34.87 37.11 49.42 51.62 52.94 Molasses, Manila/gallon 0.26 0.19 0.49 0.64 0.42 0.33 0.35 Muscovado, No. 1, Iloilo/picul 1b.20 14.20 114.20 14.20 14.20 14.20 14.20 Tobacco - Virginia Leaf Flue Cured, Bright Yellow Grade A/kilo 4.33 4.33 4.33 4.33 4.33 4.33 4.26 Grade B/kilo 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 Spotted Yellow, Grade C/kilo 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 Tobacco - Native Leaf (Isabela) (Unmanufactured) 115 kg/46 bg 175.20 187.97 208.54 245.00 245.00 245.00 236.67 Cagayan Leaf/ 115 kilos 162.50 177.98 198.54 235.00 235.00 235.00 226.67 Pangasinan Leaf/115 kilos 105.50 115.21 133.54 170.00 170.00 170.00 137.17 Ramie RD1/picul 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 RD2/picul 49.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 Source: Bureau of Commerce ANNEX 15 Table 8.11 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.14: AVERAGE WiHOLESALE PRICES IN MANILA FOR LOGS AND LUMBER, 1965-1971 (Pesos) 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Logs ('000 bd ft) 1st Group 517.00 531.67 593.05 656.97 680.00 720.38 750.00 2nd Group 280.00 527.67 317.19 352.17 365.00 39h.7 520.00 3rd Group 240.00 297.08 261.25 297.62 310.00 3154.67 442.92 Lumber ('000 bd ft) 1st Group 756.66 803.33 817.08 879.48 892.22 974.03 976.67 2nd Group 317.50 326.09 361.67 228.69 400.56 438.13 5h7.08 3rd Group 290.00 297.08 322.71 359.33 370.56 404.58 486.67 Source: Bureau of Commerce ANNEX 15 Table 8.'15 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.15: AVERAGE WHOLESALE PRICES IN MANILA FOR FRESH AND DRIED VEGErABLES, 1965-1971 (Pesos) 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Vegetables Fresh Vegetables Tomatoes/100 kilos 66.30 61.71 83.94 61.18 71.13 94.71 120.38 Mongo (gram)/60 kilos 52.69 53.07 59.11 55.72 55.70 62.70 108.12 Eggplant/100 kilos 36.64 37.34 53.20 43.51 33.34 51.31 62.09 Cabbages/100 kilos 35.7 h9.46 80.03 69.83 52.49 56.99 67.91 Onions (average Iloco and Bermuda)/kilo 0.76 0.62 0.64 0.63 0.56 1.33 1.05 Onions (Iloco, Tagalog)/kilo 0.78 0.68 0.66 0.81 0.71 1.42 1.2 Onions (Bermuda, Local)/kilo 0.7 0.57 0.62 0.45 0.56 1.25 0.68 Sweet Potatoes/56 kilos 11.25 11.65 1).22 16.96 15.9L 15.90 25.95 Potatoes (Local)/LO kg 25.94 19.65 27.65 25.83 19.94 26.87 34.75 Dried Vegetables Beans/100 kilos 51.85 55.50 55.53 50.00 50.00 67.04 120.71 Copra resecada/ 100 kilos 64.25 55.57 63.07 76.20 67.58 97.69 69.26 Copra meal/100 kilos 27.13 31.59 26.70 29.57 27.62 39.32 39.69 Coconuts, assorted mature/100 pcs 15.28 15.00 15.72 21.23 16.33 22.17 25.04 Coconut oil, crude/kilo 1.12 0.98 1.09 1.30 1.13 1.69 1.50 Dessicated coconut, Manila/l00 kilos 104.80 102.90 103.70 166.23 111.07 152.81 87.22 Source: Bureau of Commerce ANNEX 15 Table 8.16 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.16: AVERAGE WHOLESALE PRICES IN MANILA FOR MEAT AND FISH, 1965-1971 (Pesos) 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Meat Beef/kilo 3.00 3.00 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.66 4.70 Pork/kilo 2.53 2.80 3.04 3.20 3.23 3.70 4.69 Salami/kilo 3.99 4.14 4.50 4.50 4.51 4.70 6.80 Sausage, salami and frankfurters/kilo 3.56 3.71 L.07 2.08 h.08 2.23 6.63 Poultry, tandang, live undressed 3.11 3.23 3.46 3.03 3.10 3.10 4.60 Fish Fresh Bangus/kilo 1.41 1.78 1.72 1.81 1.66 1.88 2.h1 Biang puti/kilo 0.25 0.36 0.42 0.34 0.39 0.57 1.02 Kanduli/kilo 0.83 1.06 1.04 1.04 1.20 1.55 2.14 Dalag/kilo 1.05 1.30 1.32 1.26 1.38 1.60 2.29 Dalagang bukid/kilo 0.92 1.14 1.28 1.07 1.29 1.52 2.21 Saloy-Saloy 0.97 1.19 1.24 1.09 1.26 1.50 2.21 Lapu-Lapu 1.42 2.12 2.4h 1.70 1.78 1.95 2.57 Hasa-Hasa 1.04 1.28 1.36 1.20 1.32 1.65 2.19 Sap-Sap 0.91 1.17 1.21 1.09 1.28 1.52 2.02 Shrimps 2.24 2.52 2.80 2.75 2.89 3.06 3.71 Talakitok 1.18 1.45 1.62 1.24 1.54 1.71 2.17 Dilis, bolinao 0.25 0.34 0.37 0.35 0.38 0.59 1.06 Dried Daing kapak 2.49 2.51 2.59 2.50 2.60 2.54 3.38 Tuyo, tunsoy 39.17 36.56 36.85 36.85 32.83 40.57 55.38 Tinapa 3.77 3.15 3.12 2.82 2.58 2.88 5.07 Source: Bureau of Commerce ANNEX 15 Table 7.7 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.17: AVERAGE RETAIL PRICES IN MANILA FOR CEREALS AND FRUITS, 1965-1972 (Pesos) 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1/ Cereals Rice Wagwag (1st class)/ganta 2.00 2.24 2.68 2.53 2.49 2.66 3.0 3.00 BE-3 (1st class)/ganta 1.68 1.96 2.1L 1.97 2.06 2.27 2.78 2.94 Elon-Elon (1st class)/ganta 1.63 1.93 2.16 1.96 2.00 2.18 2.77 2.92 Intan (1st class)/ganta 1.55 1.8h 2.05 1.84 1.96 2.21 2.78 2.98 Macan (1st class)/ganta 1.46 1.79 2.00 1.7b 1.78 1.91 2.56 2.76 Corn Whole grain (red)/ganta 0.98 1.09 1.00 1.02 1.11 1.11 1.90 1.95 Whole grain (white)/ganta 0.99 1.05 1.00 1.09 1.02 1.19 1.84 1.94 Fruits Apples Ord. (green and red)/dozen 3.64 3.65 3.77 3.92 4.80 7.87 18.75 n.a. Oranges Sunkist, medium/dozen 4.99 4.87 4.99 5.83 7.07 13.16 20.L5 n.a. Bananas Latundan/100 pcs 3.64 3.64 3.73 4.92 4.56 4.72 5.73 n.a. Lakatan/l00 pcs 4.65 4.84 5.21 6.54 5.55 5.98 7.12 n.a. Saba/100 pcs 3.18 3.09 3.23 4.74 4.27 4.37 5.54 n.a. Papaya, Hawaii, ripe, each 0.56 0.54 0.62 1.02 0.77 0.72 1.17 n.a. Peanuts, shelled, asstd. size/ganta 2.69 2.6h 3.17 3.43 3.06 4.84 5.89 n.a. 1/ Average for January-April. Source: Bureau of Commerce ANNEX 15 Table 6.18 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.18: AVERAGE RETAIL PRICES IN MANILA FOR BEVERAGES, SUGAR AND COCONUTS, 1965-1971 (Pesos) 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Coffee, Wonder, local, 1 lb 3.53 3.63 3.64 3.67 4.06 - - Coffee, Puro, local, 1 lb 3.66 3.83 3.79 3.79 4.08 4.60 4.31 Coffee, Royal, local, 1 lb 3.45 3.56 3.56 3.56 3.69 - - Coffee, local, roasted (Batangas)/kilo 6.09 6.19 6.18 6.66 7.64 7.62 7.33 Coffee, local, roasted 11.39 12.08 (Hawaiian)/kilo 7.70 7.67 7.68 8.13 8.60 8.57 8.44 Coffee, ground (imported) 5.99 5.83 5.82 5.86 6.76 11.39 12.08 Hills Bros./1 lb tin Coffee, Chase and Sanborn, 1 lb 4.23 4.143 4.52 4.51 4.64 5.33 5.22 Cocoa, Hershey, 1 lb, 8 oz tin 1.86 1.87 1.79 1.82 2.08 2.80 3.45 Cocoa, Sergs, 1/2 lb tin 1.61 1.60 1.59 1.60 1.61 2.00 2.14 Cocoa, Ricoa, 1/2 lb tin 1.64 1.64 1.65 1.65 1.72 2.26 2.56 Sugar, Panocha/kilo 0.47 0.58 0.58 0.66 0.84 0.85 1.02 Sugar, Centrifugal, brown ordinary/kilo 0.42 0.52 0.51 0.56 0.65 0.74 0.74 Sugar, Centrifugal, washed/ kilo 0.51 0.60 0.58 0.65 0.80 0.84 0.87 Sugar, Refined/kilo 0.57 0.65 0.65 0.71 0.87 0.93 0.96 Coconut, medium size/each 0.23 0.25 0.26 0.34 0.29 0.37 0.40 Source: Bureau of Commerce ANNEX I Table 8.19 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.19: AVERAGE RETAIL PRICES IN MANILA FOR FRESH VEGETABLES, 1965-1971 (Pesos) 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Fresh pechay/kilo 0.49 0.68 0.75 0.59 0.59 0.85 0.87 Fresh radish (labanos)/kilo 0.46 0.59 0.67 0.67 0.63 0.76 0.82 Fresh string beans/kilo 0.67 0.82 0.96 0.74 0.74 0.99 1.0h Fresh squash (kalabasa) red/kilo 0.L7 0.58 0.61 0.66 0.57 0.61 0.82 Fresh white squash (upo)/kilo 0.4L 0.55 0.58 0.51 0.52 0.61 0.68 Fresh tomatoes, assorted/kilo 1.07 1.14 1.42 1.00 1.09 1.58 1.85 Mongo, yellow, native/ganta 2.56 2.83 3.23 3.44 3.06 3.22 5.55 Mongo, green, imported/ganta 2.55 2.69 3.04 2.94 2.77 3.15 5.52 Fresh chayote/kilo 0.25 0.40 0.43 0.45 0.46 0.47 0.58 Fresh gabi, Cebu/kilo 0.31 0.35 0.37 0.45 0.b9 0.61 0.62 Fresh gabi, Tagalog/kilo 0.60 0.62 0.82 1.05 1.04 1.05 1.05 Garlic, native/kilo 5.00 5.03 5.25 4.58 3.33 6.85 12.08 Fresh eggplant/kilo 0.44 0.50 0.61 0.46 0.48 0.70 0.76 Fresh cabbage/kilo 0.53 0.81 1.21 1.08 0.89 0.90 1.07 Fresh onions, local, Bermuda/ kilo 0.99 0.62 0.89 0.75 0.80 1.45 0.97 Fresh onions, native, Iloco/ kilo 1.13 1.08 1.06 1.15 1.09 1.99 1.90 Fresh ginger, native, Hawaiian/ kilo 0.86 0.62 0.56 0.86 0.84 0.71 0.72 Fresh sweet potatoes, (camote)/kilo 0.29 0.30 0.3h 0.39 0.36 0.h2 0.61 Fresh potatoes, local/kilo 0.87 0.73 0.99 0.9h 0.80 0.97 1.39 Source: Bureau of Commerce ANNEX .15 Table 8.20 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.2C: AVERAGE RETAIL PRICES IN MANILA FOR FISH AND FISH PRODUCTS, 1965-1971 (Pesos) 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Fresh bangus/kilo 2.69 2.70 3.05 3.02 3.03 3.32 ..50 Bisugo/kilo 1.63 .1.70 2.00 1.84 1.90 2.30 3.33 Dalagang bukid/kilo 1.46 1.62 2.06 1.80 1.94 2.26 3.20 Talakitok/kilo 2.48 2.57 2.77 2.76 3.00 3.36 4.34 Sap-Sap/kilo 1.48 1.57 1.78 1.62 1.79 2.24 3.32 Hito/kilo 2.90 3.34 3.50 4.08 4.85 5.42 6.07 Dalag/kilo 2.50 2.56 2.82 3.05 3.44 4.21 4.91 Shrimps, red sea/kilo 3.88 4.31 .46 4.72 5.17 5.57 7.22 Shrimps, Fishpond/kilo 4.97 5.73 6.26 6.20 6.64 7.00 9.22 Sugpo, Fresh/kilo 7.21 8.24 9.24 9.15 9.78 11.141 14.77 Dried Dilis/kilo 2.34 2.27 2.38 2.32 2.28 3.07 4.40 Tunsoy, medium/l00 pcs 3.14 3.08 3.33 3.20 3.78 3.38 4.40 Smoked:tinapa, medium/ 100 pcs 3.80 4.45 4.65 4.54 4.59 6.01 7.86 Canned: "Eat Well" sardines/ 15 oz tin 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 - - "Morjon" sardines/ 15 oz tin 1.07 1.06 1.10 1.15 1.19 1.43 1.76 "Rosebowl" sardines/ 15 oz tin 0.97 0.98 0.98 0.98 1.01 - 1.53 Squid, "Portola"/15 oz tin 0.87 0.88 0.90 0.96 0.99 1.45 1.80 /Squid, "Valere"/15 oz tin 0.85 0.86 0.34 0.84 0.85 1.2 1.51 Squid, "Morjon"/15 oz tin 0.81 0.84 0.86 0.87 0.88 - - Canned Salmon, "Del Monte"/ 15 oz 1 lb tin 1.37 1.42 1.50 1.90 1.97 4.95 6.56 Dried: Kapak/kilo 2.80 2.88 2.89 2.85 2.90 3.53 L.75 Canned: "Portola"t sardines with tomato sauce/15 oz can 1.48 1.48 1.49 1.49 1.49 - - Source: Bureau of Commerce ANNEX 15 Table d.21 PHILIPPINES AGRICULTURAL SECTOR SURVEY Table 8.21: AVERAGE RETAIL PRICES IN MANILA FOR MEAT AND POULTRY, 1965-1971 (Pesos) 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 Beef 1st class/kilo 4.83 5.31 5.64 5.71 5.71 6.14 7.91 2nd class/kilo 4.32 4.39 4.63 h.66 4.66 - - Average: 1st and 2nd class/kilo 4.58 4.89 4.96 5.18 5.18 - - Pork Pure meat/kilo 3.94 4.49 4.59 4.75 4.76 5.34 6.93 Meat with bones/kilo 3.59 3.91 3.9L 4.06 L.06 - - Average: pure meat and bones/kilo 3.76 4.20 4.27 4.40 4.41 - - Chicken Inahin/each 4.13 4.49 4.75 5.12 5.18 5.65 6.35 Tandang/each 3.93 4.44 4.74 5.11 5.08 Dumalaga/each 3.32 3.61 3.63 4.04 4.12 4.65 5.11 Average inahin 3.79 4.18 4.37 4.76 - - Sisiw/each 1.71 2.07 2.03 2.3b 2.62 - - Leghorn, live/kilo Vienna sausage Libby's/4 oz tin 1.45 1.43 1.44 1.45 1.53 2.05 2.39 Corned beef: Libby's/12 oz tin 2.02 2.09 2.14 2.46 2.52 3.18 4.75 Hereford/12 oz tin 1.72 1.76 1.85 2.00 2.07 2.82 4.01 Average Libby's and Hereford/ 12 oz tin 1.87 1.92 1.96 2.23 Target/12 oz tin 1.69 1.82 1.88 2.14 2.11 2.81 4.02 Royal/12 oz tin 1.59 1.68 1.77 1.88 1.93 - - Source: Bureau of Commerce
Groupe de la Banque mondiale · Pre-2003 Economic or Sector Report
Philippines - Agricultural sector survey (Vol. 4 of 4) : Annexes 11-15 : Agricultural credit, tree crops, land reform and settlement, production economics, and statistical annex
Voir le document original
Le texte intégral est hébergé par l’organisation qui le publie. lawenc.com indexe les métadonnées et renvoie vers la source officielle.
Texte intégral
Informations clés
Organisation
Groupe de la Banque mondiale
Type de document
Pre-2003 Economic or Sector Report
Pays
Philippines
Source
Banque mondiale