State Policies and Major Cropping Area in ... - 駒澤大学

State Policies and Recent Change of MajorCropping Area in the Phitppines:

A Case of Corn CultivationHiromitsu Umehara*

Introduction

Corn in the Philippines is, together with rice andcoconut, one of the three major crops. In 1980,there were 750 thousand corn farmsl, occupyingnearly 2 million hectares of farm area from which3.2 million hectares of crops are harvested. Interms of the number of farms, farm area and har-vested area, the corn subsector currently representsbetween one fifth and one fourth of the entireagricultural sector.

Corn can be grown throughout the islands, buttraditionally the central as well as southern Philip-pines, i.e., Visayas and Mindanao Areaz, havedevoted more extensive areas to the cultivation ofcorn. The most extensive corn area is at presentfound in Mindanao, which accounts for approxi-mately two-thirds of the total. In pre-war days,however, the supply of corn from Mindanao waslimited to less than 10 percent while the VisayanIslands supplied nearly 70 percent of the totaldomestic consumption, earning the accolade of"major corn area". It has only been since themid-1950s that corn production in Mindanao sur-passed that of Visayas. Thus, we may say that theshift of the major corn area from Visayas to Min-danao has been very recent.

Here, the reader may wonder why such a changein the major cropping areaoccurred within a rela-tively short period.

There are at least two possible reasons. One isdue to the fact that areal differentiation seldom oc-curs in a subsistence economy. Commercializationof a crop cultivation generally brings about aspecialization of farming for a specific crop in aspecific area. Such an areal differentiation is main-ly due to the comparative economic advantage,such as land productiviry or proximity to the mar-ket, of one area to the other for the certain cropproduction. However, in a subsistence agricultu-ral economy, economic factors can hardly worktowards regional specialization. In this case, it ismainly ecological factors that affect the differen-

tiation of crops, which results in a long and gradualshift in crops and major cropping areas.

Another reason lies in the fact that the changearose within so short a period. The corn produc-tion in Mindanao was by the mid-1930s not morethan several percent of total regional production,but its share jumped up to 60 percent in the late1960s. This means that the change of major crop-ping area occurred within one generation.

This paper attempts to explore the factors thatcan explain the areal differentiation in the centraland southern Philippines. Since economic factorsas well as ecological ones cannot explain the re-cent change of corn area, it is assumed that the statepolicies such as land settlement, food and feed-grain production programs, and the new econo-mic policy are highly attributable to the differen-tiation.

f. Changing Pattern of Corn Production

First of all, let us briefly confirm basic facts suchas consumption pattern, historical and regionalchange of corn production in the country.

1. Consumption Pattern

It is usually stated in the Philippine literature thatcorn is a staple food for roughly 20 percent ofFilipinos.3 From these statements, we tend to getthe impression that corn has long been an in-digenous food for a certain segment of the Filipi-no people. Tirking into consideration that corn hasso far been considered as a native crop to theAmerican tropics and brought to the older conti-nents after the Age of Exploration, however, itcould hardly be a traditional food in the Philip-pines. In fact, corn was introduced to the Philip-pines by the Spanish missionaries via Mexico forthe first time in 1543 when Villalobos, a Spanishexplorer, ordered his men to plant corn inSalanagani Island, offshore of Davao, Mindanao(Bondad 1984, p.57). The earliest corn growing

*Department of Geography, Rikkyo University, Tokyo

-37 -

Change of Corn Area in the Philippines (Umehara)

could have been in Cebu where the Spanish lan-ded in 1565 and established their base for coloni-al control over the Philippine Islands. However,corn cultivation was not popular at all in the earlydays. Phelan mentioned that the Filipinos did notlike the taste of corn and they ate it only underduress (Phelan 1967, p.111). According to Wern-stedt and Spencer, corn became accepted as a cropand a food after about 1750, and it has risen stead-ily in importance as a staple crop, having replacedrice as the primary food item in Visayas (Wern-stedt and Spencer 1967, p.198).

Table I shows the present state of annual per ca-pita cereal consumption in the mid-1970s. Accor-ding to the table, the average level of cerealconsumption for a Filipino was I39 kg annually,which consisted of 106 kg of rice and rice products,

22kg of corn and its products, and 1 1 kg of wheatand its products. This means that rice occupies 76

percent, corn , 16 percent, and wheat, 8 percent

of total cereals consumed annually.The most striking feature is, however, the con-

siderable regional variation in consumption pattern.

There is a marked regional contrast between thenorthern part and the central and the southern parts

of the Philippines as demonstrated in Figure 1. Inthe nontrern Philippines, people basically consumerice and rice products as the staple (more than 80percent), and their corn consumption is negligi-

ble except in the Cagayan region where corn ac-

counts for a little over 10 percent of total cereal

consumption. In the central and southern Philip-pines, on the other hand, rice consumptiondecreases to 75 percent or less while a fair amountof corn is consumed, occupying from 17 to 61 per-

cent of the total. The highest corn consumption isfound in Central Visayas where people eat corntwice as much as rice (61% for corn vs. 32% forrice). Next to Central Visayas come three regions

in Mindanao, namely Eastern, Westorn, and North-ern Mindanao, where the annual level of corn con-

sumption is more than 50 kg per person,

representing a little more than one-third of totalcereal consumption.

Another feature is the strong supplementarity be-

tween rice and corn in consumption as is illustrat-ed by the regional variations. Less consumptionof rice corresponds to more consumption of corn.This indicates that the people in Visayas and Min-danao Area are not eating corn in proportion tothe average consumption level. Instead, well-offpeople eat rice even in Central Visayas while peo-

ple in lower income levels consume far more cornthan the average.a

2. Change of Corn Production

Thble 2 shows the distribution of corn farms by

Thble I Regional Pattern of Annual kr Capita CerealConsumption: 197+76

(Unit: kgs.)

Administrative RegionRice &

Products

Corn &Products

Wheat TotalProducts Arnount

Ilocos

Cagayan

Central Luzon

Metro Manila

Southern Luzon

Bicol

West Visayas

Central Visayas

Eastern Visayas

Western Mindanao

Northern Mindanao

Eastern Mindanao

Southern Mindanao

134(92)

116(81)

135(94)

103(81)

122(87)

118(91)

120(84)

44(32)

102(70)

86(57)

88(59)

79(56)

95(75)

4(3)

18(13)

1( 1)

2(2)

3(2)

3( 2)

12(8)

83(61)

34(23)

54(36)

51(34)

52(37)

21(17)

7( 5)

10(6)

7( 5)

22(17)

15(11)

8(6)

12(8)

10(7)

10(7)

12(8)

9(6)

12(8)

10(8)

145(100)

1“(1∞)

143(100)

127(100)

1“(100)

129(100)

143(100)

137(100)

146(100)

150(100)

148(100)

142(199)

126(100)

Philippines 106(76)

-38-

22(16) H(8) 139(100)

Note: Figures inSource: Collado,

the parentheses are in percentage.

G.M. et al. , 198l, p.7 | .

Names of Provinces (as of 19t{l)

l. Ilocos Norte

2. Abra

3. llocos Sur

4. Mountain

5. Benguest

6. L^a Union

7. Pangasinan

8. Batanes

9. Cagayan

10. Kalinga-Apayao

I l. Ifugao

12. Isabela

13. Nueva Vizcaya

14. Quirino

15. Nueva Ecija

16. Tarlac

17. Zambales

18. Pampanga

19. Bulacan

20. Bataan

2l . Rizal

22. Cavite

23. Laguna

24. Batangas

25. Aurora

26. Quezon,

27. Marinduque

28. Occ. Mindoro

29. Ori. Mindoro

30. Romblon

3 | . Palawan

32. Camarines Norte

33. Camarines Sur

34. Albay

35. Sorsogon

36. Catanduanes

37. Masbate

38. Alkan

39. Antique

40. Capiz

41. lloilo

42. Negros Occ.

43. Negros Ori.

,14. Siquijor

45. Cebu

46. Bohol

47. Nonhern Samar

48. Eastern Samar

49. Western Samar

50. Leyte

51. Southern Leyte

52. Zamboanga delNorte

53. Zamboanga delSur

54. Basilan

55. Sulu

56. Tawi-tawi

57. Misamis Occ.

58. Misamis Ori.

59. l^anao del Norte

60. Lanao del Sur

6l . Bukidnon

62. Agusan del Norte

63. Agusan del Sur

64. Surigao del Norte

65. Surigao del Sur

66. Camiguin

67. Davao del Norte

6E. Davao Ori.

69. Davao del Sur

70. North Cotabato

7l . Maguindanao

72. Sulutan Kudarat

73. South Cotabato.


CENTRAL LUZON

WESTERN MINDANA0

妻靱囲□

Annual per capita

consumption

50kg&above

20-49

Ю-19

9kg&less

SOUTHERNMINDANA0 EATSREN MINDANA0

l

Figure L Regional Distribution of kr Capita Corn Consumption Pattern I D74-76

ffiRTHERN“も

MINDANA0

-39-


Tlrble 2 Distribution of Corn Farms by Farm Size:

As of l9Tl

Fann Size

(haS。 )

No. of Farm

Thousand %

FaHn Area

000 has. %Average Size per

Farm (has.)

0。 0-0。 9

1.0- 2.9

3.0-- 4。9

5。0-9。 9

10。 0-49.9

50&ι above

84。 2 16.4

247.6 48.2

115.6 22.5

48.3 9.4

18.1 3.5

0.4 0.1

42.5 2.8

405.0 27.1

414.3 27.7

304。 7 20。 4

261.1 17.5

66。 3 4.4

0。 5

1.6

3。 6

6.3

18.2

163.4

Total 514.2 100。 0 1,493。 9 100。 0 2.9

Source: NCSO, I97I Census of Agriculture, Vol. II National Summary, Manila, 1974.

thousand

400

夕′・

4ヽ.、

yield per hecrare

ゝ２Ｑ

■ｏ『コｏｏＳ『只じ

「『ｏａｃの■ｏコ（”）̈　〓”『く０∽一ＯＱ”『０”へ〓”・）

1930 1940 1950

Source: NEDA。 1976 and 1987.

1980

Figure 2 Change in Corn Production, Hectarage'and Yields: 1929-1986

farm size. According to the table, there were 514thousand corn farms in 1971, occupying I.49 mil-lion hectares of farm area. The average farm size

was 2.9 hectares; 87 percent of them occupied less

than 5 hectares of land. Nearly two-thirds of these

corn farms were smaller than 3 hectares. Peasants

usually plant corn twice a year, as far as climaticconditions allow it.

In view of the large number of small farms, itis inferable that raising corn in the Philippines is

basically undertaken by subsistence farmers. At the

same time, we must not overlook the existence ofcommercial farms as exhibited in Thble 2. Therewere 406 farms of a size 50 hectares or more.

Although they represented less than 0.1 percent,

they occupied 66,338 hectares, averaging 163.4

hectares per farm.Corn production in the Philippines was at the

level of 400 thousand tons in the 1920s (PCARR1981 , p.22). Production doubled between the timeimmediately before and after the Second WorldWar. In 1960, domestic corn production finallyreached the level of one million tons. Thereafter,

corn production has increased by one million tons

every decade and hit a record of 3.92 million tons

in 1986. This means that corn production has in-creased at the growth rate of 3i4 percent per an-

num from the mid-1920s to the mid-1980s, or inother words, by nearly 10 times.

According to Figure 2, one can perceive at least

two contrasting periods. One is the period fromthe 1920s to the late 1970s that is characterized

harvetted aК aノタヽれか、ノ

-40-


by a long stagnation in corn yields. The other isthe period since the late 1970s and to date duringwhich land productivity started moving upward.The highest corn yield was 0.89 tons per hectare,that was attained as a national average in 1915(PCARR 1981, p.59). It had never been surpasseduntil 1979 when the national aver4ge yield recorded0.95 tons per hectare.

Despite productivity stagnation for over half acentury corn production had seldom ceased to in-crease because of areal expansion. There are atleast three periods during which rapid increase ofproduction can be observed; namely several yearsfrom the late 1930s to the nearly 1940s, a decadebetween the late 1950s to the late 1960s, and thelast several years in the 1970s. Those periodsroughly correspond to the period of rapid expan-sion of harvested area since corn yield per hectarein those days was either stagnant or declining.

The situation after the late 1970s, however, isquite different. There is apparent, steady improve-ment of corn yield and the national average final-ly hit the level of 1.02 tons in 1984 and 1.11 in1986 (NEDA 1987 , p.2-lo). That is mainly due to

the introduction and difftrsion of high yielding cornvarieties, especially hybrid corn seed, as well as

heavy application of fertilizer and chemicals.Therefore, the production increase for the pastseveral years was due to yield improvement ratherthan to areal expansion.

3. Change in Distribution of Corn Area

Corn has traditionally been consumed mainly inthe Visayas and Mindanao Area as confirmed earli-er. The regional pattern of production heavilyreflects the consumption pattern, which indicatesthe prevalence of subsistent corn cultivation.

Figure 3 shows distribution of corn farmsthroughout the islands. In 1971 , the rate of cornarea to total harvested area was 25.9 percent in thePhilippines as a whole. However, regional varia-tion fluctuates widely. In the northern Philippines,there are only two provinces, i.e. Cagayan andIsabela, where the same rate is more than 20 per-cent and the rest are mostly less than 10 percent.On the contrary the rate of corn area rises inVisayan and Mindanao islands. In Cebu and

by Province

■ ■ 50%&Over

m30-49%20-29□ 10-19

□ 9%&less

|

Corn area (000 has)

I 200 & aborye

@ too-lee

@ 5o-eeE to-40

D 9&ress|

´D

Figure 4 Distribution of COrn Area:1980

,

Figure 3 Distribution of Corn Area Ratio over

Cultivated Area:1971

-41-


Negros Oriental, corn occupies more than 50 per-cent of harvested area in the province and in Mas-bate and Leyte it accounts for more than 30percent. This trend is further reinforced in Min-danao Area where all provinces except five (Agu-san del Norte, Misamis Occ., Surigao del Norte,del Sur, and Sulu) has more than 30 percent of cul-tivated area planted in corn.

When one crop occupies more than 30 percentof total harvested area in a province, that frequentlyidentifies it as the most dominant crop in theprovince, since very few provinces have special-ized mono-crop culture due to a predominance ofsubsistence farming. Based on that assumption, wemay demarcate the corn region in the Philippinesas shown in the Figure 3.

This pattern is further confirmed by the distri-bution of corn area in 1980 as shown in Figure 4.The provinces where corn area exceeds 50 thou-sand hectares numbered 17 out of 73 provinces in1980. Distribution of these 17 provinces is as fol-lows; one in northern Philippines, four in centralPhilippines, and 12 in the southern Philippines.There are eight provinces with corn area exceed-ing 100 thousand hectares. They are Cebu and

Negros in Visayas, Bukidnon, Davao del Sur, South

Cotabato, North Cotabato, Maguindanao, andZamboanga del Sur in Mindanao.

When the regional pattern is viewed from aproduction side, the impression we perceive issomewhat different from the foregoing one. In1981-85, the regional share of corn production is2l percent for the northern Philippines, 15 per-cent for the central Philippines, and 64 prcent forthe southern Philippines, as shown in Figure 5. Theoverwhelmingly predominant position of Minda-nao in current corn production is consistent withits high concentration of corn atea. Visayas, wheremore corn area is found, can hardly be regardedas a major corn area since its share is less than thatof Luzon Area.

When the regional distribution of corn produc-tion is examined historically, we will notice twothings. Firstly, corn production has traditionallybeen prominent not in the northern Philippines butin the central and the southern Philippines. Morethan 70 percent of domestic corn production camefrom the central and southern parts while the con-tribution of the northern part has never exceeded30 percent of total production.

ILOCOS

CAGAYAN

CENTRALLUZON

SOUTHERNLUZONBICOL

WESTERNゃ

ILOCOS

CAGAYAN

C.LUZONS.LUZON

BICOL

CENTRAL

E VISAYAS

WESTERNMINDANA0

SOUTHERNMINDANA0

ViSAYAS

NORTHERNMINDANA0

EASTERNMINDANA0S&N

N&E

Sources: PCARR,1981al NEDA、 1987.ミ

Figure 5 Change of Regional Share in Corn hoduction: 191l-1985

-42-


Secondly, there is a dramatic change in majorcropping area of corn production. The centralPhilippines used to be the most predominant cornarea in the Philippines. According to Figure 5, itrepresented 60 to 70 percent of the total produc-tion in pre-war days, whereas the share of Minda-nao was less than 10 percent. Visayan supremacylasted until the mid-1950s. Thereafter, it has shiftedfrom Visayas to Mindanao Area.

fI. Land Settlement Policy and Bxpansion ofCorn Area

It is assumed here that the government's land set-tlement policy was a major factor promoting a rapidexpansion of corn area in Mindanao between thelate 1930s and the mid-1960s. Therefore, let us ex-amine the relationship between land settlementpolicy and expansion of corn area.

1. Land Settlement Programs

Due to the growth of commercial production ofsome export crops in the l9th century and also theSpanish liberal land policy towards the priviledgedclass such as royal grants and sales of royal land,the agrarian situation had, by the turn of the cen-tury deteriorated to the extent that necessitatedsome urgent remedies for the disparity of land dis-tribution. This was particularly true in the long set-tled and export crop producing areas such as acoastal as well as somewhat interior parts of ManilaBay area, Ilocos coastal area, Cebu, Iloilo, andNegros Occidental.

In order to solve or at least alleviate the criticalsituation, the American colonial government ad-vocated an aggressive colonization policy from thebeginning, including homesteading which permit-ted peasant-colonists to acquire title to a limitedamount of land by building a home and bringingthe land under cultivation, and organized coloni-zation in which the government recruited colonists,transporting them to the frontier areas and settlingthem in subsidized colonies (Golay 1961 , p. 283).

In this regard, much attention was given to theisland of Mindanao. As the second largest island,it occupies one third of the country's territory butit had only 579 thousand residents in 1903, lessthan eight percent of the total population. It wasnot only the government but also the general pub-lic who regarded Mindanao as the land of promisesince it appeared that there was a large tract of un-occupied land to be developed. The extensive area

with bush or forest growth was actually not unoc-cupied but lying fallow because the majority ofresidents there still resorted to the forest/ bush fal-low system as their land utilization method.

As early as 1913, the government adopted thepolicy of actively encouraging migration by estab-lishing agricultural colonies and, in 1917, theBureau of Labor established the Inter-island Migra-tion Division that was delegated to promote themigration policy (Pelzer 1945, p. I32).

Early trials were not always successful due tolack of infrastructure such as transportation, edu-cation, marketing facilities, and also rampant con-flicts that arose between natives and settlers andlandgrabbers. It was finally in 1939, when theCommonwealth Government organized by Com-monwealth Act No. 441, the National Land Set-tlement Administration (NLSA), that the organizadcolonization in the so-called frontier started show-ing substantial results. NLSA operated two settle-ment projects in southwestern Mindanao and onein northestern Luzon (Golay p.283). Although theSecond World War interrupted and slowed downthe resettlement program, it was reported thatNLSA resettled some 8,300 families at an estimatedcost of 1l million pesos for the period of 12 yearsfrom 1939 to 1950 (ARI 1993, P. 35).

At the height of the political crisis created by theHuk movement, the newly independent RepublicGovernment established, by Executive Order No.355 in 1950, the Land Settlement and Develop-ment Corporation (LASEDECO) that took over thefunction, assets, and liabilities of the defunctNLSA. Under the leadership of then DefenceSecretary Ramon Magsaysay, the Economic De-velopment Corps (EDCOR) was organized in l95lin order to rehabilitate ex-Huks in frontier colo-nies. The National Resettlement and RehabilitationAdministration (NARRA), organized by RepublicAct No. 1160 in 1954, succeeded the discreditedLASEDECO. NARRA vigorously recruited andtransported settlers to the different project areaswhich were found mostly in Mindanao. It func-tioned until 1963 when the newly enacted R.A. No.3844, otherwise known as the Agricultural LandReform Code, created Land Authority to imple-ment the land settlement program. In 1971, theamended Agrarian Reform Code R.A. No. 6389,established the Department of Agrarian Reformwhich was made responsible for the implementa-tion of the Agnrian Reform Program including theresettlement project as a support program.

-43-


2. Fopulation Change in Mindanao

Thble 3 shows the accomplishment of organizedcolonization by the land settlement agency. Amongthe six agencies, NARRA recruited and resettledthe most people, 30,686 families, during nine years

from 1954 to 1963, then l2,lt3 families underDAR, followed by NLSA, Land Authority, ED-COR, and LASEDECO. This competent manage-ment of resettlement by NARRA was mainly dueto liberal peso appropriations and allocations ofUnited States' aid (Golay p.284).

Families that were resettled in the frontier areas

numbered 57,383 for the period of 45 years from1939 to 1984 (MAR, 1984, p.14). It is estimatedthat the total population sent to frontiers during thesame period was 344 thousand if 6 members perfamily is taken as an average among rural fami-lies. In view of the number of years as well as thehuge amount of the government budget spent, thismuch of an attainment was in itself not satisfac-tory. However, migration usually takes a patternthat is characterised by a "chain migration" inwhich relatives, friends, and acquaintances followthe pioneer settlers. Therefore, it is expected thattheorganized colonization under the governmentsponsorship works as a promoter or accelerator ofvoluntary migration from the longer-settled, morecongested, central and northern Philippines to the

newly opened, so called frontier.

In fact, it was explicitly shown by the tremen-dously rapid population growth in Mindanao Areaduring the several decades in this century as ex-hibited in Table 4. Population in Mindanao Areanumbered 0.67 million at the first census year of1903. More than 10 million people lived there in1980, which means the population in MindanaoArea increased ry 16.3 times during 77 years from1903 to 1980. Annual growth rate was 3.69 per-cent as against 2.42 percent for national average

for the same period. The growth rate is higher inpost-war days compared with that of pre-war days.

The dramatically high growth rate, 5.16 percent,

was recorded in the years between 1948 and 60,which corresponded with the period during whichNARRA conducted its most vigorous land coloni-zation in the frontier.

Does the tremendous population increase inMindanao Area have anything to do with the ex-pansion of corn raising? In this respect, two im-pacts should be noted. One is a change of religiouscomposition of population because almost all ofthe immigrants were Christians while natives were

Muslims or non-Muslims. As is exhibited in Table

5, Muslim people were dominant in the MindanaoArea in 1918, accounting for one half of the popu-

lation, followed by the non-Muslims consisting ofnearly one third, then by Christians occupying one-

fifth. By 1975, however, the population composi-tion was completely reversed. Christian people

predominated in the population there, occupying

Ihble 3 land Resettlement Agencies andTheir Accomplishment: 1939-f9&

Name of Agency Year of Establishment No. of Households Resettled

NLSAl

LASEDEC02

EDCOR3

NARRA4

Land Authority

DAR5

1939

1950

1951

1954

1963

1971

8,3∞

1,500

1,929

30ヴ686

2,855

12,l136

Total 573837

Note: l. National land Settlement Mministration2. hnd Settlement and Derrelopment Corp.

3. Economic Development Corps4. National Resettlement and Rehabilitation Mministration5. Department ofAgrarian Reform

6. This is gained b1r subtracting fr,om the total the accomplished number of foregoing five agencies.

7. This figure are taken fmm MARs Annual Report.

Source: ARI Advisory Council Technical Committee 1983, pp. 35-37 afi Ministry of Agrarian Reform 1985, W. n-4.

-44-

Change of Corn Area in the Philippines(Umehara)

Ъ ble 4 Population Dellslty and Growth Rate

by Three Regions:1903-1980

Philippines LuzonArea

VisayasMindanao

Area

- Annual growth rate -1903--18

1918-39

1939-48

1948-60

1960-70

1970-80

2。02

2.11

2.07

2.88

3.08

2.74

1.85

1.99

2.16

2.97

3.43

2。85

1.92

1.84

1.53

1.47

1.68

2.Ю

3.“

3.42

3.06

5.16

3.99

3.19

-Density per km2-1903

1918

1939

1948

1960

1970

1980

25。 5

34.4

53.3

64.1

90.3

122.3

160.3

29。0

38。 2

57.8

70.0

99.4

139。 3

184.4

50。 6

673

98.8

113.3

135.0

159.5

196.3

6.6

Ю.8

22.0

28.9

52.8

78.1

106.9

Thble 5 Fopulation by Religion in Mindanao Area(thousand)

Religion 1918 1975 Growth Rate

Muslim

Non-Muslim

Christian

359 (50)

206 (29)

159(22)

2,188 (31)

331 ( 5)

4,370 (64)

3.22

0。 84

5。99

724(100) 6,889(100) 4.03

Note: Figure in parentheses and growth rat€ are in percentage.

Source: Y. Tsurumi,ljia x'u nau naushiil<a (Whyare the people inAsia so poor), Asahi Shinbun-stn, 1982, p.2ll Poputn-tion gruntth mtes are calculated by the aathor.

64 percent, whereas Muslims reduced their share 8.1 percent, then by Waray from Samar and Leyteto 3l percent and non-Muslims to only 5 percent. who consisted of 0.6 percent of the total. Among

Another change occurred in terms of the ethnic non-Visayan migrants, Ilocano's 2.3 percent andcomposition of the population. 1980 population Tagalog's 1.5 percent consisted of the largestcensus presented the number ofhouseholds by di- groups.alects that were generally spoken in private house-holds. According to the census, about 70 percent 3. Cebuano and Corn Cultiviationof the total households were regarded as migrantsfrom other islands because the dialects spoken in From the foregoing census data, we were ablethose households were not native to Mindanao. The to confirm that the majority of migrants from othermajority was Visayans, among whom Cebuano islands to Mindanao were primarily Visayrans, infrom the central VisEas werwhelmingly predomi- particular Cebuanos as shown in Thble 6. This ftctnated, consistngof 57 .2 percent of the total. It was has something to do with widespread corn grow-followed I Hiligaynon from Fanay, who occupied ing in Mindanao. Migration from Visayas to

-45-


Thble 6 Number of Cebuano Household in Mindanao Area:1980

AdministrativeRegion

Total No. ofHousehold

No. of Cebuano

HouseholdPercentage

Western Mindanao

Northern Mindanao

Eastern Mindanao

Southern Mindanao

438,878

497,504

591,896

393,263

213,081

387J80

38sJ42

101,978

48.6

80.9

65.2

25.9

1,903,538 1,088,681 57.2

Smrce: NCSQ 1980 Census of Population and Housing; Philippines, Vol. 2 Natiorcl Sumnnry, Manila, 1983.

Mindanao was mainly due to the population pres-sure in Visayan Islands as well as its geographicalproximity. According to Thble 4, population den-sity has always been the highest in Visayas, andthe density there has been some decades ahead ofthe national average. Judging from the populationgrowth rate, it is inferred that Visayan Islands has

been a sole center of out-migration.In the Philippines, it is often believed that Cebu-

anos are corn eaters. Wernstedt and Spencer stat-ed that corn-eating is a mark of the Cebuano andthe Boholano and its use has spread to those areas

in Mindanao to which Cebu and Bohol migrantshave gone (Wernstedt and Spencer, p.678, note 38).

But how did the Cebuano and the Boholanoaquire corn-growing and corn-eating customs?

Corn acceptance by the people in Cebu and adja-cent islands can be explained mainly by ecologi-cal facts. Corn is a crop that shows higheradaptability compared with rice. Generally thewater requirement is less in corn planting than rice.'It is tolerant to the droughty soils. In CentralYisayas, there is less rainfall, more porous soil,and heavier population density. Corn's superiorpotential in the zones of erratic rainfall and on thedrier soils brought corn to a regional dominanceas a popular crop in Visayan Islands (Wernstedt andrSpencer, p. 198).

Cebuano migrants had a completely free choiceof food crop to be cultivated when they arrived inMindanao. They could have chosen rice growing.However, the majority did not do so. Instead, theystarted planting corn as their staple. It is mainlybecause the environment they found in Mindanaois more or less an upland type in nature. In addi-tion, the climate there is characterizndby an evenlydistributed rainfrll throughout the yer, which oftenallows peasants to grow three corn croppings a

year. There might also be some cultural factors af-fecting the decision, but these are very hard to

III. Corn Production Program and ArealDifferentiation

In the post-war Philippines, population startedincreasing more rapidly than the pre-war days. Ac-cordingly, domestic demand for food has expand-ed year after year. On the other hand, riceproduction was stagnant due to the century-old,widespread landlordism in the countryside. Agrowing expansion of cultivated area in the 1950sand the 1960s had accelerated the disappearanceof frontier agricultural land. As a consequence,food deficiency grew severe, driving the countryto import more and more rice from overseas mar-kets. Under these circumstances, numerous pro-grams were put forward to increase foodproduction. This had contributed to the arealdifferentiation in corn cultivation in the 1960s and

the 1970s.

1. White Corn Production Program

It was in 1958 that the government of the Philip-pines first provided rice and corn production in-centives by enacting the Rice and Corn ProductionAct (R.A . 2084). It was followed in 1964 by theRice Production Crash Program (E.O.No. 62) un-der the Rice and Corn Authority, and in 1966 bythe Rice and Corn Self-sufficiency Program un-der the Rice and Corn Production CoordinatingCouncil, which ushered in the so-called "GreenRevolution" with full government support. Untilthe late 1960s, the corn production program hadnever been separated from the rice program. Both

-46-


crops were always put together in a single program.Since rice is a primary staple in the Philippines,emphasis was given to rice while the corn programtended to be more or less secondary.

Since the late 1960s, however, independent cornprograms have repeatedly been implemented. Thefirst one was the National White Corn and Feed-grains Program in 1969. It was followed by the In-tensified Corn Production Program in 1970, theMasaganang Maisan Progam in 1974, ild the Mai-san 77 Program in 1977. Not much informationis available concerning the first two programs.However, it is still possible to explore the featuresof these programs in the 1970s by examining theMasaganang Maisan as well as Maisan 77Programs.

Firstly, it must be noted that the corn programswere basically white corn programs until the1970s. In the Philippines, two kinds of flint cornhave been planted. One is the white flint and theother, the yellow flint. The white flint, consideredas a Philippine cultivar, is good for human con-sumption and more popular than the yellow flint,which was introduced and good for animal feed(Bondad 1984, p.58).

The Masaganang Maisan Program aimedprimarily at satisffing the increased demand forwhite corn for human consumption and at the sametime producing sufficient yellow corn to meet thefeed requirement of the poultry and livestock in-dustries (NFAC 1974, p.1). The program had 450thousand hectares (700 thousand hectares, if areawithout credit was included) as a target area, whichconsisted of 300 thousand hectares for white cornand 150 thousand hectares for yellow corn.

Although yellow corn occupied one third of thetarget area in the program, its share was just onefourth or one fifth in terms of production in 1974(Collado, et al. 1981, p.103). Besides that, yel-low corn had reduced its share in target area yearafter yea\ and two years later it was only 20 per-cent. Furthermore, only 425 farmers, represent-ing 2.4 percent of target farmers, planted yellowcorn with the credit support of the Maisan 77 pro-gram in 1977. Actual yellow corn planting was 7.5percent in 1974, for instance, while about 91 per-cent of the total corn hectarage was planted to whitecorn, and 1.5 percent of other types of corn suchas sweet corn and popcorn (Ibid. p.74).

The second feature was non-availability of quali-ty HYV seeds. The program recommended a seriesof technology to be employed by farmers. Therecommended amount for one hectare was l2.S

kilograms for certified corn seed, 2.8 bags of fer-trhznr for white corn and 3.4bags for yellow corns.For the purchase of these inputs, the progftrmprovided loans amounting to 500 pesos per hec-tare applied.

The certified corn seed made available at thattime was not hybrid but synthetic ones. Since theywere still very much susceptible to downy mildew,which wreaked havoc to the country's regular cornvarieties, corn programs had critical deficiency inthe 1970s. Therefore, expectation for yield im-provement was not ambitious at all. Yield level ex-pected in the program area was 1.75 tons, asagainst the national average of 0.83 tons per hec-tare in 1974, which was supposed to be attainedfrom planting certified seed and applying chemi-cal fertilizer however low the amount of usagewould have been.

2. Yellow Corn Production Programs

Two corn production progmms were put forwardby the government in the early 1980s. One is thePresident's Letter of Instruction No. I 181 , other-wise known as the Maisagana Program in 1981,and the other is the Expanded Yellow Corn Produc-tion Assistance Program proclaimed by ExecutiveOrder No. 976 in August, 1984. Distribution ofpriority areas are shown in Figure 6.

Those two programs markedly contrasted witha series of corn production programs of preceed-ing decades. At least three points can be cited incomparison. In the first place, both were programsfor yellow corn production, unlike the previousones that mainly promoted white corn production.It is due to the attainment of self-sufficiency in riceproduction in the late 1970s and subsequent changeof the agricultural policy theme from food self-sufficiency to food and nutrition (R.P. 1980, pas-sim). The Maisagana Program intended to achieveself-sufficiency in domestic demand for yellowcorn within two years and to begin exportation ofyellow corn from the third year of the program(NEAC 1982, p.1). Since yellow corn is raised forthe growing feed and livestock industries, corn cul-tivation is being commercialized.

Secondly, both programs relied on the samestrategy as was employed in the "Green Revolu-tion" of rice cultivation. That is a package programof three components, namely technology, inputsand credit. Technology is embedded in the seedgrain. By that time, hybrid corn seeds as well asimproved high yielding varieties were available. As

-47-


is shown by Thble 7, the Maisagana Programrecommended 5 hybrid corn seeds with potentialyield of 7 to 10 tons per hectare and 4 improvedvarieties with potential of 4 to 7 tons. The formeris classified as 5 ton package of technology whilethe latter is 3 ton packugt, for, with proper inputsand cultural management, the recommended seeds

had sufficient production potential to harvest 5 or3 tons grain per hectare.

Heavy application of fertihzer and chemicals

were also reconrmended. For instanca, 9 to I 1 bags

of fertilizer per hectare are recommended in case

of 5 ton technology, while 6 to 9 bags in case of3 ton technology.

Thirdly, new financing schemes were employed

in EYCPAP. There were three schemes (EYCPAP

1984, pp.5-11). One was called as the BankingSystems Assistance Scheme in which the individualfarmer was to take the initiative in applying forproduction loan. His application was approved

TTTarEet area of Maisagana (top l0 prov. only)

NNlTarget area of EYCPAP (top 16 prov. only)

provided that he had a separate marketing contract

with corn buyers or end-users. The other is the Na-

tional Food Authority (NFA) Assistance Scheme,

in which NEA was to take a role of organizers

through entering a marketing agreement between

NEA and farmers. Another was the End-users/Sup-pliers Assistance Scheffie, which encouraged input-suppliers and corn end-users to engage in finan-cing corn production. In this scheme, applicants

were required to have contract growing or forwardselling agreements with farmers and a close tie-up between end-users and input-suppliers.

The very prominent feature common to schemes

is the tripartite linkages between and among sup-

pliers for production inputs, end-users of the farm-er's produce, and the corn farmers. This appears

to be a reflection of the government intention topromote the corporate participation in agribusinessfields.

|

aI

Source: Both Programs.

Figure 6 Distribution of Tbrget Areas of Maisagana

Program and Expanded Yellow CornProduction Assistance Program

-48-


Ibble 7 Recommended Varieties under the Maisagana Program

Hybrid/Varieties

Grain

Type

Potential

Yield

Days ofMaturity

Breeding LocationInstitution of Breeder Distributor

Hybrid:

Pioneer 6181

Cargill l∞

Cargin 2∞

Hycorn 9

SMC Hi―Yield

Yellow

Yellow

Ye1low

Yellow

Yellow

10。0

9。0

9。0

9Ю

70

ｍЮ６Ю５ｍЮ５

Pioneer

Cargill

Cargill

Facific

SMC3

S. Cotabato AADC1

S. Cotabato Agrotex

S. Cotabato Agrotex

N. Cotabato PPI2

S. Cotabato SMC

Improved Va■ :

DMR Comp.2MIT Var 2

1mp. Taniguib

IPB Var l

White

White

White

Yellow

95-100

95-100

95-100

Ю0

IPB4

MIT6

IPB

IPB

BPIs

BPI

BPI

BPI

4.6

4.2

4.0

7.0

Laguna

N. Cotabato

Laguna

Laguna

Note: l. Ayala Agricultural Development Corporation.2. Philippine Planters, Inc.3. San Miguel Corporation.4. Institute of Plant Breeding.5. Bureau of Plant Industry.6. Mindanao Institute of Technology.

Source: NFAC, 1982, pp.8, 29-31.

3. Priority, Productivity, and Differentiation

Every program proposed and set the priority ortarget area in order to concentrate scarce resources,necessary services and facilities for the attainmentof effective management control and the extractionof maximum yield potential in the program area.It is assumed that the strategy of program im-plementation worked for areal differentiation incorn cultivation.

In this regard, more provinces and cities wereselected as a priority areafrom the Mindanao Area.The Rice and Corn Self-sufficiency Program of thelate 1960s, for instance, set as a total target area380 thousand hectares in 1969, 500 thousand in197l. Regional distribution of those target areasis shown in Thble 8. More than half of target areaunder the self-sufficiency program was found insouthern Philippines, one third in the central p&rt,and one seventh in the north. In the MasaganangMaisan Program , target area showed more concen-tration in the south, occupying 70 percent of thetotal, whereas the central Philippines further lostits share and represented only 9 percent in I97 6.

This trend was further reinforced during the im-plementation of the Maisan 77 program, which

aimed at achieving a target yield of 77 cavans (3.85tons) per hectare in the program area. In 1977 , theprogram covered 46,613 hectares as a target areain24 provinces. Provinces in Mindanao numbered14 out of 24 provinces. The target area involvedL9,762 supervised farmers, of which 18,751 farm-ers representing 95 percent of all were from theprovinces in Mindanao (Collado et al., p.111). Thetotal amount of loan released was a little less than2 million pesos, two thirds of which was distributedamong corn farmers in Mindanao (ibid., p. 111).

It is true that some of the progftrms were not seri-otisly implemented due to various reasons such asthose of technical, financial, institutional, as wellas political nature. Even the performance of theMasaganang Maisan Program--considered one ofthe best--achieved a modest rather than remarka-ble result. According to the Phase V Status Reportof the Masaganang Maisan Program in 1976, thearea financed by the program was only 16,714 hec-tares for white corn, and 2,424 hectares for yel-low corn during the crop season from July toDecember of that year.

Allocating more target area to Mindanao was thetendency of the corn program in the 1970s. In spiteof the limited scope of implementation, it is as-

-49-


sumed that these production programs still broughtabout significant effects in rapid expansion of cornarea in Mindanao. However, the trend seems to beunder revision as far as Maisagana and EYCPAPare concerned. As Table 8 shows, distribution oftarget area to Mindanao was reduced to 52 percentwhile distribution to Visayas was raised to 24 per-cent. Despite this, Mindanao's share of corn

production is increasing in the 1980s.

With this regard, affention has to be given to thetrend of land productivity in the past few decades.Figure 7 shows the historical change of corn yieldby adminstrative regions.6 It is interesting to notehere that the regional yield difference was not sig-nificant at all at least until the mid-1970s; but itgrew larger in the latter half of the same decade.

Ibble 8 Regional Distribution of lhrget Area by MajorCorn Production hograms (in percentage)

ThreeRegions

Self―

sufrlclenり

Masaganang

MaisanMaisagana EYCPAP1

1982 19841969 1971 1974 1976

=Northem

Ontral

Southem

Total

14.5 15。 2

31.0 30。 6

54.5 54.2

100。 0 100.0

25.4

14.4

60.2

100。 0

20.7

8.9

70.4

100。 0

29.5

12.5

57.9

100。 0

24.2

2480

51.8

100.0

Thrget Area(000 has.)

1∞5∞ 23]P 652

Note: 1. An Abbreviation of Expanded Yellow Corn Production Assistance Program.

2. Half a year (July-December) only.

Source: RCPCC, Expanded Corn Production Program Q968-71), Quezon City, 1968; NFAC,1982;EYCPAR 1984.

//タ

Southern

Mindanao

EasternMlndanao

Northern MrndanaoWestern Mindanao

South-WesternMindanao

ノ

North-EasternMindanao

ジ1(rnVisayas

Central Visayas

Visayas Eastern Visayas

1981a;NEDA,1987

Change in Corn Yields by Regions:

1917‐1986

Source:PCARR,

Figure 7

National Average

-50-


Eastern and Southern Mindanao comprise thehighest yield group recording more than 1.5 tonsper hectare in 1986. The next group consists ofEastern Visayas and Northern Mindanao, followedby Western Mindanao. The lowest yield group con-sists of Western and Central Visayas, harvestingless than 0.5 tons only. There are more than 300percent difference in yields between both extremegroups. This is large enough to work as an accele-rator for areal differentiation, encouraging moreconcentration of corn area in Mindanao and lessarea in Visayas.

fV. New Economic Policy and CorporateParticipation

In the mid-1980s, the Philippine Governmentshifted her basic economic policy from the exportoriented industrialization to the new one. It ap-peared in the 1970s that the industrialization wassteadily moving ahead by the growth policy basedheavily on the foreign investments under the Mar-tial Law regime. On the conttnry, a financial cri-sis arose in the early 1980s and a severe economiccrisis followed by the mid-1980s. The new eco-nomic policy adopted by the government underthese circumstances encouraged commercializationof corn cultivation, which has resulted in furtherpromotion of areal differentiation.

1. New Economic Policy

In October 1983, the government of the Philip-pines declared its inability to pay matured exter-nal debt and requested the creditors to give a threemonth deferment. Thereafter, the moratorium wasrepeated and the economic crisis became worse,suffering from negative economic growth for twoconsecutive years in 1984 and '85. Under strongpressure from creditor countries, the governmenttried to explore a readjustment policy. The responsewas the Balanced Agro-Industrial DevelopmentStrategy (BAIDS) that was proclaimed by PD 2369in 1984.

In view of the extraordinary significance ofagriculture as the biggest single sector of the econ-omy, the government decided that industrializationshould be based on agriculture, so that the greatestnumber of people would be affected. Under thenew economic policy (BAIDS), therefore, greateremphasis was given to the development of agricul-ture and agro-industrial ventures rather than thecapital intensive industries such as heavy, chemi-

c&1, or electronics industries, in order to mobilizemore people in the rural area for productive andremunerative jobs, thus relieving their extremeproverty.

The role of agribusiness enterprises was clearin view of the experience of the "Green Revolu-tion" that modernizedthe traditional farming andmade it dependent more and more on supplies andservices from manufacturing industry This empha-sis on agribusiness development has been advoca-ted since the 1970s. A series of policies to removelimitations from public land alienations in the1970s, enactment of the Agricultural InvestmentLaw (PD 1159) in 1977, Omnibus Investment Act(PD 1789) in 1981, and the Agricultural Invest-ment Act in 1986 are all expressions of the govern-ment intention. In the 1980s, agro-industrialintegration has became a frequent theme for dis-cussion in business management circles. For in-stance, Working Documents of Plenary Conferenceof the Makati Business Club stated that to makereal progress towards self-sustaining growth in thiscountry agricultural development must be in sym-biotic relationship with industrial growth (MakatiBusiness Club 1982, Appe. p.10).

The present administration maintained the ba-sic view of agriculture as fundamental to the eco-nomy and development, although a lot of revisionswere made in respect to the economic policies andthe term BAIDS disapeared. In fact, economic de-velopment by an initiative of private sector, as wellas a large expectation for the role of agribusinesscorporations, are explicitly expressed in the nation-al economic and agricultural developmentprograms.T

2. Corporate Participation in Corn Business

Corn production programs in the 1980s were nolonger for human food but for animal feed. Thisshift of policy encouraged commercialization ofcorn cultivation and made the corn sector very at-tractive to agribusiness firms.

There are at least three factors that supported thistrend. Firstly are the government initiatives suchas promotion of agribusiness, and provision ofproduction loans made available not only topeasants but also to corporations.

Secondly is the fact that corn has wider indus-trial linkages. Unlike rice, corn is valued for itsmultifarious uses as human food, livestock feed andas raw material for industry. The extensive agribu-siness applications of corn invites a wide range of

-51 -


industrial linkages, such as varied business for foodprocessing, feed milling, poultry and livestock in-dustry starch, starch derivatives and oil industries,and so forth.

Thirdly is availability of hybrid corn seeds thatenables growers to attain considerably high yieldcompared with traditional seeds. Promotion of yel-low corn planting was tried even in the 1960s and70s, but efforts were not successful due mainly tonon-availability of high yielding varieties of cornin those days.

Seed firms are among corporate participants incorn business. After long research and experi-ments, four seed firms started cornmercial produc-tion of hybrid corn seeds in the early 1980s. Theyare Pioneer, Cargill, Pacific, and San Miguel Cor-poration. The first three are foreign seed firmswhich tie-up with domestic firms, Ayala Agricul-tural Development Corporation (AADC), Agrotex,and Philippine Planters Inc. (PPI), respectively. Pi-oneer, Cargill, ffid SMC maintain their seed farmsin South Cotabato while Pacific does in Davao delNorte. Recommended hybrids in 1984 were Pi-oneer 6181 , Cargill's CS 71 1 and 5X747, Pacific'Hycorn 9, and SMC's Hi-Yield 301 and 305 (EYC-PAP 1984, p.46).

Corporate participation is seen in corn cultiva-tion, too. They are San Miguel Corporation,hrrefoods, Planters Products, Hrjo Plantations,Cynamid Philippines, Ayala Corporation, MasseyFergusono General Milling, and many other cor-porate as well as commercial farms (PPI 1985,p.20). Purefoods, a subsidiary of Ayala Corpora-tion, started commercial planting of corn on a 1000

hectare farm in 1982, using hybrid seed, Pioneer6181, that was supplied through its parent corpo-ration, AADC (Business Day, Sept. 1, 1982).

There is also wide corporate participation in thefield of feed milling, poultry and livestock busi-ness, and food and meat processing. It is interest-ing to note that San Miguel Corporation and AyalaCorporation, the big two, have been deeply and ex-tensively involved in various aspects of agribusi-ness undertakings (PPI 1986b, p. 8).

3. Peasants Being Organized

Fositive participation of corporate firms in corncultivation and related business has had a great im-pact on the peasants and their societies. Most sig-nificant is the organrzation of peasants by corporatefirms. There are at least three ways in which thepeasants are organized.

One is contract farming, which is usually agrcedon between peasants and those who base their ac-tivities in the non-agricultural sector. Three areasin which contract arrangements are cornmonly in-volved are the purchase of farm produce, supplyof essential inputs and production loans, andproduction-management that includes the provisionof technical supervision as well as assured mar-kets (UPLB-APST 1986, pp.276-278, 280).AADC's seed corn production provides us an ex-ample. AADC formed a contract of agreement withPioneer USA to produce hybrid corn seeds underthe brand name of Pioneer. It took over the opera-tions of Pioneer, Phil., in Marbel, South Cotaba-to in 1982, beginning with 50 hectares undergrowership agreements, expanding a year later toinclude 2OO hectares engaging the services of 37

farmer-growers. The essence of the agreement isthat the farmer agrees to plant Pioneer seed, whileAADC provides all the necessary inputs, techno-logical guidance, supervision, and financial as-sistance (M. Focus 1983 ,p.52). It is said that oncethe agreement has been signed, AADC programs

the activities of farmer by providing him with a

time schedule for the various stages of the entireprocesses (ibid., p. 53). Under this situation,peasant seed-growers are no longer farmers but dis-guised laborers.

The other is a nucleus estate system, by whichpeasants were organized into a production ofspecific commercial crop around the central estate

with a processing plant. Historically, this idea c:rme

from Britain's Commonwealth Development Cor-poration (CDC) which was responsible for initiat-ing and promoting nucleus estate, beginning in thelate 1950s (Gratram 1984, p.103). In 1985, one billcalled Nucleus Estate and Smallholders Develop-ment Act was introduced in the defunct legislature,

Batasang Pambansa (Ibon No. I93, 1986, p.2).Although the bill did not reach promulgation, the

system itself is already in existence.Another is the mechanized farm in which all the

farm work is designed to be handled by machinery.Massey-Ferguson (MF), a world-famous manufac-turer and supplier of farm machinery and imple-ments, is a typical case. FM's participation in cornproduction began in 1985 when it conducted testcropping on 66 hectares of the former Cagayan Su-

gar Corporation farm. PPI reported that, envi-sioned to be a fully mechanrzed farm, MF has

introduced farm machinery of all types and sizes

for preparing land, planting, harvesting, drying and

storing, including even bosom sprayers applied

-52-

from an ,aircraft (PPI 1986b, p.3). In this case,peasants are facing massive dislocation.

Concluding Remarks

In the foregoing discussion, we were able to con-firm several points concerning corn cultivation andrecent change of major cropping area. They areas follows:

Firstly, the corn consumption pattern has a wideregional variation, which makes a national aver-age pattern meaningless. People in the central andsouthern Philippines consume more corn as theirstaple. However, corn appears to be supplemen-tary or to substitute rice, not a staple itself.

Secondly, corn has continuously increased itsproduction for the past several decades, havingresulted in the present production level of 4 mil-lion tons, ten times as much as that of the 1920s.The production increase was solely brought by ex-pansion of cropping area until the 1970s while theincrease after the late 1970s was mainly due to im-proved yields.

Thirdly, there has been a recent change of majorcorn area from Visayas to Mindanao Area. In ac-cordance with the regional consumption pattern,Visayas used to be a major corn area at least untilthe mid 1950s, but thereafter Mindanao took overthe position, currently occupying two thirds of thetotal production. We may call it as an areal differen-tiation in corn cultivation.

Fourthly, corn growing has experienced periodsof rapid areal expansion in the late 1930s to theearly 1940s, the 1950s to the 1960s, and the 1970s.These expansions can be explained in associationwith the specific state policies. The first two peri-ods corresponded to the vigorous operation of thegovernment sponsored land colonization and sub-sequent massive migration from Visayas to Min-danao Area. Particularly important were theCebuano migrants who had previous experienceof planting corn and corn eating, and ecologicalsimilarity they found in the settled areas of Min-danao. Further expansion of corn area in Minda-nao in the 1970s was attributed to the foodproduction programs, especially white corn pro-grams. In every program, more target area hadbeen allotted to Mindanao Area.

Fifthly, the rapid increase of corn production inthe 1980s can be attributed to the yellow cornproduction programs, the government new eco-nomic poliry and the subsequent corporate parti-cipation in corn business. This is a process of


commercialization of corn planting, organizingformer subsistence farmers by contact farming,nucleus estate system, or mechanized farm system.

Tlvo implications can be cited briefly. One is thatcorn cultivation in the Philippines is in transitionfrom subsistence practices to commercialized one.Subsistence growers are currently facing decisivealternatives: either to go into contract agreementas disguised laborers, or be completely dislocated.

The other is that rapid areal differentiation canoccur even under a subsistence economy, provid-ed that the impact of state policies is substantialenough. Areal differentiation occurring in Minda-nao and Visayas is expected to be further reinforcedafter the 1980s by an additional force of commer-cialization in addition to those of on-going statepolicies.

Notes

1. In the Philippine Agricultural Census, the clas-sification of crop farms by type is based on theproportion of area planted to a particular cropin relation to the cultivated land in a farm. So,a corn farm is typed according to corn area oc-cupying 50 percent or more of the cultivatedland of a farm.

2. The Philippines can geographically be dividedinto three parts, namely the northern, central,and southern parts. The northern Philippinesconsists of three major islands, i.e., Luzon,Mindoro, ild Falawan, while the central Philip-pines roughly corresponds to Visayan Islands,and the southern Philippines includes Mindanaoand Sulu Islands. In this paper, the norttrern partis also called Luzon Area, the central poft,Visayas, ffid the southern part, Mindanao Area.

3. See for instance Salita and Rocell, 1980, p. 160;PCARR, 1981b, p.l; Bondad, 1984, p.57;UPLB-APSI 1986, p.156.

4. Corn has sometimes called "poorman's rice"or "poorman's food". See, for instance, Miller,1913, p.49.

5. One bag of fertilizer is 50 kg. The number ofbags of fertilizer mentioned here is an averageof different kinds recommended.

6. The administrative regions in Luzon Area areexcluded in order to avoid complication.

7. See for instance NEDA, 1986, pp.83 -95;Department of Agriculture, 1987, passim.

-53-

References

Agrarian Reform Institute Advisory Council Tech-nical Committee. ed. 1983. The Agrarian Re-

form Program: A Decade after PD. 2 and 27,Los Banos, Laguna.

Bondad, Nestor D. ed. L984. Philippine ScienceEnqtclopedia, Vol. IV Agriculture, NationalResearch Council of the Philippines, Manila.

Collado, G. M., et al. l98l . Agribusinrtt Cornsys-tem; Philippines and Thailand, SEARCA,Laguna.

Department of Agriculture. 1987. Policies, Priori-ties, and Medium-Term Program of Action,(mimeographed), Quezon City.

Expanded Yellow Corn Production Assistance Pro-gram, (Executive Order No. W6, August 1984).

Golay, Frank H. 1961 . The Philippines; Public Poli-cy and National Development, Ithaca, N.Y.

Graham, Edgar. 1984. The Modern Plantation inthe Third World, London.

Ibon Facts and Figures, 1986. Vol.IX (Issue I78to 201).

Makati Business Club. 1982. Philippine Growthand Development: Issue and Prescriptions,Metro Manila.

Miller, Hugo H. 1913. Economic Conditions in thePhilippines, Boston.

Mindanao Foc,us (Quarterly). No. 1, (July 1983).Ministry of Agrarian Reform. 1985. Annual Repon

Igg4, a. c.NEDA. 1986. Medium-Term Philippine Develop-

ment Plan 1987-19n, Manila.1987. 1987 Statistical Yearbook of the Philip-

pines, Manila.


NEAC. ln4. Masaganang Maisan Program,(mimeographed), Q. C.

- 1982. Maisagarn; Implementing guidelines July-December 1982, (mimeographed), Q. C.

Pelzer, K. J. 1945. Pioneer Settlement in AsiaticTropics, Connecticut.

Phelan, J. L. 1967. The Hispanizntion of the PhiW-pines, Lohdon.

PCARR. 1981a. Data Series on Cont and SorghumStatistics in the Philippines, Los Banos,Laguna.1981b. The Philippines Recommends for Corn1981, Los Banos, Laguna

Philippine Peasant Institute. 1985. The NationalPeasant Situation 1985, (mimeographed), Q. C.1986a. "Significance of Yellow Corn Industryto Filipino Peasantry," (mimeographed), Q. C.1986b. "The Massey-Ferguson Yellow CornPlantation Project in Piat, Cag ayan,"(mimeographed), Q. C.

Republic of the Philippines. 1980. Food and Nutri-tion Plan, Manila.

Salita, D. C., ffid D. J. Rocell. 1980. konomic Ge-ography of the Philippines. Metro Manila.

UPlB-Agricultural Policy and Strategy Team.1986. Agenda for ,4ction for the PhilWine ktralSector, Los Banos, Laguna.

Wernstedt, F. L. and J. E. Spencer. 1967. ThePhilippine Island World; A Physical, Cultural,and Regional Geography, Univ. of CaliforniaPress, Los Angeles.

-54-