Flashback to 70s/80s, early in my career I realized that to be a good agriculturist I should also be forester and a rural sociologist as well. I lived in mountainous Central Visayas region where half of agriculture was conducted in the mountains. Kaingin and upland farming was rapidly evolving into a major environmental concern with mounting incidence of soil erosion and flooding issues, an aftermath of excessive logging of our forests in the period (coupled with population growth and slow land reform). The Central Visayas, Regional Development Council (RDC) launched a pilot project that the aimed to model the way for decentralized decision making for forest and watershed care. I was part of this undertaking and eager to test an idea and learn as a younger professional!
Ideas that inspired us (70’s/80’s)
Farming in the mountains – a social reality, before a technical issue
In the humid tropics, the nutrients needed by plants are in the biomass, not in the soil
Hilly land farming systems can be stabilized and made profitable
Exit terraces and physical structures, enter biological methods of soil conservation
Social forestry as the alternative to “command and control” (top down)
For successful watershed management -start at the micro-watershed level
Remarkable Communities
Hilly communities in Alegria in Cebu, Barangay Magsaysay in Talibon, Bohol, Bayawan in Negros and Cangapa in Siquijor
Catalytic projects that helped model the way
DOST PCARRD Technopack Project, WB-NEDA Central Visayas Regional Project; USAID DENR /DA Rainfed Resources Development Project.
My field notes
Thought leaders, Mentors and Co-travelers
Insights
The upland issues were a lot simpler then. One of the key major issues then was kaingin, today it is already about commodity driven agriculture (e.g., yellow corn in hilly lands).
Notwithstanding its gaps, the Central Visayas experiment in the 80s was the germ of a concept of transforming government from an ineffective regulator to one fostering people-oriented resource management.
The acid test of a cost effectiveness of good upland technology would be labor intensity. If too labor intensive, it won’t last or it won’t spread well (e.g., SALT).
Market forces are more powerful than the best technologies and extension work., The fruit of years of good extension work could be easily wiped out by changes in demand for products (Later on I saw this happen in North Mindanao -see subsequent stories).
Honest to goodness extension work is not enough, policy-based incentive and systems (not project incentives) coupled with context-based regulations is really the key in the uplands.
This was my first my first full exposure the” institutional culture” of DA and DENR, and LGU. These cultures either enabled or constrained meaningful development…
Too much money in so short a project timeframe is a recipe for non-sustainability of successful, project inspired practices.
Acknowledgements: community pictures and CVRP picture – Ms. Charito Chiu CVRP
Leave a reply