PHILIPPINE PEASANT INSTITUTE (PPI)
Supporting empowered peasants and self-determining rural communities
Who we are. The Philippine Peasant Institute (PPI) is a nongovernment organization that promotes and advances the interests of
the Philippine peasantry, particularly on agrarian reform and rural
development in partnership with local peasant organizations. Through
its policy research and legislative advocacy, the organization generates
support from among the different sectors in society for rural
development and democracy. PPI has a network of more than 500 small farmers’ and
peasant’s organizations nationwide. It advocates for structural policy reforms and
alternative analysis of rural development trends in support of initiatives of the
marginalized rural sectors. Through the years, PPI has built a reputation as a credible
source of information on peasants, agriculture, agrarian reform and rural development
issues.
To accomplish its goals, PPI is divided into six (6) centers namely (1) Land Tenure Center,
(2) Small Farm Development Center, (3) Agricultural Trade Center, (4) Rural Women
Center, (5) Publications and Resource Center and (6) Finance and Administration. Except
for Publications and Finance, program managers in each center are tasked to perform
basically three functions: research, advocacy and networking. These initiatives are
intended to support the peasantry, small farmers, rural women, indigenous peoples and
their communities and organizations. PPI courses its services to these sectors through the
people’s organizations that participate in regional rural congresses held in Luzon, Visayas
and Mindanao. In the process of implementing programs, PPI ensures equal representation
of peasant women and indigenous groups. Presently, PPI has a staff of 25 individuals,
including four (4) Liaison Officers based in the Visayas and Mindanao.
Where we come from. PPI was established in 1983, as a response to the clamor of peasant’s
organizations for research that would help them address the worsening conditions of the
farming sector. The Philippines was in a crisis at that time, both politically and
economically. The assassination of opposition leader Benigno Aquino, Jr. in 1983 brought a
major blow to the Marcos administration, and the economy suffered due to the worsening
peace and order situation and lack of investor confidence. Peasants in the country were
badly affected by the economic situation as credit and support services from government
were no longer coming and big landlords continue to dominate the scene. Peasant
organizations all over the country were coming together to demand their due and push for
strategic and structural reform in the agriculture sector through a genuine agrarian reform
and sustainable rural development program that would address the concerns of the
farmers. PPI’s role then was to support the farmers and peasant organizations in their
campaigns by coming out with timely and sharp researches to substantiate their demands.
The Institute served as a support group for peasants all over the country through its wellstudied positions developed from consultations with farmers; these positions and
researches were also used as a means to build consensus among the various groups in the
agriculture sector.
The 1986 EDSA uprising that deposed Marcos brought a change in the political wind. Then
President Aquino promised to restore democracy in the country and pledged to uplift the
plight of the majority of Filipinos. PPI saw this change in the political climate as a signal to
rethink their methods and explore other forms of intervention that were not available
1
during the Marcos dictatorship. In consultation with the farmers through the National
Consultative Assembly of Peasant Organizations (NACAPO), an assembly of leaders that
defines which areas are important for the peasant struggle, the institute conducted
researches and advocacy work that explored proposing alternatives to the current set-up.
Land ownership issues continued to be the priority issue of the farmers since majority of the
landholdings were owned by a few families. Genuine agrarian reform remained the battle
cry of the peasants that would enable them to own the land they till and improve their
economic status. Another pressing concern was the presence of cartels in the market; these
are groups that dictate the price and supply of agricultural products in the market which
adversely affect the farmers’ income as these cartels buy cheap from them but sell these
products high to the consumers. These critical issues and other growing concerns of the
peasants have kept the Institute busy in churning up-to-date researches and packaging
them to reach a wider audience and convince those in power to carry these proposals.
Our vision. The attainment of self-determining rural communities whose development is
founded on equity, ecological sustainability, gender fairness, respect for people’s rights and
culture; and the economic, socio-cultural and political empowerment of marginalized rural
sectors and peoples.
What we do. As a result of its rethinking and exploring other forms of intervention, PPI no
longer just fits itself in the usual mold of criticizing government policies and programs
through street mobilizations, it also uses other
modes of intervention such as lobbying at the
League building through alliances
and coalitions, Localization and
executive and legislative branches of government
regionalization of issues is one of the
through dialogues, debates and exchange of
strategies used by PPI to reach its
position papers that influence policymakers to
objectives. For instance, to ensure that
adopt the proposals. It also undertakes advocacy
coconut, rice, abaca fiber and vegetable
initiatives to spawn broader awareness and
farmers achieve a certain level of
concern for rural development and democracy in
economic and political clout that will allow
the country outside of its core constituent. It also
them to influence government policy, it is
assists in the initiatives of the marginalized sectors
best to establish commodity specific
leagues and an umbrella organization.
by way of its public education and capacity
This way, farmers gain control of
building activities such as timely publications,
production,
processing and marketing of
popular education materials and trainings and
their farm produce. Through this strategy,
seminars to disseminate the analysis and
representation and integration of women’s
proposals. Similarly, the Institute works for the
agenda in the Formations and government
adoption of measures for asset distribution reform,
agricultural policies is ensured as well.
small farmers’ empowerment, and sustainable
rural development at the executive and legislative
branches in both the national and local government levels. PPI also conducts cutting-edge
researches on agrarian reform, agricultural trade, small farm and rural development and
rural women issues. In the course of its work, PPI targets three specific sectors: (1) peasant
organizations through campaigns and publications; (2) policymakers through policy
advocacy and lobbying; and (3) the media to generate broader awareness and support for
peasant initiatives.
Combination of various advocacy strategies, namely, lobbying government through
submission of position papers, acting as resource persons on issues affecting the peasantry
on major forums like congressional hearings and symposiums, use of mass media to reach
the wider audience, and publication of resource materials that help popularize issues and
alternatives developed by the Institute and the peasant organizations – these help PPI
2
become a respected face in the eyes of the public and government.
The context. Almost half of the Filipino labor force is engaged in agriculture, although only
a minority actually owns the land they work. It is estimated that more than half of the
entire farming households are landless and two-thirds of the poor come from rural areas.
Meanwhile, foreign capital has dominated the farming sector since the 1960s. Large
corporations (both local and foreign multi-nationals) exercise control over huge tracts of
land and other resources through government leases, contracts and concessions. In
Mindanao, for example, thirty-one corporations own over one-third of the prime
agricultural land, half of which are foreign-owned.
A World Bank report in 1998 argued that the growing number of the poor and the
persistence of income inequality in the Philippines is a result of three structural factors:
unequal asset ownership, particularly land; population growth; and the lack of productive
growth. In addition, the commercialization of agriculture, fisheries and forestry led to the
massive depletion of the natural resource base in each of these sectors. Lacking the legal
instrument and logistical support, coastal workers, small farmers and indigenous peoples
are powerless in the face of rich landowners and owners of big agricultural businesses.
Because their needs are basically neglected by the state, they lack socio-economic
guarantees needed in the sustainability of the sector. It is for this reason that economists
generally regard Philippine poverty as a rural phenomenon.
To the rural poor who comprise 77% of the rural population, access to credit
facilities could mean the difference between life and death.
Similarly, free market and neo-liberal strategies in developing countries are responsible for
minimizing state intervention and reduced spending on social infrastructure like
agricultural services, health, education and welfare. Filipino farmers are barely surviving
the blows ever since the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) included
agricultural products within the scope of free trade. The country, among other things,
became the dumping ground of foreign agricultural products as a consequence of neoliberal policies of deregulation, import liberalization and agricultural privatization.
The rising costs of farm inputs such as fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides go on since the
advent of the 1997 Asian financial crisis. Meanwhile, the devastating effects of El Nino and
La Nina continue to depress land productivity and crop harvests. At the same time,
farmers have to struggle with scarce irrigation facilities, limited farm machinery, bad road
networks, limited support services and unavailability of credit. It is no wonder that the
Philippines has been posting the lowest growth rate in terms of crop production since the
late 1970s. The country’s agricultural productivity has been decreasing despite the
increasing productivity trend of its Asian neighbors.
KEY PROGRAM AREAS
Land Tenure and Property Rights. PPI supports initiatives that will secure property rights
of peasants, small farmers, farm workers and indigenous peoples, both men and women in
the Philippines. Foremost of these initiatives is to work for the speedy and effective
3
implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) and the
Indigenous People’s Rights Act (IPRA).
1. Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) - is a social justice and equity
program that sought to redistribute agricultural lands to tenant-tillers, and mandated the
provision of support services to agrarian reform beneficiaries. The basis for this program is
the passage of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (Republic Act 6657), approved in
June 10, 1988 under President Corazon Aquino. Hailed as landmark legislation, it was set
to benefit 3.9 million Filipino farmers who suffer from landlessness and unjust labor
practices of abusive landowners. The Philippines’s total land area is 30 million hectares but
only 10 million are suitable for growing crops. The same area was mandated by the law for
redistribution to landless farmers alongside financial and technical support to all CARP
beneficiaries. The Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) and the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources are the two main agencies tasked to implement CARP.
DAR is responsible for distributing public and private agricultural lands while DENR for
public alienable and disposable lands. The original target for distribution was 10.3 million
hectares of land but was reduced to 8.1 million in 1995. CARP was supposed to end in 1998
but implementation was only half-finished by then, hence, RA 8532 extended CARP
implementation to another 10 years. After 16 years of implementation, only 71% of the
target was met. There is also a growing number of cancellation of Certificates of Land
Transfers (CLTs), Emancipation Patents (EPs) and Certificates of Land Ownership Award
(CLOA). As of May 2000, some 374 hectares have been affected by these cancellations.
Millions of Filipino farmers, peasant organizations, civil society groups and CARP
advocates still have more reason to be alarmed due to the following developments:
a. Farmland as Collateral Bill (Senate Bill 167) - endorsed by the President, this
proposal authored by five (5) senators seeks to grant collateral value to Certificate of
Land Ownership Awards (CLOAs) awarded to CARP beneficiaries. This was made
possible by the recommendation to lift a 10-year period limit in land transferability.
This 10-year holding period was specified in the existing agrarian reform law to
promote the productivity of CARP-awarded lands through increased government
spending on agricultural services. The bill, however, propose to amend the law that
will allow farmers to sell, transfer, convey or lease their CARP awarded lands to any
person. Similarly, any person, corporation or entity can step in and provide credit
with the CARP awarded land as collateral. However, given high interest rates, poor
financial standing and meager agricultural infrastructure, the proposed bill is the
easiest way for farmers to lose their lands and former landlords to recover their
properties and amass more lands. Instead of taking full responsibility to aid the
development of CARP awarded lands through provision of support services such as
pre- and post-harvest facilities, credit and other infrastructure, the government is
now abandoning its duty to protect the sector under the guise of making CLOAs an
instrument to access credit in the capital markets.
b. Lifting of the 5-hectare Retention Limit (Senate Bill 168) - meanwhile, the same
Farmland as Collateral Bill allows present landowners to acquire more than the 5hectare limit as mandated by the CARP law. Agribusiness expansion heavily
favored foreign companies and big businesses at the expense of small farmers. In
recent years, unabated cases of land confiscation, land title cancellation, land
conversion and CARP exemptions have been reported nationwide. Allowing
landowners to own more successfully reduce the scope and cancel out the gains
(though limited) of CARP implementation. This proposal is a clever way to
reconsolidate ownership of farmlands and will cause landlessness all over again. It
4
is also worth noting that agrarian reform is purportedly government’s commitment
to social justice and wealth democratization in the country. But consider the CARP
budget: a measly P9 billion in contrast to P223 billion allotted to debt servicing and
P40 billion earmarked for national defense in the 2003 National Government Budget.
2003 State Budget in Billion Pesos
National
Defense
Agrarian
Reform
Debt Servicing
2. Indigenous People’s Rights Act (IPRA) - is an act recognizing the rights of
indigenous peoples and their customary laws. IPRA also provides the legal framework
for understanding and resolving the ancestral domain problem. To address these
concerns, the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples was established to
undertake tribal census and issuance of the Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title
(CADT). CADT is a native title that recognizes the land rights of indigenous
communities over the territories identified and delineated. Possession of native titles
protects the community from land grabbing, development aggression and other forms
of activities that violate customary practices.
Campaign Initiatives
Each year, PPI organizes three (3) trainings on advocacy and basic processes for securing
small farmers’ and indigenous peoples’ property rights. In coordination with other
program centers, there are usually four (4) training modules administered to leaders of
people’s organizations in the farming and indigenous peoples sector. There is also a
memorandum of agreement between PPI and legal support organizations to establish
paralegal capability in the training process. Results from these trainings are also used as
inputs to PPI’s annual legislative agenda based on current issues. Meanwhile, PPI staff
constantly monitor legislative bills filed at the House
and Senate on CARP and IPRA. They participate
For the current three-year program,
regularly in meetings of technical working groups
the Institute’s campaign focuses
and legislative committees, as well as conduct
mainly on the call to fully implement
researches on agrarian reform issues. PPI also lobbies
the targets of CARP by 2008 – fully
for increased budget allocation for agriculture and
distribute all the lands covered
agrarian reform, securing of land titles, strategy
under the program and provide
paper formulation, land acquisition and distribution.
support services to agrarian reform
Since the remaining lands for distribution under the
CARP are coconut and sugar lands, PPI will initiate
and join local commodity-based alliances and
organizations that will lobby and pursue the quick
resolution of land disputes for the full
implementation of CARP. Similarly, with the
beneficiaries. Another major
campaign together with other
organizations is the stopping of the
passage of the Farmland as
Collateral Bill and other legislation
that would undermine the limited
gains of CARP.
5
campaign to effect the immediate implementation of the IPRA, PPI will pursue better
coordination with affected indigenous peoples groups to help secure the property rights of
the beneficiaries.
Small Farms Development. According to
the Congressional Commission on
Agricultural Modernization, “we make it
our policy that the way we teach
Did you know that…
agriculture and formulate our priorities
in research and development, the manner
• Rice is the main staple of about 80% of
by which we produce commodities and
Filipinos
the institutions we create for agricultural
• Rice farms accounts for 33% of the
modernization will be governed by the
country’s total agricultural land
alternatives of the small farms.” In
• Rice production is a PhP 92 billion
industry (P1 = Euro 66)
reality, however, small farmers continue
• Rice farming employs some 2.5 million
to suffer from low savings accumulation,
farmers
low investment and low capital
• Rice production accounts for 19% of
formation, primitive production
total agricultural production
techniques, limited access to credit and
• Rice production accounts for 2.9% of
training, decreasing state subsidies, low
Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
production and low income levels. In
short, declining productivity results to
increased poverty in the rural areas. In the Philippines, there are approximately 4 million
small farms; average farm size of 2.8 hectares in 1991 continues to decline especially when
the development of agricultural sector is increasingly entrusted to private hands. Without
the strong hand of government, gross inequalities in land and capital continue to
undermine the sustainability of the small farm economy. It is only through government’s
action that tax incentives be given in favor of the poor and laws that govern inheritance,
widowhood or divorce, and joint land titling be instituted.
Campaign Initiatives
The main goal of PPI’s campaign on small farms is to urge government to come up with
clear solution to the declining productivity of small farms nationwide. It also supports
initiatives towards building commodity-based leagues of small agricultural producers to
strengthen its voice and representation in economic
planning and deliberations. Examples of these leagues
are rice, abaca vegetable, coconut farmers and maize
farmers. PPI also extends marketing assistance
PPI will pursue the
program and helps small producers to access
implementation of the
affordable credit. In addition, PPI facilitates scientists
Farmer Field Schools (FFS)
and farmer partnerships through field schools in
that address the training
certain areas, at the same time document experiences
needs and requirements of
small farmers that would
on field. National conferences on organic farming and
help strengthen their
sustainable farming approaches are also conducted.
economic,
social and political
Consultation on publicly funded agricultural research,
role in society. The training
rural credit strategy paper, development and extension
topics would include
are also being undertaken nationwide. Researches on
discussions on major
the rural credit situationer, rural credit delivery and
agricultural policies,
rice self-sufficiency are being done on a regular basis.
production technology,
marketing, and skills building
Meanwhile, PPI also conducts a review on the
that reinforce farmers’
Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act (AFMA),
economic viability and ensure
their productivity and
6
livelihood.
a landmark law prescribing urgent measures to modernize agriculture and fisheries and
enhance their productivity and prepare the sector for the challenges of globalization
through delivery of support services and providing appropriate funds.
PPI will also initiate efforts to bring together peasant organizations and advocates to
discuss and adopt a new Common Agricultural Agenda (CAA), which is an updated
version of the agricultural agenda formulated by a broad network in the past to be
presented to the newly elected government officials. The Institute will maintain its close
ties and coordination with the broad network of farmer-based organizations both at the
grassroots and national level such as the Alyansa Agrikultura (Agricultural Alliance), Alyansa
ng mga Maliliit na Magbubukid at Mangingisda (AMM or the Alliance of Small Farmers and
Fisherfolks) and the newly-formed National Rice Farmers Council to lobby and campaign
on various critical issues faced by the peasant movement.
Agricultural Trade. Predominantly agricultural country but
suffering from constant rice production crisis, rice importation
seems to be the norm in the Philippines. Viability and security of
Philippine rice farming depends on climactic changes, resource
constraints, production, marketing and distribution problems,
diminishing water resources and increasing production costs.
Marketable surplus of rice in the international market is very
small- only 5%. In Asia where 90% of the world’s rice supply is
produced and consumed, annual production growth of rice decelerated by as much as 50%,
from 3.1% in 1965 to 1980 to 1.7% from 1985 to 1994. Asian demand for rice is expected to
increase on account of 50% increase of the Asian population (excluding China).
Rice liberalization will lead to lower prices and improved food security but it assumes there
is a steady supply of rice in the international market and assumes that there is a perfect
market in rice trading. Rice tarrification is one of the major conditionalities in the release of
ADB loans to the Philippines. It calls for the implementation of a tariff scheme on the
importation of rice in the Philippines replacing the policy of quantitative restrictions (QRs)
or the limit on the amount of rice imports to the country. Sourcing rice requirements from
international markets have to answer for the ff: Where would the rice farmers sell their
products? Can they easily shift to other areas of agricultural production? Will they be
competitive given the level of subsidies of their overseas competitors? Will industry and
services sector be able to absorb farm workers?
Campaign Initiatives
In 2003, PPI served as the Secretariat of the
National Rice Summit where more than 250 farmerleaders coming from the major rice-producing
provinces of the country convened to discuss the
critical and emerging issues of the rice industry. The
farmer-leaders decided to form the National Rice
Farmers Council (NRFC) to address these issues in a
systematic manner. PPI was then tasked to come
up with a Rice Master Plan based on the discussion
and resolutions of the summit. The Master Plan was
thoroughly discussed by the NRFC, the final draft of
which will be disseminated for adoption by its
members. The Institute together with NRFC will
lobby for its adoption in the national policy level, and
will be highlighted during the celebration of the
International Year of the Rice in 2004.
In partnership with the Stop the New
Round Coalition (SNR!), a strong
public education campaign on rice
liberalization and the WTO will be
conducted to raise awareness
regarding the relationship between
Philippine commitments to the
multilateral trade body and rice
liberalization. Alongside these efforts
is the continued campaign against the
Agreement on Agriculture (AoA),
campaign to extend the rice
quantitative restrictions, and the
campaign to stop unnecessary rice
7
importation. PPI will continue to negotiate trade officials to slow down, if not, stop
agricultural trade liberalization and reorient government agricultural policy to serve the
interest of small agricultural stakeholders. To facilitate consensus on these issues and
widely disseminate positions and proposals, PPI will make use of its publications program
to come out with major campaigns annual and articles in regular publications. Lobby in the
executive and legislative branches will also be sustained through the conduct of dialogues
and legislative inquiry with agricultural stakeholders and government. Media will also be
tapped to publicize analyses and positions through press conferences and press releases.
International networking and solidarity work will also be intensified through attendance in
international meetings/ministerial conferences such as the nationwide-small farmer
consultations on Phil. Negotiating positions on the WTO in time for the ministerial
meetings.
Rural Women. PPI actively participated in the launching of the National Rural Women
Congress in October 2003. The Institute
believes that increased participation of
women in rural development policymaking and implementation would
positively impact on the productivity of
the farms that will lead to sustained
economic growth. Specifically,
government agricultural policy should
Did you know that rural women…
integrate the practical and strategic
needs of women. With this objective,
are responsible for about 45 percent of food
PPI will contribute to the advocacy and
production in SEA and about 60% of food
efforts of the broader network through
production in Asia
the conduct of policy reviews and field
compose only of 22% of the total number of
agrarian reform beneficiaries
research on rural women, particularly
at least 54% do agriculture related work
on property rights, rural finance, food
without pay
safety, agricultural tools and
receive an average daily wage that is p23.28
machineries and support services for
lower than what their male counterparts
women.
receive
The gender approach is integrated in
PPI’s activities in several ways. Foremost is the appointment of a Gender officer whose task
goes beyond gender policing activities. She writes a regular column for PPI’s Farm News
and Views and Dyaryo Kanayunan (Countryside Newspaper) newsletters, and checks that
gender fairness is maintained in all the articles. She also heads the Institute’s Rural Women
center, which undertakes policy researches on gender issues in the rural areas and actively
advocates for rural women’s issues. Lastly, the Institute makes it a point to ensure that the
rural women are equitably represented in the various fora hosted by the Institute.
Campaign Initiatives
The Institute plans to establish links and develop proposals for executive agencies, namely,
Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) and Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) for land and property rights issue; Department of Agriculture (DA) and
Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) for rural women’s access to the
Gender and Development (GAD) program and budget; National Coalition on the Role of
Filipino Women (NCRFW) and National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) for the
monitoring of rural women related programs; and the International Labor Organization
(ILO) for the informal sector definition.
8
In the current program, PPI plans to establish a Rural Women network representing 60-100
groups nationwide based on two major groups – crop specific (rice, corn, coconut, sugar
and vegetables) and sector specific (indigenous women and rural workers). It will conduct
a Peasant Women Rural Survey to map the real statistics and issues that beset rural women,
and what actions have already been undertaken. It will also come out with researches and
publications on rural finance and credit, food safety and pesticide use, cultural and
property rights of women in Mindanao, women-friendly farm tools and machineries, am
OTHER INITIATIVES
Rural Congress Network - PPI
was able to host 3 regional
congresses in 1999- the Luzon
Rural Congress was held in March
and which was followed by the
Visayas and Mindanaw Rural
Congress that were held in April.
More than 400 farmer leaders and
NGO representatives participated
in the regional congresses. The
Congresses were the result of the
collaborative efforts of PPI and the
small farmers organization.
Mindanao Land For Peace Initiatives/ Land for Peace
Network - is an offshoot of the Mindanaw Rural Congress.
The MRC prompted PPI to look into policies on ancestral
domains, and to broaden its advocacies on land tenure and
property rights. Subsequently, the MRC and the Institute
initiated the Land for Peace efforts in Mindanao with the
eventual aim of forging a peace pact among and between
the 27 Moro and Lumad tribes and the Philippine
government. The Mindanaw tri-people conference that was
held in Davao City in 7-11 February 2000 provided a venue
for the historic gathering of 9 Moro tribes, 18 Lumad tribes
and 14 organizations of small farmholders and settlers. All in
all, there were 330 Lumad (Indigenous peoples), Moro and
small farmer leaders who gathered to discuss how they
could spur the process of having their lands recognized,
titled and awarded to them, using the various government
agencies and legislation that had been put in place
ostensibly to address these very problems. The participants
also clamored for the immediate implementation of the
Indigenous People’s Rights Act. In particular, they
demanded government to hasten the distribution of
Certificates of Ancestral Domain Titles (CADT).
Mindanaw Rural Congress - 149
delegates participated in the Rural
congress. The Mindanaw Rural
congress eventually became a
launching platform for a creation
of a broad and loose coalition of
small farmers and peasants
organizations. The Mindanaw
Rural Congress (MRC), in particular, evolved into a regional umbrella organization
composed of more than 250 farmers’ and indigenous people’s organizations from 23
provinces in Mindanao. The MRC established its own council which also acts as the official
channel in engagements with the government on agriculture and agrarian reform policies.
Visayas Rural Congress - 59 farmer leaders and 47 NGO representatives participated in the
Visayas Rural Congress. The event’s theme was “Get involved! Unite and fight for our
rights!”
Task Force Visayas on Agrarian Reform. An offshoot of the Visayas Rural congress was
the formation of the Task Force Visayas on Agrarian Reform. PPI helped form Task Force
Visayas, which was a joint endeavor between small farmer organizations and the
Departmnent of Agrarian Reform (DAR) to hasten the distribution of private agricultural
lands to agrarian reform beneficiaries. PPI also assisted in efforts to physically install
agrarian reform beneficiaries in awarded lands where the landowners were still barring
entry of the beneficiaries.
Coco Levy and the Liga ng Magniniyog network. The campaign for the judicious
utilization of the coco levy funds entailed close interaction and series of discussions and
consultations with small coconut farmers organization. Advocacy work was also done
9
through the Multi-Sectoral Task Force on the Coconut Levy Recovery (MSTF) that was
composed of different coconut farmer’s federations, non-government organizations, the
business sector and the Church through the Bishop-Businessmen’s Conference. The
campaign was successful in contributing to the court decision that finally declared the coco
levy as public funds.
Publications. Rural Development Studies Monographs, Farm News and Views
And Dyaryo Kanayunan
For more information, please contact:
Romeo Royandoyan (Executive Director)
Philippine Peasant Institute
Philippine Social Science Center (PSSC) Building, Commonwealth Avenue, Quezon City,
Philippines
Telephone: (63) (2) 929-6211
Telefax: (63) (2) 924-3767
Web page: www.ppi.org.ph
E-mail: [email protected]
10