DETERMINATION OF OPERATIONAL MECHANISMS FOR

INCREASED PRODUCTIVITY AND INCOME AMONG CORN FARMERS IN

ABRA DE ILOG, OCCIDENTAL MINDORO

Jessa Espinol

CHAPTER I: Background of the Study

A. Introduction

Corn, also known as maize, is one of the most important grain commodities in the world.
It is recognized by many countries as their staple because of the versatility of the commodity in
terms of its transformative value addition for many food and non-food products. Many cultures in
the world also regard corn as their prime commodity and consumed on a daily basis. Corn is also
regarded as an alternative for other grain commodities, such as rice and wheat, on a global
perspective. Currently, the United States of America leads in the production of the commodity at
an annual volume of 377.5 million metric tons (https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/world-
leaders-in-corn-maize-production-by-country.html).

Production of corn in the country is second to rice. The importance of this commodity
includes the process of corn as raw material for starch-based products, animal feeds, and a staple
for 20% of the country’s population (Greenpeace, 2013). Upland communities in the Visayan and
Mindanao regions put greater value to corn than rice (Greenpeace, 2013). Among the variants of
corn in the country, white corn is produced for human consumption (Greenpeace, 2013). The
commodity is relatively cheaper to produce than rice in the said areas of the country making it
more accessible for a wide-scale consumption (Gerpacio et al., 2004). With this in mind, the
government’s strategy aims to streamline and elevate the status of white corn as a staple for
Filipinos (Gerpacio et al., 2004). Among the salient initiatives for the agenda on corn included the
introduction of rice-corn mixtures (RCM) which is viewed as a primary strategy to quell the
increasing demands for rice in the country (Briones, 2012). Promotion of the initiatives primarily
stresses the health benefits of corn in combatting diabetes because it’s low glycemic index (Jimeno
et al. 2008). However, these initiatives do not go without challenges.

In Occidental Mindoro, the performance of corn is towards a positive trend with increasing
production of 50,240 metric tons in 2010 to 76,934 metric tons in 2014 for yellow corn (PSA,
2015). In fact, the province ranks 16th among the top producers of the commodity. On the other
hand, the trend for white corn in the province is also generally increasing with 6,852 metric ton
production in 2010 and sustained incremental production in 2013 with up to 8,350 metric tons
(PSA, 2018). Towards the year 2014, the production slightly decreased to 7,893 metric tons. Many
factors were indicated including the occurrence of the monsoon, typhoons, and other
meteorological hazards; prolonged dry season; and the inability of farmers to cultivate the commity
during the said cropping years because of lack of capital (PSA, 2018). In the province, corn
production succeeds rice production and, to some extent, may affect the nutritional dynamics in
the soil. The commodity is also generally cheaper prices of corn also affects the income of farmers.
 In Abra de Ilog, rice and corn are the primary commodities of farmers, including the
indigenous people (IP) communities in the upland areas. Both the white and yellow varieties are
produced in the municipality with 117 and 2,227 hectares devoted for their production,
respectively (FLUP, 2018). The same scenario as the province is currently experienced by corn
farmers in terms of the lack of capital and low prices of their produce. Moreover, the production
of corn in the municipality is undervalued because of its primary utilization as a component for
various feeds for livestock and poultry.

B. Statement of the Problem

1. Current available data for corn are limited to the production statistics and do not delve into
the operational aspects of corn production.
2. Corn, being not culturally-ascribed by Filipinos as a staple, falls secondary to rice, hence
consumed less.
3. While being a top commodity in the province, the general value-chain of corn is
indeterminate, if not absent, thus, the value addition aspects are generally unknown.
4. Current state of corn production in the municipality of Abra de Ilog is generally unknown
or with very little documentation.
5. Most data also are obsolete, if not unreliable.
6. There is no current study in the province, more so in the municipality, that delves with the
improvement of production efficiency and significant improvement of income bases.
7. Participatory analysis of the needs of corn farmers has not been employed.

C. Objectives of the Study

The study primarily aims to determine the aspect of operation in corn farm lots that would
increase productivity and income generation of corn farmers in the Municipality of Abra de Ilog.
Specifically, the study aims to:

1. Identify current trends of agricultural practices in the municipality related to corn;

2. Determine the aspects that farmers find difficulty or with technical gaps in operating farm
lots;
3. Determine areas with high production and their good practices;
4. Determine areas with low production and the participatory mechanisms to improve current
scenarios; and
5. Identify major local inlets for different improvement mechanisms such as government,
non-government, and individual interventions.

D. Significance of the Study

The study would be the first of its kind to delve into the improvement mechanisms on
productivity and income generation that would be elicited through participatory methods. In
addition, the study is also timely in the nation’s thrust in streamlining quality protein maize (QPM)
as a staple in rice-insufficient localities. The study will also be relevant in further engaging corn
farmers for continued agricultural activities as their primary economic source. Likewise, the needs
of farmers will also be determined that will provide insights for local interventions.
 E. Conceptual Framework

To determine the various mechanisms for improvement of productivity and, ultimately,

income among corn farmers, the aspects of production, processing, and marketing in a simple
value chain analysis will be implored. These aspects will determine the main component for
financing and cost-effectiveness. Moreover, various activities conducted from preparation to
harvesting will also be included as these would dictate the ability of farmers for cost-effective
means. Lastly, good practices will be elicited to provide an integrative analysis of the different
activities leading to improved capabilities of corn farmers.

F. Scope and Limitations

The study will incorporate all possible low-elevated corn farm lots in the municipality for
convenience of data gathering. Both yellow and white corn production will be included in the study
to determine which variety has the greater potential for local productivity and income
improvements. On the other hand, the study will be typically limited by the production period and
stages in various areas. However, these differences will be reflected in each production stage and
will provide a scenario of improvement in productivity and income for a single cropping cycle.

G. Definition of Terms

1. Grain commodities – any member of the grass family (e.g. rice, corn, wheat, etc.) utilized
as food and food additives

2. Cost-effectiveness – a state where inputs, including capital, is used to its optimal level to
provide the maximum output

3. Good practices – the number of activities conducted that reap positive and reliable impacts

4. Operational mechanisms – the plethora of activities conducted in the production cycle

5. Value chain analysis – an economic analysis that determines the various activities in
typically three (3) components: 1) production; 2) processing; and 3) marketing

6. Participatory analysis – a socio-economic analysis tool used to determine the knowledge,

awareness, perspective, and perceptions (KAPPs) of communities in particular social and
economic activities

CHAPTER II: Review of Related Literature

A. Current State of White Corn Production

The Philippines is one of the major corn production in the world that contributes at 0.8%
or 7,900 million metric tons annually (Ministry of Agriculture Republic of Indonesia, 2017). In
the latest product release of the Philippines Statistics Authority (2018), showed an overall
production decline in both production volume and area cultivated but generally showed increments
for yield ha-1 in the last three years from 2015 to 2017 for white corn. Values presented changed
from 2,135, 2,023, and 2,104 million MT, respectively. On the other hand, areas changed from
1,265 to 1,174 hectares from 2015 to 2016, respectively, and remained the same in 2017. For yield
values, 1.69 MT ha-1 was recorded in 2015, 1.72 MT ha-1 for 2016, and 1.79 MT ha-1 for 2017.

Leading regional producers were Cagayan Valley, Northern Mindanao, SOCCKSARGEN,

and ARMM. Decrements in the production characteristics of white corn during the periods were
attributed to the lack of planting supplementation, delays in planting due to erratic weather
conditions, and peace and order situation in the Mindanao areas. These values are expected to
increase in the current planting year because of increased planting for Central Luzon, Cagayan
Valley, CALABARZON, MIMAROPA, and Zamboanga Peninsula given the expected favorable
weather conditions. In addition to these, values are also expected to increase because of
government interventions on the provision of HYVs and support for fertilization activities.
However, the current product statistics for the commodity did not reflect the different sub-sectors
of the commodity pertinent to its utilization.

Assessments of Greenpeace (2013) showed that there had been significant changes in
planting corn in the country. From 1990 to 2005, around 61% of the plantations were planted by
white corn. However, these values decreased by 11% from 2005 to 2012 with farmers prioritizing
yellow corn due to its value as feeds for livestock and poultry. White corn’s value is limited as
food, either cooked the same way as rice or eaten as snack. Ground white corn is also component
of deserts and other glutinous food items. Preference in white corn in the major producing regions
is guided by the higher price command of white corn over yellow corn. However, it was evident
that there is a need for expanding these areas in order to increase preference for the commodity as
a staple.

B. Health Benefits and Adding Nutritive Values of White Corn

White corn is being promoted by the government as a rice substitute because of its lower
glycemic index (Greenpeace, 2013). This denotes that corn has slower energy release, in the form
of glucose, compared to rice and lessens the risks of diabetes – a leading cause of deaths in the
Philippines (Greenpeace, 2013). In addition, studies showed that white corn contains more protein
than rice, in the form of lysine and tryptophan, as well as dietary fiber, minerals, and antioxidants.
In fact, a study conducted by Shah et al. (2016) showed that corn has 8.84 g 100 g-1 of edible
portions of rice. Lysine is an important protein that aids in building muscle tissues, facilitates
recovery from injuries or surgery, and for better absorption of calcium (Greenpeace, 2013). The
protein also facilitates the production of other important proteins such as enzymes, antibodies, and
hormones. Tryptophan, on the other hand, is needed by infants for better development
(Greenpeace, 2013). Moreover, the same study showed that 2.15 g of fiber, 4.15 g of aggregated
fats, and 1.5 g of varied minerals per 100 g of edible parts (Shah et al., 2016). However, there is
no study conducted for the fortification of nutrient base found in corn.

Based on the study of Gunaratna et al. (2010), addition of nutritive values for corn, known
as biofortification, is done to address undernutrition among children. Biofortification is a strategy
that guarantees addresses poor nutritional values in food intakes among rural areas in developing
countries (Gunaratna et al., 2010). Biofortification is cost-effective, more sustainable than nutrient
supplementation, and potentially facilitates food fortification because of the integration in
production processes (Gunratna et al., 2010). One of the novel examples for food fortification was
the case of partially hulled rice milling in the Philippines, low phytate maize in Guatemala, and
orange-fleshed potato in South Africa (Gunratna et al., 2010). Quality protein maize (QPM) is also
an example of this strategy.

Biofortification in QPM is done through engineering of seed stocks fortified with zinc and
iron which is added to the Vitamin A in carotenoids found in corn that was expanded from the
introduction of “golden rice” in the Philippines (Gunratna et al., 2010). The results are gathered
based on the biometrics of children that incorporated QPM in their regular diet. Height and weight
are the primary metrics utilized in the analysis of QPM impacts. However, fortification does not
apply for culturally-grown species and can only be done through laboratory methods. It is
recommended that fortification should be done in other crops modelled using the methodology of
QPM to aid in addressing undernutrition among the rural poor (Gunratna et al., 2010).

C. National Strategies for White Corn

Mainstreaming white corn is done on the basis that the commodity is a viable alternative
for rice as a food staple (Greenpeace, 2013). One of the programs cited by Greenpeace (2013) that
facilitated the initiative is the “Adaptation and Dissemination of Newly Developed Improved
White Corn Varieties as Alternative Source as Staple Food”. The program aims to support
initiatives to use corn as a food staple and expand consumption at the national level. Moreover,
stable supplies of white corn and other commodities is also supported by the said program.

Another program for the development of white corn is through the provision of funds for
research of commodities under the Food Staples Sufficiency Program (FSSP) of the Department
of Agriculture (PhilRice, 2015). Among the commodities under the program, aside from white
corn, are rice, saba, cassava, and sweet potato. The initiative’s mechanism is to launch projects
devoted for adoption of technologies to improve yield, increase incomes, and service delivery of
research and development works for the agricultural sector (PhilRice, 2015). In addition, under the
AgriPinoy framework, FSSP promotes global competitiveness and highlights on the welfare of
Filipino farmers. The ultimate goal of such framework is for the achievement of food self-
sufficiency with the concept of “satisfying domestic requirements for food, seeds and feeds
through local production”. Achievement of the said goals “FSSP strategies and interventions were
to raise productivity and competitiveness; enhance economic incentives and enabling mechanisms;
and manage food staples” (PhilRice, 2015).

CHAPTER III: Research Methodology

A. Research Site

Various sites within the Municipality of Abra de Ilog will be identified. These include the
2,345 hectares devoted for corn production. However, the sites with only existing crops during the
crop cycle will be considered because of the various operational mechanisms that need to be
determined during a planting season. A meeting and communication with the Municipal
Agriculture Office (MAO) will be conducted to pinpoint these areas more effectively.
 B. Respondent Pool

The respondents and participants to various information elicitation activities will include
farmers which will signify their approval to be interviewed. If a list of farmers is available in MAO,
then this will facilitate determining the number of respondents and participants for these activities.
Otherwise, the participants will be determined through farm visits and ocular of farm lots in the
municipality as facilitated by the MAO’s Agriculture Extension Workers (AEWs).

C. Research Design and Data Collection

The study will employ the participatory and rapid appraisal methods for information
elicitation. These include various mechanisms using a triangulation of formal interviews, focus
group discussion, and key informant interviews. The following are the specifications of each
methodology:

1. Formal Interviews – upon determining the total number of farmers with existing crops,
formal interviews will be conducted using a simple questionnaire survey. If the number of
farmers is equal to or lower than 25% of the total farmers, then all of them will be included
in the questionnaire survey. If the number of farmers encompasses 50% or greater, then
only 25% will be included in the questionnaire survey. It is assumed that there is little to
no variability in farm practices but on other factors mainly access to funding and capital.

2. Focus Group Discussion – for this method, the following will be conducted to determine
the KAPPs of the participants:

In pursuit of determining the operational aspects of improving productivity in the

communities that will benefit from the initiative, it is cognitive to understand the internal dynamics
of the community. This can be achieved through various focus group discussions that will entail
mostly two approaches: 1) Venn Diagram of Institutional Relationships; and 2) SWOT Analysis
of Operational Improvement.

The first methodology, Venn Diagram, will entail identifying the different institutions
within the community that the community perceives to be beneficial or may have adverse impacts.
The degree of “closeness” between institutions signifies the relationship that they may have prior
to the initiative and in the long-run. For example, the community will be asked what their
relationship with the LGU is and the general impact of the LGU to their livelihood. The importance
of this part is to ensure that the initiative will be sustainable on the level of their understanding and
awareness of the institutions and entities around them. An illustrative example of this approach is
presented in Figure 1.
 Institution
C
LGU Institution
Institution D
B Community Institution
A

Figure 1. Venn Diagram of Institutional Relationships

On the other hand, the SWOT Analysis of the QPM Sustainability should be able to
understand the different strengths and weaknesses of the community as well as the opportunities
and threats to the community that would entail success of the initiative. To contextualize these
points and indicators for sustainability, the following are the operational definitions:

a. Strengths – the set of positive attributes of the community that will make it possible for
the initiative to be successful;
b. Weaknesses – the set of negative attributes that the community possesses that may hinder
with the achievement of the initiative’s success;
c. Opportunities – the set of external factors to the community which may help or aid in the
achievement of the objectives of the initiative; and
d. Threats – the set of external factors which may hinder the members of the community in
achieving the objectives of the initiative.

The importance of identifying these qualities of the community is to determine the potential
for organizing the communities, putting up cooperatives, and their ability to streamline corn as
their staple, as an industry, and their capacity to address external stresses. In addition, these
qualities of the community also reflect the quality of the community-based technologies and
practices. This may imply that the success of the initiative may be greatly attributed to the
community’s innate qualities and the external factors that they consider to be beneficial or
detrimental.

3. Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) – This will determine the various interventions, projects,
and programs of the local government, i.e. municipal and barangay, for the improvement
of productivity and income of corn farmers as well as the gaps in these strategies. A semi-
structured questionnaire will be employed using well-defined guide questions which are
specific to the operations of corn production. Local agriculture offices will be visited for
these interviews to be conducted.

D. Research Instrument

The study will employ questionnaires and interviews with various local offices and corn
farmers in the municipality.
 E. Data Analysis

From the questionnaire survey, the study will determine the various socio-economic factors
which affect the general productivity and incomes of farmers. On the other hand, the FGD to be
conducted will determine the KAPPs and SWOT of the farmer communities in line with improving
their productivity and income. Lastly, the result of the KIIs will determine the various interventions
for corn in the municipality where insights of improvements will be elicited.

REFERENCES

Briones, R. M. 2012. Rice self-sufficiency: is it feasible. Philippine Institute for Development

Studies Policy Notes No. 2012-12 (September 2012)

Gerpacio, R. V., J. D. Labios, R. V. Labios, and E. I. Diangkinay. 2004. Maize in the Philippines:
Production Systems, Constraints, and Research Priorities. Mexico, D.F.: CIMMYT.

Greenpeace. 2013. White Corn in the Philippines: Contaminated with Genetically Modified Corn
Varieties. Greenpeace Southeast Asia

Gunratna, N. S., De Groote, H., Nestel, P., Pixley, K. V. and MacCabe, G. B. 2010. Food Policy
(35): 202-210. Elsevier Ltd. doi: 10.1016/j.food.pol.200911.03

Mendoza, T. C. 2011. A Review on the Estimates of Rice Per Capita Consumption and Its
Implications on the Rice Self-Sufficiency Program of the Government. Presented in the
Rice Policy Series on June 3, 2011, PRRM Building, 56 Mother Ignacia Avenue cor. Dr.
Lazcano St., Quezon City

Ministry of Agriculture Republic in Indonesia. 2017. Corn Industry Development in Indonesia.

Presented at the Meetings for the Development of Agricultural Cooperation, Ministry of
Agriculture and Agro-Based Industry Malaysia Kuala Lumpur, 5 July 2017

Municipal Government of Abra de Ilog. 2018. Forest Land Use Plan – Abra de Ilog. Unpublished.

(PSA) Philippine Statistics Authority. 2016. Philippine Population Density (Based on the 2015
Census of Population). PSA No. 2016-130

PSA. 2018. Rice and Corn Situation and Outlook, January 2018 Round (Special Release). PSA
No. 2017-016

Philippine Rice Research Institute. 2015. Rice for All Part 1. PhilRice Magazine Vol. 28, No. 2
(April to June 2015)

Reyes, C. M., Domingo, S. N., Mina, C. D. and Gozales, K. G. 2009. Policy Options for Rice and
Corn Farmers in the Face of Seasonal Climate Variability. Philippine Journal of
Development, No. 66, First Semester 2009, 36 (1): 133-156
Shah, T. R., Prasad, K. and Kumar, P. 2016. Maize – A potential source of human nutrition and
health: A review. Cogent Food and Agriculture, 2: 1166995. pp. 1-9