Economic Evaluation of Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries in Agrarian Reform Communities in Nueva Ecija

Abstract

This study was conducted in two Agrarian Reform Communities (ARCs) in Nueva Ecija: one in San Ricardo, Talavera and the other in Alalay Grande, Lupao to evaluate the status of the Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs) in the area. The specific objectives of the study were to; (1) evaluate and ascertain the status of ARBs; (2) describe the socio–demographic characteristics of the ARBs and the support services implemented in the ARCs; (3) ascertain the current status of ARBs in relation to landownership and tenure; (4) determine the current use of their lands and the benefits obtained by the ARBs, and (5) identify the problems encountered by the farmers-beneficiaries in relation to CARP and the ARC approaches. Based on the results, Alalay Grande ARBs were older, having small farm size and had same household size with San Ricardo. For both groups, most were full owners of the land they till and the common source of irrigation in San Ricardo was the NIA irrigation system while in Alalay Grande farms were mainly rainfed. As to the support services implemented in the ARCs, particularly in terms of physical infrastructure in the UNLAD BUHAY ARC, more than seven kilometers of road was built consisting of one road from Bantug Hacienda to Sibul and another road from Bantug Hacienda to San Ricardo. The UNLAD BUHAY ARC was also a recipient of one unit warehouse, one unit rice mill, and one unit truck (forward). In terms of technology services, a dairy processing plant is currently operated at San Ricardo. Unlad Saka technology involving off–season vegetables and integrated farming were also being practiced in the ARC. The credit support services include provision of Crop Production Loan (CPL) where the terms and condition include assignment of crop produce for those loans without collateral, for collateralized loan, a twelve percent interest for 180 days period and a rebate of two percent is given to farmers if payment is made before due date plus automatic crop insurance. Marketing promotion of products is done through trade fair initiated by Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR). In terms of current status, the ARBs of San Ricardo consist of 17 (53%) full–owners, three (9%) have already pawned–out their lands, while six (19%) have sold–out their lands, and six (19%) have fragmented their lands to their heirs. One (3%) has not yet received his Emancipation Patent (EP) title. While in Alalay Grande, 19 (38%) ARBs are full–owners, 12 (24%) are leaseholders, and 19 (38%) have fragmented their lands, and a significant number of ARBs about eight (16%) have not received yet their EP covering a total area of 41.9 has. All twelve leaseholders (24%) have received their leaseholder contracts with landowners. Generally, in terms of current use of land, San Ricardo ARBs has a total farm area of 68.4 has. while it was 108.4 has. for Alalay Grande ARBs. All farm areas are agricultural lands and rice is the primary crop planted thus, both brgys. utilized rice–rice cropping pattern. Most farmers planted high yielding varieties, such as IR-64 and PSBRc 82. The sources of seeds are mainly from the Department of Agriculture (DA) in San Ricardo while in Alalay Grande the sources of seeds are mainly from their own produce. As to seed class, most of the ARBs utilized certified seeds because they believed they are assured of good yield from utilizing such seeds. There were also problems encountered in relation to land ownership and tenure. In San Ricardo, one (3%) of the ARBs encountered erroneous EP issuance and another one has not yet received his EP title. In Alalay Grande, eight (16%) of ARBs have not yet received their EP titles. Erroneous EP issuances were due to wrong names of ARBs or spouse, and wrong area/hectarage entry. The results of t-test analysis showed that yield (cavan), gross return, cost of material inputs, cost of labor, other cost, net return, return to labor, return to current material input, return per peso spent, and net profit margin are significant hence, confirming the benefits obtained by the ARBs from the land awarded to them under CARP. The results further support the hypothesis that ARBs gained thru production and profit from their farms. The ARC approach is important for ARBs to maximize the benefits from their lands. However, problems relating to its implementation must be addressed by concerned agencies to reap the full benefits of the support services intended for ARBs.