Philippine Action Plan for Family Farming 2019-2028

Untitled PHILIPPINE ACTION PLAN FOR FAMILY FARMING 2019-2028 Copyright 2021. All Rights Reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means including information storage and retrieval systems, without permission in writing from ATI. All information that will be lifted from this material should be cited properly. Published by: Department of Agriculture AGRICULTURAL TRAINING INSTITUTE Elliptical Road, Diliman, Quezon City, 1100 www.ati.da.gov.ph ISBN: 978-971-9673-63-7 Printed in the Philippines i Pledge of Support With fervent desire to contribute to a world free of hunger in line with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, we pledge our support to the principles of the Philippine Action Plan for Family Farming (PAP4FF) — joining the multi- stakeholder alliance to mobilize means of implementation for its interventions. In the spirit of national partnership and solidarity, we are committed to the whole- of-nation approach to achieve the PAP4FF overarching goal of “Masaganang Ani, Mataas na Kita, at Marangal na Buhay ng Pamilyang Magsasaka” (Abundant Harvests, High Incomes, and Dignified Life of Family Farmers). We will adhere to its seven pillars of action and adopt the three strategic action areas on Policy and Program; People; and Partnerships to drive the success of the PAP4FF vision and, ultimately, bring about diverse, healthy, and sustainable food and agricultural systems to ensure that no one is left behind. Signed on the 27th of May 2021 at Diliman, Quezon City. Hon. John R. Castriciones Secretary Department of Agrarian Reform Hon. Roy A. Cimatu Secretary Department of Environment and Natural Resources Ms. Kati Tanninen FAO Representative in the Philippines Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Mr. Irineo R. Cerilla Quezon Irrigators’ Association Hon. William D. Dar, PhD Secretary Department of Agriculture Hon. Eduardo M. Año Secretary Department of Interior and Local Government Hon. Ramon M. Lopez Secretary Department of Trade and Industry Mr. Alessandro Marini Philippine Country Director International Fund for Agricultural Development Mr. Pablo R. Rosales PANGISDA iii Contents Pledge of Support i Abbreviations and Acronyms iv Foreword vii Preface viii Executive Summary 1 Part 1. Background Global Action Plan for Family Farming 4 Characteristics of Family Farming in the Philippines and Factors Affecting It 9 Gaps and Challenges 28 Part 2. Philippine Action Plan for Family Farming The Crafting of the 10-year Philippine Action Plan for Family Farming (PAP4FF) 36 Theory of Change 38 Definition and Concept of Family Farming in the Philippines 38 Family Farming Conceptual Framework 41 Family Farming Logical Framework 42 Pillars, Indicative Actions, and Success Metrics 46 Implementation and Coordination Arrangements of the National Committee on Family Farming (NCFF) 56 Monitoring and Evaluation (Results Based Monitoring and Evaluation) 59 Communications Plan 59 Proposed Financial Funding/Budgetary Requirements 59 Sustainability Plan 60 Part 3. Timelines The 10-year Messaging and Communication Campaign Angles 61 Short, Medium, and Long Term Goals 62 Part 4. Annexes Annex 1. The Crafting of the National Action Plan for Family Farming - Detailed Description of the Methodology 64 Annex 2. Chronology of Events 66 Annex 3. KLMPE 2019: Joint FO-CSO Declaration on UNDFF Implementation 71 Annex 4. List of Laws and Policies Suggested for Formulation, Review, and/or Strict Implementation based on Consultation Sessions 75 Annex 5. List of Researchable Areas Based on the Consultations 76 Annex 6. List of Capability Development Programs Based on the Consultations 77 Annex 7. List of Agencies, Institutions, and Groups Involved in the Consultation Processes 78 References 81 iv Abbreviations and Acronyms AFF - Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries ANGOC - Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development ARBs - Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries ARDKPP - Agriculture and Rural Development Knowledge and Policy Platform ATI - Agricultural Training Institute BFAR - Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources CADTs - Certificate of Ancestral Domain Titles CARP - Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program CFTF - Coconut Farmers’ Trust Fund CSOs - Civil Society Organizations DA - Department of Agriculture DA-IAD - Department of Agriculture - International Affairs Division DAR - Department of Agrarian Reform DBP - Development Bank of the Philippines DENR - Department of Environment and Natural Resources FAO-UN - Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations DFA - Department of Foreign Affairs FFOs - Family Farmers Organizations FIES - Family Income and Expenditure Survey FO - Farmers’ Organizations FSN - Food Security and Nutrition GAA - General Appropriations Act GAP - Global Action Plan GAP - Good Agricultural Practices GDP - Gross Domestic Product GERD - Gross Expenses on Research and Development ICCA - Indigenous Communities Conserved Territories and Areas ICCs - Indigenous Cultural Communities IDOFS - Integrated, Diversified, Organic Farming System IFAD - International Fund for Agricultural Development IGOs - Inter-Governmental Organizations IPs - Indigenous Peoples IPRA - Indigenous Peoples Right Act ISC - International Steering Committee v Abbreviations and Acronyms ITeMA - Information Technology–enabled Maturity Assessment IYFF - International Year of Family Farming KAYA - Kapatid Access for Youth Agripreneurs KLM - Knowledge and Learning Market KLMPE - Knowledge and Learning Market - Policy Engagement KRAs - Key Result Areas LBP - Land Bank of the Philippines LGUs - Local Government Units LRA - Land Registration Authority MTCP2 - Medium Term Capacity Building Program Phase 2 NALUA - National Land Use Act NAPC - National Anti-Poverty Commission NCFF - National Committee on Family Farming NCIP - National Commission on Indigenous Peoples NEDA - National Economic Development Authority NGAs - National Government Agencies NGOs - Non-Government Organizations NIA - National Irrigation Administration PAKISAMA - Pambansang Kilusan ng mga Samahang Magsasaka PAP4FF - Philippine Action Plan for Family Farming PARC - Presidential Agrarian Reform Council PARCCOM - Provincial Agrarian Reform Coordinating Committee PCAF - Philippine Council for Agriculture and Fisheries PhilDHRRA - Philippine Partnership for the Development of Human Resources in Rural Areas PHilMech - Philippine Center for Postharvest Development and Mechanization PhilRice - Philippine Rice Research Institute PIDS - Philippine Institute for Development Studies PKKK - Pambansang Koalisyon ng mga Kababaihan sa Kanayunan PPSA - Philippine Partnership for Sustainable Agriculture PSA - Philippine Statistics Authority RCEF - Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund RICs - Rural Improvement Clubs RSBSA - Registry System for Basic Sectors in Agriculture RTL - Rice Tariffication Law vi Abbreviations and Acronyms SDGs - Sustainable Development Goals SLM - Sustainable Land Management SUCs - State Universities and Colleges TESDA - Technical Education and Skills Development Authority ToC - Theory of Change TWG - Technical Working Group UN - United Nations UNDFF - United Nations Decade of Family Farming WRF - World Rural Forum vii Foreword In the Philippines, family farming is more than just family-managed activity, but it speaks of multiple dimensions and how a typical Filipino family engages every member of the household in agriculture. Yet, despite the initiatives of the different institutions offering to improve the lives of the people behind the food production in the country, family farmers remain the most vulnerable sector. We are delighted that the United Nations Decade of Family Farming or the UNDFF that runs from 2019-2028 provided a new light to look at our existing programs, projects, activities and processes in another dimension. Recognizing the various initiatives of all stakeholders for every member of a family of farmers, it is in this sense that the multi-sectoral collaboration is critical to ensure a whole of nation approach in pushing for a cause to sustain food security and enhance the livelihoods of our family farmers. Mobilizing the key sector to work towards a common goal is proven to be one best strategy to address the underlying causes affecting the multi-dimensional problems faced by the family farmers themselves. The PAP4FF is a product of the series of multi-stakeholder consultations with strong participation of key government agencies, non-government organizations, civil society organizations, farmers’ organizations as well as private sector. Indeed, it marks a significant milestone for the Philippines to finally come up with a national action plan that will mobilize all relevant institutions from the key sectors towards an overaching goal of “Masaganang Ani, Mataas na Kita at Marangal na Buhay ng Pamilyang Magsasaka” (“Abundant Harvests, High Incomes and Dignified Life of Family Farmers”). This initiative is in line with the key strategies of our OneDA Reform Agenda where we mobilize and empower our partners and engage every member of a farming family – particularly the women and the youth in establishing more agri-based industries in the countryside and developing markets for agriculture products. Developed amidst the Covid-19 pandemic, this document is a proof of the enduring commitment and stronger engagement of the different stakeholders, not only in the development of a national action plan, but for the decade-long implementation of the programs and activities to ensure that in the end, no Filipino family farmer is hungry, vulnerable and dissatisfied. Hon. William D. Dar, PhD Secretary, Department of Agriculture Republic of the Philippines viii Preface The proclamation of the United Nations Decade of Family Farming or UNDFF (2019-2028) has significantly reinforced the role of family farmers as key actors in achieving food security, poverty reduction, and environmental preservation across many generations. As the source of 80 percent of the world’s food value, family farming and all family-based production models have brought about an unprecedented impact spanning through many years—ultimately leading us to this decade of opportunities to continuously empower this important segment of our sector and help them realize their unique potential. Amid the growing pressures in our food system, we look to family farming as a paradigm of sustainable food production and as an innovative response to challenges socially, environmentally, economically, and culturally. The farm and the family, food production and life at home, are now at the core of our national priorities as we shape the future of our agriculture sector and, at the same time, help attain the Sustainable Development Goals. The 10-year Philippine Action Plan for Family Farming (PAP4FF) is the result of extensive multi-stakeholder efforts to translate these priorities into concrete, coordinated actions. The aim is to harness the transformative power of Policy and Program; People; and Partnerships to mobilize the whole of nation, government, and civil society so that poverty and hunger among family farmers can be eliminated by 2028. Through this, we underscore the need to ensure that those who produce food for the entire nation will no longer suffer from hunger and poverty. This plan is our national commitment to the UNDFF Global Action Plan to make sure that not one of our family farmers is left behind. Anchored in the eight paradigms of the New Thinking for Agriculture, we hope to ultimately achieve “Masaganang Ani, Mataas na Kita, at Marangal na Buhay ng Pamilyang Magsasaka” by 2028 through this national blueprint. To boost resiliency among family farmers, we help them improve their productivity and competitiveness; secure land and resource tenure; and, increase productivity of soil and water resources, food self-sufficiency, and well-being for all at all ages. More importantly, this document represents the collective ambition of various individuals and groups in the country to uphold the rights and multifunctional role of family farmers so that they can thrive in the long-term, despite the changing conditions and future shocks that threaten food and nutrition security of Filipinos. Together, we intend to keep our momentum going so that family farming continues to scale up and bring Philippine agriculture to another level from this decade forward. In our path towards development, we will continue to adopt a holistic approach to be able to grow, nourish, and sustain as a nation—one farm family at a time. Rosana P. Mula, PhD OIC-Director, Agricultural Training Institute Chair, National Committee for Family Farming 1 Executive Summary The UNDFF 2019-2028 provides a golden opportunity to put the plight of family farmers at the heart of agri-fishery-forestry and national sustainable development. Both the government and civil society organizations (CSOs) as well as the academe initiated their respective activities to make the UNDFF more meaningful. The Philippines, as a member of the International Steering Committee (ISC) of the UNDFF, crafted the ten-year PAP4FF in 2020 following inclusive, consultative, and participatory approaches with various government agencies, civil society organizations, farmer groups, non-government organizations (NGOs), academe, and research institutions. Three sectoral and one multi-sectoral national conferences, and a multi-stakeholder writeshop were convened by the Department of Agriculture- Agricultural Training Institute (DA-ATI) as the focal agency tasked to formulate and implement a national action plan for massive promotion and coordinated programs and activities on family farming in the country. The Agriculture and Rural Development Knowledge and Policy Platform (ARDKPP), a technical working group (TWG) which involves international and local institutions such as the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO-UN), the Department of Agriculture (DA), the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) and prominent farmers’ organizations as well as CSOs in the Philippines, initiated the drafting of the PAP4FF in its 2019 and 2020 annual national conferences. The PAP4FF advocates the application of a whole-of-nation approach and mobilizes all relevant government agencies, family farmers, civil society, academic, research, business institutions; and private sector representatives to achieve the seven Key Result Areas (KRAs). These KRAs are aligned with the DA’s Eight Paradigms to Level Up Agriculture, the Philippine Development Plan, the advocacies and plans of partner family farmers and CSOs in the country, other than the UNDFF Global Action Pillars and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations. It has three Strategic Action Areas -- Policy and Program; People; and Partnerships -- aimed to address the main concerns and challenges of Filipino family farmers. The multi-dimensional problems faced by family farmers making them the most vulnerable in the society can be traced to three underlying causes: • Weak Governance, characterized by weak participation of local and marginalized people that results to shrinking democratic spaces. This contributed to the weak implementation of existing asset reform laws and absence of other measures and programs fundamental to empowering family farmers, in spite of the promises of the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. • Weak Citizenship, where an estimated 80 percent of the 10 million strong agri-fishery-forestry labor force do not belong to any operational family farmer organization. Since most of the services from the government are channeled through farmers’ organizations 2 and not to individuals, a large number of family farmers, especially women and young farmers do not receive appropriate services from the Philippine Government. Also, if family farmer associations and cooperatives continue to be managed poorly, these farmers will continue to be deprived of government support. Moreover, most of the two million family farmers who are members of operational family farmer organizations, receive incomplete services from their respective organizations owing to great challenges in their managerial and technical capacities. Most farmers’ organizations do not have paid professional managers and staff who can facilitate, prepare, and execute necessary business and farm plans. Likewise, government agencies, farmers’ federations, and rural development NGOs which are assisting these farmer organizations are very much challenged in terms of personnel capacities. • Weak Partnerships, while many structures of family farmers’ participation have been established at the national and local levels such as the National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC), the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council and Provincial Agrarian Reform Coordinating Committee (PARCCOM), and Philippine Council for Agriculture and Fisheries (PCAF) with its counterparts at the regional, provincial and municipal levels, a meaningful and constructive engagement between government officials and family farmers is basically limited by weak governance and weak citizenship, coupled by the lack of human and financial resources invested in making these partnership platforms to work. To respond to these challenges, conceptual and logical frameworks were developed to provide detailed descriptions of the goals and interventions and illustrate how these activities would lead to the desired outputs and outcomes. Anchored on the overarching goal of “Masaganang Ani, Mataas na Kita, at Marangal na Buhay ng Pamilyang Magsasaka” (Abundant Harvests, High Income and Dignified Life of Family Farmers), the PAP4FF frameworks focus on zero hunger and poverty, as well as sustainable agriculture-fishery-forestry, characterized by improved productivity, competitiveness, and resilience of Filipino family farmers. This document likewise calls for secured land/resource tenure, increased productivity of soil and water resources, food self-sufficiency, and well-being for all. Its seven pillars of action, which are aligned with the pillars of the Global Action Plan, are the driving forces to achieve the goal, to wit: (1) Enabling Policy and Program Environment; (2) Generational Renewal and Sustainability; (3) Gender Equity and Empowerment; (4) Strengthened Family Farmer Organizations; (5) Socio-Economic Inclusion, Resilience, and Holistic Development; (6) Sustainable and Climate-resiliency of Food Systems; and (7) Enhanced Multifunctional Roles of Farm Families. Meanwhile, the baseline and yearly targets by 2028 will be established and completed in the succeeding months. 3 The implementation mechanism for the PAP4FF is through the formalization of a multi-stakeholder National Committee on Family Farming (NCFF) chaired by the President of the Republic of the Philippines. They will be supported by TWGs at the national and regional levels, Thematic Task Forces and a Joint Secretariat with cross-cutting sub-committees. Policy issuances and legislation shall be pursued to ensure sustainable funding and operation of the partnership structure aimed to go beyond administrations. Monitoring and Evaluation, Communications Plan, and Sustainability Plan are also included. Key activities for the 10-year plan are identified and will be further elaborated by the NCFF. P H O T O B Y : A T I R T C M IM A R O P A 4 Part 1. Background Global Action Plan for Family Farming United Nations Decade for Family Farming In December 2017, the United Nations General Assembly declared 2019-2028 as the Decade of Family Farming, which would serve as a framework to develop public policies and investments to support family farming, and contribute to the achievement of the SDGs, including rural poverty eradication in all its forms. The UNDFF 2019-2028 envisions… “A world where diverse, healthy and sustainable food and agricultural systems flourish, where resilient rural and urban communities enjoy a high quality of life in dignity, equity, free from hunger and poverty” To fulfill this vision, the UNDFF pursues these seven Pillars: Pillar 1 Develop an evidence-based enabling policy environment to strengthen family farming Pillar 2–Transversal Support the youth and ensure the generational sustainability of family farming Pillar 3–Transversal Promote gender equity in family farming and the empowerment of rural women Pillar 4 Strengthen family farmers’ organizations and capacities to generate knowledge, represent farmers, and provide inclusive services in the urban-rural continuum Pillar 5 Improve socio-economic inclusion, resilience and well-being of family farmers, rural households and communities Pillar 6 Promote sustainability of family farming for climate- resilient food systems Pillar 7 Strengthen the multidimensionality of family farming to promote social innovations contributing to territorial development and food systems that safeguard biodiversity, the environment and culture Family Farming and Rural Development in the Philippines The family, as the basic unit of the society, plays crucial roles in national development. Investing on programs and services for Filipino families provide a wide range of opportunities for economic stability and progress of a country. Substantial evidence has been collected that, globally, family farmers are major contributors to food security and nutrition (FSN), management of natural resources, rural community cohesion, and cultural heritage. As presented in the graph below, family farms produce majority of the world’s food. FAO-UN (2019) estimated that family farming production accounted for more than 80 percent of the world’s food in value – and 5 family farmers have been investing locally in the agricultural sector and therefore they have been contributing to build the economic structure. It is likewise important to recognize that the majority of family farmers operate in local –generally informal- markets, where their contributions are critical in ensuring access to food for vulnerable groups (CFS, 2017a). Figure 1. Family Farming as a predominant form of agriculture. Family farming allows a holistic approach to food production, which brings together economic, environmental, and social prerogatives particularly: • Food Security and Nutrition (FSN): Family farmers are key contributors to FSN, especially in the world’s most populous and food-insecure regions. Equally important, they play a pivotal role in maintaining nutritional diversity, while the shift to large-scale industrial farming model is normally associated with the decline in the diversity of nutrient production (Herrero, M., et al, 2017). • Land Productivity: Land productivity and diversity of production are often relatively higher on family farms due to lower transaction costs associated with hiring a family instead of hired labor, and better knowledge on specific farm landscape characteristics due to a stronger connection with the territory (FAO and OECD, 2012; Larson, D.F. et al, 2012; Wiggins, S., 2009; Lipton, M., 2006; Sen, A., 1996). • Social Equity and Community Well-being: Family farming contributes to addressing key challenges related to agrarian reform, poverty, and employment. Indeed, in communities dominated by family farming, better opportunities for civic and social engagement, stronger attachment to local culture and landscapes, and higher Commercial Farms 20% Family-managed Farms 80% 6 level of trust within communities have been observed (Pretty, J. and Bharucha, Z.P., 2014; Donham, K. et al, 2007; Lyson, T. et al, 2001;Jackson-Smith, D. and Gillesspie, G., 2005). • Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change Response: Due to their higher attachment to local communities and landscapes, family farmers have stronger interest and care for the environment upon which they rely on for their agricultural production and livelihoods. Moreover, family farmers tend to be more receptive towards the adoption of sustainable approaches that are based on their knowledge of local ecosystems, agro-ecology, and organic agriculture. However, despite their integral role in the development of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries (AFF) sector in the countryside and in assuring food security and dietary diversification for a large share of the global population, majority of the family farmers are among the poorest of the poor and risk-averse sectors of society, experiencing the most immediate and extensive negative health and socio-economic impacts. They face different challenges in terms of access to land and natural resources, access to services that support production and marketing, availability of rural infrastructure, participation in political processes, and climate change (FAO and IFAD, 2019). Moreover, with the varying factors affecting farm families around the world, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and related socio-economic disruptions, strategic actions and coherent cross-sectoral policies that address environmental, economic, and social dimensions of agricultural and rural development are of utmost importance. This is to ensure that family farmers are competent and resilient to overcome the impact of crisis situations concerning their livelihoods. Thus, the Joint FAO-IFAD Secretariat coordinated the development of the Global Action Plan (GAP), a tool to implement strategies at the global, regional, national, and local levels. The GAP highlights an approach that strongly integrates social and cultural aspects and environmental issues, which have been translated into indicative and interconnected actions that respond to the seven mutually reinforcing pillars of the UNDFF. 7 P H O T O B Y : U N S P L A S H / J U L E S B S S 8 P H O T O B Y : A T I IS D 9 Characteristics of Family Farming in the Philippines and Factors Affecting It The AFF Sector in the Philippines The Philippines is an archipelago with 7,641 islands. It has a total land area of 30 million hectares, 47 percent of which are classified as alienable and disposable lands and out of this, nine million hectares are agriculture lands, with rice, corn, and coconut as major crops (Quizon, A., et al, 2018). In the past years, these agricultural lands have been subjected to land conversions. Data from the DAR on approved land conversions show that 168,041 hectares of agricultural lands were converted and/or exempted from the coverage of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program. However, this does not show the real picture as there are thousands of undocumented and illegally converted irrigated and irrigable agricultural lands, and the violators of conversion regulations have not been prosecuted. The Philippines also has 2,200,000 square kilometers of territorial waters and a coastline length of 36,289 kilometers. The inland waters where small-scale fishers are also located, include swamplands, lakes, rivers, and reservoirs that cover a combined area of 546,000 hectares (BFAR, 2018). Households in the AFF Sector. In 2018, the number of households in the AFF sector reached around 105 million of which 53 percent live in the rural areas (FAOSTAT, 2019). The 1987 Philippine Constitution referred to households, commonly known as families, as the foundation of the nation, which implies that empowering them through policies and enabling social, political, and economic environment can maximize their potential to contribute to nation-building and economic development. In the official census of population in 2015 of the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), there were almost 23 million households in the country with an average size of 4.4 persons. This reported an estimate of an additional 8 million households compared to the year 2000 data, where the average size was documented at five persons per household. Meanwhile, according to the latest available census of agriculture and fisheries, there were more than 19 million household members in the Philippines in 2012. Of this number, more than 8.5 million households were engaged in agriculture, representing 43 percent of the total household population in the country. Additional data reflected that 87.15 percent or 7.4 million households engaged in agriculture owned their holdings, while 6.19 percent or around 526,000 were cultivating lands owned by others. Farm Size. The average size of farms in the Philippines dwindled from three hectares per family/holding in the 1980s to only 0.9 hectare in 2012, according to the PSA. In the same year, the country had 5.56 million farms, totaling 7.2 million hectares, of which more than one-half (57 percent) constituted one hectare and less, one-third or 32 percent were one to three hectares, 9 percent were three to seven hectares, and 2 percent were seven hectares and more. In the fishery sector, the vast majority of Filipino fishers remain tied to very small boats that could only go to as far as the municipal water boundaries. 10 Economic Contribution. At present, the AFF sector remains as one of the biggest contributors to the Philippine economy. In 2019, it accounted for 9.2 percent of the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP), registering 1.2 percent growth. Despite having one of the lowest mechanization levels in Southeast Asia, the Philippines’ AFF sector continues to increase its crop production with a gross output growth of 0.3 percent and remains to be one of the top fish producers globally with 1.5 percent growth or 4.4 million metric tons in fish production since 2019. In terms of exports, the AFF sector contributed 9.4 percent to the country’s total exports. Topping the agricultural exports are banana, coconut oil, and pineapple with a combined share of 52.5 percent. The AFF sector is also one of the largest employers, with 9.72 million in its workforce or 22.9 percent of the national employment. Poverty Incidence and Hunger. Despite the good performance and contribution of the AFF sector to the economy, households who are living in rural areas and depending on agriculture for their income remain poor. Data from the PSA showed that rural poverty was recorded at 29.8 percent, where 48.5 percent of the households are agriculture-dependent. Farmers and fisherfolk remain to be the poorest of the poor, which posted 31.6 percent and 26.2 percent poverty incidence rate, respectively, way higher than the national rate of 16.6 percent. The Family Income and Expenditures Survey (FIES) conducted by the PSA in 2015 also found out that farmers and fishers consistently registered as the two sectors with the highest poverty incidence since 2006. Among the subsectors of agriculture, those living in the uplands and engaged in forestry activities have the highest incidence of poverty at 68 percent. Majority of these upland dwellers are indigenous peoples (IPs). In terms of crop subsectors, the top five occupations of the heads of households with the highest poverty rates are corn farmers, farmhands and laborers, coconut farmers, fisherfolk, and rice farmers. Moreover, there are 13.9 million people undernourished, and severe food insecurity has been rising in the past years, shifting from 11.2 percent in 2014-2016 to 15 percent in 2016-2018 (FAOSTAT, 2019). Farm Diversification and Productivity. The Philippine agriculture is characterized by limited diversification and low productivity, as compared to other ASEAN countries. Traditional crops such as rice, corn, and coconut account for the majority of the production, and high value crops have also been given increasing attention. Longstanding issues that hamper productivity include landlessness, lack of access to land and resources, limited access to credit and agricultural insurance, low farm mechanization and inadequate postharvest facilities, inadequate irrigation, lack of youth participation in agriculture, lack of women participation in agricultural value chains, and weak connection between production areas and markets. In addition to these, high inequality, low salaries, and lack of access to services and credit trap the poor in poverty across generations. Climate Change. Climate change and its impact on agriculture production are also extremely relevant, considering that the Philippines has been one of the countries most affected by the effects of global warming according to the Global Climate Risk 11 Index in 2019. The poorest regions have been disproportionately affected by natural disasters. The national poverty assessment released by the World Bank suggested to sustain higher productivity in all sectors, invest in developing the skills needed for the 21st century economy, and focus on health and nutrition (The World Bank Annual Report 2018). As an agricultural country, two-thirds of the Philippine population are directly and indirectly exposed to the impacts of climate change events. The AFF sector has been greatly affected by climate change mainly because higher productivity depends on weather, water supply, and remaining biological resources, and more critically, because they rely on their produce for food and livelihood. The damages to the ARBs’ crops are in billions of pesos annually and most of them have no access to crop insurance and other programs to mitigate the effects of climate change to their farms (Quizon, A., et al, 2018). COVID-19 Pandemic. The country reported that the AFF sector is one of the three major sectors that experienced growth during the COVID-19 pandemic, which posted 0.5 and 0.7 percent in the second and third quarters of 2020, respectively. The increase in crop and fisheries production was cited as a reason for the growth. However, the pandemic continuously poses challenges to the AFF sector due to the hampering of transportation especially during the height of community quarantines in the country and the closing down of restaurants and other businesses. According to the 2020 report by the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA), high-value crops, rice, and corn farmers suffered a Php 61.05 million in income loss. Poultry and livestock recorded a Php 24.48 million income loss and Php 8.78 million for fisheries. The AFF sector also suffered from the risks of climate change and threats to biosecurity such as the Fall Armyworm, African Swine Flu, and Avian Flu. Due to the typhoons that struck the country in 2020, DA reported Php 12.3 billion damages in agriculture. Further, based on the Rapid Assessment of the Impact of COVID-19 on Food Supply Chains in the Philippines by FAO and IFAD, the COVID-19 pandemic has inflicted unprecedented controls on travel and social distancing since early March 2020, with adverse economic consequences still on-going (FAO, 2021). Public health emergency measures have disrupted both supply and demand sides of agri-food systems worldwide. The COVID-19 pandemic struck at a time when the agrifood system was facing a healthy outlook, implying that the recurrence of a world food crisis is unlikely. As with other countries, food production and food markets were classified as an essential sector and were exempted from the severe prohibitions. Food purchases and deliveries were allowed. However, the food supply chain was not left unscathed by the containment measures. The DA, as the lead national agency for agriculture and food security implemented various actions in response to COVID-19 pandemic and one of them was ensuring the food supply stability in the urban areas such as Metro Manila. Innovation and Research and Development. Science and technology is one of the most important but often neglected components of the Philippine economic development. The Philippines lagged behind on Gross Expenses on Research and 12 Development (GERD), lower than the UNESCO prescribed spending of at least one percent of GDP for research and development. Other neighboring countries have spent at least 1% of their GDP on GERD such as Thailand and Malaysia who spent more than one percent and Singapore at 3.7%. This is happening despite the expressed priority given by the Philippine government to science and technology in the past decades, as reflected in the PDPs. Family Farm Actors and Organizations This section highlights some of the typologies of family farmers in the Philippines. Rice family farmers. Rice is the staple food in the Philippines, more important to the economy and to the people at a lower income levels, hence an important intervention point for promotion of agricultural development and alleviation of poverty. In many cases, rice family farmers in the Philippines are composed mostly of owner cultivators and farmworkers, eradicating land tenancy due to various land reform measures after the 1986 People Power Revolution. Because family farmworkers are hired to do the cultivation, weeding, and harvesting, the push for mechanization may displace farmworkers in the process. Moreover, despite diversification projects introduced by the government such as rice-duck or rice-fish productions, rice farms remain largely monocrop. To contribute to the development of rice farmers, carefully planned interventions considering both the advantages and disadvantages of strategies should then be implemented. P H O T O B Y : A T I IS D 13 Coconut family farmers. Coconut, also known as the “tree of life”, is one of the most important crops in the Philippines. It is considered a major export, contributing 3.6% of the country’s gross value-added (GVA) in agriculture. The country remains to be a top producer and exporter of coconut worldwide. According to the NAPC, the small coconut farmers of around 3.5 million families, are among the poorest farmers in the country, earning on average Php 18,000 per capita per year. Most of them remain landless tenants or workers despite the CARP. Most absentee landowners of less than three-hectare farms live in the municipal or city centers, have main occupations other than farming, and consider coconut farms as sources of supplemental income. Further reports show that most coconut lands are maintained as monocrop, where coconuts are planted solely for copra production, leaving 80 percent of the total land area unutilized. Fisher families. The fishing industry contributed about 1.3 percent to the country’s GDP. In 2015, the country ranked 9th among the top fish producing countries in the world, and 11th in aquaculture production. The fishery sector was subdivided into three sub-sectors: a) municipal fisheries, b) aquaculture, and c) commercial fisheries. Municipal fisheries accounted for 26 percent of total fish production while aquaculture and commercial fisheries account for 51 percent and 23 percent, respectively. In terms of population, the municipal fisheries sector comprised 85 percent of all fishing operators nationwide. The latest figures from the Fisheries Registration System of the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (2018) showed that there were 1.93 million registered municipal fishers. The municipal fisherfolk ranked among the poorest of the poor where 34.3 percent live below the poverty line (PSA, 2017). According to a report by the National Statistical Coordination Board released in 2013, 28 out of 100 Filipinos were poor. This ratio became 41 out of 100 for fishers (Courtney, C. A., Jhaveri, N. J., Pomeroy, R., & Brooks, S. H., 2016). This situation is worsened by the travel and movement restrictions given the COVID-19 pandemic, where transporting aquatic and fishery products to the market became more challenging, coupled with the risks of being exposed to COVID-19. Furthermore, the tropical storms entering the Philippine Area of Responsibility frequently pass through and oftentimes damage the coastal areas facing the eastern seaboard of the country. The implementation and enforcement of fisheries-related laws also challenge the fisheries sector. The Fisheries Code of 1998 and the subsequent amendment which supposedly delineated municipal waters have yet to be fully implemented, while poor enforcement oftentimes does not deter illegal, unreported, and undocumented (IUU) fishing. Likewise, even with the enactment of the Local Government Code and the Fisheries Code which mandate LGUs to respond to various concerns of small- scale fishers, low productivity of the fishery sector was still recorded. These laws mandated concerned government agencies to provide infrastructure programs such as the establishment of fish landing centers and fisherfolk settlement areas, and support enforcement mechanisms through the Bantay-Dagat or fish wardens. Moreover, unorganized fisherfolk sector and the lack of capacity of people’s organizations or cooperatives to manage their organizations effectively and profitably also contributed to the continuous poor delivery of services to the sector. 14 The coconut family farmers’ organizations. Coconut farmers remain to be the least organized, and may not reach even five percent of the 3.5 million family farmers in the country, with the PCA supporting a thousand associations with very small number of members (35-100) and mostly managed by volunteer coconut farmers or elected officers. They have very limited services to members and are dependent on the extension services provided by the PCA which in itself is likewise highly challenged in terms of human capacity and budget. Independent national farmers’ federations comprising the KILUS Magniniyog are also mostly led and managed by volunteers and are likewise highly challenged to provide meaningful services to its members and cooperatives. Most NGOs involved in organizing coconut farmers have also run out of grant funds and cannot sustain their services. The rice family farmers’ organizations. Rice farmers, especially those with irrigation systems supported by the National Irrigation Administration (NIA), are the most organized farming sector with 1.1 million in the registry of NIA as members of 8,000 irrigators’ associations. However, these associations are dependent on the services of the NIA to sustain their respective associations focusing only on irrigation services. A single service is not enough to address the many other needs of rice farmers, including diversification and market. The Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund (RCEF), with Php 10 billion annual allocation from the government’s rice tariff income, has been allocated to various government agencies such as Philippine Center for Postharvest Development and Mechanization (PhilMech), Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice), Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA), ATI, Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP), and the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) to help family farmers’ associations and cooperatives better serve their members through mechanization, training on modern agricultural technologies, and high quality seeds, among others. Organic family farmers. A milestone was achieved when the government passed the Republic Act 10068 or the Organic Agriculture Act of 2010. The revised law envisions to boost organic agriculture practice in the country where only a minority of farmers subscribe. Many national farmers’ federations are advocates of organic farming but there is a need for complete value chain service by primary cooperatives/association to speed up the adoption which most of them lack the capacity to provide. At the national and local levels, there are engagements between FFOs and LGUs, except for some LGUs who are members of the League of Organic Agriculture Municipalities and Cities (LOAMC). At the national level, no such systematic platform to promote it exists except for some discussions in the PCAF. The Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries’ family farmers. Among the government agencies, DAR is among those with a sophisticated tool at assessing their partner ARBOs, assessing some 5,799 ARBOs yearly using a tool called Information Technology–enabled Maturity Assessment (ITeMA). ITeMA looks at five main indicators or KRAs to assess the maturity level of organizations, to wit: 1) Organizational Management (OM); 2) Resource Management (RM); 3) Social Enterprise/Business Operations (SEBO); 4) Financial Performance (FP); and 5) Alliance Building and Social Responsibility (ABaSR). Of the total number of ARBOs, 5,228 or about 90% are operational; 438 (7.6%) are non-operational and 133 ARBOs (2.4%) refused to be subjected to ITeMA. Of the operational ARBOs, 5,201 ARBOs have valid data (Ballesteros and Ancheta, 2020). 15 Upland family farmers. The upland family farmers, estimated to be around 20 million in population, are those who live in the government-owned uplands and are currently assisted by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). They are beneficiaries of the CARP or the Integrated Social Forestry and Community Based Forestry Management Program. Family Farmers’ Federations. The family farmers’ federations are those formed by primary associations and cooperatives at the municipal, provincial, regional, national, and international levels to be their voice in advocating policies and their channels in accessing public programs and services. Some were formed and supported by the government, while the others were organized independently of the government, and largely initiated by NGOs, church institutions, and political parties. Some of them traced their roots before the Martial Law, while most were organized after the 1986 People Power Revolution. These organizations provided their members a voice in policy-making bodies and access to government and non-government programs and services. Most of them sit in the NAPC farmers, fishers, indigenous peoples, women, and youth sectoral councils and the various committees of the PCAF and some have representatives to the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) and even the LBP. Among these federations are the nine national family farmer federations involved in the IFAD-AFA-LVC supported program, the Medium Term Capacity Building Program (MTCP2) Phase 2. Collectively, they serve as member organizations with a total membership of half a million family farmers. Reports also show that most of these organizations have or are in the process of forming their respective young and women farmers’ committees and many are being managed by full time professional staff with varied competencies. Most of these federations are engaged in providing capacity building services especially economic services to their member organizations, transforming their member associations into cooperatives. Indigenous People in AFF Sector The Philippines has more than 100 ethno-linguistics groups spread across the archipelago. According to the latest available PSA census of population and housing published in 2000, there were 6.3 million indigenous people (IP) in the country, which represented more than eight percent of the total household population. In a separate report from IFAD, the unofficial survey of the National Commission on Indigenous People (NCIP) estimated 12-15 million population of IPs, which may constitute about 10-15 percent of the total population of the country (Cariño, 2012). They are believed to be residing in 65 of the country’s 78 provinces. Based on the same report, the Indigenous Cultural Communities/Indigenous Peoples (ICCs/IPs) are inhabiting 1,362 ancestral domains or around 14 million hectares of land, which represented 48.02 percent of the total areas of the country. However due to the lack of IP Family Registry data bank, the data above do not show the exact number of mostly poorest-of-the poor ICCs/IPs family farmers who inhabit the said ancestral domains. This lack of baseline data on their population could be related to why the IPs remain one of the poorest sectors in the country as there are not enough programs that could uplift their lives. Added to their challenges are discrimination, neglect or marginalization in terms of basic social services, 16 disrespect of their ancestral domains, degradation of forests and the environment, and the limited fund of government, particularly of the NCIP that supports their welfare and livelihood. In the AFF sector, based on the same PSA 2000 data, three in ten IPs were farmers or 35 percent of the employed IPs were engaged in agricultural activities. Majority of the male members of the IPs were in the AFF sector, while female members were engaged in non-gainful activities. In the real current situations of the ICCs/ IPs, family farming is their main occupation based on their ancestral domains but were marginalized in terms of support from all stakeholders especially from the government that led to their massive poverty situation. The enactment of Republic Act 8371, commonly known as the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) in 1997, brought hope among the IPs in the Philippines. The IPRA, which sets out the legal framework for indigenous peoples’ rights, was supposed to usher in a new era of development and protect their rights to their ancestral lands, and ensure their economic, social and cultural well-being. While there is an 18 percent accomplishment rate for issuance of Certificates of Ancestral Domain Titles (CADTs) to IPs, the long-term benefits of the issued tenure instruments or titles on indigenous communities is uncertain. Notably, poverty incidence in the uplands where the majority of the IPs reside is still very high. Twenty-three years hence, IPs still suffer the same problems and development barriers prior to the passing of IPRA. Securing land rights remains elusive. First, the burdensome land titling process does not work well. In particular, there are concerns on how to resolve the bottlenecks in the approval of applications and in the registration of the CADTs as well as the pressure being made to bear on IPs in the light of the aggressive promotion of mining and other extractive industries in ancestral lands. Second, in recent years, while the NCIP has already approved a number of CADTs, these could not yet be granted and awarded to the indigenous communities, unless these are first duly registered with the Land Registration Authority (LRA). This is a direct result of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the NCIP and the LRA which stipulates such conditions. Third, farmers, through CARP, can access support services and facilities but not IP groups. Fourth, actual access and control of IP communities over their ancestral domains are also heavily threatened by foreign or local land investments; extractive industries, such as mining, quarrying, logging; other land ownership programs; private land claims; and local government expropriation, among others. 17 Women in the AFF Sector Women play a vital role in the growth of the AFF sector primarily because 14.3 percent of the country’s employed females are in the agriculture sector. This translated to over 2.2 million women in 2018. Citing a 2012 data from PSA, around 2.3 million women are engaged in agricultural activity and 87 percent of this number owned their lands. In comparison, more men are employed by the agriculture sector with 30.5 percent of the total workforce of the country. In terms of wages, disparity is apparent as women usually earn lower than men. In fact, the daily nominal wage rate of women in agriculture is only at Php 304.60 compared with the Php 335.00 earned by men based on the 2019 data by PSA. Aside from these economic inequalities, women are also faced with other issues and threats. According to a policy note published by the Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS), women’s development, to become productive members of the economy, is often hampered by tradition and norms where age-old roles are still assigned to them such as remaining in their homes to take care of their children (Dacuycuy, 2018). For ARBs, the Magna Carta of Women states that “equal treatment shall be given to women and men beneficiaries of the agrarian reform program, wherein the vested right of a woman ARB is defined by a woman’s relationship to tillage or her direct and indirect contribution to the development of the land.” It is further noted that the DAR in its Administrative Order 1, series of 2011 defines rural women’s work as both direct PHOTO BY: ATI ISD 18 and indirect (productive and reproductive) contribution to tillage – a) direct tilling/ farming, e.g. land preparation, planting, weeding, fertilizer application, harvesting etc.; b) reproductive work in the farms, e.g. food preparation for the farmworkers; c) indirect work for the farm, e.g. accessing of capital and farm equipment, hiring of labor, organizational participation; d) reproductive work in the farming households, i.e. taking care of the children and other household chores; and e) food subsistence work, e.g., vegetable and livestock raising; securing water and fuel. However, according to the 2018 PSA data, most employed or engaged women in the agriculture sector were assigned mostly in five major production activities which include pulling and bundling of seedlings, cutting of planting materials, planting or broadcasting, harvesting, and manual weeding. Activities that involved the use of machineries were almost if not always, given to men. In fisheries, according to FAO, women are assigned in fish-shrimp fry collection, fish marketing, mend fishing gears, pre-harvest, post-harvest activities, fish production (fish ponds, fish cages, fish pens, hatchery), fish processing (smoking, canning), preservation, handling packing. However, these productive activities do not translate to more income among women. According to the 2018 poverty statistics, poverty incidence among women was estimated at 16.6 percent. Women in BARMM, Zamboanga Peninsula and Caraga region were poorer with 61.7 percent, 32.6 percent, and 30.4 percent, respectively. Another gap is the lack of gender perspective or gender lens in the formulation of agricultural policies. One of the enacted laws is the CARP, which only consider the head of the family, who are usually men, for land reallocation. In addition, women and girls in rural communities remain to be underrepresented and undervalued, with their common experience of marginalization, gender-based violence, poverty, lack of access to basic services, and lack of control over productive resources. There is also an absence of disaggregated data on how women benefit from the farming industry and their actual contribution to aggregate farm production. This also results in the non-inclusion of women-farmers from the overall planning and implementation of government programs, projects, and support services. Their burden is made heavier with unpaid care work, which also hinders women to participate in the agriculture and fisheries sectors, and the impact of climate change and disasters, and war and conflict. Moreover, women are also threatened by the effects of climate change which makes it hard for them to delegate command to resources such as land, credit and information (Dacuycuy, 2018). Women farmers’ organizations have been formed nationwide by the government, farmers’ federations, and NGOs. The most pervasive are the Rural Improvement Clubs (RICs) supported by the DA. The broadest coalition of women farmers’ organizations in the country is the Pambansang Koalisyon ng mga Kababaihan sa Kanayunan (PKKK). The PKKK is involved in policy advocacy as well as membership capacity building. 19 P H O T O B Y : A T I IS D 20 P H O T O B Y : A T I IS D 21 Youth in the AFF Sector The aging population of Filipino farmers and fisherfolk is a major challenge in the AFF sector. Palis (2020) cited that the overall average age of farmers was 53 years old. Farming practices are not transferred or taught to the youth leading to increase in the knowledge and skills gap. One major reason was the farmers themselves, especially rice farmers, do not want their children to be like them, and would suggest their children to earn a college degree in urban areas or work overseas (Palis, 2020). It is in this condition that the youth fills an important role in continuously producing and improving the AFF sector. According to the 2012 census of agriculture and fisheries, 2.8 million youth were engaged in agriculture. The data range available is 15-34 years old but per Republic Act 8044 or the Youth in Nation-Building Act, the legal definition of youth in the Philippines is between 15-30 years old. In 2018, PSA estimated that the poverty incidence rate among the youth was at 14.7 percent or around 4.48 million lower than the 2015 data of 20.5 percent. Most of the poor youth were living in regions and rural areas where agriculture is a main source of income. In recent years, several laws, programs, and campaigns were passed and developed encouraging the youth to venture into agriculture or fisheries. One of these programs is the Agricultural Competitiveness Enhancement Fund-Grant-in-Aid in Higher Education Program (ACEF-GIAHEP) of the DA, which aims to attract the youth in taking up courses related to AFF and veterinary medicine. Parallel to this, the DA has been assisting 4-H Clubs, training young farmers to eventually take on leadership positions in existing farmers’ organizations. CSOs including farmers’ federations likewise have formed and are forming their respective young farmers’ organizations. Similarly, the DA through the ATI has been implementing programs, projects, and activities on professionalizing the youth in agriculture such as the Educational Assistance for the Youth (EAsY Agri), and Internship Program like the Young Filipino Farmers Training Program in Japan and the Filipino Young Farmers Internship Program in Taiwan. This is targeted to capable and deserving youth, particularly the children of smallholder farmers and fishers to pursue studies and professional careers in agri-fisheries. Moreover, there is also the Kapital Access for Youth Agripreneurs (KAYA) which gives financial opportunities to the youth in supporting their ventures. Existing Policies Republic Act 8435. Known as the Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act of 1997 or AFMA, Republic Act 8435 was passed into law to modernize the Philippine agriculture and fisheries sector to enhance their profitability and to become globally competitive in the world market. The goal is to ensure a “more equitable distribution of opportunities, income and wealth; a sustainable increase in the amount of goods and services produced by the nation for the benefit of the people; and an expanding productivity as the key to raising the quality of life for all, especially the underprivileged.” 22 National Food Policy. This will contain the government’s action plan or roadmap on how the country will achieve zero hunger by 2030. Further, this aims to ensure food security in the country by supporting farmers and fisherfolk through increasing their productivity and income. Landless Farmers and CARP, CARPER, Agrarian Reform Notice of Coverage Bill. Since 1988, a total of 4.79 million hectares of agricultural land have been covered and 2.84 million ARBs have received their Emancipation Patents or CLOAs under the CARP. However, the full implementation of CARP was discontinued when the issuance of Notice of Coverage (NOC), the first step to cover CARP-able landholdings, ended on June 20, 2014. FOs/CSOs support the pending legislation on CARPER or CARP Extension with Reforms to complete the land acquisition and distribution (LAD) and for the government to fully subsidize the amortization payments of ARBs. The issuance of tenure instruments, speedy resolution of agrarian reform cases, expansion of the ARB services to include housing, health insurance, education, transportation, among other services, and the review of the Local Government Code (Republic Act 7160), which authorizes LGUs to reclassify agricultural lands for other uses as stated in Section 20 of the Code are seen to improve the situations of landless family farmers. Sagip Saka Act of 2019. This is the Republic Act 11321, “An act instituting the farmers and fisherfolk enterprise development program of the DA” that aims to achieve sustainable modern agriculture and food security. The programs and initiatives intend to help the agricultural and fishing communities to reach their full potential, increasing farmers’ and fisherfolk’s income, and bridging gaps through public-private partnerships, thereby improving their quality of life. The Act shall strengthen the Farmers and Fisherfolk Enterprise Development Program through a comprehensive and holistic approach consolidating the roles of different government agencies involved in farmers and fisherfolk enterprise development, and intensifying the building of entrepreneurship culture among farming and fishing communities. Rice Farmers and Rice Tariffication Act. The Rice Tariffication law (RTL) or Republic Act 11203, which was enacted in March 2019, removed the quantitative restrictions (QRs) on rice imports, replaced with tariffs and allowed traders to import unlimited volumes at any time. The RTL removed almost all regulatory and trading functions of the National Food Authority (NFA) and limited it to buffer stocking. The RTL also created the Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund (RCEF) with Php 10 billion annual allocation for six years – with Php 5 billion allocated to rice farm machinery and equipment; Php 3 billion for rice seeds; Php 1 billion for expanded credit assistance; and Php 1 billion for rice extension services such as training for farmers. Based on the consultation with the FFO-CSOs, farmers and major stakeholders are disappointed on how the RCEF programs are being implemented, citing that the rice farmers suffered drastic losses during the first year of implementation of RTL. Such successive losses and increase in the farm gate prices of palay forced some farmers to abandon rice farming, putting at risk the country’s food security. Hence, they voiced out that the RTL needs further review specifically on the law’s effects 23 on the rice industry, farmers, farm workers and government employees of the NFA. Temporary safeguard measures of raising the effective tariff rate as provided by the law may need to be invoked to prevent the flood of cheap rice imports, and enable rice farmers to survive and adjust to the new tariff regime. Government needs to learn from the past food and economic crises and lead the country to building its resilience, sovereignty and food self-sufficiency as global shocks, pandemics and more emergencies are bound to happen because of environmental destruction and the worsening climate change problem. Indigenous Peoples and IPRA and ICCA. The landmark IPRA of 1997 aims to protect the right of IPs and their communities to self-determination, which is intrinsically linked to their right to exercise traditional self-governance within their ancestral lands and domains (e.g. forests, pastures, burial grounds) to ensure their economic, social, and cultural well-being. Proposed measures on the Indigenous Communities Conserved Territories and Areas (ICCA) Bill recommended a national ICCA registry, the creation of a process of documentation, recognition, inclusion of IPs’ rights in local government plans, the identification of penalties for prohibited acts within their territories, and the assurance of funds needed to manage them. Most importantly, the ICCA bill recognizes and empowers IPs as the primary guardians of the country’s biodiversity to put an end to the historical injustice and marginalization they continue to face. Fisheries Code and Related Bills on Small Fishers/Bantay-Dagat bills/FLAs/ Municipal Water Delineation. The 1998 Philippine Fisheries Code (Republic Act 8550) was enacted to protect the rights of municipal fisherfolk and provided for their preferential use to the 15-kilometer municipal waters. However, after 20 years, PHOTO BY: UNSPLASH/ KENNY ABELLA 24 only 7.2 percent of all municipal waters have been delineated, which clearly pointed to the urgent need to hasten the process through the issuance of local ordinances and mandated the National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA) as the final authority. In 2014, another law was enacted, Republic Act 10654, which amended the Philippine Fisheries Code to end rampant, illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing. This enabled the shift from open access to a sustainable fisheries management regime where strict regulations against destructive fishing practices would be strictly implemented. The continuing decline of fisheries productivity is brought about by the degradation of coastal habitats like coral reefs, mangrove and beach forests, and seagrass beds. Coconut Farmers and Coconut Farmers Trust Fund Bill. On February 26, 2021, President Rodrigo Duterte finally signed the Coconut Farmers and Industry Trust Fund Act, or the Republic Act No. 11524, that mandates the distribution of funds to various government agencies for their respective projects for coconut farmers. However, the said Act garnered more issues and concerns among the coconut farmers due to several provisions that are not favorable to the farmers’ interests. Magna Carta for Young Farmers Bill. The younger generation is leaving the rural areas, depleting the pool of potential family farmers and farmworkers. Farmers and fishers are getting too old for hard labor and their children are not keen on pursuing family farming for lack of interest or incentive. The proposed Magna Carta of Young P H O T O B Y : A T I IS D 25 Farmers Bill will recognize the aspirations of young women and men farmers and promote their roles and contributions to family farming. It aims to protect the rights of young farmers aged 15-40 years, establish programs for young farmers such as the agriculture-sensitive educational curriculum and broader scholarships for all agri-related courses, promote young farmers inherited land take-over schemes, and institutionalize young farmers’ representation in all agricultural policy-making bodies and other agencies. Land Conversion and National Land Use Act. Existing and key land use and resource management policies require a comprehensive review considering the possible overlapping and conflicting jurisdictions. There are some bills pending in the Congress whose objective is to put in place a national land use policy that shall end the current degradation of the country’s land resource and optimize balanced development. One is the proposed National Land Use Act (NALUA), which has been pending in Congress for more than two decades. NALUA aims to protect prime agricultural lands from conversion and promote the land use for ensuring food and water security, identifying safe areas for settlements, and using land sustainably. A related bill, the Agricultural Land Conversion Ban Act, aims to address the problem of shrinking agricultural lands due to rapid urbanization and population growth. Mining and Alternative Minerals Bil. CSOs have remained steadfast in urging Congress to repeal the 1995 Philippine Mining Act which led to the aggressive promotion of large-scale, environmentally destructive mining in the country. Financial and Technical Assistance Agreements (FTAAs) were embedded within the law allowing multinational companies to own 100 percent of mining rights. Likewise, generous tax incentives are provided through a tax and duty-free capital equipment imports, four-year income tax holiday, value-added tax exemption, and income tax deduction with accelerated depreciation. The recommendation is an Alternative Minerals Management Bill (AMMB) that has strict safeguards to uphold the rights of communities affected by mining and ensure the protection and conservation of the environment. As of July 2019, there were 707,077 hectares of mineralized lands or areas where there are mining operations. A moratorium on large-scale mining operations is also being demanded by CSOs. Proposed Policies and Measures Agriculture and fisheries development must be complemented with measures that will require the active participation of various stakeholders from the national, regional, provincial, up to the municipal level. Likewise, it is also important to ensure access to and allocation of a larger bulk of credit and insurance to farmers and fisherfolk from the different lending institutions. Creation of a Cabinet-level private- public sector oversight body will be important to curb agricultural smuggling and carry out effective agrarian reform for farmer-beneficiaries. In times of emergencies and pandemics such as the COVID-19, the LGUs are proposed to create a responsive community-based system (production, distribution, processing and recycling), enjoin every household to grow food, establish farmers’ markets or trading centers linking farmers more directly to consumers in the 26 barangays provided with logistical requirements, delivery systems, and marketing support for the producers. Upland Farming, Integrated Social Forestry (ISF), and Community-Based Forest Management Agreement (CBFMA). In the last few decades, the rapid rate of deforestation rate in the country is due to continued logging despite stringent environmental laws passed, urban infrastructure encroachments into forest lands, and population push into upland areas where the country’s remaining forest stands are found. A Forestry Resources Bill or an alternative sustainable forest management policy should be passed that veers away from production forests and logging, and ensures that next generations will benefit from healthy forests with a steady supply of food, medicine and shelter for wildlife, with community ownership and participatory processes. Community-based forest management systems must be connected to traditional practices of local communities who reside ‘in and around’ forests and are dependent on forests for their traditions, livelihood, food security and derive their identity, social, cultural and economic well-being and values out of forests. Human Rights and Land Rights. The 1987 Philippine Constitution acknowledges the rights of farmers and peasants to land, of fisherfolk to traditional fishing grounds, and of indigenous peoples to ancestral lands. More than one-third of the total land area of the country has been covered by distributive reforms but based on recent developments, this is at risk of being reversed through massive land grabbing and human rights violations. Land grabbing adversely affects the enjoyment of human rights, such as the right to farmland and property, the right to food through food insecurity and hunger, the right to housing through involuntary or forced evictions and deprivation of access to water and sanitation, the right to an adequate standard of living through loss of livelihood opportunities and means of subsistence, and the right to consultation and information of local communities. Several proposals on land and resource conflicts such as completing land and resource reform programs and ensuring tenure security for the rural poor, instituting an effective and efficient mechanism to resolve overlapping claims on land, ensuring the integrity of safeguard mechanisms that regulate land investments by integrating the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGP-BHR) in land and resource governance, among others have been put forward by CSOs/FOs (Quizon, A. et al, 2018). Existing Partnership Mechanisms Participation of farmers, indigenous peoples, and fisherfolks is mandated in the laws and pertinent mechanisms have been established accordingly, such as in agrarian reform programs at the national and local levels, as well as in other land governance mechanisms with existing task force and bilateral agreements. However, there has been no established partnership mechanism between coconut farmers’ associations/cooperatives and the PCA. Thus, it remains an advocacy of the Coconut Industry Reform Movement and KILUS Magniniyog to set up a local multi-stakeholder council focused on the development of coconut hubs in every coconut municipality. 27 P H O T O B Y : D A 28 Gaps and Challenges Recent societal and environmental conditions both locally and globally have been putting greater pressures towards strategic, sustainable, sufficient, and speedy improvement in the agricultural sector. This improvement entails a critical direction shift in family farming, which contributes to 80 percent of the world’s agricultural production. If today’s challenges remain unresolved, the Filipino small farmers, fishers, and upland dwellers will continuously be vulnerable to shocks and disruptions and will have limited opportunities to grow. The Filipino nation will continue to face the challenges of an aging farming population, with the youth not enticed to venture into agriculture, and grapple with threats on food security and social cohesion. Various stakeholders identified a wide range of interconnected challenges on family farming. This document enumerates these challenges, as gathered during the series of consultation sessions on family farming and as supported by various reference materials. The multi-dimensional problems faced by family farmers making them hungry, poor, and most vulnerable can be traced back to three underlying causes which need to be addressed urgently: Weak Governance. Weak governance characterized by elite capture of the executive, legislative, and judiciary branches and shrinking democratic spaces contribute to the weak implementation of existing asset reform laws and the absence of other measures and programs that are fundamental to empowering family farmers, in spite of the commitments of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. 29 Weak Citizenship. An estimated 80 percent of family farmers in the 10 million agriculture-fishery-forestry labor force do not belong to any operational family farmer organization. Since most of the services of the government are channeled to farmers’ organizations and not to individuals, eight million family farmers do not receive meaningful services from the government. Without strong family farmer associations and cooperatives in every municipality or city and good outreach and resource mobilization capacities, millions of family farmers especially women and young farmers will continue to be deprived of various government programs and projects, which are mostly unspent or are lost to corruption. Meanwhile, most of the two million family farmers who are members of operational family farmer organizations, will be receiving incomplete services from their respective organizations owing to great challenges on capacities. Most of the farmers’ organizations do not have paid professional managers and staff who are able to facilitate, prepare, and execute the necessary organization, business, and farm plans. Government agencies, farmers’ federations, and rural development organizations that are assisting these organizations are also challenged, having only a few hundreds of these personnel who are trained to do cooperative capacity building. This proves the need for further human resource support to serve all of the Filipino family farmers. Weak Partnerships. While many structures related to the participation of family farmers have already been established at the national and local levels such as the NAPC, the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council and Provincial Agrarian Reform Coordinating Committees (PARCCOMs), and the PCAF, meaningful and constructive engagement between government officials and family farmers are still limited due to various factors such as weak governance, weak citizenship, and the lack of human and financial resources that could make partnership platforms work. (see: GAA annual budget allocations to these agencies) A number of literatures cited some gaps and challenges faced by family farmers, which were verified through the various consultation sessions, to wit: Policies and Enabling Environment - There is no specific policy on family farming while the existing policies on agriculture need to be reviewed for possible duplication, complementation, and contradictions; and their impact, and monitoring and evaluation mechanisms managed and executed. - There are inconsistencies and gaps in the implementation of various government policies and programs due to several factors such as decentralized government system, lack of strict and consistent implementation guidelines, and the lack of interest from LGUs. - The political and institutional landscape needs to be strengthened to transition family farmers from subsistence to market-oriented and entrepreneurial economy by incentivizing the expansion of family farming. 30 - The bureaucratic red tapes related to government processes on procurement, accounting, audit, and support availment procedures are seen as tedious and complicated. - A number of agrarian reform concerns such as the unclear direction on the national agrarian reform program, slow and inefficient distribution of land, and economic viability of land distributed linked with land tenure, security, and conversion issues contribute to challenges faced by the family farmers. - There is a need for policies on competitive pricing of agricultural products, cost of inputs, agricultural trade, and national food systems management. - The policy making and budget allocations anchored on conflicting interests raise concerns. - There is a need to evaluate the possibility of setting baseline information such as income for farmers and fishers and review best practices from neighboring countries. National Agenda and Recognition on Family Farming - The objectives of the national agenda on family farming and the success indicators of each family farming intervention by various agencies and organizations are not clearly defined and cascaded. - Family farming interventions are not contextualized based on the food systems concept and approaches. - There is no systematic monitoring and evaluation of family farming initiatives. - Family farming is not recognized as a noble profession and the contributions of small farm families, upland dwellers, and fisherfolk are not properly acknowledged and accounted for. - There seems to be a conflicting or mismatched image of the farming sec- tor, specifically in relation to how agriculture and farming is taught to stu- dents. Research and Data Management - Although there is an overflow of data and research reports on family farming from different agencies and entities, these studies and information are not consolidated towards establishing a comprehensive national data on family farming. - There is no database of family farmers, which serve as basis for informed decision-making processes and program development. - The data gathering or research studies on family farming is challenging considering its resource requirements, duration, timeliness and applicability, stable source of funding, and the farmers’ mobility. 31 P H O T O B Y : A T I IS D 32 P H O T O B Y : D A 33 Social Inclusion and Gender Contextualization - The IPs, who have their own governance structures and ancestral domains, are not usually considered by various organizations in developing their agricultural programs. - The role and rights of women in family farming have not been recognized in many areas in the Philippines, with female farmers having lower income than the male farmers. - The training programs for family farmers become ineffective at times. The women attend the training sessions and are not able to apply the learning because the men are the ones working on the farms. - The participation of women in productive work is hindered by her unpaid care and domestic work tasked by the discriminative gender norms. - There is a limited involvement of the youth in planning and policy-making related to agriculture and family farming. Farmer Capacity Development and Upscaling - Most family farmers have insufficient knowledge on more profitable and sustainable farm management practices and technologies and their potential returns, resulting in the unwillingness to pursue innovations that combine new and traditional knowledge, skills, and attitude; unwillingness to venture into farm diversification, adherence to traditional farming approaches, proliferation of informal economies, low productivity, and inadequate profitability. - The Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) are not being implemented in family farms due to varying factors such as insufficient extension systems, irregular training and mentoring, and insufficient, if not lack of, funds. - The family farmers have limited access to the right information, inputs, climate-resilient technology, credit, and infrastructure such as access to production, post-harvest and processing equipment, machineries, and facilities. These hampers the economic opportunities and resilience of family farms. They also clamor for the provision of support services and timely capacity building programs. - The farmers need to be equipped with an entrepreneurial as opposed to a subsistence mindset, and be properly trained on value-adding, diversification, and digitalization. - The clustering and organization of farmers are seen to provide many benefits to farmers including the potential of upscaling their skills and opening up market opportunities. However, most family farmers are not yet part of farmer organizations and some lack the motivations to join the organized farmer groups. - Some farmers are not willing to join the formal organizations as this is deemed to be costly (e.g. time and money due to regular meetings, among others). 34 - The family farmers who are already part of farmer organizations find difficulty registering their groups to various government support programs and other possible assistance due to difficulties in fulfilling documentary and regulatory requirements. This can also be linked to tedious application processes and literacy problems. - Some family farmers are yet to claim ownership of their lands, which has long been delayed due to various factors. - The family farmers lack capital to venture into farm improvement activities and are mostly not familiar with various financial and credit assistance programs. If aware, they experience difficulties availing of the financial support due to the lack of requirements and complex regulations. - The farmers remain vulnerable to disasters, environmental shocks and hazards, and crises, including the current COVID19 pandemic. Aging Actors of the Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries - There is an increasing concern on the aging population and youth migration to urban areas. Farming is not deemed as profitable compared to employment. - There is a need to motivate the Filipino youth to go into farming through various interventions such as the passing of the Magna Carta for Young Farmers, encouraging the participation of youth and young professionals in policy-making activities, and the provision of access to support services, among others. Government Programs and Support - The government (national and local) programs and other assistance on family farming should be strategically planned to strike a balance between economic development and environmental sustainability and take into consideration the food systems approach. - Some government programs lack significant components such as information dissemination and marketing, and appropriate performance indicators related to family farming. The lack of success measures limits the programs from providing the intended equitable benefits to their respective target stakeholders. - Some agricultural programs have unclear implementation guidelines resulting in varied interpretation by the recipients of the documents issued. - There is a need to include the sustainability clauses during the conceptualization phase despite changes in administration to realize the originally intended project results, ensure the program’s sustainability, and proper turnover. - The government may look into providing appropriate family farm machineries and communal processing and post-harvest facilities, associated with constant monitoring by the LGUs and preferably, LGU subsidies to sustain the operation and maintenance of the equipment or machineries. 35 - There is limited expertise and technical support that can provide adequate agriculture mentoring and technical assistance to family farmers especially in the BARMM areas. - Some of the agricultural inputs and planting materials distributed have been reported to be uncertified and of low quality. - The timing and speed of distribution of farm inputs and planting materials should also be properly scheduled based on varying factors such as crop cycles. - The interventions on market access and transportation should be developed to help respond to the issues on dumping of agricultural produce (food losses and wastes), which in turn result to income losses. - The guidelines on the provision of insurance and incentives to family farmers should be assessed so they can easily be availed by family farmers, especially in times of calamities. - The documentary and regulatory requirements are suggested to be simplified and streamlined. The tedious process prevents many family farmers to avail of government programs and discourages the youth to venture into farming. - A digital infrastructure should be put in place, which will provide internet connectivity to rural areas. Peace, Security, and Order - The insurgencies and land conflicts in various areas in the Philippines disrupt farming activities. - There are also cases of recurring conflicts and displacements that affect farm families. Coordination and Partnerships - There is a lack or poor close coordination between CSOs and the government, particularly the legislative branch. - Productive partnerships among organizations, private entities, and the government are encouraged to allow interventions to be implemented properly. - There are cases wherein organizations are ‘red-tagged’ or labelled for being left-leaning, subversives, and communists. This sometimes prevents the ‘labelled’ organizations from taking part of collaborative projects and limits them from contributing productively to social progress interventions. Red tagging should be eliminated to promote equal opportunities for organizations to participate in family farming interventions. - There is a need to establish good working relationships between farmer groups and local project implementers for better and effective project implementation. - Programs on climate change adaptation and mitigation and control are fragmented. 36 Part 2. Philippine Action Plan for Family Farming The Crafting of the 10-year PAP4FF PAP4FF is a product of a multi-stakeholder engagement with the strong presence and participation of key representatives from NGAs, NGOs, CSOs, family farmers organizations (FFOs), academic and research institutions, tracing the United Nations International Year of Family Farming (IYFF) in 2014 as a significant milestone. The Philippines, through a joint advocacy among farmers’ federations, CSOs, and the DA, initiated the draft UN Resolution in 2012, eventually succeeding to get a UN Declaration for the IYFF in 2014. As a member of the ISC for the IYFF, the Philippines eventually hosted the closing ceremony of the IYFF celebration on November 26, 2014. In 2019, the Philippines as well as the Asian Farmers Association became members of the UNDFF’s ISC, the main governing body that oversees the development and implementation of the UNDFF. Prior to 2014, there were intermittent national conferences tackling different themes on family farming either initiated by the government, farmers’ federations, or NGOs but seldom jointly organized. One of which was the annual Knowledge and Learning Market (KLM) convened by IFAD Philippines and attended by its portfolio partners from government and civil society since 2006. The KLM, later renamed as “Knowledge and Learning Market-Policy Engagement (KLMPE): IYFF,” to focus on the best practices and policy proposals on family farming. This event was also instrumental in ratifying a joint FO-CSO Declaration, which was received formally by the Philippine Government. The KLMPE also yielded three books on family farming best practices and a compilation of scores of policy briefs and proposals. In 2017, the institutions jointly managing the annual KLMPE Conferences formally called themselves the ARDKPP TWG, and was recognized by the World Rural Forum, as the National Committee on Family Farming (NCFF) in the Philippines from 2017-2018. Then UNDFF global implementation in the Philippines started in 2019. Also in the same year, KLMPE, attended by 300 participants from various farmer organizations and CSOs, produced a declaration localizing the UNDFF targets and indicative actions. To officially carry on with the initiatives on family farming, Agriculture Secretary William D. Dar designated the DA-ATI as the chair for the NCFF per Special Order nos. 792 and 546, series of 2019 and 2020 respectively. The DA-ATI led by OIC- Director Dr. Rosana P. Mula, along with other stakeholders also participated in two regional (Asia-Pacific) workshops held in October 2020 to learn about various best practices on the UNDFF national action planning. 37 In view of this, the DA-ATI, with support from the moderators from the Philippine Partnership for Sustainable Agriculture (PPSA), initiated a multi-stakeholder series of consultation meetings to formulate the 10-year action plan on family farming – the PAP4FF. The consultation meetings gathered representatives from various government agencies, SUCs, research and development organizations, FFOs, NGOs, youth and volunteer groups. Another multi-stakeholder conference was also convened by the Pambansang Kilusan ng mga Samahang Magsasaka (PAKISAMA) on behalf of the ARDKPP to provide updates on the implementation of the UNDFF at the global, regional, and national levels, and help refine its proposed action agenda. On February 11, 2021 through a virtual conference, the DA-ATI presented the PAP4FF to selected legislators from the legislative and executive branches of the Philippine Government, with observers selected from the participants of the multi-stakeholder consultation meetings. P H O T O B Y : A T I IS D 38 Theory of Change The PAP4FF advances the Theory of Change (ToC) framework that if policies and programs are supportive (Good Governance), family farmers and their institutions (People) are strengthened to exercise their role as responsive citizens (Good Citizenship). Hence, all shall be engaged in a partnership platform (Partnerships) to work in synergy (Constructive Engagement), then hunger and poverty among Filipino farmers would end by 2028. The PAP4FF highlights three components based on this ToC: • An Overarching Goal which prioritizes two of the 17 SDGs (SDG 1 and 2) aimed to mobilize the whole of nation, government, and civil society, to end poverty and hunger among family farmers by 2028; with the vision that those who produce food for the entire nation will no longer suffer hunger and poverty. • Three Strategic Action Areas: Enabling Policy Environment, Organized Family Farmers, and Functional Multi-stakeholder Partnerships aimed to address the root causes of problems facing family farmers. • Seven Focus Areas or Key Result Areas with performance indicators to ensure clarity of purpose. The annual targets and baseline data will be established in the coming months. A multi-stakeholder implementing structure at the national, regional, and city/municipal levels will be established to ensure unity in action building on existing structures. A detailed Monitoring and Evaluation, Risk Management, Communications, and Sustainability Plans will also be developed following the approval of the PAP4FF. Definition and Concept of Family Farming in the Philippines The FAO-UN developed a definition of family farming based on the global narrative and situation of farm families. The definition was created for the IYFF declared in 2014 which reads: Family Farming (including all family-based agricultural activities) is a means of organizing agricultural, forestry, fisheries, pastoral and aquaculture production that is managed and operated by a family, and is predominantly reliant on the family labour, including women. The family and the farm are linked, co-evolve, and combine economic, environmental, social, and cultural functions. 39 This existing definition was agreed to be adopted by the stakeholders consulted in the crafting of the PAP4FF. They acknowledged that this definition has passed through a thorough review, and based on the empirical research of the FAO. Moreover, the family farming concept was already captured by the definition highlighting that productions are managed by a family and recognizing the encompassing economic, environmental, social, and cultural considerations. To contextualize the concept of family farming in the Philippines, the stakeholders agreed on the proposed definition stated below: Family Farming is a means of organizing and managing agricultural, forestry, fisheries, pastoral, and aquaculture production which is managed and operated by a family, and predominantly reliant on family labor, including women. The family and the farm are linked, co-evolve, and combine economic, environmental, reproductive, social, and cultural functions. In the Philippines, the concept of family farming is culture-based and family- managed that highlights the significant roles and needs of family farmers, IPs, small fishers, women, and the youth; the support to the transformation of family farming tenants and farmworkers into owner-cultivators based on existing asset reform laws, the government’s thrust of clustering into production groups; and its contribution to sustainable management of land, soil, and water resources towards the achievement of just, inclusive, and sustainable development. The above concept was developed based on the context and parameters in identifying family farming in the Philippines raised by the stakeholders. These identifying parameters can be summarized in four major aspects: composition, ownership, orientation and culture-based management, and land size. Composition - Family farming is composed of a single or extended family; a household mostly of small-scale farmers, fishers, IPs, and upland dwellers. - Reliant on family members’ labor in food production, processing, and distribution. - It is inclusive of all labor force in the farming systems where women and the youth play significant roles that need particular attention. Ownership - It is owned, inherited, verbally-acquired or any manner of acquisition or ownership; legitimate owners or tenants. - The ARBs are part of family farming. - Ancestral domains of the IPs are included as family farms; where traditional farming approaches are considered and where communal farms with more than five hectares are acknowledged. 40 Orientation and Culture-based Management - The family farmers manage the agricultural production and other farm forestry or fishing activities based on their distinct culture/indigenous knowledge systems and practices. - It is composed of smallholder farmers operating to become entrepreneurial or market-oriented or a family enterprise. - Each family member plays significant roles that allow the management of the small farm business. Land size - All family farmers are included, regardless of their land size. - Family farming prioritizes smallholder farmers, upland dwellers, and fisherfolk. Smallholder farmers in the Philippines cultivate and own land of not more than five hectares based on the existing laws. P H O T O B Y : A T I R T C 1 2 41 Family Farming Conceptual Framework 42 Family Farming Logical Framework The pillars of the 10-Year PAP4FF are aligned with the UNDFF Global Action Pillars, the PDP, and the DA’s eight Paradigms of the New Thinking for Agriculture, and also aimed to accelerate the achievement of SDGs. These pillars were structured and validated based on the results of the consultations, which formed part of the PAP4FF conceptual framework. This logical framework summarizes and describes the overall goal (outcome), the pillars (results), the performance indicators of each pillar, and the baseline and targets by 2028. Establishing more accurate baseline and yearly targets and activities will be done by the NSC. This framework shall serve as reference for the committees and task forces in developing the communications plan and mapping out the monitoring and evaluation mechanisms. Indicative targets of the identified indicators will be determined upon completion of the baseline study. Description Performance Indicator* Overarching Goal Zero hunger among family farmers; Zero poverty among family farmers Adequate Nutrition Resource Tenure Security- Land, Fisheries, Ancestral Domain Tenure Improved productivity, competitiveness, and resilience of Filipino family farmers, fishers, and upland dwellers characterized by secured land and resource tenure, increased productivity of soil and water resources, food self-sufficiency, and well-being for all at all ages (Masaganang Ani, Mataas na Kita, at Marangal na Buhay ng Pamilyang Magsasaka) By 2028: - Percentage increase of family farmers’ adoption of sustainable agricultural technologies - Percentage increase of family farmers producing demand-driven products - Percentage increase of family farmers turned to agripreneurs from subsistence farming - Percentage increase of family farmers’ yield - Percentage increase of family farmers’ income or family farming income increased by 50% in 2028 or at least 5% increase annually of family farmers’ income; with baseline income set at the national level - Percentage reduction in hunger incidence among family farmers - Percentage reduction of malnutrition among family farmers 43 Description Performance Indicator - Percentage reduction of poverty incidence among family farmers - Percentage increase of family farmers with social protection Pillar 1: Enabling policy and program environment Effectively implement the Philippine Action Plan on Family Farming enabled by an evidence- based policy environment, institutional landscape, and effective and humane governance - Number of Laws and Policies enacted contributing to family farming - Number of impact assessment conducted/funded on existing laws and policies related to family farming - Number of laws related to family farming reviewed and fully implemented Pillar 2: Generational Renewal and Sustainability Ensure generational sustainability of family farming through active and assertive programs that target youth engagement and awareness on family farming- related initiatives - Percentage increase of Filipino youth professionals participating in the Bayanihan Agri Clusters - Decrease in the average age of Filipino farmers from 58 years old to 55 years’ old - Increased number of young farmers aged 18 to 30 - Percentage increase of Filipino students taking up AFF-related courses - Increased number of 4-H clubs and other young farmers’ organizations - Number of new programs developed to ensure participation of young farmers in rural development Pillar 3: Gender Equity and Empowerment Achieve gender equity in family farming and promote women farmer empowerment - Percentage increase of women farmers and fishers as members of farmer cooperatives and associations - Increase access of women farmers and fishers to information services and credit facilities - Equal wage rate among men and women family farmers 44 Description Performance Indicator - Increased number of RICs and other women farmers’ and fishers’ organizations - Percentage increase of women farmers listed as beneficiaries of CARP - Percentage increase of women farmers/fishers listed in RSBSA, PCA, and BFAR profiling, etc. - Percentage increase of leadership role of women in FFOs/FCAs Pillar 4: Strengthened Family Farmer Organizations Empower family farmers through the organization of farmers into groups, strengthening FFOs, and implementing capacity development programs - Percentage increase of family farmers who are members of an organized group or Bayanihan Agri Clusters - Percentage increase of family farmers’ organization with professional managers - Percentage increase of FFOs/FCAs - Percentage increase of youth and women participation in FFOs/FCAs - Percentage increase of family farmers’ organizations recognized/ accredited in formal governance structures Pillar 5: Socio- Economic Inclusion, Resilience, and Holistic Development Improve socio-economic inclusion, resilience, and wellbeing of family farmers, rural households, and communities - Percentage increase of organized groups/FCAs/FFOs with access to crop insurance - Percentage increase of organized groups/FCAs/FFOs with access to life and health insurance - Percentage increase of organized groups/FCAs/FFOs with access to financing for production and post- harvest - Percentage increase of IPs, PWDs, senior citizen family farmers and fishers as members of organized groups/FCAs/FFOs - Percentage increase of organized groups/FCAs/FFOs with access to basic support services such as decent housing, education, information, heath facilities, roads, etc. 45 Description Performance Indicator - Percentage increase of organized groups/FCAs/FFOs linked to direct consumers/institutional buyers Pillar 6: Sustainability and Climate-resiliency of Food Systems Enhanced sustainability of family farming for climate-resilient food systems through family farming modernization and digitalization - Percentage increase of organized groups/FCAs/FFOs adopting Sustainable Land Management(SLM)/ Integrated, Diversified, Organic Farming System (IDOFS) - Percentage increase of organized groups who are involved in the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems and their services, in particular forests, wetlands, mountains, and drylands - Percentage increase of organized groups/FCAs/FFOs who have direct link to local consumers - Percentage increase of barangays with nutritious food centers/ terminals directly sourced from local organized groups/FCAs/FFOs - Percentage increase of family farmers, fishers, and upland dwellers adopting modernized, digitized, and climate-resilient technologies Pillar 7: Enhanced Multifunctional Roles of Farm Families Strengthen multi-stakeholders partnerships - Percentage increase of organized groups/FCA/FFOs engaged in natural resource conservation and management, and the preservation of culture - Percentage increase of organized groups/FCAs/FFOs engaged in AFF tourism - Percentage increase of family farmer earning from payment of ecosystem services - Number of functional partnership mechanisms with active participation of FFOs in governance and implementation 46 To achieve these, three integrated strategic action areas will be pursued. 1. POLICY and PROGRAM. This refers to the enabling policy and program environment that will be in place to support the growth of family farmers and their well-being in the Philippines. The implementation of the 10- year PAP4FF will be enabled by an evidence-based policy environment, institutional landscape, and effective and humane governance. 2. PEOPLE. Family farmers, organizations and their communities, which include the youth and women are organized, grouped, and empowered as change agents who are able to reach their full capacity, achieve resilience and prosperity, and become ambassadors of environmental and social sustainability. 3. PARTNERSHIPS. Effective, inclusive, sustainable, and transformational multi-stakeholder partnerships are forged and managed at the national and local levels, with the strategic direction from the NCFF, and its cross-cutting committees and task forces. Pillars, Indicative Actions, and Success Metrics The strategic action areas of Policy and Program, People, and Partnerships have been contextualized to identify concrete next steps based on the seven pillars of the PAP4FF, with corresponding key performance indicators for the specific activities, program implementation, and monitoring and evaluation. PILLAR 1: Enabling Policy and Program Environment • Responds to Global Action Pillar 1: Develop enabling policy environment to strengthen family farming • Aligns with the New Thinking for Agriculture Paradigms: Roadmap Development (6), Higher Budget and More Investments (7), and Legislative Support (8) • Supports SDGs; No Poverty (1), Zero Hunger (2), Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions (16), and Partnerships for the Goals (17) Given the dynamic nature of the local and global socio-economic and environmental conditions, these key elements of a healthy and responsive society must move in sync towards reaching a state where no Filipino family farmer is hungry, vulnerable, and dissatisfied. This direction calls for a strong political commitment, effective legislative frameworks, and good governance that will mobilize all of the planned interventions. These are deemed to enhance investments and synergies among the NGAs and the LGUs. Thus, it is also imperative to create clear and appropriate family farming indicators, and tools for assessment and analytics that will guide the research efforts, policy formulation and review, and program development. Adequate and acceptable policy 47 and legislation that transform family farms into active and prosperous society members will keep family farmers motivated and engaged, empowering them to own their farms’ profitability and families’ development. These, in turn, may allow the key stakeholders to demonstrate positive behavior that promote resilience and foster a supportive environment where agriculture and food security are protected. Further, a need to promote continuous multi-actor dialogue is vital to build coherent and active political commitment with appropriate financing for the implementation of programs, projects, and activities for family farming. The availability of harmonized, relevant, gender-disaggregated, and area-specific data on family farmers packaged into a comprehensive database will allow the government to conduct inclusive and participatory policy reviews, law enhancements, and strict implementation. Apart from the research data and explicit knowledge, there is an emerging need to manage implicit knowledge from the Filipino farmers and other family farming stakeholders to gain deeper understanding of the challenges and opportunities both at the community level and its enabling environment. Thus, the need to regularly conduct dialogues. While policy reviews and enhancements will be done at the national level, the adaptability, responsiveness, openness, and engagement at the provincial, municipal, and community levels are required for family farming interventions to be appropriate and sustainable. There should be constructive bottom-up rigorous exchanges of evidence-based inputs, wide adoption of the family farming strategic framework, and ownership and delineation of roles and accountabilities towards the efficient achievement of national family farming goals. P H O T O B Y : A T I IS D 48 Ultimately, this pillar stresses that national family farming programs can only be effective with a strategic institutional landscape, an enabling policy environment grounded by relevant and timely data, and engaged committees that adhere to the shared decade goal on family farming in the Philippines. Specifically, the following are proposed based on the series of consultation sessions: • Enactment of national legislations such as National Land Use Act, the Magna Carta of Young Farmers, the Magna Carta on Informal Economy, the Indigenous Communities Conservation Act (ICCA), Alternative Minerals and Management Act, Agri COOP Act, and the Family Farmers’ Act. • Full implementation of laws such as: CARP, Fisheries Code, IPRA, Magna Carta of Women, Amended Organic Agriculture Act, AFMA, the Coconut Farmers and Industry Trust Fund, and the Sagip Saka Act. • Review of the provisions and implementations of RCEF under the Rice Tariffication and APECO Law. • Formulation, review, and/or strict implementation of related policies based on consultation sessions: RCEF, Sagip Saka Act, Organic Agriculture Act, RSBSA, End Local Communist Armed Conflict, Survival and Recovery Assistance Program for Rice Farmers, KAYA, and National Soil Health Program. • Conduct of necessary research towards proposing a baseline information such as income for family farmers and fishers among others. PILLAR 2: Generational Renewal and Sustainability • Responds to Global Action Pillar 2: Support youth and ensure the generational sustainability of family farming • Aligns with the New Thinking for Agriculture Paradigms: Modernization (1) and Industrialization (2) • Contributes to SDGs: No Poverty (1), Quality Education (4), Decent Work and Economic Growth (8), and Justice and Strong Institutions (16) This focus area takes into account the different factors affecting the young generation’s perspectives towards farming and fishing as a viable profession. Hence, possible interventions are listed to entice them to go into family farming, and recognize the AFF sector as a viable profession with a lot of opportunities for innovations. First, coherent policies that address youth migration, support socio-economic diversifications in the rural areas, and improve the generational turnover of farm assets should be put in place to prevent the youth from moving to the urban areas or outside of the country. Incentives for the young professionals who invest in family farming are also seen to entice the youth due to the possible additional financial support for their farm management and upscaling plans. 49 The youth in general should also be empowered by providing opportunities to take part in consultation sessions and knowledge exchange activities related to family farming, policy development, decision-making activities, program development, responsible investments in agriculture and food systems, various capacity development programs, and leadership roles in farmer organizations and advocacy groups, among others. A massive communication and awareness campaign, which would lead the education sector to take steps in integrating family farming and food systems in the education curriculum in primary, secondary, and tertiary levels is also a key indicative action that will support the youth and ensure generational sustainability of family farming. Likewise, provision of non-formal trainings will be a strategic action for the continuous empowerment of young farmers. However, various groups emphasize that while the interventions to engage the youth in family farming become more aggressive, youth and child rights should continue to be prioritized to enable the young farmers to finish their education, improve their capacities on innovation practices interconnecting local practices knowledge with new solutions, and protect their welfare and safety. To ensure the generational sustainability of family farming, active and assertive programs shall be implemented to target the awareness and engagement of young farmers on family farming-related initiatives. An increase in the number of Filipino youth professionals participating in the Bayanihan Agri Clusters is envisioned to result to a decrease in the average age of Filipino farmers by at least three years and an increase in the number of young farmers aged 18 to 30. This pillar also targets the increase in the number of Filipino students taking up AFF-related courses and the number of 4-H clubs and other young farmer organizations. PILLAR 3: Gender Equity and Empowerment • Responds to Global Action Pillar 3: Promote gender equity in family farming and rural women leadership role • Aligns with all of the eight Paradigms of the New Thinking for Agriculture: Modernization (1), Industrialization (2), Export Promotion (3), Farm Consolidation (4), Infrastructure Development (5), Roadmap Development (6), Higher Budget and More Investments (7), and Legislative Support (8) • Contributes to SDGs: No Poverty (1), Zero Hunger (2), Good Health and Well-Being (3), Quality Education (4), Gender Equality (5), Clean Water and Sanitation (6), Affordable and Clean Energy (7), Decent Work and Economic Growth (8), Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure (9), Reduced Inequalities (10), Sustainable Cities and Communities (11), Responsible Consumption and Production (12), Climate Action (13), Life below Water (14), Life on Land (15), Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions (16), and Partnership for the Goals (17) The roles, needs, and contributions of women are oftentimes not recognized and accounted for, especially in the rural areas, which worsens the inequalities and exacerbates the challenges being faced by the country’s agriculture sector. However, 50 for sustainable development and equitable economy to be achieved, gender equality, social inclusion, and human capital development should be promoted and widely recognized in a society and incorporated in programs and investments. Addressing the gender gaps can potentially provide a wide array of project and institutional returns including the increase in income and productivity, and upliftment of the well- being and dignity of the women farmers. To unlock the potentials for a more sustainable and inclusive impact and greater contributions of women in socio-economic development, this focus area enumerates indicative actions highlighting the role of women in family farming ventures. Specifically, this pillar aims to significantly increase the percentage of women farmers listed as beneficiaries of the CARP, as well as of women farmers and fishers who are members of farmer cooperatives and associations. Moreover, specific activities will be implemented to increase the percentage of women farmers and fishers listed in the various databases and registries of the government agencies such as the PCA and DAR. This pillar also targets to increase the access of women farmer and fishers to information services and credit facilities, and the number of RICs and other women farmer organizations; and establish an equal wage rate among men and women family farmers. P H O T O B Y : A T I R T C 1 2 51 PILLAR 4: Strengthened Family Farmer Organizations • Responds to Global Action Pillar 4: Strengthen family farmers’ organizations and their capacities to generate knowledge, represent farmers’ concerns and to provide inclusive services in rural areas • Aligns with New Thinking for Agriculture Paradigms: Modernization (1), Industrialization (2), Promotion of Exports (3), and Farm Consolidation (4) • Contributes to SDGs: No Poverty (1), Zero Hunger (2), Quality Education (4), Gender Equality (5), Clean Water and Sanitation (6), Affordable and Clean Energy (7), Reduced Inequalities (10), Sustainable Cities and Communities (11), Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions (16), and Partnership for the Goals (17) Given the dynamism of the development landscape, increasing market competition, and unpredictability of consumer demand and behavior, family farmers need further support to help them adapt to all of these changes. This focus area thus emphasizes interventions on organizing farmers into profitable and vigorous farmer organizations, strengthening existing and upcoming farmer organizations, and building their capacities to become prosperous market players and leaders of not only their respective households, their groups and affiliations, but as well as their communities. P H O T O B Y : D A 52 The indicative actions highlight the need for strengthened governance and organizational capacities of the national and local government agencies, and FFOs towards the provision of capacity building and training programs, and the conduct of knowledge generation and sharing activities. The initiatives also give value to the conduct of further research studies on successful family farm models that can be scaled up and/or replicated towards helping farmers increase their yield and income. The need for more collective actions to motivate farmers to build their capacities and work towards their and their family farms’ development shall form part of this focus area. Concretely, this pillar will push for the empowerment of family farmers by developing Information, Education and Communication (IEC) materials and implementing systematic capacity building programs for FFOs, eventually increasing the percentage number of membership in FFOs. Through the activities of this pillar, all FFOs who thrived for the past years shall be trained on organizational and professional management. This pillar also targets a percentage increase of FFOs/ FCAs, and a percentage increase in youth and women participation in FCAs. PILLAR 5: Socio-Economic Inclusion, Resilience, and Holistic Development • Responds to Global Action Pillar 5: Improve socio-economic inclusion, resilience and well-being of family farmers, rural households and communities • Aligns with all of the eight Paradigms of the New Thinking for Agriculture: Modernization (1), Industrialization (2), Export Promotion (3), Farm Consolidation (4), Infrastructure Development (5), Roadmap Development (6), Higher Budget and More Investments (7), and Legislative Support (8) • Contributes to SDGs: No Poverty (1), Zero Hunger (2), Gender Equality (5), Decent Work and Economic Growth (8), Sustainable Cities and Communities (11), Responsible Consumption and Production (12), Life below Water (14), Life on Land (15), Peace, and Justice and Strong Institutions (16) The sustainability of family farming interventions can be achieved if these interventions are implemented along social inclusion and poverty reduction strategies. Without the access to basic support services, family farmers will continuously be restricted by inequality and a subsistence mindset as their goal would be to get by and help their families survive each day. This focus area puts value to two separate but equally important agenda: 1) Recognizing the contributions and needs of culture-based groups - prioritizing support for the IP farming communities, and 2) Strengthening the resilience and overall development of family farmers in the Philippines, including youth, women, IPs, fishers, among others. 53 P H O T O B Y : D A 54 The first agenda aims to recognize and support the existing resilient and sustainable IKSPs of ICCs/IPs on family farming then actively engage them in national economic development through increased societal recognition of their contributions and labor; comprehensive and dedicated policies incentivizing IP communities and guaranteeing their access to social rights, education, financial mechanisms, natural resources, health, and social protection; and knowledge generation and sharing activities on culture-based family farming practices. The second agenda promotes an enhanced standard of living of family farmers through the access to social protection systems, basic services, and financial assistance; implementation of policies related to access and rights to land and other natural resources; and building the capacities of the family farmers to climate- related risks, especially those in more vulnerable areas, and to economic, social, and environmental shocks. The logical framework of the 10-year Philippine Action Plan presents verifiable indicators under this pillar. This includes the access to crop, life, and health insurance coverages and to financing of all family farmers by 2028; 50 percent of family farmers has access to basic support services such as decent housing, education, information, heath facilities, and roads, among others; and 80 percent of family farmers have been linked with direct consumers and/or institutional buyers. PILLAR 6: Sustainability and Climate-Resiliency of Food Systems • Responds to Global Action Pillars 6: Promote sustainability of family farming for climate-resilient food systems • Aligns with all of the eight Paradigms of the New Thinking for Agriculture: Modernization (1), Industrialization (2), Export Promotion (3), Farm Consolidation (4), Infrastructure Development (5), Roadmap Development (6), Higher Budget and More Investments (7), and Legislative Support (8) • Contributes to Sustainable Development Goals: No Poverty (1), Climate Action (13), Life below Water (14), and Life on Land (15) As socio-economic and environmental challenges and disruptions become more and more complicated, there is an urgent need to explore various innovations that are adaptable and responsive to these unpredictable concerns. Apart from promoting the wide access and adoption of climate-smart technologies, a strong and effective digital infrastructure is seen as a critical enabler that will open opportunities for scaling up, modernization, market access, and responsible agricultural investments. Once modernized and farms become attractive for investments, the potential for growth of family farmers increases along with their increased productivity, efficiency, profitability; and increased resilience or ability to adapt to various difficult situations. This focus area promotes an increased knowledge and adoption of sustainable modernization approaches and digitalization techniques, and the family farmers transition to sustainable agricultural practices. It also outlines the need for further government support in terms of provision of family farming facilities and equipment 55 and credit and financial services, interventions to reduce food loss, food waste, and carbon emissions, and the establishment of a digital infrastructure for agriculture. The indicative actions under this pillar is expected to result to an increase in the proportion of family farmers who adopt the practices of SLM and IDOFS; a 50-percent increase in the number of family farmers directly linked with local consumers; 80 percent of barangays in the country has nutritious Food Centers where products are directly sourced from the local family farmers; and 50 percent of family farmers, fishers, and upland dwellers have already adopted modernized, digitized, and climate-resilient technologies. PILLAR 7: Enhanced Multifunctional Roles of Farm Families • Respond to Global Action Pillar 7: Strengthen the multi-dimensionality of family farming for social innovations contributing to territorial development and food systems that safeguard biodiversity, environment and culture • Aligns with all of the eight Paradigms of the New Thinking for Agriculture: Modernization (1), Industrialization (2), Export Promotion (3), Farm Consolidation (4), Infrastructure Development (5), Roadmap Development (6), Higher Budget and More Investments (7), and Legislative Support (8) • Contributes to SDGs: Partnerships for the Goals (17) The FFOs play various roles apart from their management and conduct of farm activities, including their multi-functional roles as change agents, tourism enabler, and even environment protection advocates. It takes the whole-of-society approach to lift up the morale and dignity, growth of the Filipino family farmers whose hard work, commitment, sacrifices, and contributions significantly supports agricultural development and food security. There is a need for concerted efforts of empowered organizations who are committed to reaching the decade goal for family farming and passionate towards helping Filipino farmers achieve their fullest potentials. This pillar aims to forge and maintain effective, inclusive, innovative, sustainable, and transformative partnerships through policies and institutional arrangements, learning exchange activities, and advocacy campaigns. The creation and mobilization of various committees and advocacy groups is also important in managing these partnerships and facilitating all of the family farming interventions, ensuring that all of the efforts contribute to the agreed decade goal on family farming. Organizing multi-stakeholder partnership mechanisms at the national level is critical. These mechanisms must be cascaded at the regional, provincial, and municipal levels to build and scale-up partnership platforms. To do this, this pillar recognizes the role of various organizations from both the public and private sectors, including CSOs and FFOs as key players from the conceptualization to the monitoring and evaluation of any family farming-related activity. 56 Implementation and Coordination Arrangements of the NCFF PAP4FF recognizes the role of various organizations, entities, and institutions from its crafting to implementation. In sealing their roles and contributions, NCFF was created to oversee the implementation of the proposed actions, review the document to align to the changing landscape of the agriculture and fisheries sector or monitor and evaluate the projects that will be created thereafter. To ensure a participatory approach, the current structure of the NCFF shall be enhanced to include other sectors who play critical roles in this endeavor. The NCFF shall be composed of the following committees and shall deliver the following responsibilities: • NSC – The NSC shall be responsible for overseeing and providing strategic directions, and deciding on important matters for the adoption and implementation of the PAP4FF. It is the highest policy-making body of the PAP4FF. 57 The NSC shall be chaired by the President of the Republic of the Philippines, together with a designated Alternate from the National Focal Agency – the DA. NGAs such as the DAR, DENR, DILG, DSWD, NCIP, PCW, DTI, and other concerned offices shall also compose the NSC. Two representatives each from CSOs/NGOs, farmer groups, women organizations, IP organizations, fisherfolk organizations, youth organizations, academe/research institutions, financial institutions, and international organizations shall complete the composition of the NSC. • NTWG – The Technical Working Group at the national level shall facilitate the interventions and programs and develop targets for the PAP4FF. It shall be composed of the leaders of the Thematic Task Forces on Family Farming, and the Cross-cutting Sub-Committees. • Thematic Task Forces on Family Farming – The Thematic Task Forces on Family Farming shall handle the implementation of specific action-focused areas and thematic components of the PAP4FF. It shall be composed of the leaders and members of each thematic or action-focused areas, as follows: - Policy and Legislation Task Force - This task force shall review existing laws and policies related to family farming, create a repository of these laws, and spearhead the advancement of policy agenda of family farming. - Farm Clustering, Knowledge, and Capacity Task Force - This task force shall provide training and capacity-building programs that will empower all members of farm families. Farm consolidation and clustering shall be one of the priority areas of this task force. - Socio-Economic Inclusion and Protection Task Force - This task force shall create and ensure that social protection mechanisms anchored on the human rights-based approach such as land tenure and social security shall be provided to all members of farm families. These mechanisms may be advanced to develop a policy that will institutionalize them. - Climate Change and Resilience Task Force - This task force shall develop programs in the achievement of climate-resilient, sustainable, and nutrition-sensitive food systems. Financial and insurance mechanisms shall also be prioritized by this task force. This will also work with the different agencies and institutions in identifying solutions to mitigate the risks brought about by climate change. - Innovation, Environmental Sustainability, and Culture Task Force - This task force shall push for innovative and modernized agriculture and food systems, through digitalization. This will also ensure resources such as land, soil, and water are used sustainably while the different ancestral, traditional and indigenous practices are being recognized. - Youth and Empowerment Task Force - This task force shall specifically focus on empowering the youth towards pursuing agriculture and agro- entrepreneurship and create mechanisms that will encourage them to maximize their potential in helping achieve economic and agricultural development. 58 • Local Counterparts of the NCFF – These localized committees at the regional, provincial, municipal and/or even at the barangay level shall provide synergistic structure with the participation of the different multi-stakeholders. - Women and Gender Empowerment Task Force- This task force shall create programs that will push forward women’s rights, and promote equality and equity in terms of the socio-economic aspects of family farming, or agriculture and fisheries, in general. - IPs Empowerment Task Force- This task force is not pillar-specific as ancestral and indigenous practices are recognized across all pillars. This task force shall be created to specifically provide mechanisms that will promote a wider respect to the ancestral domains of the IPs in the Philippines and identify development programs that are tailored with the cultural considerations of the IPs. - Fishers’ Task Force- This task force shall create programs, projects, and activities that will promote the lives and livelihood of small fishers who remain among the poorest in the rural areas. The task force shall work on the delineation of municipal waters which would be favorable to the fisher families. • Joint Secretariat – The Joint Secretariat will facilitate partnerships and provide administrative and communications support to the overall implementation of the PAP4FF. The Secretariat shall have the following sub-committees: - Strategic Communications- This sub-committee shall be responsible for the development of the communications strategy in advocating family farming. - Research and Development- This sub-committee shall conduct continuous research on technologies, issues, and topics in the achievement of inclusive and innovative family farming. - Partnerships- This sub-committee shall be responsible for seeking partnership opportunities, especially with the private sector and other entities, to support family farming programs. - Monitoring and Evaluation- This sub-committee shall be responsible for the development of a database of farm families, and the conduct of benchmarking or baselining initiatives and evaluation studies. - Resource Mobilization- This sub-committee shall ensure that partner agencies and organizations have budgetary provisions in supporting the implementation of the programs and activities of the PAP4FF. 59 Policy Issuances A declaration of Farm Family Day or Month can be explored by the issuance of an Executive Order to support and acknowledge the contribution of the family farmers in the development of the rural sector. Moreover, a law can be enacted with an indication concerning the creation of the local coordinating offices at the regional, provincial, municipal, and barangay levels to support the family farmers and ensure sustainability of the programs, projects, and activities. Monitoring and Evaluation (Results Based Monitoring and Evaluation) The logical framework of the PAP4FF, which enumerates the key performance indicators for each of the seven strategic pillars, shall be the main reference in monitoring and evaluating the specified interventions . The Monitoring and Evaluation Framework, including the tools, as well as the overarching Project Plan of Action shall be developed once the committees and task forces have been established to ensure ownership and commitment to their various roles and responsibilities. A data flow and knowledge management process shall also be created as part of the monitoring and evaluation processes, which should be facilitated with the guidance of the NSC in close coordination with the subcommittee on Monitoring and Evaluation. Communications Plan The Communications Plan shall be developed once the committees and task forces have been established to ensure ownership and commitment to their various roles and responsibilities. The Joint Secretariat, through the Strategic Communications sub-committee, shall spearhead the development of this plan. Proposed Funding/Budgetary Requirements The budget for the implementation of the proposed interventions shall be taken from the existing funds of the different stakeholders that will address the parameters set in the seven pillars of the plan. Moreover, the NCFF will explore on proposing a separate budget that will be funded under the General Appropriations Act (GAA). One important aspect that needs to be considered for funding is the creation of a new office at the local level that will synergize its implementation of the PAP4FF. 60 Sustainability Plan The NCFF shall be responsible for ensuring that further sustainability analyses and plans are executed by the Task Forces to understand and guarantee the relevance, acceptability, viability, and adaptability of each of the indicative actions under the seven PAP4FF strategic pillars. The Sustainability Plan, which will be developed upon the establishment of the committees following a consultative and collaborative manner, should clearly state the planned follow-through activities and strategic interventions to ensure that the family farmers are empowered to be resilient and self-reliant, even beyond the 10- year program. Continuous participatory and inclusive methods shall be employed by all stakeholders in all stages of the program (planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation, and governance). As the program progresses, another important causal factor to sustainability is ensuring that continuous feedback/monitoring shall be done and documentation of good family farming practices for possible replication and scaling-up to other areas beyond the duration of the plan. The visible impacts of the program may also trigger new series of funding donor/s. Moreover, a passage of policies and laws shall be carried out to ensure funding and sustainability of the program. 61 Part 3. Timelines The 10-year Messaging and Communication Campaign Angles This document provides a timeline of messaging and communication campaign angles to better guide the Strategic Communications Subcommittee in creating the PAP4FF communications plan and strategies. It is recommended to tap various creative and media agencies in developing the communication activities and materials for a wider awareness and engagement on family farming. This PAP4FF component and recommendation should be taken into consideration when proposing for budgetary requirements. 2019-2020 - GET READY - Consultation Sessions - Crafting of the 10-Year PAP4FF 2021 - KICK-OFF - Launch of the 10-Year PAP4FF - Creation of the PAP4FF Committees and Task Forces - Data Gathering, Baselining, and Profiling - Finalization of Concrete Actions Per Committee - Drafting of the PAP4FF Communications Strategy and Plan - Drafting of the PAP4FF Sustainability Plan - PAP4FF Conference and Partnership-Building 2022 –GAIN MOMENTUM - Internal Cascade (Info Sharing and Capacity Building for Project Partners and Government Agencies) - Policy Reviews and Formulations/ Family Farming Curriculum - Farm Family Advocacy Campaign 2023 - PUSH FURTHER - More Aggressive Farm Clustering - Policy Enhancements and Policy Lobbying - Addressing Low-Hanging Fruits - Knowledge Exchange and Further Dialogues 62 2024 - SCALE UP - PAP4FF Review and Adjustments - Progress Monitoring and Evaluation - Capacity Building - Digital Infrastructure for Agriculture 2025-2027 - TRACK AND SUSTAIN - Networking of successful Family Farms - Continuation of PAP4FF Implementation - Information Campaign - Knowledge Exchange - Capacity Building - Continuing Education and Research - Family Farming Modernization and Digitalization - Progress Monitoring and Evaluation 2028 – RIPPLE IMPACT - Success family farms passing the baton to other family farmers - Progress Reporting - Communicating the Progress: National and Global Cascade of Milestones - Thought Leadership Short, Medium, and Long Term Goals The PAP4FF conceptual framework is anchored on the three strategic action areas and the seven pillars. These are expected to yield an appropriate enabling institutional policy and social environment, strengthened FFOs and synergized coordination and partnerships. As a result, the family farmers shall become more resilient with improved productivity and competitiveness, secured land and resource tenure, increased soil and water resources productivity, food self-sufficiency, and adequate nutrition. All of these shall contribute to achieving the ultimate goal of making the family farmers sustainably nourished and prosperous. 63 P H O T O B Y : D A 64 Part 4. Annexes Annex 1. The Crafting of the National Action Plan for Family Farming - Detailed Description of the Methodology The series of consultation meetings and planning workshops targeted participants from the DA attached agencies and bureaus, NGAs, SUCs, research institutions as well as CSOs, NGOs, youth groups, farmer organizations, and volunteer organizations. The groupings per batch were planned, where the nature of organization was considered. The first meeting gathered representatives from the DA attached agencies and bureaus through a face-to-face session. Succeeding workshops, held virtually, were with representatives from the NGAs, SUCs and research organizations for the second consultative workshop and the third from the CSOs, NGOs, youth groups, farmer organizations and volunteer organizations. Workshops involved individual participation and group engagements. The workshop proper involved writing or generating ideas in metacards (in case of the physical workshop), and virtual idea board (in case of the online workshop). After each activity, the participants were asked to elaborate their answers or share insights relevant to the workshop topic. Inclusions of the Philippine National Action Plan for Family Farming The PAP4FF provides a roadmap to implement the UNDFF and ensure alignment to the achievement of the SDGs. Developed based on a common strategic vision, the PAP4FF aims to guide all relevant national stakeholders to consolidate, align and reinforce their actions and define policy interventions in support of family farming at the national level. The PAP4FF is based on the following information: • Strong alignment with the general objectives of the UNDFF and the indicative actions proposed in the seven pillars of the GAP, tailored and adapted to national and local condition; • Existing national strategies, activities and processes conducted by various government agencies, organizations, companies, and other institutions that support family farms in the Philippines; • Available instruments and mechanisms that promote policy coherence, multi-actor and inter-institutional cooperation, and integrate family farming related issues into the wider food and agricultural policies and strategies, and broader social and environmental policies; and • Specific commitments based on the jointly identified needs and priorities. 65 At the minimum, the PAP4FF includes the following components: • Conceptual framework of family farming in the country, including the result of a needs/gap assessment, which is based on a review of existing initiatives of various agencies, companies, and organizations. The conceptual framework highlighted the following: • Concrete outcomes, actions, and initiatives including proposals for specific inter-sectoral policy interventions in support of family farming. These include: - Commonly agreed ‘definition’ of family farming in the Philippines - Criteria and parameters in identifying family farmers at the national level, considering various constraints and challenges that limit data collection on family farmers in the Philippines - An analysis on the current status of family farming in the Philippines based on available national and local data. This status will include the nature of the agri-food system in the Philippines and the contributions of family farming in rural development - An analysis of the main challenges and needs of family farmers; their strengths and opportunities to overcome the challenges. - Definition of the specific group of family farmers and the level (national, regional, local); - Public and private actors with roles defined and effective coordination and monitoring mechanisms recommended; and - Expected results, activities, and measurable indicators and means of verification; and - Phases for the 10-year implementation, a recommended timetable, yearly milestone messaging (communications strategy/angle) for the setting up of milestones and deadlines. 66 Annex 2. Chronology of Events IFAD-FAO-GO-CSO INITIATED Philippine UNDFF PAP4FF Process November 24-25, 2014: KLMPE IYFF. With the support from the World Rural Forum (WRF), the PAKISAMA catalyzed a series of FOs-CSOs consultations on the IYFF. Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) convened the first multi-stakeholders meeting at the DAR office, participated by DA, PAKISAMA, PhilDHRRA, AsiaDHRRA, AFA, ANGOC, and IFAD. A two-day national conference dubbed as KLMPE was co-designed and managed by a multi-stakeholder TWG composed of DA, DAR, PAKISAMA. PhilDHRRA, ANGOC, TRIAS, WE-Effect, CSA, and IFAD TWG members sharing human and financial resources, convened 270 family farmer leaders from different farmer organizations, leaders and staff of CSOs, agri-agencies, international NGOs, inter-governmental organizations (IGOs) such as IFAD and FAO, and national government agencies especially DAR and DA. With trade and photo exhibit, and an IYFF song composed and sang by the participants, a score of best practices and policy proposals around five themes such as Asset Reforms, Resilient Agriculture, Market Power, Agri Governance, and Role of Women and Youth were discussed. An FO-CSO declaration summarizing the thrust of the event, was agreed and read in the plenary and was received by government representatives. November 2015-2018: KLMPE IYFF +1, KLMPE IYFF +2, KLMPE IYFF +3, KLMPE IYFF +4. An Annual two-day KLMPE conferences held, with the multi-stakeholder TWG designing, managing, conducting, financing, monitoring and evaluating the annual events, producing four books of a hundred best practices on the same themes with the first 2014 KLMPE, a video summary, and a set of written policy proposals and strategic thrusts. The platform was eventually named in 2017 ARDKPP. August 23, 2019: Issuance of Special Order No. 792, series of 2019. DA Secretary William D. Dar issued a special order creating the NCFF and designating DA-ATI as the chair for the NCFF. November 12-13, 2019: KLMPE IYFF+5. The event was held at the Bahay ng Alumni, University of the Philippines with the theme: IYFF+5: “Celebrating the International Year of Family Farming: Strengthening the Role of the Youth in Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development,’’ was attended by more than 300 participants from various FOs, CSOs, agri-agencies, IGOs, academe, DAR and DA. To highlight the start of the UNDFF global implementation, FOs and CSOs participants validated the results of consultations/survey conducted for localizing the UNDFF action agenda through a workshop on the seven pillars of the Global Action Plan. The event also allowed interaction of the FOs with policy makers/influencers towards a localized UNDFF action agenda. A UNDFF declaration containing the seven pillars or key result areas and strategic thrusts or performance indicators and targets was discussed, read, and agreed in the plenary. January 22, 2020: ARDKPP Assessment and Planning Meeting. The activity was attended by DA-International Affairs Division (DA-IAD), SPCMAD, SAAD, BFAR- FishCoRAL, DAR-ConVERGE, AFA, AsiaDHRRA, PhilDHRRA, MTCP-Philippines, 67 PAKISAMA, UP-CIDS-AltDev, FAOPH and IFAD-PH. Ms. Maria Catherine Castillo of the DA-IAD, the liaison officer for the UNDFF-Philippines, updated the group on the created UNDFF committees within DA and the on-going liaising with Rome- based organizations for the UNDFF. More importantly, a committee within the DA had already been created led by Dr. Rosana P. Mula to produce the National Action Plan (PAP4FF). DA planned to involve other agencies and to link with the CSOs and FOs. The ARDKPP-KLMPE was considered the most likely platform especially for the non-government/FO stakeholders’ participation. It must be noted that the November IYFF+5 Conference already produced a document of “local action plans” to implement the seven pillars of the UNDFF in the Philippines. Cathy encouraged the group to have a courtesy call with the DA Secretary to share the directions and activities of ARDKPP-KLMPE and how it can be linked with UNDFF PAP4FF. DA planned to launch the UNDFF PAP4FF within the first semester of 2020. The participants saw these developments within DA as an opportunity for the ARDKPP- KLMPE to be strategic in contributing to the UNDFF PAP4FF processes and decided to broaden the ARDKPP platform to include agri-coops and other stakeholders, engage the legislative and executive branches (Congress, Senate, Cabinet), and strengthen the KLMPE as a national gathering of farmers, among others. The body then decided to conduct an ARDKPP Strategic Action Planning on February 26, 2020 which later on was moved to March 16, 2020 to ensure the presence especially of CSO principals. March 8, 2020: Meeting with the members of ILC-NES Philippines to include ANGOC, ARNow!, TFM, and PAKISAMA. It is during this meeting that the group decided to enjoin all members to join the ARDKPP as the platform for involvement in UNDFF implementation in the country. March 16, 2020: Lockdown imposed in the entire country. Scheduled ARDKPP TWG Strategic Planning workshop was postponed indefinitely. September 29, 2020: UNDFF Implementation Planning Zoom Conference. The activity was led by the ARDKPP TWG with 52 participants. The planning conference aimed to update everyone on the recent initiatives of various stakeholders including DA-ATI who shared the output of the recent brainstorming session regarding drafting of the National Action Plan for Family Farming. It is during the event that the DA-ATI expressed their plan to involved the CSOs and FOs and other multi-stakeholders in the series of consultation-workshops. Also, during the event the PAKISAMA urged the DA-ATI to consider ARDKPP as the platform for UNDFF National Action Planning. October 6-7, 2020: Regional Forum: Sustaining Family Farming in Asia through inclusive farmer driven approaches. The activity was co-organized by AFA, ARNow!, ILC, SEI, and IFAD. The Philippine experience in ARDKPP was shared by PAKISAMA in a panel zoom conference. The multi-stakeholder nature of ARDKPP and the synergy, and complementation of expertise and resources among actors, the limits and possibilities of the platform in pushing for the UNDFF implementation were highlighted. 68 October 28, 2020: Follow-up Conference thru Zoom. This was convened by the PAKISAMA and was attended by 50 participants coming from the different ARDKPP- ILC NES stakeholders, including representatives from various agencies of the DA. Discussed during the activity are the draft timeline and ideas how PAP4FF can be most participatory, realistic and responsive. October 29, 2020: Conference on Sharing Lessons on NCFF’s initiatives in drafting the PAP4FF. The WRF-FAO sponsored the conference and the Philippines’ experience was presented by PAKISAMA entitled “Roadmap to inclusive, realistic, responsive PAP4FF.” The DA-ATI and other government agencies including DAR and BARMM Ministry of Agriculture participated in the event. November 11, 2020: Invitations from the DA to IFAD, re face-to-face Consultation for the UNDFF PAP4FF crafting was looped to PAKISAMA. Mr. Raul Socrates Banzuela, Executive Director of PAKISAMA, appreciated the initiative of the DA- ATI and informed Ms. Maria Catherine Castillo of the DA-IAD of his availability and urged DA to build on earlier activities on family farming crafted during the series of ARDKPP conference over the past six years. November 17-23, 2020: Series of National Consultative Meeting and Planning Workshop on the Crafting of the National Action Plan for Family Farming 2019- 2028. The activity was led by the DA-ATI and IAD in partnership with FAO, IFAD, and SMART. Ms. Amy Chua and Mr. Veejay Calutan of the PPSA facilitated the series of consultations. • First Batch was held on November 17 and was participated by representatives from the different agencies of the DA. • Second Batch was held on November 19 and was participated by the representatives from the different NGAs other than DA, Congress and Senate Policy Department, academe and research institutions. • Third Batch was held on November 23 and was participated by the CSOs, FOs, youth and volunteer organizations, among others. November 27, 2020: FO-CSO Meeting. Fourteen FOs-CSO members of the ARDKPP TWG met virtually and assessed the ongoing UNDFF PAP4FF process. Strengths and some recommendations/observations were discussed during the event. Some of the areas for improvement are in terms of the following: 1) content, not building on the literatures generated already during the past six years, 2) non-recognition of the ARDKPP TWG as an established national multi-stakeholder platform on family farming recognized both by IFAD and FAO, and 3) reduction of level of participation of FOs and CSOs especially the members of the ARDKPP TWG. The participants agreed to propose an improved plan of action leading to the broad adoption of the UNDFF PAP4FF to include FO-CSO participation in the UNDFF PAP4FF drafting committee and convening of a KLMPE Conference on December 11 to discuss and approve the draft UNDFF PAP4FF. It is also during the event that IFAD and FAO agreed to meet with Dr. Rosana P. Mula of the ATI to convey the result of the meeting. 69 December 2, 2020: A separate meeting between IFAD and FAO representatives with Dr. Rosana P. Mula and USec Rodolfo V. Vicera was held. The IFAD was represented by Mr. Alessandro Marini, Mr. Jerry Pacturan, and Mr. Yolando Arban while FAO was represented by Ms. Tamara Duran and Mr. Fidel Rodriguez. They were also joined by some colleagues from the ARDKPP TWG. They introduced the ARDKPP and the concerns of the FOs-CSOs were conveyed during the meeting. The DA and DA-ATI expressed their willingness to broaden the participation of the FOs and CSOs in the PAP4FF Steering Committee. Further, the DA and DA-ATI also agreed to join the planned December 11 KLMPE Conference and to present the draft for discussion among the participants. December 3, 2020: Multi-stakeholder Consultation-Workshop. This is the last batch of the series of consultation-workshop facilitated by the DA-ATI. The activity aimed to discuss the consolidated results of three previous consultations. The activity was conducted via Zoom and was attended by around 40 participants. The comments and suggestions from the group were gathered as input on the enhancement of the draft action plan. December 11, 2020: KLMPE 2020, IYFF +6. The event was participated by 229 individuals, mostly family farmers from different provinces of the country, IFAD and FAO Country Directors, DAR and DA Undersecretaries, BFAR Director, and leaders of national family farmers’ federations (PAKISAMA, PKSK, etc.), CSOs (PRRM, PhilDHRRA, KAISAHAN, ANGOC, etc.), and other agri-agencies (WE Effect, etc.). The activity yielded the following comments and recommendations on the current UNDFF Draft presented by the DA-ATI. 1. Definition. The adoption of the global definition of family farming and the additional proposed definition based on Philippine conditions were accepted. 2. Situationer and Gaps & Challenges. These can be merged in one section and a deep analysis of the situation of family farmers should be specified. Members of ARDKPP were asked to elaborate on key problems and analysis based on their respective expertise and advocacies. 3. Overarching goal. The proposal to revise the goal to focus on zero hunger and zero poverty among family farmers by 2028. 4. Strategic Action Pillars. The suggestion to change the first strategic action pillar to “Policy and Program” since “Platform” is similar to the third pillar-- “Partnerships.” The second pillar entitled “People” was acceptable. 5. Policy Agenda. The inclusion of other policy agenda such as National Land Use Act, Magna Carta for Young Farmers, and others in the main document not in the annex. 6. Logical Framework. The integration of the proposed KRAs/Pillars, performance indicators, targets and program building blocks as suggested by FOs/CSOs. 7. Governance. The proposed multi-stakeholder nature of the structure from the Steering Committee, TWG, Joint Secretariat, and Task and Sub-Task Forces are acceptable. However, since the whole of society is needed to address the multi-dimensional problems faced by family farmers, the President himself shall Chair the NCFF Steering Committee. 70 8. FO-CSO Role. As this is all about family farmers, all other institutions and other supportive CSOs shall be further consulted and be included in the national drafting committee. FOs and CSOs in the ARDKP Platform TWG are all interested to join the drafting committee to include: PAKISAMA, PKSK, ARNow!, KAISAHAN, AFA, ANGOC, PhilDHRRA, UP ALT-Dev, AgriCord Ph. January 5, 2021: Writeshop on the Integration, Polishing, Firming up of the Draft National Action Plan for Family Farmers. The writeshop was convened and chaired by Dr. Rosana P. Mula and was participated in by the representatives of PAKISAMA, AFA, BAFS, BSWM, ATI, and PCW. The eight points generated from the KLMPE Conference were elaborated and mostly accepted by the participants. The writeshop produced a re-calibration of the outline to make it simpler highlighting the background, the problem analysis, the strategic interventions, and institutional arrangement. The overarching goal, performance indicators per pillar (aligned to the seven pillars of the global action plan), and the institutional mechanism such as multi-stakeholder NSC to be chaired by the President, were elaborated and agreed. FOs-CSOs were asked to further elaborate on the problem analysis such as the situationer, gaps, and challenges as well as the background to include the initiatives of FOs-CSOs in coming up with the final draft of the PAP4FF. January 6-10, 2021: FOs-CSOs worked on further enhancement of the draft PAP4FF. January 14, 2021: Meeting with USec Rodolfo V. Vicerra, DA Undersecretary for Policy and Planning, regarding the draft 10-year PAP4FF. February 11, 2021: Presentation of the Draft 10-Year PAP4FF by Dr. Rosana P. Mula to dignitaries, legislators and key decision makers. The activity was attended by Senator Francis ‘Kiko’ Pangilinan, Dr. Romulo Emmanuel Miral, Jr., Director General of the Congressional Policy and Budget Research Department, Mr. Alessandro Marini, Country Director of IFAD, Ms. Tamara Duran, Asst. FAO Representative to the Philippines, Mr. Peter Turingan and Ms. Mace Solatre of the Senate Economic and Planning Office, DA Chief of Staff Dr. Leocadio S. Sebastian, USec Rodolfo V.Vicerra, Dr. Virginia Cardenas and other multisectoral partners in the crafting of the PAP4FF. March 2, 2021: Final Writeshop on the Integration, Polishing, Firming up of the Draft PAP4FF as a result of the February 11 presentation to the key decision makers. Participants of this activity were the same with the January 5 writeshop. April 8, 2021: Presentation of the Draft PAP4FF during the Task Group on Food Security (TGFS) Meeting chaired by Secretary William D. Dar. It is during the event that the signing ceremony and launching of the PAP4FF was confirmed to be carried out in May 2021 in time with the Farmers’ and Fisherfolk’s Month Celebration. 71 Annex 3. KLMPE 2019: Joint FO-CSO Declaration on UNDFF Implementation Joint Civil Society Declaration on the United Nations Decade (2019-2028) of Family Farming University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City 14th November 2019 We, representatives of a broad spectrum of civil society in the Philippines, from Philippine-based international and national family farmers’ organizations and cooperatives, non-government organizations, agri-agencies, academic and research institutions, meeting annually since the 2014 International Year of Family Farming, assembled again on a two-day 13-14 November 2019 Knowledge Learning Market and Policy Engagement conference at the University of the Philippines, Diliman in Quezon City. Note that while there are some innovations we celebrate, there remains the fact that progress has been very slow in the various advocacies and commitments we agreed to pursue five years ago specifically in the areas of asset reforms, resilient agriculture, increased market power, good agri- governance, and increased participation of women and youth. Poverty levels among family farmers are at 34.3% (farmers) and 34.0% (fishermen) much higher than the national average of 21.6% in 2015. Feel the frustration of 11 million people in the agri-fishery-forestry labor force as the price of their commodities especially palay, copra, and corn plunge to all-time low while cost of basic necessities such as food, transport, health, and education remain high. Jointly celebrate the declaration of the United Nations Decade of Family Farming (2019-2028) or UNDFF with like-minded government agencies, personnel and other stakeholders as another opportunity to rededicate our respective organizations for concerted action to address squarely the serious challenges facing family farmers, recognizing further the important role of our collective efforts in pushing member- states in the UN General Assembly to make this landmark declaration, taking inspiration from our successful push for a UN-declared International Year of Family Farming or IYFF in 2014 - affirming the catalytic role of family farmers in attaining internationally- agreed sustainable development goals. Envision family farming as necessary and essential in ushering in a world where diverse, healthy and sustainable food and agricultural systems flourish, where resilient rural and urban communities enjoy a high quality of life in dignity, equity, free from hunger and poverty, and able to exercise their fundamental civil and political rights. Recognize that in order to achieve this vision, multiple stakeholders especially government, family farmers’ organizations and civil society organizations need to 72 work together more meaningfully; and on the occasion of the first year of the UNDFF, we come forward to renew our declaration of and deepen our commitment to attain our main goal of eradicating hunger and poverty among 11 million family farmers in the agri-fishery-forestry sectors by 2028. Commit to work together to achieve the following seven objectives and agenda: First, a stronger enabling policy environment that transfers and guarantees natural resource assets to family farmers. We will help complete and speed up the meaningful implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, the Fisheries Code, and the Indigenous People’s Rights Act and where needed, campaign for needed improvements in the law. We will continue to engage government to provide sustained political commitment and investment in family farming through adequate financing and strong enforcement of public policies; to distribute the remaining 600,000 hectares of big landholdings to landless farmers and provide further support services to 6M agrarian reform farming families, complete the delineation and zoning of 870 municipal waters benefitting 1.4 M fishing families; enact the Department of Fisheries bill; oppose disastrous reclamation projects, accelerate the process of registering and distributing 8M hectares of ancestral lands to 17M indigenous peoples; provide farmers and indigenous peoples with adequate protection and support services against corporate and individual land grabs and armed conflict; enact the National Land Use Act (NLUA) ensuring family farmers’ rights to land, water and natural resources, review and amend or repeal the Rice Tariffication Law and land conversion act, and the Coconut Farmers’ Trust Fund (CFTF) bill providing for the utilization, management and administration of recovered coco levies to benefit some 3.5 M coconut farmers; Second, a broad and meaningful program incentivizing young farmers, ensuring the generational sustainability of family farming. Recognizing that the average age of the Filipino farmer is 57 and the increasing trend of migration of rural youth to urban centers, we will intensify our push for the speedy enactment into law of the Magna Carta of Young Farmers bill, recognizing young farmers as a sector, institutionalizing their rights, and providing them representation in decision-making bodies, giving youth in family farms opportunities and incentives to become actively engaged in the rural economy and to be represented especially in decision-making bodies; integrate agriculture in the curriculum from primary to tertiary education, provide scholarships for rural youth, and provide for the integration of Young Farmers in the Sangguniang Kabataan policies and programs; Third, gender equity in family farming providing more opportunities for women farmers. As women in family farms are disproportionately affected socially, economically and politically, and recognizing the important role of women in family farming and the rural economy, we will intensify our advocacy efforts and service to our members to implement and further improve current laws and providing reasonable budget for programs guaranteeing women access, ownership and control over natural resources and meaningful access to social services including women who are indigenous, Muslim, PWD, senior citizen, and singles; recognize the (re)productive role of women, and give value for unpaid housework and care work so that women can have stronger roles in family farms; 73 Fourth, strengthened capacities of family farmers’ organizations to generate knowledge, represent farmers’ concerns and provide inclusive services in rural areas. Recognizing the important role of organized, family farmer-led and controlled associations, agro-forestry-fishery cooperatives, and rural enterprises in the delivery of agricultural extension services, securing family farmers’ access to land, financing, and markets, and in representation in decision-making bodies; increase investments in professionalizing the management of family farmers organizations and cooperatives; we will intensify our efforts at organizing and strengthening the capacity especially of agri-cooperatives, including family farmer leaders through programmatic leadership training, to reach most of the 11M people in the agri- fishery-forestry labor force, calling on government to allocate a meaningful portion of budgets on agriculture including the Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund (RCEF) and Coconut Farmers Trust Fund (CFTF) in these efforts; Fifth, improved socio-economic inclusion, resilience and well-being of family farmers, rural households and communities. We will enhance standard of living and reduce rural household vulnerability by ensuring access to and strengthening of social protection and social services for family farmers, particularly women and youth through among others provision of crop insurance, life and health insurance, access to financing, information and ensured direct market access by meaningfully implementing the SAGIP-SAKA Act establishing institutional food purchase; provide programs to encourage farm integration and diversification, and for government to support compliance with agricultural product certification; Sixth, sustainable family farming and climate resilient food systems. Given the contribution of agriculture, fisheries, and forestry in addressing climate change, we will ensure that family farmers are at the center of sustainable and responsible management and use of land and natural resources, with increased access to productive assets and services. Create database on science-based tools on climate-resilient food systems, and adopt a multidisciplinary and multisectoral approach towards developing and implementing climate resilient programs based on forecasting models. We will push for the broadest implementation of the Organic Agriculture Act and related government programs to promote and support integrated, diversified, agroecological, holistic, resilient, organic agri-aqua-forest food systems to cover at least 80% of agri-aquaculture and forestry farms and ensure an appropriate government structure to carry out program implementation at the local level; and Seventh, strengthened multi-dimensionality of family farming to promote social innovations contributing to territorial development and food systems that safeguard biodiversity, environment and culture. We will push for the adoption of an ecosystem approach to food production, building on the synergies among fisheries, aquaculture, crop and livestock production and enhance the management of biodiversity and ecosystem services by family farmers; promote community- based, owned and controlled seed banks, local knowledge and innovations and use of native seeds, farmers’ varieties, landraces, and neglected and underutilized species; maximize use of information and communication technology, and to build the capacity of family farmers and their organizations to access and gain benefit from new technologies. 74 Call on the Philippine government to support the existing Agriculture and Rural Development Knowledge and Policy Platform (ARDKPP) as the National Committee for Family Farming (NCFF) in the Philippines and continue to co-convene the platform in a participatory and inclusive manner— involving family farmers’ organizations, civil society organizations, development organizations in the formulation, operationalization and implementation of the UNDFF National Action Plan in the Philippines. The theme of this year’s conference highlights the role of youth in sustainable agriculture and rural development. We begin the Decade of Family Farming mindful of the challenges and obstacles but invigorated by the energy and dreams of our youth, and further inspired by the thankless yet paramount work of farming families in feeding the world and caring for our common home. When farming families thrive, a better world can be reached—one free from hunger and poverty and where family farmers live with dignity. 75 Annex 4. List of Laws and Policies Suggested for Formulation, Review, and/or Strict Implementation based on Consultation Sessions 1. Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program 2. National Land Use Act 3. Fisheries Code 4. Coconut Farmers’ Trust Fund 5. Magna Carta of Young Farmers 6. Magna Carta on Informal Economy 7. Magna Carta of Women 8. Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund 9. SAGIP-SAKA Act 10. Organic Agriculture Act 11. Registry System for Basic Sectors in Agriculture 12. End Local Communist Armed Conflict 13. Survival and Recovery Assistance Program for Rice Farmers 14. Kapital Access of Young Agripreneurs 15. National Soil Health Program 76 Annex 5. List of Researchable Areas Based on the Consultations 1. Significant completed and existing initiatives of various agencies and organizations related to family farming 2. Society’s acceptance on farming as a profession 3. Factors affecting family farmers to venture into farm diversification and modernization 4. Factors affecting the adoption of farm production and post-harvest standards and good agricultural practices 5. Issues and concerns of setting baseline and acceptable agriculture products competitive pricing mechanisms 6. Awareness of the value of proper and sustainable land management practices 7. Benefits and contributions of traditional and sustainable modern farming approaches 8. Analysis of the role and contributions of women and men in family farming practices 9. Unpaid care and domestic work and its impact on the productive work of women and the perceived multiple burden 77 Annex 6. List of Capability Development Programs Based on the Consultations 1. Value-Adding and Agri-business Development 2. Agri-Preneurship 3. Array of On and Off-farm Activities 4. Benefits of Farm Diversification 5. Gender Sensitivity and Gender Analysis 6. Climate-resilient Agricultural Technologies and Best Practices 7. Value and Methodologies on Sustainable Land Management 8. Good Agricultural Practices and Family Farming Quality Standards 9. Disaster Resilience, Climate Risk Mitigation, and Farm Business Continuity Plans 10. Farmer Organization Development and Management 11. Agro-Eco Tourism 12. Organic Agriculture 78 Annex 7. List of Agencies, Institutions, and Groups Involved in the Consultation Processes The Department of Agriculture, and the Agricultural Training Institute, as the national focal agency, acknowledge the following organizations from the different sectors, agencies and offices who were consulted and contributed to the crafting of the Philippine National Action Plan for Family Farming 2019-2028. DA Attached Agencies, Divisions, Bureaus • Agribusiness and Marketing Assistance Service (AMAS) • Agricultural Credit Policy Council (ACPC) • Agricultural Training Institute (ATI) • Bureau of Agricultural Research (BAR) • Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Standards (BAFS) • Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI) • Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) • Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) • Bureau of Soils and Water Management (BSWM) • Climate Resilient Agriculture Office (CRAO) • Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA) • High Value Crops and Rural Credit Office • Information and Communications Technology Service (ICTS) • International Affairs Division (IAD) • Kabuhayan at Kaunlaran ng Kababayang Katutubo (4Ks) • National Dairy Authority (NDA) • National Organic Agriculture Program (NOAP) • National Tobacco Administration (NTA) • Philippine Carabao Center (PCC) • Philippine Center for Postharvest Development and Mechanization (PHilMech) • Philippine Coconut Authority (PCA) • Philippine Council for Agriculture and Fisheries (PCAF) • Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation (PCIC) • Planning and Monitoring Service - Investment Programming Division (PMS-IPD) • Policy Research Service - Food, Agriculture, and Fisheries Policy Division (PRS-FAFPD) • Project Development Service - Project Identification and Evaluation Division (PDS-PIED) • Special Area for Agriculture Development (SAAD) • Special Concerns Office National Government Agencies, Academe, Research Institutions • Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao • Central Luzon State University • Central Philippine University 79 • Congressional Policy and Budget Research Department (CPBRD)- House of Representatives • Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) • Department of Foreign Affairs Office (DFA) • International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) • League of Municipal Agricultural Officers, Municipal/City Agriculturists of the Philippines, Inc. (LeMMCAP) • League of Provinces of the Philippines • Mariano Marcos State University - Main • Mindanao Development Authority • National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) • Philippine Commission on Women (PCW) • Pampanga State Agricultural University (PSAU) • Senate Economic and Planning Office (SEPO) • Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA) • Tarlac Agricultural University • University of the Philippines Center for Integrative and Development Studies Program on Alternative Development (UP CIDS AltDev) • University of Southern Mindanao • Visayas State University • Xavier University Science Foundation CSOs, NGOs, Youth Organizations, Farmer Organizations • 4H Club of the Philippines (National 4-H Club of the Philippines) • AgriCooph Federation • Asian Farmers Association for Sustainable Rural Development (AFA) • Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) • Asian Partnership for the Development of Human Resources in Rural Asia (AsiaDHRRA) • Camarines Norte Federation of Cooperatives (CANOFECO) • Integrated Community Development Assistance Inc. (ICDAI) • International Institute of Rural Reconstruction (IIRR) • John J Carroll Institute on Church and Social Issues (JJCICSI) • KAISAHAN Tungo sa Kaunlaran ng Kanayunan at Repormang Pansakahan • Kalipunan ng mga Maliliit na Magniniyog sa Pilipinas (KAMMPIL) • Labo Progressive Multipurpose Cooperative (LPMPC) • Magungaya Mindanao, Incorporated (MMI) • MTCP2 - ASEAN Farmers’ Organization Support Program MTCP2 - AFOSP • NGOs for Fisheries Reform (NFR) • Pambansang Kilusan ng mga Samahang Magsasaka (PAKISAMA) • People’s Campaign for Agrarian Reform Network (AR Now!) • Philippine Partnership for the Development of Human Resources in Rural Areas (PhilDHRRA) • Silangang Dapit sa Habagatang Sidlakang Mindanao (SILDAP) • Trias – Southest Asia • We Effect - Philippines • Young Professionals for Agricultural Development (YPARD) 80 International Partners • Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) • International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD) The 150 FFOs and CSOs who attended the KLMPE-2019 in Bahay Alumni-University of the Philippines which agreed and issued a Conference Declaration on Philippine Action Plan for Family Farmers; and the 80 FFOs and CSOs who attended the KLMPE 2020 Conference via zoom, to react and give feedback on the draft UNDFF NAP presented by DA-ATI representative. 81 References Ballesteros, M. M. and Ancheta J.A. (2020) The Role of Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Organizations (ARBOs) in Agriculture Value Chain. Philippine Institute of Development Studies: 15-16 Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (2018). Fishery Resources, 2018. Retrieved from https://www.bfar.da.gov.ph/profile Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (2018). Fish Contribution to the Economy, 2018. Retrieved from https://www.bfar.da.gov.ph/profile?id=18#post CNN Philippines (2020 July 7). DA assures ₱10-B yearly allocation for rice fund despite expected lower imports due to pandemic. Retrieved from https:// cnnphilippines.com/news/2020/7/7/DA-P10-billion-for-RCEF.html Gomez, E.J. (2021 March 6). P75B to reboot coco trust fund. The Manila Times. Retrieved from https://www.manilatimes.net/2021/03/26/news/national/p75b-to- reboot-coco-trust-fund/855581/ National Statistics Office (2004). Indigenous People. Special Release. Retrieved from https://psa.gov.ph/sites/default/files/SR%20086%20Indigenous%20Peoples. pdf Philippine Statistics Authority (2012). Number of Household Members of Agricultural Operators who Engaged in Agricultural Activities by Sex, Age Group, Region and Province: Philippines, 2012. Metadata on Census of Agriculture and Fisheries. Retrieved from https://openstat.psa.gov.ph/PXWeb/pxweb/en/DB/DB 2E AFC/0262E6CEAA0.px/table/tableViewLayout1/?rxid=fac5dc30-b112-44d8-9ed0- 3ec729189d7a Philippine Statistics Authority (2016). Highlights on Household Population, Number of Households, and Average Household Size of the Philippines (2015 Census of Population). Retrieved from https://psa.gov.ph/population-and-housing/ node/69728 Philippine Statistics Authority (2017). Census of Agriculture and Fisheries 2012. PSA: Quezon City. Retrieved from https://psa.gov.ph/sites/default/files/CAF2012Agri Philippines.pdf Philippine Statistics Authority (2020). 2020 Selected Statistics on Agriculture. PSA: Quezon City. Retrieved from https://psa.gov.ph/sites/default/files/2 SSA2020 final signed.pdf Philippine Statistics Authority (2020). Fisheries Statistics of the Philippines, 2017- 2019. PSA: Quezon City. Retrieved from https://psa.gov.ph/sites/default/files/ Fisheries%20Statistics%20of%20the%20Philippines%2C%202017-2019.pdf 82 Philippine Statistics Authority (2020). Farm workers are paid an average daily wage of PhP 331.10 in 2019; CALABARZON farm workers are the highest paid while Central Visayas farm workers are the lowest paid. Retrieved from https:// psa.gov.ph/content/farm-workers-are-paid-average-daily-wage-php-33110-2019- calabarzon-farm-workers-are-highest FAO and IFAD. 2019. United Nations Decade of Family Farming 2019-2028. Global Action Plan. Rome. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/3/ca4672en/ca4672en.pdf Knowledge Learning Market and Policy Engagement (2019). Executive Summary: IYFF+5: “Celebrating the International Year of Family Farming: Strengthening the Role of the Youth in Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development” Sama-samang Deklarasyon ng Lipunang Sibil para sa United Nations Dekada (2019-2028) ng Pamilyang Pagsasaka. 2019. Quezon City. 83