harvest no. 3

3Pesticides to the rescue

NO. 3 • OCTOBER 2010

Advocating science-based agriculture

Croplife with the new DA secretary

10Brighter days ahead for Bt corn in RP

AT THE courtesy call paid by Croplife last August 12, new Agriculture Secretary Proceso “Procy” Alcala was “electric,” to say the least.

Full of humor and engagingly informal, he confidently laid out a program that was at once sensible and yet over-reaching in its compass. Very challenging, but probably achievable with great commitment and his own brand of infectious enthusiasm.

9New BPI Chief opposes ban on Bt eggplant tests 12The cause and cost

of going organic

Brighter days ahead for Bt corn in RP

ARTWORK: LEONILO DOLORICON

The secretary began the discussions with his passion for farming and his primary objective of bringing the country to rice self-sufficiency within three short years.

Then, turning a bit more serious, he outlined how he intends to do all his DA projects while also trying to bring

down the expenses of the department, focusing mainly on the efforts he believed would be most felt by the people, especially those less fortunate in life.

Rice. Going back to rice self-sufficiency, Alcala said that there

continued on page 2

By Cris T. Michelena

2 Advocating science-based agriculture

are still so many Filipinos willing and able to farm, but they don’t have the land to till. He proudly beamed, “We have identified about 100,000 hectares of upland areas that can be awarded to them for upland rice!” The logic is unassailable: 100,000 new hectares for rice cultivation will definitely add to the kaban ng bayan.

When the discussion turned to seeds and other farm inputs, Alcala mirrored the farmer’s plaint about the high out-of-pocket costs of such and why he was supporting the develop-ment of organic inputs that farmers themselves can produce in time.

Nevertheless, Alcala is not about to remove any options available to the farmer. In fact, he is trying to expand the variety of options available to them, whether organic or conventional. His support for organic farming is actually a means to make that less financially taxing option available to the farmers once they learn to produce the organic inputs themselves.

Alcala is also looking to Mindanao to be the major food source for the whole country, having plans to put up large-scale granaries and port-side silos in strategic trading centers there.

But for the most part, his plans revolve around getting the local government units and the officials there to work more hand-in-hand with the department in going after its goals.

“Iba rin yun kung yung mga gobernador at mga mayor ay katulong ng DA sa mga gawain nito!”

he said. “Sila ang mga nakakakausap sa mga magsasaka natin, nalala-man ang kanilang mga problema, ang kanilang mga pangangailangan. Pero kailangan din nila ang suporta natin.”

Playfully emphasizing his Southern Tagalog accent, Alcala prides himself in being a home-grown “probinsya-no” used to simple things, simple solutions based on folksy common sense.

He sees that there is a need to make the farms profitable for the farmers once more if we are to rely on them for our food. If the farmers are not able to make a decent living from the farms, then they will definitely leave and

Croptlife with New DA sec...continued on page 2

seek gainful livelihood elsewhere.

The crop protection industry is well-placed to help support these new departmental initiatives. CropLife offered that its objectives are in keeping with making farms more profitable through higher quality yields. Also, that its technicians are constantly moving among the farmers all over the country and would be able to help disseminate information or give feedback from the field.

The secretary welcomed the offer and expressed his hope that the crop protection industry and the DA can work together in helping the farmers gain more from their farms.

Brussels- At a CropLife International event in

advance of World Food Day (16 October), Tom Vilsack, the US Secretary of Agriculture, has reiter-ated the importance of science-based regulation and the need to maintain a diverse choice of tech-nologies for farmers.

“When managed appro-priately, farm and ranchlands that embrace science and new technology can produce more, while preserving much of the native biodiversity,” Vilsack said during CropLife International’s Biodiversity World Tour. “We must work to ensure that all types of agricultural production can co-exist.”

‘All tools in the toolbox’ needed to save biodiversity

He continued: “As we confront the dual challenge of feeding the world while maintaining biodiversity...we must utilize all of the appro-priate tools in our toolbox.”

The Biodiversity World Tour (www.biodiversi ty -wor ld tour.com) was an online broadcast debate a l lowing growers, agr i -cultural researchers, and policy makers to discuss the intersection between food security priorities and biodiversity. The World Tour took place in three venues — Ames, Iowa; Brussels, Belgium and Nagoya and Japan.

Vilsack maintained that achieving the goals of food security and protecting bio-diversity “requires formula-

tion of careful national and international policies and requires the advancement of agricultural research and practices.”

“ Above all, these solu-tions must be built on strong science,” he said.

I n a c k n o w l e d g m e n t of the World Food Day, CropLife International en-courages the international community to support the adop t ion o f p roduc t i ve agricultural technologies and techniques to achieve food secur i ty whi le st i l l p reserv ing b iod ive rs i t y and natural resources.

“ F a r m e r s a r e f a c e d w i t h t h e c h a l l e n g e o f g ro w i n g ab u n d a n t an d nu t r i t i ous foods fo r an increasing world popula-tion — but must do so in a sus ta inab le way tha t pro tects and preserves n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s a n d biodiversity,” said Howard M i n i g h , P r e s i d e n t a n d CEO of CropLife Interna-tional.

As he put it, “utilizing a variety of innovative ag-ricultural tools is the only way to achieve sustainable land use and increased crop productivity that will feed an ever-growing population.”

US Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack

Agriculture Secretary Proceso “Procy” Alcala


Such a cooperative effort was last seen in the aftermath of Typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng when the industry also joined hands to help rehabilitate typhoon-devastated farms and bring the affected farmers in Northern Luzon and the Benguet areas back on their feet.

Last August 3, a total of 467.3 liters of agrochemical pesticides were donated and delivered by the members of the combined group to Quezon Province, enough to combat the current

infestation and eradicate the destructive worms that devour everything in their path. The crop protection industry members had also recently been individu-ally engaged in and helped successfully eradicate such army worm and cut worm infestations in Bataan and other provinces.

Crops most affected by the current infestation in Quezon are 80 hectares of upland rice, 840 hectares of corn and 340 hectares

Pesticides to the rescue

of vegetable crops such as eggplants, string beans, squash, snap beans, hot pepper and bitter gourd (ampalaya).

A total of 23 out of the 41 towns in Quezon are now under infestation.

In an emergency meeting with the crop protection industry and their experts on such worm infestations called by the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA) prior to this effort, the decision was reached that the main objective of this current campaign would be to exterminate the worms first before the infestation spreads to other areas and becomes too widespread to control and becomes even more massively destructive to our food crops.

The crops already affected by the infestation are no longer viable for harvesting and distribution and will have to be disposed of. However, after the worms are exterminated, the farms

will again be suitable for replanting within a week, helping the farmers on the road to recovery almost immediately.

Letty Hernandez, coordinator of the FPA for Region 4, led the distribution of the donated products to the farmers, together with Carlos S. Cena, administrator of the Sentrong Pamilihan ng Produktong Agrikultura ng Quezon Foundation, Inc., Robert Gajo, OIC of the Provincial Agriculturist’s Office (PAO) of Quezon and Anna Pamela Agudilla, chairwoman of the Depart-ment of Agriculture-Task Force Contra Uod.

Before the distribution of the pesticides, the farmers were given briefings on the safe and responsible use of the products by combined teams of expert techni-cians from both the crop protection industry and the Department of Agriculture.

CROPLIFE, CPAP and PICMA recently joined hands once more

in helping rescue the croplands of Quezon Province from the voracious army worms and cut worms that infest-ed more than 1,300 hectares of various crops in that province alone. The crop

protection industry members had also recently been individually engaged in and helped successfully eradicate such army worm


image credit: www.veggistate.com


THE FORTY-FOUR- YEAR-OLD, 60-thousand

hectare Mindanao-based Philippine export banana industry contributes an average of $720-million in export earnings annually to the national coffer making it the second biggest dollar-earning agricultural product next to coconut. However, it utilizes a mere 0.004 percent of the country’s total agricultural land area of 13 million hectares.

The industry traces its beginnings to 1966 in the then Municipality of Dadiangas which is now the City of General Santos where the first plantation-type banana farm in Mindanao was established. In 1969, the pioneering Cavendish banana farm was established in Davao Province when one of the country’s leading agro-industrial entrepreneurs, Don Antonio O. Floirendo Sr., shifted from abaca production to export banana production.

Today, the Floirendo-owned Tagum Development Corporation (TADECO) manages the biggest contiguous banana plantation in Asia at 6,281 hectares. The company contributes roughly 13 percent of Mindanao’s total production of 3 million metric tons for the world market last year which made the Philip-pines the second biggest banana exporter in the world next to Ecuador.

Japan is still the primary market where an estimated 46 percent of the island-region’s productions are shipped while the rest goes to Russia, New Zealand, the Middle East and China.

Large corporate farms initially provided the main bulk of production until the late 90s when the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program was fully implemented. Today, the industry relies on the production of 30,000 landowners, mostly agrarian reform beneficiaries. An estimated 240,000 farm workers

are also directly employed by the industry based on two field personnel per hectare and another two support personnel providing technical or adminis-trative services or employed in support industries such as carton manufacturing, trucking, port services and shipping.

The industry’s monthly payroll averages P1.5 billion at the current basic pay of P7,223.00 per worker or a whopping P19 billion per annum. At the current rate of P13,374.00 per hectare on business permits, real property taxes and other fees, the industry generates an annual tax payment

of P 833 million for 60,000 hectares in addition to P764 million in annual tax payments by its contractors and suppliers.

“Banana-exporting companies also regularly provide medical and dental services, livelihood and technology trainings as well as health centers and sports facilities for communities near farmlands,” said Jules Bulacito of DOLE-Stanfilco, current Chairman of the Community Development Committee of the Pilipino Banana Growers and Exporters Association (PBGEA).

PBGEA is the 34-member industry consortium that coordi-nates the various efforts of banana companies in community development, technical services, and legal services. A scholarship program for children of banana growers, employees and workers is also undertaken through the Banana Export Industry Founda-tion (BEIF).

It is also the PBGEA that coordinates efforts of various stakeholders for the formula-tion and adoption of govern-

Banana Growers call for aerial spray regulation

Most are hopeful though that government decision-makers will

resolve the issue whether to regulate or ban aerial spraying of low-dose

fungicide as an agricultural practice in the country on the basis of

incontrovertible scientific fact.

By Eli R. Lamsen

image credit: www.natureabove.com


SOLIDARITY RALLY. Stakeholders of the Philippine export banana industry mostly agrarian reform beneficiaries call for the legislation of aerial spray regulation November 20, 2009 instead of banning the practice which crop scientists say is “a critical component in the production of world-class Philippine bananas”. [PBGEA photo]

ment policies for the industry such as the regulation of the aerial application of low-dose fungicide as an agricultural practice in the Philippines.

“Controlling the Black Sigato-ka fungus is the most challenging element of our pest management system and a critical factor in maintaining our productivity and production of quality bananas,” said PBGEA executive director Stephen A. Antig.

Antig said that a call to ban the aerial application of low-dose fungicide is bereft of any scientific basis. He said that this aerial spraying does not pose a risk to people’s health and the environment and that nobody has ever been adversely affected by the formulation for the past 44 years that it has been in use on banana farmlands in Mindanao.

Dr. Andrew Hewitt, the world-renowned aerodynamics and aerial spraying expert and regulatory consultant to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, found aerial spraying practices in Mindanao

to be in accordance to interna-tional safety standards.

Hewitt debunked allegations of anti-spray advocates that spray drift can go as far as 3.2 kilome-ters since spray aircraft cruise not more than 8 feet above the canopy of banana leaves which catch and contain the spray mist almost immediately upon its release.

Dr. Benny Corcolon, the Vice-President for Research of Tagum Development Corpora-tion said that aerial application is a hundred-fold more efficient than ground or manual spraying.

“It is GPS-guided and so the level of precision as to which area is to be sprayed is very high. It can consistently deposit 60-70 drops per square-inch of leaves which is not possible with other spraying methods,” said Corcolon.

Aerial spraying though is appropriate only in flatland farms which is about forty percent of the total banana farmlands in Mindanao. Truck-mounted and manual spraying

are used in rolling terrains where productive areas are reduced by twenty percent, on the average, for the needed road networks.

The association’s technical and financial committee reckons that “production cost per hectare in flatland farms will increase by as much as thirty-eight percent (38 percent) if the industry shifts to ground spraying. Costs will increase to defray additional manpower and higher chemical usage while overall production output will decrease due to a reduction in productive area.”

“Small growers with less than a hectare will suffer most as twenty percent of their landholdings will have to be reconfigured into passageways for ground spraying,” said Corcolon.

It is one dire prospect staring small banana growers in the eye. Most are hopeful though that government decision-makers will resolve the issue whether to regulate or ban aerial spraying of low-dose fungicide as an agricultural practice in the country on the

basis of incontrovertible scientif-ic fact.

“Both the science and economics of the practice make it imperative that it be regulated,” said crop protection specialist and chair of PBGEA’s Technical Committee, Dr. Emily Fabregar.

She stipulates though that no other pesticide must be aerially sprayed other than low-dose fungicide.

“Aerial application of other pesticides must not be allowed,” declared banana grower Renante Bangoy with as much vehemence as the militant few who have been falsely accusing the banana industry of spraying all kinds of pesticides.

Bangoy heads the coalition of cooperatives of agrarian reform beneficiaries, small banana growers as well as farm workers, calling for the strict regulation of aerial spraying.

“Banning the practice is like banning the chlorination of potable water,” said Bangoy citing the fact that there is not much difference in the raw risks posed by low-dose fungicide and chlorinated water.

Cases filed by Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs) and small banana growers vs. Dr. Francisco Duque III, Dr. Romeo Quijano, Dr. Allan Dionisio, et al

In a letter to the Civil Service Commission dated 16 October 2009, LEONARDO TIGAO,

Tribal Chieftain in Camocaan and BERNARDO DIAZ, Barangay Kagawad of Barangay Aplaya where Camocaan is located, prayed that DR. ALLAN DIONISIO, DR. LYNN CRISANTA R. PANGANIBAN, DR. CARISSA C. DIOQUINO, DR. NELIA P. CORTES-MARAMBA, DR. ANNABELLE YUMANG, and a number of UP-PGH doctors, including DR. ROMEO QUIJANO be sanctioned for violating their Oath as Doctors and for violating the Code of Ethics for Doctors for causing the people of Camocaan, Bgy. Aplaya, Hagonoy, Davao del Sur, to be falsely branded as diseased and shamed around the world.

The above-named doctors had been party to flawed “studies” that besmirched Camocaan’s citizenry in order to propel a move to ban aerial spraying as an application method for low-dose, low-toxicity fungicides to combat black sigatoka in the banana plantations.

Ironically, on January 14, 2010, Dr. Francisco Duque III, the former DOH Secretary who had caused the above flawed recommendation to ban aerial spraying to be carried by the DOH, was appointed to chair the Civil Service Commission.

On February 10, 2010, RODOLFO M. VILLANUEVA, ELEUTERIA B. CHACON, CELSO R. CUBIO and RENANTE F. BANGOY, Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries (ARBs) and small banana growers/farmers and all of Panabo City, Davao del Norte, filed an Affidavit-Complaint with the Ombudsman for Mindanao “to pave the way for the prosecution of former DOH Secretary, Francisco Duque III, for violation of Section 3 (e) of Republic Act No. 3019; and Sections 4 (b) and (c) of Republic Act No. 6713” otherwise known as the “Anti-graft and Corrupt Practices Act.”

The complaint was docketed as Ombudsman case vs. Dr. Francisco Duque III (Case No.

OMB-M-C-10-0063-B; For: Violation of Sec 3(e) of RA 3019). It cites Dr. Duque as DOH Secretary for supporting the recommendation to ban in spite of peer reviews by the WHO and the UP System that found the study flawed and the recommendation insufficient to support a ban.

On the fourth week of May, 2010, Mr. Villanueva received a copy of Dr. Duque’s Counter Affidavit to this Ombudsman case.

On May 26, 2010, the complainants filed their Reply-Affidavit to the Ombudsman, denying as baseless and false practically all of the paragraphs in Dr. Duque’s Counter-Affidavit “in order to refute the allegations of Dr. Francisco T. Duque, III, in his Counter-Affidavit so that the latter be investigated for impeachment purposes” as now Chairman of the Civil Service Commission.

This case awaits Ombudsman action at the moment.


HAVING been a rice farmer on the side for the last 30 years, I am always intrigued by the fact that our country has to regularly import rice and that rice is closely intertwined

with politics. This despite the fact that among the country’s major agricultural crops, rice is by far the most researched commodity for which various intervention strategies have been adopted by our government through the years in the form of policies and programs.

The farm is situated in one of the best rice areas southwest of Nueva Ecija, It is fully irrigated as part of a national irrigation

network fed from the waters of Pantabangan Dam. During the dry season, we get yields of up to 7 mt./ha. of hybrid rice, while during the rainy season we get an aver-age of slightly more than 5 mt./ha with certified inbred seeds, except when we get hit by really bad typhoons which so far, and thank God, happened not more than 6 times over the last thirty years. Use of inputs is at the optimum level.

The land tiller/ownership profile of the general area where the farm is situated has over the years somewhat changed in the face of the agrarian reform program. Many small land reform beneficiaries have made “sanla” and have practically “sold” their land to mostly enterprising people who have enough hard-earned cash, giving rise to some kind of consolidation into more economic size farms. Such farms, run like a business, are now some of the more productive if not the most productive rice farms in the country today.

Yet the maintenance of irrigation canals and dikes needs a lot of improvement; many of the farm to market roads are in bad shape; there is a dearth of solar drying pavements and mechanical drying facilities, which forces many small farmers to sell their palay fresh right after harvest and leave the drying to the buyers or middlemen. All these substantially increase the farmers’ post-harvest and marketing expenses. A lot of “leaks” in what otherwise would have added to the income of the farmers.

The Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization ActRepublic Act 8435, otherwise known as Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization

Act (AFMA), whose principal author is Sen. Edgardo Angara, was signed on Dec. 22, 1997 by former President Fidel V. Ramos. Its implementing rules and regulations were embodied in DA Administrative order no. 6, signed by acting Secretary William Dar on July 10, 1998.

Among others, AFMA seeks to “modernize the agriculture and fisheries sectors by transforming these sectors from a resource-based to a technology-based industry, increase the sectors’ productivity and enhance profits and incomes, particularly of the small farmers and fisherfolk by ensuring equitable access to assets, resources and services, and promoting higher-value crops, value-added processing, agribusiness activities, and agro-industrialization, poverty alleviation and social equity, and ensure the accessibility, affordability, availability and stable supply of food to all at all times.”

Food security: rice self sufficiency-elusive reality?By Simeon CuysonExecutive Director, CropLife Philippines, Inc.

Harvest is a quarterly publication of CropLife Philippines, Inc. in partnership with the Initiative for Farm Advocacy and Resource Management (IFARM). CropLife headquarters is at Unit 5E MAPFRE Asian Condominium Center, Acacia Avenue, Madrigal Business Park, Alabang, Muntinlupa City 1780. Telefax (+632) 772-3992 / (+632) 772-3993 / Cell No. (+63917) 824-3992 / (+63917) 838-3992. E-mail address: [email protected] / [email protected].

Editorial offices are located at IFARM, 2/F The Advocacy House, 8 Scout Chuatoco St., Roxas District, Quezon City. Telefax (+632) 372-8560. For comments and editorial contributions, email at [email protected]. You may also visit our website www.safepinoy.com.

Simeon Cuyson, publisher • Joel C. Paredes and Cris T. Michelena, editors • Jason B. Valenzuela, art director • Ian Go, editorial coordinator and deskman • Beth Jazildo, business coordinator

THE PLANT science industry has taken a great leap forward.

It has crafted The Compact, a framework for settling claims for dam-age caused by living modified organisms (LMOs).

This is an initiative that the industry took on its own, an indication that it is responsive to the demand for fairness and truthfulness about the impact of products that it has developed and applied to increase crop yield and develop new varieties that can withstand the impact of climate change and disasters.

It is the dawning of the age of corporate responsibility, particularly for an industry that prides itself as the exponent of scientific rigor to enhance productivity while saving the planet.

The Compact is but one of the many deeds that the industry wants to continue doing for the benefit of the market that it serves.

Take the case of deep involvement in the local anti-dengue campaign, with the industry adopting communities that used to suffer from the on-slaught of disease-carrying vectors.

In close coordination with local officials and private sector repre-sentatives, the plant science industry member-companies of CropLife operating in the country succeeded in eradicating dengue in Barangay Culiat in Quezon City.

The campaign has gathered steam and is well on the way to exter-minating the deadly fever elsewhere in the metropolis.

This, they did with less fanfare and lesser exposure.

Another worthwhile enterprise is the ongoing campaign to educate farmers and rural residents on the proper handling of agricultural inputs.

With the culture of good agricultural practices at work, we may even-tually succeed in looking at these inputs as tools of production and not as poisons.

It takes a decade to establish this culture, but the industry will not waver in its attempt to teach and learn and contribute much to the acceptance of one basic fact--- that the plant science industry is a partner for rural develop-ment and national growth.

The industry has labored long and hard to erase the negative percep-tion that it is not doing its corporate civic duty to be responsible to its partners and its clients.

Fact is, research-based member companies of CropLife have spent billions to develop technologies and LMOs that would make life easier to bear, with food there in the pantry and the labor spent for agriculture is reduced.

The plant science industry should be seen as a partner in humanity’s collective aspiration to upgrade the quality of life in a world struggling to free itself from the yoke of ignorance and superstition.

E D I T O R I A L

Responsibility


LAST June the Philippines inaugurated a new government under the leadership of Benigno Aquino III, the 15th president

of the Republic. “Noynoy” as he is popularly known swept to power on a platform of transparency, good governance, and uplifting the lives of the Filipino masses. His appointment as Secretary of Agriculture was Proceso Alcala, a congressman from Quezon province who successfully set up agricultural trading centers and sponsored the Organic Bill . This signals the President is serious about selecting lieutenants with successful track records and yet have a common touch.

Several members of Crop Life Philippines had the opportunity to meet the new Secretary of Agriculture on August 12 at his office in Quezon City and exchange ideas about the challenges the country is facing. It was an informal affair which seems to suit the new Secretary’s style, but also a very down to earth and informative one. The Secretary reiterated the government’s goal to become self sufficient in rice in three years. Greater use of certified rice seeds will play a key role in lifting productivity as well as further training of Filipino farmers. The Secretary also stated that Mindanao has a key role to play in increasing our food security as it is fertile and not prone to typhoons, and the government is exploring infrastructure investments there. To make these changes happen the government is seeking the support and expertise of the private sector. Finally while the Secretary is an advocate of organic production, he does not believe in forcing it on farmers or the public.

While it was a brief introductory meeting, there was a feeling of engagement and sincerity that lifted our spirits. Hopefully the new administration will put into action its stated intentions and involve the private sector where we our expertise can make contributions. There have been mixed results in the past, but we believe we do have many of the solutions towards increased agricultural productivity in the Philippines. It is a just a matter of consistently using proven technologies that make sense for our local conditions. Over the next months the officers of Crop Life will seek to engage and support policy makers in our new administration towards the common goals of increased food security and rural development for the Philippines. Hopefully we move forward as an industry and a country.

Hopefully looking forwardBy Jose ValmayorPresident, CropLife Philippines, Inc.

CropLife Philippines, Inc.2010-2011 Officers and Board of Directors

Jose Ramon L. Valmayor, Syngenta Philippines, President; Rodolfo F. Macatula, DuPont Far East, Inc. Phils., Vice President; Florence B. Vasquez, Bayer CropScience Phils., Secretary; Dennis C. Miciano, Sinochem Crop Protection Phils., Treasurer; Fernando C. Tagalog, Jardine Distribution, Inc.; Edgar Juan C. Surtida III, Monsanto Philippines, Director; Claro C. Arriola, BASF Philippines, Director, and; Simeon A. Cuyson, Executive Director.

IFARM Board

Dr. Calixto Protacio, chair • Joel C. Paredes, president • Cris T. Michelena, managingdirector • Attorney Roberto Oliva, Dr. Renato Labadan, Floreño Solmerano, directors

The law also seeks to promote global competitiveness of our agriculture and fisheries sectors.

Since then, reports on the performance of Philippine agriculture have been mixed- particularly in the crop sector. In “Philippine Agriculture in the next millennium: Some Strategic Issues and Directions” February, 2000, L.A. Gonzales cited that “reforms in the agricultural sector have been hampered by inadequate resources, limited implementing capabilities of national and local government units (LGUs) and weak coordination among implementing agencies. In addition the occurrence of the El Niño phenomenom and the 1997 financial crisis exacerbated the real growth of the sector, resulting to contraction in output in 1998.”

Need for increased productivityWe have roughly 1.5 million hectares irrigated area (out of about 3.1 million hectares

irrigable area) and 1.3 million hectares of rain-fed area. Average yields from irrigated areas is about 4.0 mt/ha while that from rain-fed areas is about 2.6 mt/ha.

Looking into published BAS and NSO data over the last ten years, palay production has been increasing annually by more than 3 percent ( from 11.786 million mt in 1999 to 16.266 million mt in 2009), while our population increased by about 2.1 percent annually.

At current levels of productivity and population growth, our rice area is still not big enough for us to have the flexibility to absorb the impact of a big typhoon or a protracted drought without causing significant setback to our self sufficiency efforts.

In contrast, Thailand and Vietnam have roughly 9 million hectares and 7 million hectares of rice, respectively. And we have a bigger and faster growing population than both countries.

Experts agree that the only way our country can produce its own rice requirements is to increase productivity in a sustainable way. Cantrell (2004) stated that future in-creases in supply must come from yield improvements in existing cultivated lands and expansion of rice farming to marginal areas.

We should take Secretary Proceso Alcala’s plan for rice self-sufficiency as a chal-lenge and clear call for action. His thrust towards rainfed/upland rice and his intention to help the small rain-fed/upland rice farmers is well taken. We believe that he knows fully well that this should be done not at the expense of programs for irrigated rice which contributes more that 70 percent to the total rice production, as compared to less than 30 percent from rain-fed rice. Both should be given equal intensity of support.

From where he is coming, we appreciate the secretary’s statements about organic farming, but this may be sending confusing signals if not taken in the right context. There are other available options that can help us increase our productivity. In the first place, our country needs to increase production through increased productivity or by increasing yields per unit area. Given our limited land area, we need to exploit all op-tions, including new and proven technologies, to be self sufficient in rice

Secondly, organic produce has its own niche market. There must be a clear strategy on organic rice production ; perhaps encouraging organic rice farming only in specific, selected areas would do the trick. Best practices in conventional agriculture, which includes balanced fertilization, and use of proven scientific and modern productivity-enhancing , safe and environment friendly technologies must be actively promoted and supported.

Thirdly, the policy, the institutional and the science-based regulatory framework for evaluating human and environmental safety of new technologies such as biotechnology are well established and adequate safeguards are in place. The country’s experience with GM corn for the last eight years can speak for itself. There are clearly promising so-called Pinoy GM crops being researched and developed by our own world-class scientists.

Fourth, farmers and consumers should be given the option to choose what sys-tems, technologies, techniques and products to adopt. But they must be empowered to make the right decisions.

The role of science in driving agricultural productivity cannot be overemphasized.

Yield GapPhilippine Rice Research Institute studies indicate that actual rice yields on aver-

age are only about a quarter of potential (experimental) yields of modern, high yielding varieties (12 mt per ha). V.B.J. Tolentino, et al (Nov. 1, 2001) attributed this yield gap to production constraints, to wit:

a) Insect pests and diseases - 35 percentb) Inappropriate water management - 26 percentc) Inappropriate fertilization and soil management - 21 percentd) Weeds - 9 percente) Inappropriate seeds and seedling management - 9 percentThey further explain that there are significant interactions among the above

mentioned production constraints. The quality of water management, for example is known to influence the level of farm inputs such as fertilizers, as well as the incidence of weeds, and other pests and diseases.

Hossain et al (1995), from a survey of households, identified pests and diseases as contributing greatly to the yield gap in rice production. According to his report, except for calamities such as typhoons and drought, insects and diseases are the highest contributor to losses in yield, averaging 26 percent in the wet season and 16 percent during the dry season of the total production losses (28 percent of normal yield). Other factors contributing to said losses are: typhoons/strong winds, floods, insects & diseases, inferior variety, lack of capital and others.

Along this line, the Secretary’ program for training and helping the small rain-fed rice farmers to use certified seeds, and at the least to produce good seeds themselves

Continued on Page 11


Professor Antonio Laurena for his part has been at the forefront of applied biotechnology in the univer-sity, putting to good use the advanced training on biotech techniques for developing delayed-ripening and ring virus-resistant papaya that he undertook in Australia.

Initial development of delayed ripening papaya about a decade ago was vulnerable to papaya ring spot which negated the effects of the delayed ripening. They have finally got this solved with this new dual-trait strain.

This semester, Prof. Mendoza and Laurena oversee the implementation of the spanking new Agbiotechnology degree course at UPLB. It looks very promising and…fruitful.

Though biotechnology is not new to the UP System, its courses on cell and molecular biology and other like biotech disciplines usually lead students into the medical sciences. UPLB, being a center for agriculture in Asia, sees the need for agricultural applications.

For the new degree course, the IBP staff together with UPLB Chancel-lor Rey Velasco, all tempered their expectations and targeted only 35 degree students for its first semester. But surprisingly, 71 students signed up and quite a few more are wanting to shift to the new baccalaureate course.

By way of introduction, they have also replaced the former NatSci GE subjects in UPLB with a Science and

BS Agbiotechnology now in UPLB

Technology for Society (STS) course and added a new subject coded SS10 that is an introduc-tion to biotechnology for general education.

“Matuto sila ng kaunting biotech and make them think and analyze,” Prof. Mendoza said.

“These students are coming from engineering, applied physics, mayroon tayong CA din. So iba-iba ang kanilang background,” she added. The teaching style is also different.

“‘Yung topics namin, explaining

what biotech is, from traditional to modern, tapos ‘yung concep-tion of principles at the level that they would understand. Mga applications saka mga issues. Pinagdedebatehan. Kunwari ang isa, ang proposition is the Jurassic Park is ready to open to visitors. All the safety concerns have been addressed. So ‘yung isa pro, isa con,” Prof. Mendoza goes on excitedly.

“Makita mo talaga, nag-aral sila, nag-isip sila, they have to work as a team. So ibig sabihin, nakapag-usap sila sa bawat isa and they have to verbalize. And we asked them to speak either straight English or straight Filipino. Siyempre nai-insert lang ang mga English terms.”

The interest in biotechnology is alive and well and is seen to be a trend for future careers.

“Isa sa mga successful programs namin ang food tech (with a lot of biotechnology in it), in terms of enrollees, kasi ina-absorb agad ng industry. May trabaho agad sila,” opines Prof. Laurena.

The young seem to have a better grasp of and a more avid interest in the basic concepts. But introducing BS Agbiotechnology into the University curriculum has taken a painstakingly long time. Ten years since now-Chancellor Velasco, who introduced the idea of Agbiotech as a degree course, was then Dean of the College of Agriculture.

The going has not been easy. The regulatory system on biotech-nology, as with all food and food production (agriculture) technolo-gies, is prudently rigid and strictly enforced, nationally and interna-tionally, including its development for educational purposes.

The most exciting field is actually in genetically modified organisms (GMOs) now also known as genetically enhanced products. As early as 2000, in an international scientific convention in Bangkok, Dr. Saturnina Halos, Advisor for Biotechnology to the Philippine Secretary of Agriculture, submit-ted a paper entitled “Agricultural Biotechnology in the Philippines” on the challenges the discipline was confronting even then.

“There is a small foreign-funded group trying to block the commercial planting and entry of GMOs in the country and has actively tried to block the field test of Bt corn through a very effective system of disseminating misinformation. This campaign has resulted in the passing of a resolution to block the Bt corn field test by the General Santos City Council, resolutions at the

House and Senate to investigate the field test, a pending bill at the Senate calling for a ban on GMOs and the filing of a trumped up charge against the DOST, DA and IPB in connection with the Bt corn field test at the Supreme Court which dismissed the case. The anti-GMO group appears to be going around the country campaigning. There are also reports of Roman Catholic priests strongly advising parishioners in their homilies to reject Bt corn,” Dr. Halos reported.

The misinformation continues to this day. The new degree course in UPLB is intended to confront this challenge squarely with science-based learning and investigation.

Today, after having acquired and perfected the skills in isolat-ing, genetically implanting and propagating the dual-trait strain papaya (giving the fruit up to 14 days of marketability rather than the current two to four days), Prof. Antonio Laurena sees great development in the fruit’s economic contribution to the country and industry.

“At saka natanggal na rin namin ang genetic markers nito,” he proudly states, referring to a main

bone of conten-

tion that contrarian alerts have espoused against GMOs as being carriers of “unwanted genetic material,” though Prof. Laurena maintains that the markers have no active properties for humans at all.

With this new course, a refocus on good science in agriculture is coming to the fore. Under the agricultural regime of new DA Secretary Proceso Alcala, science-based agriculture may yet succeed in “making farming profitable for our farmers” once more.

PROFESSORS Mae Mendoza and Antonio Laurena of the Institute of Plant Breeding (IBP) in UP Los

Baños are very excited indeed. Professor Mendoza had authored an introductory book on biotechnology that tremendously simplifies the concept for students and laymen and now leads in introducing biotechnology and a new baccalaureate degree course on it to UPLB students – B.S. Agricultural Biotechnology.



Barron made his position in response to a letter by lawyer Joy Angelica P. Santos Doctor, counsel of the Southeast Asian Research Institute on Community Empowerment (SEARICE), on BPI’s approval of such tests in seven sites nationwide.

Barron made it clear that BPI issued the approval for multi-location field trials based on the policy of the Department of Agriculture (DA) under Administrative Order No. 8 (AO 8).

Under the order, no regulated article shall be released into the environ-ment for field testing unless “a Permit to Field Test has been secured from the BPI, and the regulated article has been tested under contained conditions in the Philip-pines.”

The BPI director elaborat-ed that Bt eggplant had satisfied the two conditions required under AO 8.

“Bt eggplant has undergone contained trials (screenhouse and single location contained field test) under the supervision of the Depart-ment of Science and Technol-ogy-Biosafety Committee (DoST-BC)as indicated in the certificate of completion issued on 30 March 2009,” he told Doctor.

Barron added that the proponent, University of the Philippines at Los Baños (UPLB), submit-ted an application for multi-location field trials

and satisfied all the require-ments.

“The proposal for the field trial, entitled “Development and Commercialization of Philippine Fruit and Shoot Borer (FSB) Resistant Eggplants Containing MAHYCO Eggplant Even, EE-1: Multi location Field Trials fro Biosafety Assess-ment, Variety Accreditation and Fertilizer and Pesticides Authority (FPA) Registra-tion” was endorsed by the UPLB Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC). The objective of the study is to generate the following information on promising eggplant genotypes contain-ing MAHYCO event EE-1 for biosafety assessment, variety accreditation and FPA registration: Yield and horticultural performance; biosafety against EFSB infestation and damage; incidence and non-target insect pests and diseases, and; other insect resistance

management (IRM)-related information,” Barron narrated.

“Risk assessment was conducted by three independent Scientific and Technical Review Panel (STRP) members using the risk assessment form for genetically modified (GM) plant for field test as you can view in our website

Barron made it clear that BPI issued the approval for multi-location field trials based on the policy of the Department of Agriculture (DA) under Administrative Order No. 8 (AO 8).

www.biotech.da.gov.ph,” he told Doctor.

Barron also told the SEARICE counsel that the risk assessment considered a number of factors: “The GM species to be released; natural habitat; distribution range of the GM and non-GM taxonomic relatives; natural enemies (predators and parasites); GMO genetics (genetic manipulations and details of methods used, where in the genome the genetic manipulation was done; the morphological biochemical markers which differenti-ate the GM from the wild type counterpart, copies if the genetic sequence was inserted/deleted/mutated in the

BPI Director Clarito Barron

Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) Director Dr. Clarito Barron opposed

a moratorium on the field testing of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) eggplant, saying it would deprive the country of “a very promising technology.”

GMO; how modification altered the phenotype of the GM; level of expression of the transfered gene and how expression is regulated; data on stability, survival and transfer under contained conditions; experimental procedures; methods to minimize dispersal/survival and risk analysis.”

He pointed out that some of the materials submitted by UPLB to BPI were studies done in India that were also used by STRP as cross-reference to evaluate the safety of the field trials.

Barron told Doctor that so far, the BPI has received “only the data to support the safe conduct of the field trial even as the proponents have been conducting the effect of Bt eggplant on non-target organisms, protein expres-sion on different plant

parts, protein expression on the different stages of development and the

effect of Bt eggplant on soil microorganisms and pollen flow.”

New BPI Chief opposes ban on Bt eggplant testsBy Ian Go


Brighter days ahead for Bt corn in RP

Rice and corn, which are the country’s two most important

crops, would reasonably be the focus of biotechnology research, development and adoption. In the case of corn, it has been consis-tently proven that the yield and income of farmers who planted Bacillus thuringi-ensis (Bt) corn were signifi-cantly higher than those who did not. Moreover, the expenditure on insecticide was significantly lower among Bt corn farmers.

A study conducted by STRIVE Foundation to assess the socio-economic impact of biotech seed corn technologies on smallholder corn farmers in the Philip-pines revealed that biotech-nology seed corn were superior to ordinary hybrid corn in terms of increasing yield, net farm income, subsistence level carrying capacity, global competi-tiveness and return on investment and in reducing production costs.

The same study also indicated that “the benefit of having genetic traits of corn borer and weedicide resistance contributed to yield gains favorable to Bt, RR and stack corn seed users. The yield advantage was favorable for average to high yield farmers across seasons, generating positive yield differences of from 4 percent to 34 percent.” Bt corn is now being cultivated in 400,000 hectares across the country.

Dr. Leo Gonzales, a noted agricultural economist looks

By Chat Garrido-Ocampo

at biotechnology commer-cialization and adoption as vital to national interest “due to its implications for food security and alleviation of poverty, with on-farm benefits from biotech products having strong multiplier effects among small farmer adoptors.”

However, Dr. Gonzales also recognizes that technol-ogy breakthroughs such as agricultural biotechnology can only be harnessed to meet the challenges of the future if “there is a favorable policy environment that will allow them to be used as tools for development.

Support from Govern-ment and the scientific community

The successful adoption of Bt corn would not have been possible without strong government support. Biotechnology remained

consistently high on the priority list of the govern-ment agenda. From the time of President Marcos, up to the time of President Arroyo, the Philippine government had consistently supported the promotion and development of biotech-nology through the follow-ing official acts:

Ferdinand E. Marcos – established BIOTECH at the University of the Philippines at Los Baños which was the first Philip-pine biotechnology R & D institution.

Corazon C. Aquino – Established the National Committee on Biosafety of the Philippines (NCBP) through EO 430. The NCBP oversees the compliance of policies and guidelines in all institutions – public or private – as well as coordinates with the appropriate national

bodies that have regulatory powers over any violations.

Fidel V. Ramos – signed the Agriculture and Fishes Modernization Act into law. AFMA set the policy framework for moderniza-tion and transformation of the agriculture and fisheries sector using technology as a base. The Act also recognized modern biotech-nology as one of the tools to realize improvement in crop production. The AFMA Implementing Rules and Regulations dated June 10, 1998, stated that 20 percent of the Department of Agriculture research budget would be allotted for modern biotechnology

Joseph Estrada – Issued a national policy to use biotechnology as a strategy to improve agricul-tural production, modernize Philippine agriculture and

enhance rural development.

Gloria Arroyo – signed policy statement on modern biotechnology for national

development . A Memorandum to this effect dated July 17, 2001 was issued, addressed to the Secretaries of Agriculture, Science and Technology, Health, Environment and Natural Resources and Trade and Industry (Ampil and Palacpac, 2003).

Hopefully, the Aquino Government and the Depart-ment of Agriculture, under the watch of Secretary Proceso Alcala, will continue the long standing support provided by the Philippine government for the promotion of biotech-nology.

Meanwhile, an extensive survey done by the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign (UIUC) and the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applica-tions (ISAAA) in 2003 revealed that a majority of Philippine stakehold-ers - particularly policy makers, journalists, businessmen, farmer leaders, and extension workers - were highly interested in agricultural biotechnology. About 70 percent of policy makers, businessmen, and extension workers believed that biotechnol-ogy is good for Philip-pine agriculture. On the other hand, consumers, religious leaders and scientists showed relatively less interest

image credit: home.howstuffworks.com

and concern about biotechnology (ISAAA 2003).

More than 3400 scientists from 60 countries, including 25 Nobel laureates, have signed an earlier, broader petition in support of agricultural biotechnology (http://www.agbioworld.org).

Early this year, Dr. Clive James, ISAAA founder and chairman, indicated in a study that “as a result of consistent and substantial crop productivity, and economic, environmental and welfare benefits, a record of 14 million small and large farmers in 25 countries planted 134 million hectares in 2009, an increase of 7 percent or 9 million hectares over 2008. The 80-fold increase in biotech crop hectares between 1996 and 2009 is unprec-edented and makes biotech crops the fastest adopted crop technology in the recent history of agriculture.”

Model country in AsiaThe Philippines was among the

first countries in Asia to recognize the value of biotechnology. The Philippines is considered a leader in the region and has consistently been visited by public agriculture officials as a model country for successfully using biotechnology to improve the plight of farmers towards the development of the agriculture industry.

Now, the Vietnam government supports biotechnology and has committed to commercializing biotech corn by 2011. China, which already has several biotech crops including cotton, has just recently announced the approval of biotech rice and corn. The Indonesian government is also considering approving biotech crops.

Meantime, the biosafety rules of Bangladesh were finalized earlier this year during the Consultation Workshop on Biosafety Rules of Bangladesh held at the Depart-ment of Environment, Ministry of Environment and Forests with the facilitation by the South Asia Biosafety Program (SABP).

In the past month, the Philippines has also been visited by high level Indonesian and Pakistani public agriculture officials to observe the application of our biotech protocols. The said officials have been informed how farmers in the Philippines prospered with biotech crops so that they also wanted to provide the same advantage to their farmers.

Stand of the Catholic ChurchIn a predominantly Catholic

country, official pronouncements of the CatholicBishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) exert a strong influence in policymak-ing. To date, the CBCP has not issued a clear-cut and united stand on biotechnology. Conservative members of the CBCP, like Bishop Varela of Sorsogon, in the Southern part of Luzon Island, however, believe that GMOs can help provide a humane solution to the global problem of hunger and malnutrition.

Late last year, Dominican Archbishop Leonardo Legaspi of Caceres told UCA News that “Church opposition (to GMO) is no longer as strong.” The bishop noted “a gradual evolution” toward acceptance as it became apparent that GMO offers food safety and security as well as environmental sustainability.”

The National Catholic Reporter also reported last year that during the May 15-19, 2009 study week on genetically modified organisms sponsored by the Pontifical Academy for Sciences in Rome, Italy it was concluded that “in light of eight years of experience with growing transgenic crops, many additional field trials, and many additional published research reports, the conference concluded that the scientific evidence is overwhelming that transgenic crops improve the lives of the poor and offer additional significant improve-ments in their lives in the years to come.”

Future DirectionThe experience of the Philippines

with the introduction of Bt corn as documented in so many scientific papers and reports is a good indica-tor of the country’s openness to biotechnology. Despite the apparent aversion of some militant groups towards technologies owned by multinationals, opposition has clearly been declining as more corn farmers adopt the technology. The decline of resistance from the various groups opposed to GMO in the past years is nothing short of remarkable.

The level of acceptance and planting of Bt corn has been continuously building up in as much as the National Committee on Biosafety of the Philippines also continues to enjoy the confidence of civil society. In fact, scientists engaged in biotechnology

research regard the current biosafety guidelines as among the most stringent in Asia.

Nevertheless, Dr. Gonzales stated in his study which was published in 2009 that before society can truly optimize the benefits of biotechnol-ogy, there is a need for a proactive, participatory and integrative institu-tional development mechanism to implement major important policies. These include immediate implemen-tation of macro policy and sectoral reforms, institutional strengthening and human resource development, formulation and implementation of an infrastructure development

policy, creation of strategic alliances to fast track the commercialization and adoption of biotech products, and the continuous monitoring and evaluation of the socio-economic impacts of GM technologies.

Undeniably, the future of biotechnology in the Philippines relies largely on the government’s resolve to push for the promotion and adoption of frontier technolo-gies. If national capacity for biotechnology research, develop-ment and adoption continues to expand, the future of biotechnol-ogy in the Philippines can only look bright.

is well conceived and very timely. This should ultimately help in reducing the yield gap.

Putting our acts togetherRice constitutes the staple of 90

percent of all Filipino households. It takes up to 25 percent of the total budget of the average Filipino family, while 80 percent of Filipino households devote half of their expenses to food (B.V. J. Tolentino, 2001).

The opportunity is here for us to further improve our rice productivity, at-tain self sufficiency and save on imports, given a declining population growth (from 2.34 percent annually between 1990-2000 to a projected 1.95 percent annual rate between 2005 and 2010). But such improvement can only come about if we put our acts together and consistently put our resources where they are needed, following and in accordance with a well-

conceived long term plan, regardless of who sits at the top.

At the same time, we must also support the expansion, diversification and value add-ing for other agricultural crops and products. L.A. Gonzalez, 2000 cites that based on a University of Asia and Pacific Global Com-petitiveness study, the following crops have been identified as export-competitive: coco-nut (oil), oil palm, cavendish banana, banana chips, coffee beans, mango, pineapple, durian, mangosteen, onion (seasonal), abaca, cacao, and rubber. The same study also identified rice, yellow corn, potato, cas-sava, vegetables, tomato, and cutflowers as competitive as import substitutes.

Enabling farmers to increase their productivity would contribute to the devel-opment of a vibrant rural economy.

It is only when the average Filipino household spends a substantially lower proportion than ½ of their total household expenses can we claim success at all in our poverty alleviation efforts.

Food security...from page 7


imag

e cr

edit:

www.

delta

flow.

com

The cause and

Supporters: • International Council for Science (ICSU) • International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP) • International Fertilizer Industry Association (IFA) • CropLife International (CLI) • IFDC • World Federation of Engineering Organizations (WFEO) • International Institute of Refrigera-tion (IIR) • International Seed Federation (ISF) • International Plant Nutrition Institute (IPNI) • Partnership to Cut Hunger and Poverty in Africa • International Food & Agricultural Trade Policy Council (IPC) • Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network (FANRPAN) • European Irrigation Association (EIA) • TechnoServe • Pan African Agribusiness & Agro-Industry Consortium (PanAAC) • The Africa Enterprise Challenge Fund (AECF)

Access the most up-to-date info on global agriculture and food. Video clips, news

releases, interactive information sources, video and teleconferences, webinars. Global farming and technology news

at your fingertips via internet!

Subscribe now! It’s robust! It’s comprehensive and global!

It’s FREE!

http://www.farmingfirst.org

As the title suggests, the article delved on the advantages and disadvantages of organic and the conventionally produced, or geneti-cally modified, or chemical-laden food, or whatever people may call it, food that is readily available in supermarkets.

The story hit the bull’s eye, in the Philippine setting, when it said on the third paragraph: “True, the importance of going organic is less relevant in the developing world— where food security trumps other concerns— but those who can afford it, so we’re told, should support the movement.”

How can we afford to go organic when we, a nation of rice eaters, hardly have enough conventionally grown varieties of the staple to feed our continu-ously growing population? That is only rice. What about fruits and vegetables, milk, meat and poultry?

As the population increases, farmlands inevitably decrease. The only option is to try to grow more from less land, which can not be achieved using organic farming methods.

The article written by Jeffrey Kluger also said that a 2009 study in the American Journal of Chemical Nutrition found no difference between organic and conventional produce with regard to all but three of the vitamins and other food components studied.

Conventional produce, the article further said, even edged organic in a category.

“The back-to-the land ideal of farming without the use of pesticides and other synthetic chemicals can take you only so far in a world with 6.8 billion mouths to feed. Norman Borlaug, the father of the Green Revolution who nearly doubled the wheat yields in Pakistan and India in the late ‘60s via a

combination of high-yield plants and fertilizers, is often credited with saving a billion lives.” the article stressed.

“Say what you will about the environmental depredations of agribusiness, but industrial farms coax up to twice as much food out of every acre of land as organic farms do,” it continued.

What are we to do?According to the article, the

organiccost of going

AS A GROUP lobbies a ban on multilocation tests on Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) eggplant in the

Philippines, with probably the total outlawing of all “non-organic” food as their end goal, Time Magazine published a timely article on their September 6, 2010 issue entitled “What’s So Great About Organic Food?”

answer is for the two sets of produc-ers and customers to find a better way to co-exist.

Peaceful co-existence is hard to attain when we have people around us who do not want to give us a choice, who insist that theirs is the one true and correct path, without scientific proof to back up their claims.

We all should have a choice, farmers and consumers, on what we plant and what we eat.

Co-existence is impossible if there remain people who are not open to new ideas and refuse to accept the fact that if we do not use pesticides and chemical inputs, and we don’t resort to using scientifically developed better crop varieties, we will all go hungry, go nuts, probably hold hostage an entire plane’s passengers and result to bloodshed, or, as we find that there are more questions than answers in the skies, starve to death.

Either way, people will die. That is the awful price we, all of us, have to suffer and pay, for the choices that only some, not all of us, made.

By Ian Go

imag

e cr

edit:

www

.pim

adm

ission

s.wor

dpre

ss.co

m


harvest no. 3

Documents

mga mayor

alcala prides

rice selfsufficiency

upland rice

mga magsasaka natin

sila ang mga nakakakausap

mga gawain nito

new hectares