菲律宾水稻种植的变化：五年家庭式调查的启示（英文版）.pdf

Changes in Rice Farming in the Philippines: Insights from five decades of a household-level survey Piedad Moya, Kei Kajisa, Randolph Barker, Samarendu Mohanty, Fe Gascon, and Mary Rose San ValentinThe International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) is the worlds premier research organization dedicated to reducing poverty and hunger through rice science; improving the health and welfare of rice farmers and consumers; and protecting the rice-growing environment for future generations. IRRI is an independent, nonprofit, research and educational institute, founded in 1960 by the Ford and Rockefeller foundations with support from the Philippine government. The institute, headquartered in Los Baos, Philippines, has offices in 17 rice-growing countries in Asia and Africa, and about 1,400 staff members representing 36 nationalities. Working with in-country partners, IRRI develops advanced rice varieties that yield more grain and better withstand pests and disease as well as flooding, drought, and other harmful effects of climate change. More than half of the rice area in Asia is planted to IRRI-bred varieties or their progenies. The institute develops new and improved methods and technologies that enable farmers to manage their farms profitably and sustainably, and recommends rice varieties and agricultural practices suitable to particular farm conditions as well as consumer preferences. IRRI assists national agricultural research and extension systems in formulating and implementing country rice sector strategies. The responsibility for this publication rests with the International Rice Research Institute. Copyright International Rice Research Institute 2015. This publication is copyrighted by the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) and is licensed for use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0. License (Unported). Unless otherwise noted, users are free to copy , duplicate, or reproduce, and distribute, display , or transmit any of the articles or portions of the articles, and to make translations, adaptations, or other derivative works under the following conditions: Attribution: The work must be attributed, but not in any way that suggests endorsement by IRRI or the author(s). NonCommercial: This work may not be used for commercial purposes. ShareAlike: If this work is altered, transformed, or built upon, the resulting work must be distributed only under the same or similar license to this one. For any reuse or distribution, the license terms of this work must be made clear to others. Any of the above conditions can be waived if permission is obtained from the copyright holder. Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author s moral rights. Fair dealing and other rights are in no way affected by the above. T o view the full text of this license, visit creativecommons/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ Published by the International Rice Research Institute Headquarters: College, Los Baos, 4031 Laguna, Philippines Mailing address: IRRI, DAPO Box 7777, Metro Manila, Philippines Phone: +63 (2) 580-5600 Fax: +63 (2) 580-5699 Email: infoirri Web: irri Suggested citation: Moya P, Kajisa K, Barker, R, Mohanty S, Gascon F, San Valentin MR. 2015. Changes in Rice Farming in the Philippines: Insights from five decades of a household-level survey. Los Baos (Philippines): International Rice Research Instute. 145 p.iii CONTENTS List of tables vi List of figures viii Preface xiI. Introduction 1 II. The survey setting and sample farms 3Evolution of the Central Luzon Loop Survey 3 The survey setting 4 The sample farms 6 III. Household and farm characteristics 10 Farm operator profile 10 The farm household demographic profile 12 Farm characteristics 12 Land ownership and tenure distribution 15 Changes in cropping intensity 19 IV. Trends in rice productivity 20 Trends in yield by season 20 Trends in yield by ecosystem 23 Trends in yield by land ownership 23 V. Changes in crop management practices and input use 26 Fertilizer use 26 Comparative fertilizer use by season 26 Comparative fertilizer use by ecosystem 28 Fertilizer management practices 30iv Pesticide use 32 Trends in insecticide application 33 Weed control practices 36 Herbicide use 36 Hand weeding 38 VI. Labor use for rice production 40 Labor use by activity 40 Labor use by source 44 VII. Historical changes in the adoption of new technologies in rice production 46 Varietal adoption through time 46 Adoption of labor-saving technologies 49 VIII. Profitability analysis 54 Methodology 54 Rice price and gross revenue 54 Cost, income, and profit 58 Factor share analysis 64 IX. Case studies: looking beyond the survey data to family and farming issues 69Case 1: An enterprising woman farmer 71 Case 2: Living with natural disasters and development 74 Case 3: Three generations of rice farmers: the case of a fully irrigated rice farm in Nueva Ecija 76 Case 4: A diversified rainfed farm in Pangasinan 78v Case 5: A self-financing farm: conversion of fallow land to commercial use 80 Case 6: A fulfilled father and a farmer 82 X. Conclusions and implications 85 XI. References 87 XII. Appendices 92 Appendix A. Appendix tables cited in the text 92 Appendix B. History of farm-level surveys: past and present 125 Appendix C. Summary of studies that used the Central Luzon Loop Survey data sets 127 Appendix D. Detailed survey data by observation but processed on a per hectare basis and containing data on farm characteristics, yield, input use, and costs and returns 143vi List of tables Table 2.1 Central Luzon Loop Survey sample respondents, 1966-2012. Table 2.2 Source of water for rice production, sample parcels, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Table 3.1 Socioeconomic characteristics of farm operators, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Table 3.2 Family labor force and number of economically active family members, Central Luzon Loop Survey sample households, 1966-2012. Table 3.3 Trends in farm size in hectares, Central Luzon Loop Survey sample farms, 1966-2012. Table 3.4 Long-term changes in area planted to rice by season, sample parcels, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966- 2012. Table 3.5 Land tenure distribution of sample parcels, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Table 4.1 Trends in yield by season, sample farms, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Table 4.2 Trends in yield (t/ha) by season, Central Luzon region, Philippines. Table 4.3 Growth rates (%) in production area and yield, Central Luzon, Philippines. Table 4.4 Trends in yield (t/ha) by ecosystem and season, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Table 4.5 Trends in yield (t/ha) by tenure status and season, WS and DS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966- 2012. Table 5.1 Comparative fertilizer use (kg/ha), WS, irrigated and rainfed farms, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Table 5.2 Timing and frequency of fertilizer application by season, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Table 5.3 Frequency and timing of insecticide application by season, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012.vii Table 5.4 Frequency and timing of herbicide application by season, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Table 5.5 Amount of labor use (person-days/ha) and frequen- cy of hand weeding by season, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Table 7.1 Trends in adoption of modern varieties, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966- 2012. Table 7.2 Top five varieties planted over time by season, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Table 7.3 Adoption (%) of new rice technologies by season, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Table 8.1 Costs and returns of rice production, WS and DS, at 2012 constant price (PHP/hectare), Central Luzon Loop Survey, Philippines, 1966-2012. Table 8.2 Changes in factor share distribution, WS and DS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Table 9.1 Changes in sources of household income (%), six selected case studies, Central Luzon Loop farmers, 1960s to 2000. Table 9.2 Trends in yield (t/ha) per crop, 1966-2012, for a sample rice farm in Bulacan. Table 9.3 Trends in yield (t/ha) per crop, 1966-2012, for a sample rice farm in Gapan, Nueva Ecija. Table 9.4 Trends in yield (t/ha) per crop, 1966-2012, for a sample rice farm in Pangasinan. Table 9.5 Trends in yield (t/ha) per crop, 1966-2012, for a sample rice farm in San Leonardo, Nueva Ecija. Appendix Table 1.1 Area, production, and yield by ecosystem and season, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012, Philippines. Appendix Table 2.1 Household composition by age, sex, and family relationship, 1966-2012. Appendix Table 4.1 Long-term yield (kg/ha) for sample parcels, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012.viii Appendix Table 5.1 Comparative fertilizer use (in kg) per ha, WS and DS, for sample farms, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Appendix Table 5.2 Comparative fertilizer use (in kg) per ha, WS, for irrigated and rainfed farms, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Appendix Table 6.1 Trends in labor use for rice production (8-h person- days/ha), Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Appendix Table 8a Costs and returns of rice production, at CPI (PHP/ hectare), Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Appendix Table 8b Costs and returns of rice production, by ecosystem at nominal prices (PHP/hectare), Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Appendix Table 8c Costs and returns of rice production, by land ownership at nominal prices (PHP/hectare), Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. List of figures Fig. 2.1 Map of the Central Luzon Loop Survey. Fig. 3.1 Household composition by age and by sex, 1979-2011. Fig. 4.1 Trends in yield per ha, sample farms, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 5.1 Trends in fertilizer use per ha, WS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 5.2 Trends in fertilizer use per ha, DS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 5.3 Trends in N fertilizer price, WS and DS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 5.4 Trend in nitrogenpaddy price ratio, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 5.5 Trends in insecticide use in kg active ingredients per ha, WS and DS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012.ix Fig. 5.6 Trends in herbicide use in kg active ingredients per ha by season, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966- 2012. Fig. 6.1 Trends in labor use for rice production (8-h person- days/ha), Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 6.2 Trends in farm wage rate, WS and DS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 6.3 Labor use by source, person-days per hectare, WS and DS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 8.1 Trends in paddy price at constant 2012 prices, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 8.2 Trends in gross revenue and total cost, WS and DS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 8.3 Trends in income and profit, WS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 8.4 Trends in labor cost, WS and DS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 8.5 Trends in capital cost, WS and DS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 8.6 Trends in land rent, WS and DS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 8.7 Trends in the coefficient of variation (CV), WS and DS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 8.8 Changes in payments for factors of production in terms of kg paddy and factor shares (%) in rice production per ha, WS and DS, Central Luzon Loop Survey, 1966-2012. Fig. 9.1 Concrete houses of the Central Luzon Loop farmers.xi PREFACE This book centers around the structural and economic changes in rice farming that have occurred in the Philippines during the past five decades. As a researcher at the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) for more than 30 years, I have been a witness to these changes through my involvement and encounters with farmers. This experience has given me a first-hand knowledge of what is actually happening in farmers fields and with their family. Five years ago, Samarendu Mohanty, the head of the Social Sciences Division (SSD), gave me the responsibility to establish the social science database that involved the organization and consolidation of numerous farm-level data sets that SSD had accumulated over the years and make this available on the web (https/ricestat.irri/fhsd/php/panel.php).The farm household survey database is a collection of farm-level data sets on rice productivity, fertilizer and pesticide use, labor inputs, prices, income, demographics, farm characteristics, and other related data on rice production in farmers fields. One of those data sets is the Central Luzon Loop Survey data set; it is a rich and historical collection of detailed panel data covering many aspects of rice production systems and the farm family from 1966 to 2012. A lot of studies have made use of only some specific aspects and time periods of the data set; however, none of these numerous studies have organized, summarized, and presented the complete data set. Realizing the importance of this gold mine of information about rice production systems at the farmer level, I took upon myself to organize, analyze, integrate, and summarize all the data from 23 seasons of loop survey, which is conducted every four years. At this point, it came to my mind to write this book because of the enormous potential for use in future research and policy formulation. The book came into being with the full support and encouragement of SSD head Samarendu Mohanty. On top of this, two respected agricultural economists, Randolph Barker and Kei Kajisa, agreed to participate in the writing of this book, for which I am particularly grateful. Randy was a former head of the Agricultural Economics Department (now Social Sciences Division) of IRRI and had been involved in these surveys in the late 1960s. Kei was a former senior agricultural economist in SSD and an expert in micro-level studies; he had also been involved in one or two rounds of the loop survey in the late 2000s. Also important is the participation of Fe Gascon, who has the institutional memory of a majority of the Central Luzon Loop Surveys and who knows a majority of the xii farmers by heart. We are fortunate to have Mary Rose San Valentin on the team, who helped patiently in organizing, processing, and checking the data for accuracy and consistency. The assistance provided by Maria Cristina Obusan in preparing some of the figures and formatting the tables is very much recognized. Similarly, Joel Reao provided additional information because he had been involved in the survey and in the encoding of the data in the later years. I would also like to recognize the encouragement and support of David Dawe in the initial stage of the development o