Baybay, Leyte

A Case Study

on

Impact of the Special Area for Agricultural

Development (SAAD) in Bayugan City

As a partial fulfillment of the requirements in

AgDev 201- Rural Development Theories and Approaches

Submitted to:
Virgelio C. Dargantes Jr.
Professor
Submitted by:
Josephine G. Teofilo
MagDev-Agricultural Education
Acknowledgement:

The completion of this study could not have been possible without the cooperation of the
concern agency the Bayugan City Department of Agriculture, the cooperative and considerate
respondents – the rice farmers of Bayugan City particularly in Barangay Mahayag, Marcelina
and Charito and to my friends who assist me in interviewing the farmers. Their contributions to
the completion of this study are sincerely appreciated and gratefully acknowledged.

To my family who always been my support morally and emotionally.

To my professor who continuously encouraged, understands, and give me chance to

present the case study.

And to our Almighty Father who is the author of knowledge, love, and wisdom, Thank
you for the countless blessings and good health.
Executive Summary:

This study is all about the Impact of the Special Area for Agricultural
Development (SAAD). A Rural Development Program Implemented by the Government thru the
Department of Agriculture of Bayugan City. The Philippines, Department of Agriculture
implemented Special Area for Agricultural Development (SAAD) Program which hopes to
complement the DA national banner in two ways. First, SAAD shall provide interventions in
areas not reached by the regular DA programs. Second, SAAD may provide interventions and
schemes which are not part of DA regular programs. In line with DA mandate to uplift the socio-
economic situation of farmers SAAD shall likewise assist beneficiaries to organize an efficient
production, post-harvest, and marketing process to improve their gains from farming. Cluster
production and community Agri -enterprises along existing supply shall be encouraged. (see DA
DM#4 series 2019)
A random interview with 30 responsible farmers were conducted and evaluated to know
impact of the project to the beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries.

Title of the Case Study:

Impact of the Special Area for Agricultural Development (SAAD) Implemented by the
Government thru the Department of Agriculture of Bayugan City

I. Introduction:

The Philippine agricultural sector employs 36 percent of the labor force and accounts for
roughly 14 percent of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). When the agricultural- based
food processing sector is included, the whole of agriculture and food contributes 26 percent to
GDP. From the 1950s to the 1970s, government policies were biased against agriculture. These
policies included the government’s import substitution policy until the 1980s which created a
favor of manufacturing and penalized returns to agricultural investments and exports, export
taxes and exchange rate over-valuation which greatly reduced earnings from agriculture, and
government intervention through the creation of government cooperatives that siphoned off the
gains from trade (Intal and Power 1990, David 2003). There have also been numerous studies
examining the linkages between agriculture and machineries in particular locations (see Fei,
Ranis and Stewart for review). The integration of agriculture and machineries is necessary to
understand how linkages between the sectors affect not only the growth of each sector taken
individually but also the aggregate growth rate, the spatial pattern of such growth and whether
growth in incomes and employment is broadly based geographically and in terms of the
participation of different classes. The term linkages used to describe the manifold interaction
between agriculture and rural non-agriculture activities in a developing economy. It is our
contention that linkages not only describe the connection between sectors which are necessary
aspect of economic growth and development – their nature and magnitude changing as
development – their nature as magnitude changing as development proceeds – but also that the
extent and nature of these linkages materially affect the rate of growth of each sector
individually and that of economy as a whole. The strength and quality of this process of
dynamic interaction, moreover, affects the regional pattern of development, the size and labor
intensity of both agricultural and non-agricultural production and trough these mechanisms, the
distribution of income. If all of this is true, it follows that linkages and the spatial dimension of
development represent an important and dimension of development (see Linkages in
development by Gustav Ranis, Frances Stewart, and Edna A. Reyes)

The Philippines, Department of Agriculture implemented Memorandum Circular No.4 the

Guidelines of the Special Area for Agricultural Development (SAAD) Program. The SAAD
Program hopes to complement the DA national banner in two ways. First, SAAD shall provide
interventions in areas not reached by the regular DA programs. Second, SAAD may provide
interventions and schemes which are not part of DA regular programs. In line with DA mandate
to uplift the socio-economic situation of farmers SAAD shall likewise assist beneficiaries to
organize an efficient production, post-harvest, and marketing process to improve their gains
from farming. Cluster production and community Agri -enterprises along existing supply shall be
encouraged. (see DA DM#4 series 2019)
II. Objectives

The purpose of this study is to be able to know the impact of the Special Area for
Agricultural Development (SAAD) Program, a Rural Development Program implemented by the
government thru the Department of Agriculture of Bayugan City, Bayugan Agusan del Sur in
helping the farmers attain better production.

III. Methodology

A descriptive research methodology was used in this study. A thirty (30) questionnaire
was administered to attain best result of this study. Also, an interview of the respondent of the
study was conducted. Together with the data gathered in Bayugan City DA office.

IV. Review of Related Literature

There is wide ranging of rural development program found in the literature. For this
paper three aspects are reviewed: definitions of rural development, rural development program
and factors that contribute to the success of the programs.

3.1 Defining rural development

Rural development is one of the foundations of rural economic development. Rural

development generally can be defined as creation of a new organization/ways that introduces a
new product, serves, or creates a new market, or utilizes a new technology in a rural
environment (Wortman, 1990). Development in rural areas include widening the base of a farm
to include all the non-agricultural uses, those available resources can be put to or through any
major changes in land use or level of production that related solely to agriculture (Petrin, 1994).

In this regards, rural development is someone living in a rural location and contribute to
the creation of local wealth (Petrin, 1994). They can be focusing on agriculture or areas that
relate to natural resources (Degei & Martin, 2009) or. Hoy (1983) stated that a popular image of
a rural development is that of someone who is “independent, risk taking, achievement oriented,
self-confident, optimistic, hardworking and innovative”. He added development in a rural context
is focused upon creating new opportunities in rural areas, via the generation of new ventures.
Specifically, Stathopoulos et al., (2004) divided rural development into three phases; conceptual
development; awareness in which farmer aware of the opportunities; and operational phase in
the actual operations. The above definitions imply that rural development are the person who
undergoes development in rural area and at the same time they can adapt any changing of
environment.

3.2 Rural Development Programs

It is understood that the success stories of rural development programs usually depend
on government policy and strategy on program implementation. Over the last decades there are
diverse ranges and complex structure of programs and policies which, in some way or another
are concerned with stimulating and supporting various kinds of rural development. Some of
these are specifically targeted at rural development areas, whilst others are national programs
that include firms in rural areas alongside their counterpart in the rest of the country. From the
policy viewpoint Philippines has developed its own developmental or agricultural development
policy. The policy usually reflecting specific characteristics of the country such as cultural and
ideological histories of the country, the economy, and the role of state policy in relation to
agricultural development. It is also associated with differences in government structures and the
degree to which regional and local tiers of government have been involved in economic
development. In predominantly rural areas, the strategies and programs have infrequently been
related to rural development (Wortman, 1990). Whatever the location of the program, Petrin
(1994) suggested that rural development policy or strategy must be relevant to the development
needed.
Special Area for Agricultural Development (SAAD) Program is a 6-year (2017 to 2022).
A locally funded project of the Department of Agriculture (DA). A locally funded program of the
Department of Agriculture (DA) which aims to help alleviate poverty among the marginalized
sectors of agriculture and fishery of the thirty (30) priority provinces identified by the Philippine
Statistics Authority (PSA) as well as areas covered by Executive Order No. 70, series of 2018.
The strategy of the program is to increase food production and the establishment of
community enterprises by providing the appropriate technology, financing, marketing, and other
support services for animals, crops, and fisheries to individuals, families/households, and
organized farmers and fisherfolks including among others DSWDs 4Ps and Indigenous Peoples
(IPs).

The Municipal Agriculture Office of Bayugan City thru the Department of Agriculture
conducted technical awareness on Rice Program Intervention, Rice resiliency projects and Rice
Competitiveness Enhancement Fund.

3.3 Factors that contribute to the success of SAAD rural agricultural development
programs

Determinant of rural agricultural development are also diverse in nature. Previous

studies provide a range of factors that contribute to the success of agricultural development
programs. According to Petrin (1994) behind each of the success stories of rural agricultural
development there is usually some sort of institutional support. The factor can be seen like
urban agricultural development programs. The factors can be classified within three
perspectives: farmers perspectives, programs, and implementing bodies.
From farmers’ perspectives Wortman (1990) discovered understanding of the
agricultural programs provided by government is the most important factor that contributes rural
agricultural development. He added the objectives of agricultural development programs must
be understood and fully utilize by rural recipient after attended the agricultural development
programs. In addition, Mohar (2007) argued that the recipient mindset is needed in the early
stage of structure and agricultural development environment. This argument in accordance with
(Lee, 1997) who concluded that agricultural development attitudes and motivation towards the
program is important to ensure the success of the program.
In the case of Malaysia, the Ministry of Regional and Rural Development (2009) has
provided training and consultation specifically to provide knowledge and understanding of
agricultural development among the rural areas. A survey conducted by SME Corp Malaysia
(2010) indicated that agricultural development programs promotion as a vital factor to increase
agricultural development awareness toward programs organize by government. By doing so the
Ministry believed that the program can be successfully implemented.
From the perspective of the program, North and Small borne (2006) said the success of
the program depending on the appropriateness of the programs to local circumstances. They
suggested that the program should be designed according to specific module that are relevant
to agricultural need and development.
 V. Results and Discussion

5.1 Respondents’ Characteristics

This section presents descriptive statistics and explains the background of respondents
and reasons for involving agricultural activities.
Table 1 shows that about half (53 percent) of the respondents are male. In terms of
marital status, almost 82 percent of them are married, 11 percent are still single and almost 7
percent are divorce/separate. Most of the respondents are High School level (90.6 percent).
Large percentages of the respondents (34 percent) were involved in the rural agricultural
development activities because of their interests, followed by to gain income (31 percent). In
addition, most of them have started their activities/farming using government aid capital/financial
supports (62.5 percent) as well as borrowed from family members (25.5 percent) and only 9.4
percent rely on government/4P’s member.

Table 1: Respondents’ Characteristics (N= 32)

Respondents’ Sub-Profile Percentage (%)

Characteristics

Gender Male 53.1

Female 46.9

Status Single 9.4

Married 81.8
Divorce/Separated 8.8

Education Elementary Level 6.2

High School level 90.6
College level 3.1
Reason of Involvement Family 50.0
Gain Income 35.0
Personal Interest 14.0
 Source of Capital Government Aid 65.6
Family 25.5
Bank loan 6.4

It can be concluded that both male and female are involved in the rural agricultural
activities and their involvement mainly based on their interests and for their family. However,
their levels of education are at medium level. Although the government has provided various
kinds of financial, seeds and mechanical support, few of them depend also on their family
support.

5.2 Understanding Agricultural Development Programs

Level of understanding of rural entrepreneurs toward Agricultural development programs
organized by Department of Agriculture thru Municipality found to be high. The average mean
score ranging from the lowest (program content, 3.9), suitability programs (4.4) promotion
awareness and content (4.5) and activities (4.6). The result support a study by Wortman (1990)
which also discovered understanding of the Agricultural development programs provided by
government is the most important determinant of rural economic development. Specifically,
understanding of Agricultural development programs promotion as vital factors to increase
agricultural awareness toward programs organize by government.
The results on the suitability of Agricultural development programs also support previous
studies by North and Smallborne (2006). Based on Mohar (2007) and Lee (1997) this study
contended that the respondent clearly understands about the Agricultural development
programs and their mindset will be more focus and highly motivated towards success of the
programs.
Based on the above findings this study concludes that the entrepreneurship programs
organized by Ministry of Regional and Rural Development need to be understood by the farmers
before it can be successfully implemented.

Table 2: Understanding Agricultural Development Programs (n=32)

Factors Mean Rank
Promotion awareness 4.5 High
 Promotion content 4.5 High
Suitability program 4.4 High
Program content 3.9 High
Activities program 4.6 High

Mean Average 4.4 High

5.3 Implementing Bodies

Implementing bodies are individuals that work on Department of Agriculture that

bridge the SAAD program toward the recipients-the farmers. Upon gathering the questionnaires,
it is vividly seen the humanitarian nature of an implementing bodies. Those farmers/recipients
that a family member, friends, and old acquaintance received the firsthand benefits of the
program compared to others. This kind of humanitarian nature is a fact in our country that leads
to inequality of distribution of the program.

Analytical Points
The SAAD program is beneficial among the marginalized farmers/recipients if the
distribution of it is fairly given. Sad to say that the problem is seen among the implementing
bodies because of greediness, political influences and the comradery that placed a huge factor
of the in effectivity of the program.
The greediness of an individual will affect the effective implementation of the program.
Most of the identified recipient /beneficiaries were not truly belong in marginalized group of
farmers. Some of them were blood related, kumpadre/kumadre or dummies. Politics also plays
a huge factor of program implementation as part of politicians’ tradition not to help the residents
of a barangay where he or she gains low votes during election. They also used their power and
authority in identifying recipients or beneficiaries which mostly were family members, relatives,
close kumpadre and kumadre, organization that close to him and others.
 VI. Conclusion

Eventually, it can be concluded that the SAAD Program heavily impacted the
living situation of the poor farmers who were directly benefited to the program whilst those who
were unrecognized both individual and organizational still struggling to improve their farming
/living status.

VII. Proposed Solutions

Creating an independent body to validate the recipient or beneficiaries of the

program to ensure that the marginalized, disadvantage, and poor farmers will be the one to be
benefitted is the proposed solution for effective implementation.

VIII. Recommendation

The study shows that there’s significant linkage effect in rural agricultural productivity in
the presence of Special Area for Agricultural Development (SAAD) program which organized
and implemented by the government. It does help the beneficiaries in improving their living
status. The increased of agricultural product is evident. Furthermore, the equality in the
distribution of agricultural product and machineries to improve food production for household
consumption and commercial purpose in areas of operation should be focused.
As the Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yaw said “The problem of the Philippines is
not democracy but the kind of democracy that ruins the country”
VIII References:

MR. BHOKSE UMESH CHINDHU- AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT

International Research Journal of Marketing & Economics ISSN (2348-9766) Impact Factor:
5.779 Vol. 7, Issue 2, February 2020 © Association of Academic Researchers and Faculties
(AARF) [Link]

Ray D. Bollman
Agricultural Statistics for Rural Development
Research and Rural Data Section
[Link]

Sylvain Cloutier , No.32 (21-601-MPE96032) Employment in Agriculture and Closely Related

Industries in Rural Areas: Structure and Change 1981-1991

Aguilar, F. The Making of Cane Sugar, Poverty, Crisis and Change in Negros Occidental. La
Salle Social Research Center, Monograph Series 3, 1994

Young, F. W. “Regional Organization and Agricultural Productivity in two Philippine Provinces”

The Philippine Economic Journal No. 32 Vol. XV p. 596-603

Wangwacharakul, V. “Direct and Indirect Impact of the New Cropping Systems Technology and
Irrigation in community economy: The Case of Oton and Tigbauan Municipalities, Iloilo
Philippines” Ph. D dissertation, University of the Philippines

[Link]

[Link]
IX Appendices: