Land reform is one of the most complicated laws to enact in the Philippines, with long standing struggle
between farmers and landowners. affects the importance of land when it comes to power. If anything,
these landowners/landlords hold's the responsibility in some of these farmers since they all got the
knowledge, the contract, the power.
The Philippines is very rich in land. So we should focus on helping these filipinos. Kids these days don’t
know anything about farming. If we do not encourage young people to go into farming its going to be a
big problem in the future.
The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) commenced in 1988, with the objective of
providing security of land tenure for small farmers. It also aimed to provide support services to its
beneficiaries in such forms as capital, marketing support and infrastructure. Today, some 20 years after
CARP started, the Philippine countryside is still rife with inequities in access to and control over land,
with the persistence of share-cropping, the sacada system and numerous landless for whom land
ownership remains a distant dream.
The Department of Agrarian Reforms (DAR) claims to have covered 85 percent of the total targeted
lands for distribution (most of which are largely public lands). According to DAR, the program has
benefited an estimated 2.129 million farmer beneficiaries at a total cost of approximately PhP103.9
billion.
In 1996, CARP coverage was decreased from 10.3 million hectares to 8.064 million hectares—the largest
chunk taken out from public lands, with two-fifths of its original scope slashed. DAR’s coverage of
private land was also decreased by close to 10 percent. Part of this adjustment was because of
exemptions, including so-called cattle ranches, after the Supreme Court ruled in a case involving the
Sutton estate in Masbate that “lands devoted to raising of livestock, poultry and swine have been
classified as industrial.” This, even though part of the estate was also farmed for crops such as rice and
coconut. Still, most of the land removed from the program has remained unaccounted for. Jun Borras
(2000) observed that “while it is understandable that CARP scope will constantly evolve during the
implementation process, still, government owes the public a full explanation of the 1996 changes in
CARP scope and the actual process and method taken toward these changes.”
The actual scope or coverage of CARP has also been in doubt because there is, as yet, in an age of GPS,
no reliable and accessible database of land and its ownership in the Philippines. Neither has there ever
been an effective cadastral survey of the country matched with the existence of valid documents of
ownership!
DAR officials have, in a number of cases, been accused of over-pricing the land, with one celebrated case
being given a value of PhP1.4 million per hectare against an average of PhP18, 000 for non-rice and corn
lands.
As a result of the focus on VLT, VOS and on the distribution of publicly owned lands, as of December
2004 compulsory acquisitions of land had only achieved 16 percent of the overall target.
Against farmers owning land:
Agrarian reform was wrong in the first place. Not every farmer is capable of owning and farming. The
highly productive lands more than 45 years ago was split up into parcels for the sake of ownership by
farmers. The real issue was splitting of profits between land owner and tenants. That should have been
addressed instead of confiscating one's property and giving it away to farmers who are not capable of
sustaining it. Chronically, many farmers are not able to sustain the land they were given due to
complexity of many factors: capital, equipment, modern farming techniques, labor, farm to market to
say the least. One can always lament how farmers are experiencing hardship. Sympathy will not solve
current issues. The government needs to undo this lack-luster law (agrarian reform) because the
evidence simply speaks for itself.
Disadvantage:
The lost of passion, the price of rice has dropped and farmers had gone bankrupt, farmer are still hungry
after 30 yrs in agrarian reform. 10 years there will be no farmer
Pro:
the term land reform refers to the process of redistributing land ownership or rights inorder to assist
small farmers and agricultural laborers. According to the comprehensive agrarian reform program the
government has distributed more than 4 million hectares of land since 1988 helping around 2.8 million
landless farmers. These include increased agricultural income and yield improve land tenure and
enhance market and credit and a decrease in a prevalence of poverty.
Individual titling has recently been given a second push by the government in a effort to speed up
change in rural areas. By using new technologies and digital platforms streamlining regulatory processes
and improved consultation with beneficiaries. The swift project implement by the department DAR will
assist the government on going effort to implement parcelization and individual titling
These include higher farm income and yield, improved land tenure, access to market and credit, and
reduction of poverty incidence among farmer- beneficiaries.
Agrarian reform not only distribute land to concern fairly land ownership but also optimize land uses to
improve people income [1]. Fairly land ownership reduces land conflict. It's hoped that non conflict land
and certainty of ownership increase land productivity.
Agrarian societies were able to support a larger population, and you could also make enough food so
that not everyone's job had to be creating food. This led to craftsmen, which led to more knowledge and
better tools, and by extension, human progression.
Con: the Philippine government has lately given individual titling on second push in an effort to accept to
accelerate transnation on rural regions regions, nevertheless many farmers will save properties as part
of the countries agricultural reforms program have been waiting for individual titles for decades
Not all of those landless farmers get government supports in receiving a fair share.