The challenge that Philippine agriculturists must face is to interface
traditional farming systems with the demands of the new crop varieties.
The authors maintained that traditional farming practice could give
farmers’ an assurance of success for they were familiar with the system
that they relied for years and could calculate the risks involved rather
than imbibed on something that promises heaven which were full of
uncertainties and uncalculated risks (Chambers, 1995; Rhoades & Booth,
1982). Traditional agriculture is characterized by low education and a
high economic dependency ratio which further made them adhere to the
usual way of doing a task. The only competitive advantage that
Philippine farmers have is farming experience. If experience is not
taken into account, rejection or modification of introduced technology
is possible to happen. For development agents, acceptance, modification,
rejection of technology are measures of success of developmental
activities (Fujisaka, 1987). The reasons why projects fail because these
projects are socially naïve (Dove, 1986; Peluso, 1993), and the naivete
lies on the approach of analyzing human behavior.
To beat economic challenges, farmers found it fit to diversify their
activities to sustain both the household and farm enterprises. Instead
of specializing on rice cultivation, farmers decided to undertake
diverse activities like livelihood activities and vegetation cultivation
options. This strategy was learned from previous generation. For these
farmers, their decisions to diversify have paid-off their efforts which
are always accompanied by a rational apportionment of time and resources
for the attainment of the desired goals, and these decisions are
reflective of values and needs of household members (De Buck, Van Rijn,
Roling, & Wossink, 2001; Gladwin, 1980; Greiner, Patterson, & Miller,
2009). For instance, the use of the slash-and-burn method, the tilling
of the sloppy areas, the preference on the diversified systems over the
specialized systems or the generalized ecosystem manifests cultivators’
values, needs, and rationality (Casiño & Casiño, 1976; Eder, 2003,
2010).
Off-farm employment was considered by upland farmers as a buffer
resource to augment capital needed for specific agricultural tasks.
Employment and other alternative livelihood options assured farmers of
steady cash inflow. Income earned from this activity is used to finance
some agricultural activities and needs like the needed labor force and
farm inputs e.g. seeds and fertilizers.
To minimize overhead expenditures, upland farmers used three labor types
that did not cause them financial obligations e.g. self labor, unpaid
family labor, and the collective or communal labor. Upland farmers
utilized their own labor and the unpaid family labor in all phases of
the agricultural cycle although with minimal participation in the
planting phase. Collective labor, on the other hand, was only used
minimally for upland farmers resorted to its use when there is scarcity
of labor or during labor bottlenecks. In synchronized rice farming
system, it is expected that synchronization of agricultural tasks is
inevitable. Hired labor was used for the field preparation (plowing),
planting, and harvesting tasks. With very limited financial resource,
livelihood diversification activities were resorted to assure the
continuance of the tasks.
By experience, upland farm households have asserted that they were able
to improve and meet their needs through the different economic
activities. Through their traditional way of farming, they were able to
sell some of their produce to the nearby markets and acquired some farm
implements for the next cropping cycle.
Conclusion and Recommendation
It is evident from the discussion that upland farmers’ management of
land, labor, and capital and the natural resources is a result of a
complex interaction among a number of interdependent components of which
a cultivator has access to his resources — both human and
non-human — to maximize the attainment of goals according to the
knowledge he possesses. From this premise, development of relevant and
viable technology for marginalized farmers should be grounded in full
knowledge of existing farming systems. Evaluation of the program or
technology used should also be made on the conformity of the program or
technology to the goals, needs, aspirations, and socioeconomic
circumstances of the target beneficiaries not solely on the technical
performance of technology.
We have to be reminded time and again that the failure of induced
development was not factored on the technical aspect of the programs but
was placed on the inability of the development planners to understand
the cultural behavior of a society. Farmers’ environment was formed
according to their goals, aspirations, perceived needs and expected
benefits. Goals, aspirations, and perceived needs underlie practices,
and practices imply decision-making strategies. All these strategies and
other similar plans were developed as anti-poverty alleviation
solutions.
As a response against poverty, upland farmers resorted to primarily use
their traditional way of farming as an adaptive response. The reliance
of self-labor, unpaid family labor, and cooperative labor ensured upland
farmers’ labor needs and facilitated the performance of agricultural
tasks. Therefore, labor and farm scheduling would help diminish labor
shortage in the case of labor bottlenecks.
Multiple cropping, as wont by the upland farmers, needs more push from
government agriculture extension workers for farmers perceived this as
buffer resource in times of weather disturbances. Furthermore, adoption
of the local way of multiple cropping into the local agricultural
pattern is a form of mainstreaming culture in development plans which
could ensure farmers’ cooperation and thus helped alleviate poverty.
Conflicts of Interest
None declared.
Research Ethics
Research clearance to proceed with the study was granted by the
departmental ethics committee of the provincial agricultural office
(Province of Leyte, Philippines) to use the data of the project.
Funding Support
The study received no fund support.
References:
Adewale, J. G., Oladejo, J. A., & Ogunniyi, L. T. (2005). Economic
Contribution of Farm Children to Agricultural Production in Nigeria: A
Case Study of Ekiti State of Nigeria. Journal of Social Sciences ,10 (2), 149–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/09718923.2005.11892473
Altieri, M. (2018). Agroecology:The Science of Sustainable
Agriculture . CRC Press (Vol. 448). Taylor & Francis.
Avila-Foucat, V. S., & Rodríguez-Robayo, K. J. (2018). Determinants of
livelihood diversification: The case wildlife tourism in four coastal
communities in Oaxaca, Mexico. Tourism Management ,69 (June), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.06.021
Barrett, C. B., Reardon, T., & Webb, P. (2001). Nonfarm income
diversification and household livelihood strategies in rural Africa:
concepts, dynamics, and policy implications. Food Policy ,26 (4), 315–331.
Bernard, H. R., & Killworth, P. D. (1993). Sampling in time allocation
research. Ethnology , 32 (2), 207–215.
Bezu, S., Barrett, C. B., & Holden, S. T. (2012). Does the nonfarm
economy offer pathways for upward mobility? Evidence from a panel data
study in Ethiopia. World Development , 40 (8), 1634–1646.
Boserup, E. (1966). The Conditions of Agricultural Growth .
Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co.
Bosma, R. H., Udo, H. M. J., Verreth, J. A. J., Visser, L. E., & Nam,
C. Q. (2005). Agriculture Diversification in the Mekong Delta: Farmers’
Motives and Contributions to Livelihoods. Asian Journal of
Agriculture and Development , 2 (1&2), 49–66.
Casiño, E., & Casiño, E. S. (1976). The Jama Mapun: a changing
Samal society in the southern Philippines . Cellar Book Shop.
Chambers, R. (1995). Poverty and livelihoods: whose reality counts?Environment and Urbanization , 7 (1), 173–204.
Corral, L., & Reardon, T. (2001). Rural nonfarm incomes in Nicaragua.World Development , 29 (3), 427–442.
Davis, B., Winters, P., Carletto, G., Covarrubias, K., Quiñones, E. J.,
Zezza, A., DiGiuseppe, S. (2010). A cross-country comparison of rural
income generating activities. World Development , 38 (1),
48–63.
De Buck, A. J., Van Rijn, I., Roling, N. G., & Wossink, G. A. A.
(2001). Farmers’ reasons for changing or not changing to more
sustainable practices: an exploratory study of arable farming in the
Netherlands. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension ,7 (3), 153–166.
Dercon, S. (2006). Economic reform, growth and the poor: Evidence from
rural Ethiopia. Journal of Development Economics , 81 (1),
1–24.
Dinku, Y., Fielding, D., & Genç, M. (2018). Health shocks and child
time allocation decisions by households: evidence from Ethiopia.IZA Journal of Labor Economics , 7 (1), 4.
Dorsey, B. (1999). Agricultural intensification, diversification, and
commercial production among smallholder coffee growers in central Kenya.Economic Geography , 75 (2), 178–195.
Dove, M. R. (1986). Peasant versus government perception and use of the
environment: a case-study of Banjarese ecology and river basin
development in South Kalimantan. Journal of Southeast Asian
Studies , 17 (1), 113–136.
Eder, J. F. (2003). Of fishers and farmers: Ethnicity and resource use
in coastal Palawan. Philippine Quarterly of Culture and Society ,31 (3), 207–225.
Eder, J. F. (2010). Ethnic differences, Islamic consciousness, and
Muslim social integration in the Philippines. Journal of Muslim
Minority Affairs , 30 (3), 317–332.
Ellis, F., & Freeman, H. A. (2004). Rural livelihoods and poverty
reduction strategies in four African countries. Journal of
Development Studies , 40 (4), 1–30.
Fermont, A., & Benson, T. (2011). Estimating yield of food crops grown
by smallholder farmers. International Food Policy Research
Institute, Washington DC , 1–68.
Fujisaka, S. (1987). Filipino upland farmers: informal ethnoscience for
agricultural development research. Philippine Studies ,35 (4), 403–419.
Gaba, S., Lescourret, F., Boudsocq, S., Enjalbert, J., Hinsinger, P.,
Journet, E. P., … Ozier-Lafontaine, H. (2015). Multiple cropping
systems as drivers for providing multiple ecosystem services: from
concepts to design. Agronomy for Sustainable Development ,35 (2), 607–623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-014-0272-z
Garibaldi, L. A., Gemmill-Herren, B., D’Annolfo, R., Graeub, B. E.,
Cunningham, S. A., & Breeze, T. D. (2017). Farming approaches for
greater biodiversity, livelihoods, and food security. Trends in
Ecology & Evolution , 32 (1), 68–80.
George, T. (2014). Why crop yields in developing countries have not kept
pace with advances in agronomy. Global Food Security ,3 (1), 49–58.
Gladwin, C. H. (1980). A theory of real-life choice: Applications to
agricultural decisions. Agricultural Decision Making:
Anthropological Contributions to Rural Development , 45–85.
Gollin, D., Hansen, C. W., & Wingender, A. (2018). Two blades of
grass: The impact of the green revolution . National Bureau of Economic
Research.
Greiner, R., Patterson, L., & Miller, O. (2009). Motivations, risk
perceptions and adoption of conservation practices by farmers.Agricultural Systems , 99 (2–3), 86–104.
Gross, D. R. (1984). Time allocation: A tool for the study of cultural
behavior. Annual Review of Anthropology , 13 (1), 519–558.
Haddad, L., & Reardon, T. (1993). Gender bias in the allocation of
resources within households in Burkina Faso: A disaggregated outlay
equivalent analysis. The Journal of Development Studies ,29 (2), 260–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220389308422273
Haggblade, S., Hazell, P., & Reardon, T. (2005). The rural nonfarm
economy: Pathway out of poverty or pathway in? In International
Food Policy Research Institute. The future of small farms. Proceedings
of a research workshop, Wye, UK (pp. 151–178).
Horlings, L. G., & Marsden, T. K. (2011). Towards the real green
revolution? Exploring the conceptual dimensions of a new ecological
modernisation of agriculture that could ‘feed the world.’ Global
Environmental Change , 21 (2), 441–452.
Jung, S. Y., & Smith, R. J. (2007). The Economics of Poverty:
Explanatory Theories to Inform Practice. Journal of Human Behavior
in the Social … , 16 (2003), 21–40.
https://doi.org/10.1300/J137v16n01
Kamanga, P., Vedeld, P., & Sjaastad, E. (2009). Forest incomes and
rural livelihoods in Chiradzulu District, Malawi. Ecological
Economics , 68 (3), 613–624.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.08.018
Kasem, S., & Thapa, G. B. (2011). Crop diversification in Thailand:
Status, determinants, and effects on income and use of inputs.Land Use Policy , 28 (3), 618–628.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.12.001
Kassie, G. W., Kim, S., & Fellizar, F. P. (2017). Determinant factors
of livelihood diversification: Evidence from Ethiopia. Cogent
Social Sciences , 3 (1), 1369490.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2017.1369490
Kidane, M. S., & Zegeye, E. W. (2018). Crop diversification and
productivity in semiarid and sub-humid maize-legume production systems
of Ethiopia. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems ,42 (10), 1106–1127. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2018.1505679
Koomson, I., & Asongu, S. A. (2016). Relative Contribution of Child
Labour to Household Farm and Non‐Farm Income in Ghana: Simulation with
Child’s Education. African Development Review , 28 (1),
104–115.
Kyi, T., & Doppler, W. (2011). Impact of Crop Diversification on Income
Generation of Beneficiaries under Rice Based Irrigated Farming System of
Myanmar. Asia-Pacific Journal of Rural Development , 21 (1).
Levy, V. (1985). Cropping pattern, mechanization, child labor, and
fertility behavior in a farming economy: Rural Egypt. Economic
Development and Cultural Change , 33 (4), 777–791.
Loos, J., Abson, D. J., Chappell, M. J., Hanspach, J., Mikulcak, F.,
Tichit, M., & Fischer, J. (2014). Putting meaning back into
“sustainable intensification.” Frontiers in Ecology and the
Environment , 12 (6), 356–361.
Makate, C., Wang, R., Makate, M., & Mango, N. (2016). Crop
diversification and livelihoods of smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe:
adaptive management for environmental change. SpringerPlus ,5 (1135), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2802-4
Matshe, I., & Young, T. (2004). Off‐farm labour allocation decisions in
small‐scale rural households in Zimbabwe. Agricultural Economics ,30 (3), 175–186.
Meert, H., Van Huylenbroeck, G., Vernimmen, T., Bourgeois, M., & Van
Hecke, E. (2005). Farm household survival strategies and diversification
on marginal farms. Journal of Rural Studies , 21 (1),
81–97.
Mentamo, M., & Geda, N. R. (2016). Livelihood diversification under
severe food insecurity scenario among smallholder farmers in Kadida
Gamela District, Southern Ethiopia. Kontakt , 18 (4),
e258–e264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kontakt.2016.09.003
Michler, J. D., & Josephson, A. L. (2017). To Specialize or Diversify:
Agricultural Diversity and Poverty Dynamics in Ethiopia. World
Development , 89 , 214–226.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.08.011
Neitzert, M. (1994). A Woman’s Place: Household Labour Allocation in
Rural Kenya. Canadian Journal of Development Studies / Revue
Canadienne d’études Du Développement , 15 (3), 401–427.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02255189.1994.9669567
Nguyen, T. V., & Tran, T. Q. (2018). Forestland and rural household
livelihoods in the North Central Provinces, Vietnam. Land Use
Policy , 79 (March), 10–19.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.07.046
Paolisso, M., & Hames, R. (2010). Time diary versus instantaneous
sampling: A comparison of two behavioral research methods. Field
Methods , 22 (4), 357–377.
Pellegrini, L., & Tasciotti, L. (2014). Crop diversification, dietary
diversity and agricultural income: empirical evidence from eight
developing countries. Canadian Journal of Development Studies /
Revue Canadienne d’études Du Développement , 35 (2), 211–227.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02255189.2014.898580
Peluso, N. L. (1993). Coercing conservation?: The politics of state
resource control. Global Environmental Change , 3 (2),
199–217.
Pingali, P. L. (2012). Green revolution: impacts, limits, and the path
ahead. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences ,109 (31), 12302–12308.
Rhoades, R. E., & Booth, R. H. (1982). Famer-back-to-farmer: A Model
for Generating Acceptable Agricultural Technology. Agriculrural
Administration , 11 , 127–137.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0309-586X(82)90056-5
Saenz, M., & Thompson, E. (2017). Gender and policy roles in farm
household diversification in Zambia. World Development ,89 , 152–169.
Saha, B., & Bahal, R. (2015). Factors Leading to Success in Diversified
Occupation: A Livelihood Analysis in India. The Journal of
Agricultural Education and Extension , 21 (3), 249–266.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2014.927372
Saha, B., & Bahal, R. (2016). Livelihood diversification pursued by
farmers in West Bengal. Indian Research Journal of Extension
Education , 10 (2), 1–9.
Salvioni, C., Rondinelli, V., Esposito, L., & Henke, R. (2009).Diversification strategies in small farms in Italy .Economia . https://doi.org/10.14601/EDA-8975
Shiferaw, K., Gebremedhin, B., & Zewdie, D. L. (2017). Factors
affecting household decision to allocate credit for livestock
production: Evidence from Ethiopia. Agricultural Finance Review ,77 (4), 463–483. https://doi.org/10.1108/AFR-06-2016-0062
Singh, R. B., Kumar, P., & Woodhead, T. (2002). Smallholder farmers in
India: Food security and agricultural policy. RAP Publication ,3 .
Srisopaporn, S., Jourdain, D., Perret, S. R., & Shivakoti, G. (2015).
Adoption and continued participation in a public Good Agricultural
Practices program: The case of rice farmers in the Central Plains of
Thailand. Technological Forecasting and Social Change , 96 ,
242–253.
Stone, G. D., Netting, R. M., & Stone, M. P. (1990). Seasonally, labor
scheduling, and agricultural intensification in the Nigerian Savanna.American Anthropologist , 92 (1), 7–23.
Udry, C. (1996). Gender, agricultural production, and the theory of the
household. Journal of Political Economy , 104 (5),
1010–1046.
Udry, C., Hoddinott, J., Alderman, H., & Haddad, L. (1995). Gender
differentials in farm productivity: implications for household
efficiency and agricultural policy. Food Policy , 20 (5),
407–423.
Vadez, V., Reyes-García, V., Huanca, T., & Leonard, W. R. (2008). Cash
cropping, farm technologies, and deforestation: what are the
connections? A model with empirical data from the Bolivian Amazon.Human Organization , 384–396.
Wei, D., Chao, H., & Yali, W. (2016). Role of income diversification in
reducing forest reliance: Evidence from 1838 rural households in China.Journal of Forest Economics , 22 , 68–79.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfe.2015.12.002
Zepeda, L., & Kim, J. (2006). Farm parents’ views on their children’s
labor on family farms: A focus group study of Wisconsin dairy farmers.Agriculture and Human Values , 23 (1), 109–121.
Zhang, W., Cao, G., Li, X., Zhang, H., Wang, C., Liu, Q., …
Jiang, R. (2016). Closing yield gaps in China by empowering smallholder
farmers. Nature , 537 (7622), 671.