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.