The Philippines’ Agrarian Reform: An Unfinished Business?

Abstract

The Philippines’ agrarian reform can be divided into first and second generations. The programs of the first generation are limited to the regulation of tenancy arrangements and land reforms in response to rural unrest rather than achieving rural economic or social objectives. The second generation’s objective is to go beyond limited land distribution. With the implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), the coverage of land for acquisition and distribution included all types of farmlands and all kinds of crops. The beneficiaries of CARP received not only support services but also legal services involving
agrarian conflicts. This explains why the second generation is a period of agrarian reform, wherein policy objectives and scope of reform are quite comprehensive. Such a change in terms of policy paths proves Torfing’s (2009) path dependence argument, saying that these paths are not static. Instead, they are bound to change eventually. Although the second generation may be comprehensive it is not holistic in the sense that the government failed to provide complementary reinforcing mechanisms. Since the government is still settling land distribution, it is unable to make bigger improvements in support services, rural infrastructures, agricultural technologies, agricultural markets, etc. Thus, institutional limits and constraints are not only a hindrance to bringing about
significant changes in policies, as argued by Torfing (2009). Instead, the findings show that these constraints, such as the changing priorities of the different administrations, continued resistance from landowners, and lack of political will, have limited the outcomes and impacts of the country’s agrarian reform efforts.