Primary Sector Value Chains, Poverty Reduction, And Rural Development Challenges In The Philippines

Abstract

The insertion of Philippine agriculture and fisheries into global value chains has not contributed significantly to rural poverty reduction, in contrast to several other Southeast Asian countries. While there are pockets of downstream export successes, upstream actors face persistent precarious conditions. This comparative investigation of the relationships between value chains and rural development fills a gap in the literature on the Philippines. An analysis of four important products affecting at least 3 million households illustrates the need to focus more on upstream value‐chain governance and pro‐poor rural development interventions. This article shows that the integration of livelihoods and value‐chain analyses has the advantage of fleshing out upstream challenges that are relevant for agri/aquabusiness performance, socio‐spatial policies, and refinements of rural development theories. It is unlikely that horizontal coordination/social capital as well as associated upgrading efforts will be effective without a stronger emphasis on vertical coordination and human‐capital formation.

Key words:

• agriculture
• aquaculture
• Philippines
• poverty reduction
• upstream upgrading
• vulnerability context

The author wishes to thank Mr. Yeongseob Eum for drawing the Figures.

The author wishes to thank Mr. Yeongseob Eum for drawing the Figures.

Notes

The author wishes to thank Mr. Yeongseob Eum for drawing the Figures.

1. Recently, Andriesse and Lee 2017 and Fabinyi (2016) have conducted research explicitly linking rural coastal communities in the Philippines to Asian/Global value chains.

2. Firms like Shemberg and MCPI Corporation are global carrageenan exporters and are also engaged in research and development.

3. See Sumadio, Andriesee, Aprilianti and Sulyat 2017 for a more comprehensive discussion of this point.

4. The Philippine statistical authority does publish data on land use, yield, production, trade, etc, but not the number of smallholders and plantation owners.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Edo Andriesse

DR. EDO ANDRIESSE is an associate professor of geography at the department of geography at Seoul National University [[email protected]].