The development and agriculture paradigms transformed: Reflections from the small-scale organic rice fields of the Philippines

Abstract

This article tracks the debate about development in theory and practice, moving from the global level of the development debate to the rice fields of the Philippines. The authors offer a reframing of the development debate through the lens of ‘vulnerability’ versus ‘rootedness’ in social, environmental and economic terms. They argue that food and farming are currently at the leading edge of the development debate and of the vulnerability versus rootedness frame. They demonstrate this through their field notes from research with small-scale, rice farmers in the Philippines who have transitioned from chemical-intensive to organic production. The authors then show how their research results mesh with those of others and examine the significance of this farming ‘revolution’ for a transformation of the overall development paradigm.

Keywords:

• Philippines
• development
• food sovereignty
• rice
• agro-ecology
• neoliberalism
• small-scale farmer

Notes

¹The statistics in this paragraph were calculated by the authors based on online data from various years from the International Monetary Fund, www.imf.org/external/ns/cs.aspx?id=28 [accessed 10 March 2011].

²Let us note that these farming transitions in the southern Philippines are part of a quarter-century history of organized attempts by small-scale farmers and their advocates in the Philippines to shift toward sustainable agriculture in the wake of the Green Revolution. As early as 1987, the first Magsasaka at Siyentipiko Para Sa Pag-Unlad ng Agrikultura (MASIPAG) center was set up to facilitate cooperation among farmers, non-governmental groups and scientists on sustainable rice farming (Ciencia 2010, 14). Since then, the Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement and other non-governmental groups have collaborated on numerous efforts to develop and advocate for sustainable alternatives in rice (Regalado et al. 2007, 37–53). And many different versions of sustainable rice farming – from organic to biodynamic to ‘system of rice intensification’ – were introduced in a number of provinces across the country. The non-government group we spent time with in Davao del Norte – the Davao Provinces Rural Development Institute – was, for example, a key innovator of Masipag Rice Technology, an experiment in lowering production costs without sacrificing yields (Regalado et al. 2007, 55–82).

³Unless otherwise specified, all direct quotations are from the authors' interviews with farmers in the Philippines in July–August 2010. For the current article, we have chosen not to cite these farmers by name. For an earlier version of this research that focuses primarily on one farmer, see Broad and Cavanagh, 2012.

⁴As Altieri and Toledo explain (2011, 587–8), ‘Agroecological initiatives aim at transforming industrial agriculture partly by transitioning the existing food systems away from fossil fuel-based production largely for agroexport crops and biofuels and towards an alternative agricultural paradigm that encourages local/national food production by small and family farmers based on local innovation [and] resources… This implies access of peasants to land, seeds, water, credit and local markets…’ This approximates the definition used by Pretty et al. (2006) for ‘sustainable agriculture’ which they define as including agro-ecology, integrated pest management, soil conservation, etc. See also Koohafkan et al. (2011) on ‘sustainable agriculture’; as well as Douwe van der Ploeg 2010, WorldWatch Institute 2011.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Robin Broad

The authors would like to thank Pauline Abetti, Liezl Bugtay, Nikki de la Rosa and Rachel Nadelman for research assistance, and two anonymous reviewers and Jun Borras for insightful comments on an earlier draft