| Photo by Shayan Ghiasvand on Unsplash
As the clash of political dynasties unfolded in the Philippines, it is easy to forget whose welfare was at one point paramount, at least according to their campaign rhetoric. On the one hand, there was peace and order; on the other, there was P20 per kilo of rice.
The Tokhang (alleged extrajudicial killings) implementation highlighted the Duterte presidency would be both unfair and shortsighted. Equally, measuring the Marcos administration’s effectiveness against its failure to achieve P20 per kilo of rice would have the same fallacy. While comparing the government declared 6,000 plus dead during its war on drugs to the broader failure of uplifting the welfare of subsistence farmers on whose backs P20 per kilo rice was supposed to be achieved may be inappropriate, these are the most tangible and most prominent of campaign promises.
The war on drugs, initiated by FPRRD during his presidency, was an intense and divisive campaign aimed at eradicating illegal drug activity. The initiative involved widespread police operations and reports of extrajudicial killings. While the official government data reported 6,000 deaths in anti-drug operations by 2022, estimates by human rights groups assert the actual death toll could be as high as 30,000, including civilians. There were criticisms both domestically and internationally. Many organizations and advocates condemned the human rights violations, including allegations that the campaign targeted the poor and undermined the principle of due process. Critics argued that it failed to tackle the root causes of drug addiction, such as poverty and lack of access to social services.
Given the controversial methods, the war on drugs resulted in widespread societal and political implications, which raised questions about governance, law enforcement accountability, and the balance between security and human rights in the Philippines. There is one glaring question of how many drug lords were apprehended and made to account for their crimes. There was a dearth of incentives to help identify and arrest those in the upper echelons of drug syndicates, leading to speculation that what transpired was merely an introduction of a new order among those operating the drug rings. There were no generic wanted lists from law enforcement, starting with the street-level pushers.
If the government were serious, a Php1M reward for the arrest of street-level pushers instead of jail time for drug users, drug pushers would have been deterred. Escalating the monetary rewards up to P10B for drug lords, delivery dropoff points, and drug labs would have further deterred drug dealers. Sadly, despite 6,000 dead, even FPRRD himself admitted to having failed even to dent the drug problem in the Philippines.
Neither here nor there – extrajudicial killings or increased bounty against actual drug lords?
The promise of Php20 per kilo of rice in the Philippines was doomed from the very start. A clique of rice importers wields such influence on rice production. The story of Philippine rice production can be summarized by comparing what was not implemented in the Philippines to the miracle of Vietnam, which today exports rice to 150 countries.
“There was a dearth of incentives to help identify and arrest those in the upper echelons of drug syndicates, leading to speculations that what transpired was merely an introduction of a new order among those operating the drug rings. There were no generic wanted lists from law enforcement, starting with the street-level pushers.”
Vietnam became a leading rice producer due to its advantageous geography, historical developments, and transformative agricultural policies. The Mekong and Red River deltas provide Vietnam with fertile lands and abundant water resources, perfect for rice farming. The Mekong Delta, often called the “Rice Bowl” of Vietnam, is responsible for nearly half of the country’s rice output. But this advantage also exists in the Philippines with its fertile lands, lands that have not yet been converted to housing, industrial parks, and other uses.
Vietnam’s self-sufficiency in rice production changed dramatically with the introduction of the Doi Moi reforms in the mid-80s. These economic reforms liberalized agriculture, granting farmers ownership of their land and allowing them to participate in open markets, resulting in a surge in productivity and efficiency.
Vietnam adopted technological advancements, such as improved irrigation systems, high-yield rice varieties, and modern farming techniques, further contributing to the nation’s success in rice production. Shortly thereafter, Vietnam began exporting rice, transitioning from a country grappling with food insecurity to one of the world’s leading rice exporters. Today, Vietnamese rice reaches markets in over 150 countries. Government support was instrumental. Policies promoting sustainable farming and fostering export-oriented agriculture have ensured Vietnam’s success, highlighting the power of strategic reforms combined with its natural advantages.
The Philippine Department of Agriculture recently announced the acquisition of drying facilities, additional warehouse capacity, and additional funds for purchasing more palay from farmers in 2025. What misses the point is the absence of any discussion of the Filipino farmer owning more, if not the entire rice supply chain – allowing the farmer to profit from every single step of rice production – from farm to table. In the backdrop of an aging farmer demographic around 57, the impetus for urgent reforms is now.
Neither here nor there – selling palay should not be the end all and be all for Filipino farmers – they must control more of the rice supply chain. Their prosperity will ensure the rice supply.
–——————————————————-
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Dr. Crispin Fernandez advocates for overseas Filipinos, public health, transformative political change, and patriotic economics. He is also a community organizer, leader, and freelance writer.
