Analysis: Misnomer of Philippines as an agricultural country

As early as my childhood school days I was made to think and believe that the Philippines is basically an agriculturally–based economy, so that much of its growth contributions are generated from local natural resources, particularly the local agricultural reserve. Why not? the fact is about 50 percent or more of our labor force is directly or indirectly employed by agriculture; relative to that is the fact that out of the estimated 9 million people who are currently unemployed, approximately 50 percent comes from the agricultural sector. Out of this total employment population nearly 60 percent is employed in agriculture. No wonder people in the countryside who rely on agriculture for their livelihood fall victim when serious problems of joblessness strike.

Gauging from the agricultural sector's performance in the economy dating from the 1960s, it has practically not contributed significantly to local growth. According to reports, agriculture, fishery and forestry directly account for only one-fifth (or 20 percent) of the economy's aggregate domestic output (GDP). Since the 1960s, the direct share of agriculture in the GDP had fallen below one-third, and by 1981, the sector's share had decreased to only 23 percent. In their study, economists Cielito Habito and Roehlano Briones in 2005 found that agricultural output was largely stagnant through the years, while industry and especially the services sectors significantly raised their local growth shares, particularly in the past two decades.

Gauging from the agricultural sector's performance in the economy dating from the 1960s, it has practically not contributed significantly to local growth.

Several studies and GDP historical information belie the fact that the Philippines is an agriculturally-based country. In his study, agriculture economist L.A. Gonzales in 1985, observed that the Philippines being an archipelago has misplaced priorities. He added, "Why fit an agricultural development objective to an archipelagic country?"

Admittedly, agriculture is essential because it concerns food and local subsistence. But being an archipelago suggests that the country is more of an aquaculture country than an agricultural one. While it is true that we cannot live by fish alone, to put primary emphasis on agriculture as a direction of rural development for an island nation is simply a case of wrong priorities. While it is true that agricultural output is still by far more productive than the output of aquaculture, empirical findings support the qualitative results that aquaculture in the Philippines has a potential to be a sustainable alternative source of food supply given its high value and the potential for income despite low produce.

Being an archipelago suggests that the country is more of an aquaculture country than an agricultural one.

The government for its part should take a proactive stance to develop this area of industry. Aquaculture should not only become a source of food. More than its gastronomic nature comes the big potential as a source of export earnings.

Emmanuel J. Lopez, Ph.D. is an associate professor at the University of Santo Tomas and the chair of its Department of Economics. Views reflected in this article are his own.  For comments email: [email protected]