I write better when I smoke. Don’t ask me to reduce it to a science.


Maybe I’m over-simplifying this, but here’s how I understand Malthus: he predicted that man’s ability to produce food would be outstripped by the speed of population growth, eventually resulting in everyone being reduced to a subsistence existence.

In August last year, the New York times loudly trumpeted the debunking of Malthus by saying that the Industrial Revolution had boosted humanity’s ability to produce food (by industrializing agriculture), allowing it to keep pace with the growth of population. Locally, Solita Monsod (in an article I can no longer find) agreed and dismissed Malthus by adopting pretty much the same line of reasoning.

Another favorite of Malthus’ critics is the idea that, even in the absence of technological advancement or increased capital expenditure, the very growth of labor would overcome the imbalance. Basically, the thinking goes that food production increases (enough to meet relentlessly growing demand) because there are more people to make food.

And so, most everyone comfortably thinks that Malthus got it wrong. Recent events seem to me to prove otherwise. Either that, or we’re such a fucked-up country that even with what we needed to escape the Malthusian trap, we still ended up neck-deep in it.

First of all, we were in fact benefited by the fruits of the industrial revolution. Back in the day – circa 60s and 70s – everyone hailed Philippine agriculture as one of the most advanced in South East Asia, maybe even the world. But, having reached that peak, we’ve gone pretty much downhill since then. Where once our farmers had tractors and such, now too many of our farmers have gone back to using wooden plows. Wooden plows, man! That’s screwed up.

I blame government for not having a rational agriculture policy. I blame government for letting corruption take its toll on this, one of the most vital parts of a country’s life. But mostly, I blame government for perpetuating the insanity that is comprehensive agrarian reform.

Second, we have labor in spades. But with our bullheaded adherence to the concept of agrarian reform, we’ve gamed our system so that we can’t even maximize use of that labor force. I mean, think of it:

With land in the hands of big farmers, there is enough capital for modernization. Modernization means increasing agricultural efficiency and productivity. With productive farms, labor becomes a much needed resource and farms become major employers. Thus, with both modernized agriculture and the labor force to work the tractors and things, food production would have been boosted in a major way.

But with land reform, we carved up otherwise productive lands, took them away from the people with the capital to maximize the potential of the land, and gave them to individuals who did not have the technology or the capital to make their lands as productive as it used to be. Today, many of those who didn’t sell their lands the minute they got their titles, engage only in subsistence agriculture, making enough food only to feed their families.

And so we end up smack dab in the middle of a Malthusian crisis. While it is true that we had in our grasp everything we needed to escape that trap, we foolishly let it all slip away.So where does that leave that country?

In a rice crisis.


Filed under: musings, society, , ,

3 Responses

  1. cvj says:

    Food security and land reform does not have to be mutually exclusive. In fact, as i previously described in my blog, in the case of Taiwan, they have been mutually reinforcing.

    Addressing the problem in the inequality of ownership of land is important because it drags down GDP growth:

    …and in my blog entry on the Sumilao Farmers, i point to a study which shows that this is indeed the case even with the local CARP, defective as it is:

    What needs to be done is plug the loopholes which allow the landed to exempt their lands as well as to invest more heavily in support services, especially roads and fertilizer to reduce the costs of transport.

  2. BrianB says:

    With the price of oil nowadays, machine-powered farming will only be efficient super-large-scale, as in plantation-type farms. What farmers need is irrigation. The rest they can figure out themselves.

    Big farms are impractical considering the minimum wage and standard of living. You’ll have to treat laborers like scum to turn a profit. Farming may not even be that profitable in an unregulated country like ours, without subsidies.

    So you’ve got that problem: land reform, labor rights and subsidies. But really, if all our farmlands are fully irrigated we won’t even be talking about crisis. In fact, we’ll be an exporter. ROM, compared to Thailand and Vietnam, our rice farmers are thrice as efficient producing many times more yield per acre. You’re not suggesting we roll back minimum wage?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

RSS Short Puffs

  • Re-election 31 December 2008
    Maceda sez Erap consulted Narvasa and others, and they told him that the 1987 Consti prohibits only the INCUMBENT prez from re-election. Former prezzies, by their definition, face no such prohibition. But in the same breath, Maceda also sez that they know an Erap candidacy will be the subject of a disqual case – but […]
  • Escalation 30 December 2008
    I still think the Pangandaman’s shouldn’t have retaliated even if dela Paz threw the first punch. But is anyone really surprised at the escalation in the story-telling on both sides? BTW, I think we can dispense with the age angle nao.
  • Etiquette 29 December 2008
    Unless you’re spoiling for a fight, assume that the writer has some basis for what she writes. Don’t make like a lawyer and ask retarded questions in an attempt to lay the foundation for whatever point you’re trying to make.
  • Anne 28 December 2008
    Anne Curtis won best actress? Against the likes of Marian Rivera and Diana Zubiri? So what?
  • Baler 28 December 2008
    Watching Baler tomorrow. Will it be worth it?

Locations of visitors to this page

Archived Maps:
Politics & Government - Top Blogs Philippines

My site is worth $119.
How much is yours worth?

%d bloggers like this: