See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/265148443

Urban Agriculture: The Cagayan de Oro Experience

Conference Paper · January 2001

CITATIONS READS

2 987

1 author:

Robert Holmer
Urban Food International
121 PUBLICATIONS   558 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Ecological Sanitation (Ecosan) View project

Making Vegetables Visible (VegGIS) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Robert Holmer on 23 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Urban Agriculture: The Cagayan de Oro Experience1
Robert J. Holmer2

1 Abstract
Different aspects of urban agricultural activities in Cagayan de Oro, Northern
Mindanao, are discussed, particularly scope, volume and ways of production, their
impact on the city environment as well as business opportunities involved. Special
emphasis is given to the linkage of improved solid waste management practices with
urban food security. Issues and action to further enhance urban and periurban
agriculture in the Philippines are elaborated.
2 Introduction
Cagayan de Oro is located along the central coast of Northern Mindanao, Southern
Philippines (8º latitude North, 125º longitude East). The city is divided into 80
barangays, 57 of which are considered as urban and 23 as periurban. Its total land area
is about 49,000 hectares. About forty-four point seven percent of its territory is
considered as agricultural areas and 38.4 % as open spaces.
At present, the number of population living in city is about 520,000. Figure 1 shows
the population growth of Cagayan de Oro during the period from 1879 to 1998. In
1903, the population was about 21,000. Some 36 years later, the population had
doubled. Since then, the doubling of population was experienced in successively
shorter spans. Right now, the annual growth rate is 4.4%, almost double compared to
the Philippine national growth rate of 2.3% only.
3 Urban agricultural production
As of 1995, some 13,000 small scale farmers and tenants (of whom 3,000 are women)
in Cagayan de Oro were producing on 2,276 ha of land rice, corn, banana, coffee, root
crops, fruits and vegetables both for home consumption and market sales. Levels of
crop production in Cagayan de Oro are lower compared to the neighboring rural
provinces of Bukidnon and Misamis Oriental, which are situated in upland areas (table
1).
3.1 Vegetable production
In 1995, vegetables were grown on 55 ha, or 2% of the cultivated area of Cagayan de
Oro City. The average size of these farms is 1.7 hectares out which 0.5 ha are planted
with vegetables (CITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, 1995).
The most popular vegetable crops grown are eggplant, squash, stringbeans, tomatoes,
bell pepper and bitter gourd. The yields of bell pepper, tomato and eggplant grown in
Cagayan de Oro are less than half of those obtained in the upland areas such as in
Bukidnon. This indicates that the varieties grown are not well adapted to the climatic
conditions in the lowlands (POTUTAN ET AL., 1997).

1
Paper presented at the National Conference on Urban Agricultural Activities in the Philippines, Bureau
of Soils and Water Management, Quezon City, Philippines, January 15-17, 2001
2
Research Director, Xavier University College of Agriculture, Manresa Farm, Fr. W. Masterson Ave.,
9000 Cagayan de Oro
Findings of a survey among 100 vegetable farmers (POTUTAN ET AL., 1997) showed
that for 44% of the farmers vegetable production is their only means for sustaining their
livelihood. Forty-six percent of the vegetable farmers get their irrigation water from a
river or stream, 20% from deep wells, 11% from irrigation canals and 12% depend
entirely on rainfall. Eighty-six percent of the farmers reported that they applied
chemical fertilizers; 82% of the farmers actively controlled pests, diseases and weeds in
the last three crops, of which 90% used insecticides, 36% fungicides, 4% herbicides
and 50% utilized natural control measures. Importantly, 49% of those who applied
synthetic pesticides personally encountered ill effects the last time they sprayed,
including headache (55%), nausea (31%) and chest pain (14%).
Of farmers questioned, 24% had heard of the Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
program of the government ("Farmers' Field Schools"), and 12% of them had received
training. The impact of IPM training was ambivalent, as 36% of farmers increased their
level of pesticide use after receiving training and 36% maintained the same level of
pesticide use. Only 27% reported that they decreased the level of pesticide application
and used less toxic chemicals after receiving IPM training.
Vegetable farmers mentioned more than fifteen constraints to higher levels of vegetable
production. The most mentioned constraints are unfavorable climatic conditions (63%),
insect damage (53%), lack of capital (53%) and irregular water supply (23%). Among
other notable limitations to vegetable farming were the presence of plant diseases (7%),
poor soil fertility (7%), poor water quality (5%), and a lack of access to marketing
(3%).

3.2 Livestock and poultry

The livestock and poultry industry in the city can be categorized into commercial and
domestic production. In 1995, production reached 158,000 heads, of which 135,000
were chickens (table 2). There is only one slaughterhouse in the city, which also caters
for neighboring towns. It is inadequate to cater to the needs of the growing population.
Animals kept for home consumption are also slaughtered at home. There are no
recorded data how much meat is produced by livestock reared at home.

3.3 Other types of Urban agriculture

3.3.1 Backyard gardening
Backyard gardening is common. The City Agriculture Office (CAO) estimates that
about forty percent (40%) of total households (94,672 in 1997) maintain backyard
gardens. Backyard gardens mainly produce leafy vegetables, fruits and ornamental
plants. This practice is common in both urban and peri-urban areas, which signifies
economic importance as families can save on food items, which they would otherwise
have to buy. In addition, most households own domesticated animals.
3.3.2 School gardens
Ninety six percent (75 out of 78) of public elementary schools in Cagayan de Oro
maintain a school garden. This activity is pursued by pupils as part of the school
curriculum and supervised by principals and teachers. The size allotted for garden
ranges from 500 -1,000 square meters. The pupils usually plant leafy vegetables, fruits
and ornamentals as well as herbal plants. In some schools, parents are involved in
maintaining and safeguarding these gardens. School administrators adopted bio-
intensive gardening, designed for pupils to learn urban agriculture in both formal and
informal education approaches.
3.3.3 Agroforestry
Some reforestation projects for the production of mahogany, and other trees have been
implemented in Cagayan de Oro, mostly on hilly land in the Lumbia, Malasag and San
Simon barangays, about 10 to 15 kilometers from town center. Some 30 subsistence
farmers acquired to access these government lands through their local leaders
(barangay captains). They plant mainly vegetables and corn under the trees.
3.3.4 Aquaculture
As Cagayan de Oro is a coastal city marine fishing is dominant. Six hundred full-time
and 797 part-time fishermen provide about 70% of the demand for fish in the city
(CAO estimate, 1998)
Aquaculture has not yet gained popularity among city farmers. This could be explained
by the lack of knowledge about appropriate aquaculture, relative high investment costs
and the limited technical assistance. In light of the city's growth and the availability of
brackish water, the government may give more attention to aquaculture development by
providing adequate financial and technical assistance.
At the moment 18 urban farmers (6 full time and 12 part time) engage in aquaculture,
mainly producing tilapia, milkfish, and prawn/shrimp
The production is small-scale market oriented in ponds of 3 to 6 ha the average
production for milkfish is 40 kg/ha.
3.3.5 Nurseries
Nurseries focus on the production of fruit tree seedlings or ornamental plants, mainly
for parks and plazas. No concrete data related to the area coverage and the actual
number of farmers engaging in this activity are available.

4 Urban agriculture and the city environment

4.1 Waste disposal
A fast increasing population generates rapidly growing amounts of garbage. While the
population of Cagayan de Oro increased by the factor 1.3 from 1993 (387,000
residents) to 1999 (510,000 residents), the amount of solid wastes collected and
dumped at the city landfill site increased in the same period by the factor 2.8 (81,300
m3 in 1993 compared to 224,400 m3 in 1999). Correspondingly, the amount of garbage
collected doubled from 0.6 l per capita and day in the year 1993 to 1.2 l per capita and
day in the year 1999 (table 3). Possible reasons for the per capita increase are higher
generation of garbage due to changing consumption habits (e.g. popularity of fast food
chains) and/or a larger area serviced by public and private solid waste collectors.
Our own survey data from 1998 (HOLMER ET AL., 1999) indicate that in only about 50
% of the city households solid wastes are hauled by garbage collectors, while 38 % of
the households burn their garbage and further 12 % just dump it in vacant lots. These
data, however, do not reveal the causes why garbage are burned or dumped. The
respective households may be either not serviced by garbage collectors or are not able
or willing to bring the garbage to the collection receptacles for some reason or the other
(table 4).
The major shares of the solid waste volume dumped at the city landfill site are from
private households (54 %), 28 % come from commerce and institutions, 10 % from the
public markets, 8 % from the industry and 1 % from other sources (figure 2). A closer
look at the composition of the solid waste delivered to the Cagayan de Oro landfill site
reveals that about 40 to 50 % of its fraction is bio-degradable and, hence, has the
potential to be converted into organic fertilizer if appropriate technologies are available.
Further 20 to 30 % of the solid waste are potential products for the recycle industry
(table 5). At present, an increasing number of people are making their livelihood from
collecting and selling recyclable materials from landfill areas.
Landfills for solid wastes in many countries are approaching their capacity. If the life-
span of a landfill site can be expanded by both converting biodegradable materials into
organic fertilizer and by segregating out other recyclable materials, city governments
can save huge amounts of taxpayers’ money, which can be used for other purposes.
New landfill sites are difficult and expensive to source and – if found – are in general
located at greater distances from the city center with corresponding higher
transportation costs.
4.2 Agricultural dimension
Municipal engineers traditionally have focused on landfills, dumps and incinerators to
solve solid waste problems. Farmers, meanwhile continue to predominantly use
inorganic fertilizers to meet the nutrient demands of their crops. In a survey conducted
among 100 vegetable growers in Cagayan de Oro, 86 % of the respondents applied
fertilizers in the last three croppings (table 6). Most of those 14 % who did not use any
fertilizers at all had either no capital, considered their soil as fertile enough - hence no
need for external inputs - or were worried to cause soil acidity when applying synthetic
fertilizers (table 7).
The overwhelming majority of farmers use synthetic fertilizers (72 % Urea, 60 %
Complete, 48 % Muriate of Potash, 25 % Ammonium sulfate) while just 14 % of the
respondents applied chicken dung and 4 % used either cattle manure or compost (table
8). Though only 4 % of the farmer respondents applied compost during their last three
croppings, 36 % of them already practiced the technology of composting (table 9). One
of the major reasons for not engaging into composting is lacking knowledge about
compost making (52 %). Further 25 % think that composting is out of trend (table 10).
The very low number of farmers practicing composting and actually applying it to their
crops indicates certain reservations towards this technology compared to the use of
synthetic fertilizers. The latter are commercially available products with a standardized
quality. They are easily accessible and convenient to handle for farmers. Technologies
on compost production that guarantee a product with similar parameters as synthetic
fertilizers and, thus, making it competitive and attractive to be used by farmers, are
available but need to be properly introduced into local programs (GTZ, 1998; HOLMER
et al., 1997).
4.3 Urban agriculture and business opportunities
4.4 Vegetable consumption
Cities take in natural resources, process them, and in some way or the other create
pollution. These open-loop polluting systems of the city can be closed through
improved municipal solid waste systems in connection with urban agricultural
activities. However, to make these systems sustainable, these systems have to be
designed in economically viable, environmentally sound and socially uplifting ways.
If the term “waste” is described as a “misplaced resource”, it suddenly acquires a
commercial dimension. As already earlier mentioned, about 50 % of municipal solid
wastes are organic, hence, constitute possible raw materials for composting and can be
re-integrated into agricultural production systems. As regards the economic potential of
periurban vegetable farming, survey data for Cagayan de Oro revealed that vegetables
are consumed everyday by 73 % of all respondents. Consumption is highest among
farmers (85 %) and lowest among consumers from the higher-class subdivision (64 %).
However, higher-class consumers have by far the highest consumption of meat (78 %)
and the farmer respondents the lowest (7 %) (table 11).
Table 12 lists the 10 most commonly consumed vegetables in Cagayan de Oro. It is
apparent that leafy vegetables such as horseradish tree leaves (Moringa oleifera),
camote tops (leaves of Ipomea batatas) or Malabar spinach (Basella alba) are
particularly popular among the low-income groups. Camote tops are commonly
consumed by 70 % of the consumer group living in lower class areas of the city, but
only by 18 % of those living in higher-class subdivisions. Head cabbage, for example,
is very popular among the consumer groups with more than 70 %. In contrast, only 26
% of the vegetable growers consume this vegetable.
Respondents were also asked about the quantity of certain vegetables they consumed
during the last 30 days before the interview (reference month was February 1998).
Most popular vegetables were tomato (95 %), eggplant (88 %), bell pepper (83 %),
head cabbage (72 %) and papaya (58 %), followed by cauliflower (27 %), yambean (12
%) and soybean (8 %) (table 13). The monthly consumption of these vegetables ranged
from 0.9 kg for soybeans up to 3.5 kg for tomatoes. From these responses, the
estimated daily per capita consumption of vegetables is less than 100 grams, which is
consistent with findings of similar surveys (PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF NUTRITION,
1997). This is far below the recommended daily intake of 200 grams of vegetables
necessary to assure a sufficient vitamin and micronutrient supply for the human body
(FAO/WHO, 1992). The average amount spent for vegetables in Cagayan de Oro is
PhP 83. Based on the number of households in the city (94,672 as of 1997), the annual
expenditures for vegetables by private households alone amounted to about 410 million
PhP (table 14).
As regards the business opportunities for other potential raw materials in garbage such
as paper, glasses, metals and plastics which constitute further 20 to 30 % of the solid
wastes, no detailed surveys were conducted yet in Cagayan de Oro. However, based on
interviews with some garbage pickers at the landfill site, one family could earn as much
as 300 PhP a day if materials were well sorted and not contaminated. Different
guidelines and manuals on how to involve micro- and small enterprises in municipal
solid waste management are available (HAAN et al., 1998, AHMED et al. 1996,
LARDINOIS & FUREDY, 1999. LARDINOIS & KLUNDERT, 1995).
However, in order to make these improved systems economically viable, products from
these enterprises such as organic fertilizer, agricultural produce and raw materials for
the recycling industry must be competitive. Key criteria for competitiveness are
outlined in figure 3 showing that cost, quality, quantity and service delivery are
considered major areas.
The right product at a certain time in quality and quantity is a market demand, which
can never be denied. Very often standards and quality control are missing in developing
countries but need to be established for competitiveness particularly versus imported
goods. It is a fact that “the market sets the quality”. The entrepreneur, be it a farmer, a
producer of compost or a garbage picker, must therefore quickly respond to buyers’
requirements with an understanding of and communication with the market.
Consequently, appropriate transport facilities and communication systems, i.e. linkage
with the markets have to be set in place.
Strategic directions have to be developed based on local conditions for each country
and society. Nevertheless, basic subsystems must be appropriately addressed as
outlined in figure 4. Those are production, input supply, marketing & distribution,
financing and human resources.

5 Issues and Actions

Much has still to be considered to make urban agriculture linked with improved solid
waste management a successful tool for an economically viable, ecologically sound and
socially accepted development for cities worldwide.
5.1 Improved solid waste management systems
An initial and indispensable step to make improved solid waste management systems
work is solid waste segregation at the source where garbage is generated: at the
household level, in public markets, commercial and industrial centers, etc. The
objective is to provide clean and uncontaminated raw materials for possible users at the
lowest cost possible.
Such systems have to be initialized by community organizing public educational and
promotional campaign with the different stakeholder groups such as local government
units, homeowner associations, market vendors, environmental officers of the private
industry, garbage pickers, educational and research institutions, farmers and others.
Information systems, linkages and responsibilities among the different stakeholders
have to be established.
If the segregation of solid wastes has been established, the respective raw materials
have to be channeled to the different processors who will further take charge of them.
The remaining solid wastes without any economic value have to be dumped to the
landfill site, respectively incinerated (such as hospital wastes).

5.2 Urban agriculture

Composts from biodegradable city wastes can be converted either in a substrate for
seedling production, used as a potting media or applied as fertilizers, depending on the
respective standardization. However, fertilization is only one of the components of crop
production, particularly in vegetable farming. Other important technologies that must
be available for farmers are:
• Availability of adapted cultivars with tolerance or resistance to prevalent pests and
diseases and quality attributes accepted by the market;
• Integrated pest and disease management strategies for reduced dependence on
chemical pesticides such as netting for protection, introduction of parasitoids and
intercropping technologies;
• Organic or synthetic soil mulching for weed control;
• Simple but efficient and economic irrigation systems for higher water productivity,
such as the bucket system with drip irrigation laterals by gravity and for advanced
technology even drip irrigation and fertigation;
• Postharvest technologies;
• Market transparency.

Furthermore, community gardening or gardening by private individuals who have the

motivation should be seriously encouraged (with incentives) considered by city
administrators as an efficient combination for urban agriculture such as allocating and
subdividing suitable areas within the city limits to promote urban greening, improving
social structures and be part of ready available food supply. The same is true for school
gardening which can become an efficient way of educating early-on pupils in
elementary school to grow fruits and vegetables, improving their eating habits and
integrating such school gardening operations into family interactions for educating
whole communities for food supply and healthy nutrition. Demonstration farms must be
established under responsibility of interested groups (e.g. NGOs, schools,
etc.)cooperatives or city governments for education and extension not only to interested
farmers but also to consumers and city residents. To make urban agriculture really
successful, community laws and regulations have to be adopted accordingly,
particularly for land allotments, infrastructure, sales outlets, support to cooperative
establishments, extension and credits. Even if there are established extension services
for agriculture in rural areas, such have to be adapted to farming under urban and
periurban environments. It is, therefore, necessary to formulate innovative training
programs for trainers and others and to provide appropriate extension service to urban
and periurban farmers.
6 Acknowledgement
This research study was funded by the INCO-DC program of the European Union
Commission (Project No. IC18-CT97-0184). The authors want to thank the staff of the
Periurban Vegetable Project of Xavier University College Agriculture and the City
Government of Cagayan de Oro, particularly the Local Environmental Planing
Management Unit and the City Agriculture Office, for their contributions rendered.
7 Literature cited
AHMED, R., KLUNDERT, A.V.D., LARDINOIS, 1996. Rubber waste – options for small-
scale resource recovery. Urban Waste Series 3, Urban Waste Expertise Program,
Gouda, Netherlands.
FAO/WHO. 1992. International Conference on Nutrition. Rome: Food and Agricultural
Organization of the United Nations.
GTZ, 1998. Utilization of organic waste in (peri-)urban centers. GFA-Umwelt and
Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn, Germany.
HAAN, H.C., COAD, A., LARDINOIS, I., 1998. Municipal solid waste management:
Involving micro- and small enterprises. Guidelines for municipal managers.
International Training Center of the ILO, Turin, Italy. ISBN 92-9049-365-8.
HOLMER, R.J., POTUTAN, G. E., SCHNITZLER, W. H., 1999. Urban horticulture in the
Philippines: Its impact on food security, health, gender and urban environment.
Proceedings of the Sub-Regional Workshop on Constraints and Opportunities for
the Development of Urban and Peri-Urban Horticulture in South-East Asia, October
16-19, 1999, Kunming, Yunnan, China. Ministry of Agriculture, People's Republic
 of China, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy, pp
39-48.
HOLMER, R.J., GABUTIN, L.B., SCHNITZLER, W.H., 1997. Organic fertilizer production
from city waste: A model approach in a Southeast Asian urban environment.
Kasetsart J. (Nat. Sci.) 32 (5):50-53 (ISSN 0075-5192).
LARDINOIS, I. & FUREDY C. (eds.), 1999. Source separation of household waste
materials: Analysis of case studies from Pakistan, the Philippines, India, Brazil,
Argentina and the Netherlands. Urban Waste Series No. 7. Urban Waste Expertise
Program, Gouda, Netherlands.
LARDINOIS, I. & KLUNDERT, A.V.D., 1995. Plastic waste – options for small-scale
resource recovery. Urban Waste Series 2, Urban Waste Expertise Program, Gouda,
Netherlands.
PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF NUTRITION. 1997. Fourth National Nutrition Survey,
Philippines, 1993. Part A: Food Consumption Survey. Philippine Journal of
Nutrition, Vol. XLIV Nos. 1 & 2.
POTUTAN, G.E., JANUBAS L. G., ARNADO J. M., HOLMER, R. J., SCHNITZLER, W. H.
1997. Periurban vegetable production, consumption and marketing in Cagayan de
Oro, Philippines. Kasetsart J. (Nat. Sci.) 32 (5):61-66 (ISSN 0075-5192).
8 Figures and Tables

700000
600000
500000
400000
300000
200000
100000
0
1860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Figure 1: Population growth of Cagayan de Oro from 1879 to 1999

Source: Cagayan de Oro City Planning and Development Office

7% 1%
10%

54%

28%

Residential Commercial & Institutional Market Industrial Others

Figure 2: Distribution of solid waste generators in Cagayan de Oro

Source: Cagayan de Oro City Public General Services department (period January to August 1997)
 COMPETITIVENESS CRITERIA KEY RESULT AREA
Cost • Unit farm cost
• Productivity optimization
• Efficient input usage
• Post harvest losses
• Transport and distribution cost
• Packaging/Processing cost
Quality • The right product
• Quality standards and control
• Handling and packaging
“The market sets the quality”
Quantity • Minimum volumes for a certain quality are required

Service delivery • Quick response to buyers’ requirements

• Regularity of supply
• Communication with markets
• Transport availability and frequency

Figure 3: Elements of competitiveness

SUBSYSTEM KEY RESULT AREA
Production • Technology packaging and dissemination
• Organization of co-operatives
• Quality standards and quality control
• Minimization of production and post harvest losses
• Investment-friendly policies

Input supply • Knowledge about and access to appropriate farm inputs (seeds,
labor, fertilizers, etc.)
• Knowledge about appropriate and efficient input usage
• Transport and distribution
• Research, Development & Extension
• Credit availability

Marketing & Distribution • Timely market information and intelligence

• Marketing infrastructure
• All weather farm-to-market roads
• Producers’ organizations
• Joint ventures and strategic alliances
• Appropriate storage systems

Financing • Access to credits

• Linkages with corporations, e.g. contract growing, joint
ventures, etc.
• Development of financing modalities

Human resources • Entrepreneurship training

• Universities and colleges must be responsive to the needs of
the agro-industry
• Group and Coop management.
• Sensitive bureaucracy
• Responsive local governments
• Good program/project management

Figure 4: Strategic directions

Table 1: Agricultural production in Cagayan de Oro City 1 and neighboring provinces

Misamis Oriental 2 and Bukidnon2
Cagayan de Oro1 Misamis Oriental 2 Bukidnon2
CROP Area (ha) Volume (t) Area (ha) Volume (t) Area (ha) Volume (t)
Corn 1,162 1,813 8,150 15,066 195,710 402,558
Rice 115 455 3,242 7,470 71,490 288,420
Coffee 65 39 5,988 3,228 23,640 19,478
Fruits 579 12,420 2,179 25,220 35,766 375,026
Root crops 304 2706 1,029 7,344 10,016 88,399
Vegetables 55 560 791 5,336 1,642 18,059
TOTAL 2,280 17,993 21,379 63,654 338,264 1,191,940
Source: City Agriculture Office; Department of Agriculture Region X, 1995
1
= 1995; 2 = 1990
Table 2: Livestock and poultry population in Cagayan de Oro (1992 -1995)
Species 1992 1993 1994 1995
Livestock
Carabao 1,593 1,609 1,367 1,411
Pig 10,237 10,204 13,986 12,399
Goat 3,523 3,523 3,337 3,252
Cattle 4,570 4,581 5,245 4,010
Horse 453 462 424 409

Poultry
Chicken 75,000 74,999 74,874 135,072
Duck -- -- -- 1,350
Total 95,376 95,378 99,233 157,903
Source: City Veterinary Office

Table 3: Municipal solid waste (MSW) collection in Cagayan de Oro for the years 1993
to 1999

Year Total MSW MSW collected per capita (l/day)

collected (m³)
1993 81,348 0.58
1994 97,439 0.66
1995 126,154 0.81
1996 134,379 0.82
1997 141,088 0.83
1998 172,995 0.97
1999 224,416 1.21
Source: Cagayan de Oro City Public Services Office

Table 4: Garbage disposal practices of private households in Cagayan de Oro (N=300)

Disposal practices Percentage (%)

Through the garbage collector 48
Burned 38
Dumped in a vacant lot 12
Source: Xavier University College of Agriculture, Periurban Vegetable Project Survey (1998)
Table 5: Composition of waste delivered to Cagayan de Oro landfill side (% of total
wet weight)

Component Market Commercial, Institutional Residential

Food and Kitchen Waste 51% 41% 27%
Garden and Yard Waste 0% 10% 9%
Glass Bottle 0% 0% 4%
Inert 13% 2% 10%
Metal and Tin 1% 6% 4%
Miscellaneous Waste 1% 4% 5%
Paper and Cardboard 11% 8% 25%
Plastic 21% 26% 13%
Rubber and Leather 0% 0% 0%
Textile 1% 0% 1%
Wood 2% 2% 1%
Waste Density 230 kg/m³ 108 kg/m³ 200 kg/m³
Source: City General Services, survey period September 28 to October 02, 1998

Table 6: Application of fertilizers during the last three croppings (N=97)

Fertilizer usage %
Applied fertilizer 86
Did not apply fertilizer 14
Total 100
Source: Xavier University College of Agriculture, Periurban Vegetable Project Survey (1998)

Table 7: Reasons of not applying any soil ameliorants (N=14)

Reasons %
No Capital 43
Fertile soil 29
Synthetic fertilizers can cause soil acidity 21
No Response 7
Total 100
Source: Xavier University College of Agriculture, Periurban Vegetable Project Survey (1998)
Table 8: Fertilizer usage and application per cropping (N=83)
Fertilizer % Mean quantity
applied (kg/ha)
Synthetic:
Urea (46-0-0) 72 186
Complete (14-14-14) 60 179
Muriate of potash (0-0-60) 48 199
Ammonium sulfate (21-0-0) 25 218
Diammonium phosphate 5 174
Organic:
Chicken dung 14 1433
Compost 4 453
Cattle manure 4 233
Source: Xavier University College of Agriculture, Periurban Vegetable Project Survey (1998)

Table 9: Respondents who practiced production of compost (N=300)

All Farmers Vendors Consumers
Answer % % % %
Yes 25 36 23 16
No 75 64 77 84
Total 100 100 100 100
Source: Xavier University College of Agriculture, Periurban Vegetable Project Survey (1998)

Table 10: Reasons for not producing compost

All Farmers Vendors Consumers
Answer % % % %
Not enough knowledge about compost 36 52 27 32
making
No suitable space for compost production 23 5 27 32
Not enough time 18 16 17 20
Compost making is out of trend 15 25 13 8
Compost making is inconvenient 5 2 12 2
Not used to make compost 2 2 3 1
Bad odor 1 0 0 2
Not interested in compost production 0 0 0 1
Don't know 0 0 1 0
Source: Xavier University College of Agriculture, Periurban Vegetable Project Survey (1998)

Table 11: Daily consumption of staple food in Cagayan de Oro

Type of Vegetable Vegetable Consumers (%) Mean
Food Growers Vendors (%)
(%) (%) Higher Middle class Lower
class class
Rice 97 100 95 96 96 97
Vegetables 85 75 64 67 76 73
Fish 40 35 25 59 83 48
Meat 7 12 78 42 14 31
Eggs 11 15 23 29 11 18
Source: Xavier University College of Agriculture, Periurban Vegetable Project Survey (1998)
 Table 12: Commonly consumed vegetables in Cagayan de Oro
Vegetable Vegetable Consumers All
growers vendors Higher class Middle class Lower class
% % % % % %
Horse radish tree leaves 94 87 65 75 100 86
Eggplant 85 74 71 88 83 78
Squash 80 58 73 63 60 69
String beans 77 58 71 63 63 68
Tomatoes 70 73 57 63 60 67
Malabar spinach 76 60 48 63 80 65
Pak choy 53 67 69 75 70 63
Bitter gourd 67 51 65 63 33 58
Cabbage 26 54 71 75 73 51
Camote tops 61 52 18 75 70 50
Source: Xavier University College of Agriculture, Periurban Vegetable Project Survey (1998)

Table 13: Consumption of selected vegetables in Cagayan de Oro

Selected Respondents who Mean quantity Monthly
vegetables consumed vegetables consumed in the last consumption in
30 days per household Cagayan de Oro
% kg kg
Tomato 95.3 3.5 315,778
Eggplant 88.3 3.3 275,865
Sweet pepper 83.0 1.2 94,293
Head cabbage 71.7 2.9 196,851
Papaya 58.0 3.2 175,711
Cauliflower 27.7 2.3 60,316
Yambean 11.7 1.0 11,077
Soybean 7.7 0.9 6,561
Total 18.3 1,136,452
Source: Xavier University College of Agriculture, Periurban Vegetable Project Survey (1998)

Table 14: Economic aspects of vegetable consumption in private households of Cagayan

de Oro
No. of households in Cagayan de Oro as of 1997: 95,000
Amount spent for vegetables per week and household: 83 PhP
Amount spent for vegetables in Cagayan de Oro per week: 7,885,000 PhP
Amount spent for vegetables in Cagayan de Oro per year: 410,020,000 PhP
Source: Xavier University College of Agriculture, Periurban Vegetable Project Survey (1998)

View publication stats