Name: Aiza Lozano Gomez BSAM-2D

Santiago, A., & Roxas, F. (2015). Reviving farming interest in the Philippines through agricultural
entrepreneurship education. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 5(4),
15–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2015.054.016

ISSN: 2152-0801 online

ARTICLE:

 Santiago,A. Professor, Management and Organization Department, De La Salle University; 2401

Taft Avenue; Manila, Philippines 1004; ma.andrea.santiago@dlsu.edu.ph
 Roxas, F. Associate Professor, Asian Institute of Management, Washington Sycip Graduate
School of Business, Asian Institute of Management; 123 Paseo de Roxas; Makati, Philippines;
fyanroxas@aim.edu

INTRODUCTION

Entrepreneurial income from agriculture-related activities offers an opportunity to reduce rural

poverty if efforts are make to address productivity constraints, access to finance, extension services,
and climate change. There is general acceptance that entrepreneurial activity spurs economic
growth, although not all agree as to whether it encompasses all forms of activity (including self-
employment, rent, and job creation) or only those that introduce innovation in products, services,
processes, or delivery. It helps in reducing food costs, supply uncertainties and improving the diets
of the rural and urban poor in the country. It also generates growth, increasing and diversifying
income, and providing entrepreneurial opportunities in both rural and urban areas. Since the
economy of many developing countries is agriculture-based, we believe that various sectors in
society should collaborate in a more focused manner to arrest urban migration. This collaboration is
possible by supporting agricultural entrepreneurship (or agripreneurship) education. Beyond
farming and farm management training, emphasis should be given to the entrepreneurship side,
providing skills related to opportunity seeking, value creation, risk management, resource
generation, and commercialization, among others.

 The Case of the Philippines.

 Addressing the Gap with Education.
 Family Farm Schools.
 SAKA Program.
 Farm Business Schools.
The the Philippines entrepreneurship education is still considered an agricultural country; yet the
average age of farmers is 57 years (Pangilinan, cited in Casauay, 2014). This suggests that in a decade or
so, there will be no more Filipino farmers unless a youthful generation replaces them. Unfortunately,
children of farmers take no interest after seeing their parents remain in poverty (Cariño, 2013). Moves
by the Philippine government to support agripreneurship are timely. Despite efforts to increase farm
productivity, crop production from 13 milion hectares of land grew marginally from 87 million in 2011 to
88 million metric tons in 2012. Despite the increase in output, crop production in 2012 was valued at
P797 million, down from P802 million in 2011 (Philippine Statistics Authority [PSA], 2013). Even for rice,
a basic staple of Filipinos, unmilled rice production reached only 18 million metric tons, resulting in only
11 million metric tons rice.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Seth B Heinert, T Grady Roberts

Journal of Agricultural Education 59 (3), 291-308, 2018

A sustainable agricultural workforce is contingent on youth engagement in agriculture, however

many youth in rural areas show a lack of interest in agricultural careers. (Bennell, 2010; FAO, 2010;
USDA, 2015). Agricultural entrepreneurship may provide an enticing career option for rural youth.
Agricultural entrepreneurship education programs have existed for some time (Acker & Gasperini, 2009;
Phipps, Osborne, Dyer, & Ball, 2008), however, little is known about the characteristics of effective
programming for this unique type of education.

 School based agricultural education (SBAE) program

 classroom/laboratory instruction, Supervised Agricultural Experience (SAE),
 leadership development/competition (FFA)

Entrepreneurship education programs around the world vary widely in terms of design and delivery
as well as content, curriculum, and available wrap around services. Programs are offered at all levels of
education and in a variety of settings with, generally, more literature available on university level and
training programs. SBAE has a long history of entrepreneurship education through formal curricula as
well as supervised agricultural education programs.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

The plan envisions a sector that shall have amajor role in reducing poverty, achieving food security,
global competitiveness, sustainabilityand justice and peace. It looks forward ten years hence to a vision
of robust and vibrant agriculture tural and natural resources production systemsand ecosystems
services that improve and sustainable well being in the Philippines.In the Philippine education system,
the Department of Education supervises basic education, the Technical Education and Skills
Development Authority supervises technical and vocational training, and the Commission on Higher
Education supervises higher education. A problem with the basic education sysyem is that for decades it
has focused on preparing students for college. This emphasis is to encourage students to take the route
of higher education to improve their employability. Unfortunately, not all college graduates are able to
obtain employment in their field of study (Rosero, 2013).

 Achieving food security

 supervises basic education
 supervises higher education
 vibrant agriculture tural and natural resources production.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Poverty in the Philippines continues to be a rural phenomenon. While the desire of government to
educate the rural poor and make them selfreliant is strong, the resources needed for such a program are
wanting. Thus, the participation of civil service organizations and the private sector is a tremendous
boost in this direction. There are many approaches to take, which are not mutually exclusive. What is
clear is the goal of making the agricultural poor more productive by equipping them with
entrepreneurial skills and making available financial resources to do so.
Finally, the various models presented were initiated by the private sector at different times. The FFS
model has taken much more time to gain momentum than the GK model. Yet all four models seem to
converge. It would be interesting for researchers to map the progress of each of these models and to
assess their impact. The results of the FFS model can also be compared to its counterparts in France and
Spain, where theprogram originated, and other countries, with the caveat that the agriculture sector in
the country faces much more constraints and challenges than those in more developed countries. In the
process, specific enabling and deterring factors can be determined.

 educate the rural poor and make them selfreliant is strong, the resources needed for such a
program are wanting.
 initiated by the private sector at different times.

COMMENT CRITIQUE :

The highest poverty incidence includes that of farmers, fisherman, and children from low-income
families. In relation to poverty in rural areas, the service sector now has more workers than in
agriculture making it the largest sector in the Philippines.

SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS

The report concludes that findings throughout the study seem to be generally contrasting. Concerns
for the future of agriculture stem from the decreasing number of workers in the sector, the increasing
age of Filipino farmers, and the low enrollment in agricultural-related programs in higher education.
However, the various programs in agriculture for youth in urban and rural areas provide some signs of
improvement and an increased interest in farming amongst youths.

RECOMMENDATION

Maruja M. B. Asis, PhD. Scalabrini Migration Center, Philippines. The original, unabridged version of
this paper was published on 16 March 2020 by the Scalabrini Migration Center of Manila.
 Encourage investment in agriculture that promotes area-based development.Ensuring that every
region in the Philippines is given priority through specific development programs will no longer be a
problem. Every aspect will be tapped, which will lead to comprehensive agricultural development and
ultimately economic development.

To ensure that tomorrow’s generation will not go famished, it is the social responsibility of everyone to
set in motion plans of action that will encourage the young ones to take interest in farming, fishing,
raising livestock and similar agri-fishery activities.

But to meet this challenge, we have to take into consideration that agriculture has never been an
attractive field for the youth. It is often perceived as an undercompensated hard labor. Some call it
jologs or baduy, and other similar shameful moniker.

However, farming and fishing are noble professions that have continued to feed and reinforce our
nation, nutritionally and economically for many years. We just have to reintroduce to the younger
generation its advantages and merits, and allure them to go into the business of agriculture.

CLASS OF GROUP READERS

To encourage the youth to study agriculture, there must be a link between what is actually being
taught to the technological advances and innovations available. The sector must be presented as an
evolving-dynamic industry that presents opportunities in different fields. As such, students must be
trained in decision-making and leadership in preparation to the diversity of careers that may be
available for them in the future.

References :

1. K Yamagishi, C Gantalao, L Ocampo - Journal of Tourism futures, 2021 - emerald.com

2. Para Jansuwan, Kerstin K ZaZand Sustainability 13 (21), 11611, 2021
3. Siti Fatimahwati Pehin Dato Musa, Pg Siti Rozaidah Pg Hj Idris, Khairul Hidayatullah BaBas
Economics, Business, and Islamic Finance in ASEAN Economics Community, 31-56, 2020
4. Ashley Joy Alcantara, Jasmin Basmala, Semera Yluj Sepillos, Eric Pasquin International Journal of
Social and Management Studies 3 (1), 208-220, 2022
5. Grace Inegbedion, Md Mofakkarul Islam International Journal of Agricultural Science, Research
and Technology (IJASRT) in Extension and Education Systems 11 (1), 55-69, 2021
6. Marissa Hernando-Valdez, H CeCecil Plant Science Today 8 (3), 445–450-445–450, 2021
7. Charina A Javier, Cristina G Malabad, Ma Lynell V Maniego, Cheder D Sumangue, Charmaine A
Duan. Philippine Journal of Science 151 (1), 425-435, 2022
8. SS Kodithuwakku, C Weerako Agricultural Research for Sustainable Food Systems in Sri Lanka,
455-473, 2020
9. Kim Edward S Santos, Carl Louie R Nocum, Crisanto D De Jesus International Journal of
Environment, Agriculture and Biotechnology 6, 6, 2021.
10. Janet Nakhayo Ojwang United States International University-Africa, 2019