PRA Report of Brgy. Ilaya Ilasan, Tayabas City for Organic Farming
(Assessment of the Potential of Ilasan Organic Farmers Association and Brgy.Ilaya Ilasan Philippines For Promoting Organic Farming)
23 February 2012
I.INTRODUCTION The class in Agricultural Systems 145 (Participatory Methodologies in Agricultural Systems Research and Extension) of University of the Philippines Los Baños, Agricultural Systems Cluster – Cluster – College of Agriculture, in cooperation with the local government of Tayabas City Quezon, conducted a Participatory Rural Appraisal [PRA] in Brgy. Ilaya Ilasan. The participants are members of Ilasan Organic Farmers Association [ILOFA]. Within the PRA a Participatory Organization Appraisal [POA]of ILOFA was conducted as well. The PRA supplemented by the POA will allow for the assessment of the potential of Brgy. IlayaIlasan and ILOFA for promoting organic agriculture.
A. Objectives of the PRA
The PRA aims to assess a community’s community ’s potential for organic farming using agricultural systems analysis while simultaneously enabling participant farmers to analyze their own farming situation and identify points for improvement.
B. The PRA Process
The PRA team was first organized on 6
th
of January 2012 to set the purpose of
the PRA, and to define specific objectives. Roles were distributed among team members – different PRA tools were assigned to be facilitated by each member.
On the 14
th
of January 2012, the PRA was conducted in the Barangay Hall of
Brgy. Ilaya Ilasan, Tayabas Quezon. It was attended by 15 ILOFA members [13 men, 2 women] as well as local personnel from the Municipal Agricultural Office. The team briefed the
participants about the PRA, its objectives, what they can expect from it, and what is expected from them. The participants were divided into 4 groups and one PRA team member was assigned to facilitate each group. Each group was initially assigned to make one PRA tool. After the allotted time for each tool, the groups rotated among themselves until every participants gave their inputs in every tools.
PRA Tools Used
In order to generate the required information, choosing of PRA tools must be in line with the objectives of the PRA. In this regard, the following tools were decided to be used. Barangay profile Institutional diagram Internal and external stakeholders analysis Village map Livelihood matrix Trend analysis The type and extent of information to be generated from each tool was initially determined. This served as a guide for each facilitator, as they will know what type of information needed from participants. Each tool and the information expected from it are as follows: Barangay profile: This shows the farm practice of participants – conventional farming, organic farming, in transition, in conversion, or in reversion. It also shows the year when the participants are in that phase. Institutional diagram:This diagram: This is expected to generate a representation of institutions and other organizations, existing within and outside the barangay, that work with ILOFA. The linkages/ interactions between these institutions are also represented as well as their degree or extent of
interaction. This will enable the team and the participants to identify the important institutions necessary for the ILOFA’s progress of activities, as well as potentialpartners that the association still needs. Internal and external stakeholdersanalysis: This tool is expected to supplement the institutional diagram by giving specific ratings to the institutions and organizations that work with ILOFA. Village map: This will give an overview of the bio-physical bio -physical situation of the barangay, specifically specifically the major crops and livestock, major resources, landmarks and infrastructures. It also specifically showed farm areas that are organic, conventional, in transition, in conversion, or in reversion. This tool will help in assessing the bio-physical potential of the barangay in promoting organic farming. Livelihood matrix: This will provide a more in depth view of the participants’ source/s of income and their economic status. It should show their major crops and livestock as well as their non-farm activities. Trend Analysis:This Analysis:This will aide in monitoring the overall effect of organic farming to the participants as compared to conventional farming, in transition, in conversion phase of organic farming. It will specifically look at economic, social, and environmental indicators. It will also project the participants’ view of these aspects after ten years.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA A. Bio-physical Characteristics
Figure 1.Village Map of Brgy. Ilaya Ilasan Tayabas City, Quezon
From the village map, actualobservation actualobservation of the location, additional information provided by participants, andsecondary data from NSO, the following bio-physical description of the study area was made. Brgy. Ilaya Ilasan is found at the northeastern part of Tayabas City. The road to the barangay is rocky with unfinished road construction. The ride to the location showed vast areas
of green rice fields. Ilaya Ilasan is bounded to the north by Mt. Banahaw and to the east by Sierra Madre. The land area of the barangay is medium in size relative to the other barangays of Tayabas. Most of its land is devoted to agricultural activities which is mainly rice planting. There is one pronounced residential are that is identified by participants. The rest of the residential areas are clustered on different areas of the barangay. There are also no major infrastructures other than 2 churches and 2 barnagay halls [old and new]. A rice mill is also present as well as a barangay organic “halamanan” [vegetable gardern]. The barangay is rich in water water source; a river runs through the barangay which waters their rice fields. There is also a vermicompost [organic residues decomposed by earthworms]in the middle of the barangay. Aside from rice; other crops planted include cassava, fruit trees,vegetables, and coconut. The participant farmers were asked to identify their farms as well as their farming practice – whether they are organic farming, conventional, in transition, in conversion, or in reversion. They also identified some farms and farming practices of other non-members in the barangay. In figure 1, the pink areas signify organic farms, orange signifies conventional, green is in transition, yellow is in reversion. From the figure, it can be seen seen that more farms are are in pink or in organic farming.
B. Agricultural Activities Table 1, livelihood matrix of Bgy.Ilaya Ilasan and Brgy. Ibabang Ilasan participants shows the detailed crops planted and livestock raised in the barangay.
Table 1 LIVELIHOOD MATRIX Bgy.IlayaIlasan and Brgy.IbabangIlasan Participants Name of Farmer
Crops Grown Palay
1. Ben Cabuyao
1.5ha
Banana (puno) 100
2. Jose Dejoras
2.0 ha
100
--
--
500
sitaw, patola, gabi
3. Vito Ramos
1.25 ha
30
--
--
800
sitaw, patola, gabi
4. ConradoAgudilla
1.0 ha
75
5000
10 plots
300
5. LolitSaberola
0.25 ha
80
--
--
200
sitaw, talong, patola, kalabasa, gabi --
6. SimplicioLaorte
0.5 ha
--
--
--
--
--
7. TinongDejoras
1.0 ha
100+
500
--
600
--
8. Imelda Padrique
2.0 ha
100+
6000
5000 [plant]
100
patola, lagikway,kamote, lagikway,kamote, gabi
9. Norman Pagana
30+
--
--
40+
--
10. PoldingAcado
2.0ha(convent.) 1.0ha (organic) 1.0ha
87+
--
--
100
--
11. Teddy Ramos
2.0ha
50
--
0.25ha
400
sitaw, talong, gabi
12. Polly Cadavido
1.0ha
20
[0.5ha]
--
13. Juanito [Teodoro]
0.5ha
15
--
--
150
sitaw, talong, kalabasa, gabi
14. Neil Roy Cayanan
0.03ha
--
--
--
30
--
15. TeodoroAgudilla
0.75ha
10
[0.5ha]
--
--
--
Goat 1
Tilapia --
Other Sources of Income --
Name of Farmer
Cassava (puno) 3000
Camote --
Coconut (puno) 700
Vegetables sitaw, patola, gabi
--
Livestock and Poultry ( no. of heads) Chicken Swine Cow 10 ---
1. Ben Cabuyao
Carabao 1
Horse 2
2. Jose Dejoras
1
1
6
2
1
--
--
--
3. Vito Ramos
1
1
1
--
--
--
--
--
4. ConradoAgudilla
1
--
3
--
--
--
--
--
5. LolitSaberola
1
--
3
--
--
--
--
--
6. SimplicioLaorte
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
7. TinongDejoras
1
3
2
1
--
4
--
--
8. Imelda Padrique
1
2
2
5
1
--
--
2 pabo, 3 itik
9. Norman Pagana
--
--
--
--
1
--
10. PoldingAcado
--
--
2
--
--
1
[0.01ha]
11. Teddy Ramos
1
--
--
--
--
--
[0.01ha]
tricycle driving fruit (bearing) trees store, fruit (bearing) trees
Name of Farmer
Livestock and Poultry ( no. of heads) Chicken Swine Cow 10 ---
Goat 1
Tilapia --
Other Sources of Income --
1
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
3
--
--
--
--
--
--
3
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
7. TinongDejoras
1
3
2
1
--
4
--
--
8. Imelda Padrique
1
2
2
5
1
--
--
2 pabo, 3 itik
9. Norman Pagana
--
--
--
--
1
--
10. PoldingAcado
--
--
2
--
--
1
[0.01ha]
11. Teddy Ramos
1
--
--
--
--
--
[0.01ha]
12. Polly Cadavido
3
1
7
--
--
1
--
fruit (bearing) trees store, fruit (bearing) trees --
13. Juanito [Teodoro]
--
1
2
--
--
--
--
--
14. Neil Roy Cayanan
1
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
15. TeodoroAgudilla
1
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
1. Ben Cabuyao
Carabao 1
Horse 2
2. Jose Dejoras
1
1
6
2
3. Vito Ramos
1
1
1
4. ConradoAgudilla
1
--
5. LolitSaberola
1
6. SimplicioLaorte
tricycle driving
Legends: -- none Puno – Puno – no. of plants
The table also shows some off-farm source of income of some participants.It can be seen that the rice farm owned by the participants vary in size from 3ha to 0.03ha. It is already established that rice is the main crop, but the coconut production is also quite big. Those who planted coconut has at least 30 coconut trees and the highest being 700 coconut trees. It can also be deduced that livestock raising is not a popular venture in the barangay, or at least to the rice farmers. Aside from carabao, which almost every participant has at least one to plow their rice field, there is no other distinct livestock or poultry that is raised in the barangay. But it
The table also shows some off-farm source of income of some participants.It can be seen that the rice farm owned by the participants vary in size from 3ha to 0.03ha. It is already established that rice is the main crop, but the coconut production is also quite big. Those who planted coconut has at least 30 coconut trees and the highest being 700 coconut trees. It can also be deduced that livestock raising is not a popular venture in the barangay, or at least to the rice farmers. Aside from carabao, which almost every participant has at least one to plow their rice field, there is no other distinct livestock or poultry that is raised in the barangay. But it is noted that tilapia raising is present, 2 participants are identified to have their own fish pen. Planting vegetables is also present but production is quite small; it is mainly backyard gardening for home consumption. There are no distinct vegetable plots identified aside from the brgy.organic brgy.organic “halamanan”. “halamanan”.
C. Socio-Cultural-Economic Characteristics Brgy. Ilaya Ilasan is 1 of the 66 barangays of Tayabas City, Quezon. Relative to the other barangays of the city, it is medium in land area [542.99ha]. With a population of 1797 from 392 households, it has a population density of 3.309 persons per 1hectare of l and. Table 2 shows the Brgy.profile of Ilaya Ilasan. It shows the farm practice of participants – conventional farming, organic farming, in transition, in conversion, or in reversion. It also shows the year when the participants are in that phase in order to assess how long they stayed in that phase before completely shifting to organic farming.
Table 2. Barangay IlayangIlasan, Tayabas City Barangay Profile: Population: 1797_
No. of Households (HH): 392__
Pananim
Conventional
In Transition
In Conversion
Organic Agriculture
1. Polly Cadavido
palay
1980-2007
--
2008-2009
2010-2012
--
2. Juanito T. Mora
palay
1965-2007
--
2008-2009
2010-2012
--
3. TeodoroAgudilla
palay
1970-2008
--
2009-2010
2011-2012
--
4. Neil Roy Cayanan
casava
--
--
--
2009-2012
--
5. Ben Calayag
palay
1970-2006
2007-2012
--
--
--
6. Jose Dejoros
palay
1970-2006
2007-2012
--
--
--
7. Jovito Ramos
palay
1990-2009
2010-2012
--
--
--
8. LolitSaberola
palay
--
1970-1979
1980-1981
1982-2012
--
9. ConradoAgudilla
palay
1978-2007
--
--
2008-2012
--
10. SimplicioLacorte
Palay
1980-2007
--
--
2008-2012
--
11. Norman Pagana
palay
1980-2007
2008-2012
--
--
--
12. Teddy Ramos
palay luya talong
1970-2007 1970-2007 1970-2007
2008-2012 2008-2012 2008-2012
----
----
----
13. Imelda Padrique
palay
1980-2007
--
--
2007-2012
--
14. LeopoldoOcado LeopoldoOcado
palay
1970-2007
--
--
2008-2012
--
15. CelestinoDejoros
palay
1960-2007
2008-2012
--
----
--
Pangalan
Reversion
Note:Conventional- use of chemical inputs
In transition- mix/ combination of chemical and organic inputs In conversion- no chemical inputs for less than a year Organic agriculture- all organic for more than a year Reversion- had practiced organic agriculture before but went back to conventional farming
Based on the table, most of the farmers started at conventional farming back in the year 1960s/ 1970s. Conventional farming lasted until 2007. Most Most of the farmers shifted from ‘conventional’ to ‘in transition’ in the year 2008 after ILOFA was founded in the year 2007. T here are two cases that shifted in the same year that the organization was founded. One of the participants shifted to transition just in the year 2010. In the case of Mrs. Lolit Saberola, she have started with a farming
practice of using a combination of chemical and organic inputs from 1970 and
remained in transition for ten years before shifting to in conversion. Eight of the participants didn’t undergo the transition phase. They either went to conversion or organic farming from conventional.Six of them still remainsin transition until the present time.
Among the farmers who are currently at the ‘organic agriculture’ phase , 4 of them have undergone ‘in conversion’ phase meaning they excludes exclu des the use of chemical inputs for less than a year. Among this 4, only one undergone the transition phase and the rest shifted to conversion directly from conventionalfarming.
There are 9 of the participants who are currently at the th e ‘Organic agriculture’ phase. Eight of them shifted directly from conventional into ‘In conversion’ and
later to ‘organic agriculture’
phase except for one casewho have gone through transition before being in the ‘in conversion’ phase.
At present, none of the 15 farmers have reverted back to conventional farming.
It should be noted that all of these participants have their own land to plow and use for agricultural purposes. They have sole farm decisions, particularly their choice of farm practices. Among non-members of the association however, there are still landholding issues in terms of
choice in farming practice. There are cases identified wherein some tenants want to shift to organic farming but land owners prefer the conventional approach.
To monitor and assess the overall effect of organic farming to the participants as compared to conventional farming, in transition, and in conversion phase of organic farming, table 3.3 shows the trend analysis ofBrgy. IlayaIlasan.
Table 3 TREND ANALYSIS Brgy.IlayangIlasan, Tayabas City
ASPETO
Conventional
ECONOMICS Kita Input -chemical - organic Labor requirement Ani
In Transition
In Coversion
Organic Agriculture
After 10 years
--
--
------
------
--
--
──
--
── ── ──
-----
------
+ + + + +
++ ++ ++ ++ ++
+
──
---
---
--
SOCIAL PansarilingKalusugan PampamilyangKalusugan KatayuangSosyal PansarilingPag-unlad PagkainsaBahay ENVIRONMENT DamingInsekto Damingisda/hipon Pananda: -mas marami
(—) negatibong epekto
-marami
+
-mayroon
++ mas positibong epekto
positibong epekto
Major phases/ trends in organic farming practice such as conventional, in transition, in conversion, organic agriculture and future (after 10 yrs.) are used are reference points for Table 3, trend analysis. Aspects such as economic, social, and environmental and its indicators were used to determine and analyse analyse changes or impacts impacts that that occurred occurred during those phases. phases.
Since
the group of farmers who have made this trend analysis doesn’t undergone ‘in transition’ and ‘in conversion’ phases and are all currently at a t the organic agriculture phase, indicators were analysed only under conventional, organic agriculture and future (after 10 yrs.)
Under the economic aspect, the indicators such as yield, inputs, labor requirement and income were used to compare the impacts on conventional and organic agriculture as well as the changes that occurred in those phases with reference to the indicators. Visions of the future (after 10 yrs.) in terms of economic aspect were also considered. In terms of input, under conventional, more chemical inputs and no organic inputs are used while under organic agriculture, there are no chemical used but more organic inputs. Income under the 2 phases is almost the same. Although there is more yield under conventional farming (as indicated in the table), table), still the income under the 2 phases doesn’t show significant differences. This is because yield less the costs of inputs [income = yield – yield – input cost] are being considered in the income generation. Since costs of inputs are higher under conventional while lower under organic agriculture, the income is almost the same. However, the participants shared that under organic agriculture they avail less credits compared to conventional farming where they acquire large amount of debts in order to sustain their chemical inputs.
Still from table 3, organic agriculture has better impacts in terms of social aspects compared it conventional. It is also more likely to have much positive effects in the future. This is manifested in all the social indicators such as personal and family health, social status, personal development, and food sufficiency. Improvement of health status is, of course, not surprising in organic agriculture as it is one of its main benefits. The improvement in social status however, also has significant increase for the organic farmers. This is indicated by the fact that an organic farmers association was established, allowing the farmers to practice and improve their own leadership and social skills.
For the environmental aspect, the indicators that were used are the number of insects and number of aquatic animals, specifically the beneficial ones. Both of which are indicators of a good environment because it means lack of chemical residues in the air and in rivers. Organic agriculture shows more insects and aquatic animals, enough to deduce that the environment is safer and healthier compared to conventional farming.
Generally, the farmers thought that there will be more positive impacts or changes in the future if the present trend of organic farming continues. This is true for all of the aspects being considered.
In terms of non-farm sources of income, table 1 livelihood matrix, shows that among 15 participants, only 2 has an off-farm source of income [tricycle driving, and a store]. However, it is not determined whether farming generates enough income for the farmers or non-farm sources of income are really limiting limi ting or unpopular in the community.
D. Institutional Aspects Figure 2 shows the institutional diagram of the barangay, particularly concerning with the activities of ILOFA. The internal institutions/ institutions/ person involved in the activities activities of ILOFA are the Brgy. Chairman, Brgy.Council,ILOFA president, ILOFA Members, Farmer’s Federation, Federation, Farmer’s President, President, Committee on Agriculture, and Ilasan Multipurpose Cooperative. The external stakeholders listed by the participants are MASIPAG [Magsasaka ta Siyentipiko para sa Ikauunlad ng Agrikultura], City Mayor, Department of Agriculture, SCFO [Small Coconut Farmers Organization], U.P Students (Diliman), Roman Catholic Church, and Seventh Day Adventist. Table 4 and 5 internal and external stakeholders analysis, summarizes the extent and kind of help given by these stakeholders to ILOFA. According to the table, internal stakeholders like the Brgy. Chairman, Brgy. Council,ILOFA president,and ILOFA Members are the active participants in the activities of the association. While external stakeholders like MASIPAG and City Mayor are deemed important to ILOFA by providing technical and political support respectively.
Fig. 2. Institutional Diagram, Brgy. Ilayang Ilasan, Tayabas City
Pananda: Malaki ang naitutulong Hindi Masyadong malaki ang naitutulong Kaunti lamang ang naitutulong
U.P. DILIMAN
MASIPAG
Students
Roman Katolik
SCFO Farmer’s
Brgy. Captain
Federation ILOFA
Brgy.
Members
Council Pangulo ng ILOFA
DA
ILOFA
Farmers’ Farmers’ Committee
.
Pangulo ng Farmer’s Organization
Ilasan Multipurpose Cooperative
BRGY. ILAYANG ILASAN TAYABAS CITY
SDA Seventh Day Adventist
Mayor
Table 4. External Stakeholders Analysis Organisasyon/Institusyon 1. MASIPAG
3. Department of Agriculture
Tulong na naibibigay - pag-aaral tungkol sa organikong pagsasaka, binhi, seminar, pinansya - pahintulot sa pagbuo ng samahan, pinansyal, kiskisan, makina, at upuan -nangasiwa sa mga ibinibigayng mayor
4. SCFO
- nagbibigay ng binhi ng niyog at abono
5. U.P Students (Diliman)
- nagbigay ng training tungkol sa pagbuo ng samahan - ginanap ang katutubong sistema sa organikong pagkain -mayroong miyembro na naggaling sa SDA at patuloy na sumusuporta sa ILOFA
2. Mayor
6. Roman Katolik (simbahan) 7. SDA (Seventh Day Adventist)
Laki ng Naitutulong
Table 5. Internal Stakeholders Analysis Organisasyon/Institusyon 1. Kapitan 2. Brgy. Council 3. Pangulo ng ILOFA 4. ILOFA Members 5. Farmer’s Federation 6. Farmer’s President 7. Committee on Agriculture
8. Ilasan Multipurpose Cooperative
Tulong na naibibigay - nagbigay ng tao para mabuo ang ILOFA - sila ang nanguna sa seminar at nanghikayat ng kasapi. - masugid na tagasubaybay tagasubaybay ng samahan - sila ang patuloy na nagkakaisa nagkakaisa para sa ikauunlad ng samahan - nagbibigay ng tulong tungkol sa Vermi Compost - nagbibigay ng impormasyong i mpormasyong pangorganikong pagsasaka - nangunguna sa pagsasagawa pagsasagawa ng mga proyekto ng ILOFA at nagbibigay din ng tulong pinansyal sa samahan - nagbibigay ng pautang sa mababang interes
Pananda: Pananda: -malaki ang naitutulong -hindi masyadong malaki ang naitutulong -kaunti lamang ang naitutulong
Laki ng Naitutulong
III. ASSESSMENT OF COMMUNITY Table 6 summarizes the potential of barangay for promoting organic farming through a SWOT matrix. Strengths Existing farner’s association and cooperative (Ilasan Multi-purpose cooperative) Existing organic farmer’s association (ILOFA) Existing Brgy. Vermicompost Existing Brgy. Organic “halamanan” Knowledge of organic fertilizer is not foreign to the community, introduction of further knowledge is easily adaptable Agricultural activities are the main source of living The brgy. Captain and brgy. Council have an active participation in agricultural development of the community Off-farm source of income is lacking in the community Organic farming is most relevant to small size farmers There is rich source of clean water from rivers which is essential in organic farming Large portion of the barangay is already in organic farming
Weaknesses Organic farming is labor intensive Organic products are not yet popular in the barangay The area is quite far from poblacion The road to the area is not yet finished There are only few livestocks and poultry that c an be a source of animal manures for o rganic fertilizers Landholding issues – issues –tenants tenants cannot shift to organic farming if land owners owners prefers conventional Only one rice mill is availbale in the barnagay for both organic and inorganic rice The community has no market for organic products Marketing system for organic products is still weaak compared to that of orgaanic or gaanic
Opportunities There is financial, technical, technical, and political assistance to the community available through MAO, DA, MASIPAG, and SCFA Organic farming is supported by the national government There is increasing market demand for organically produced vegetables Higher price for organically produced vegetables than conventionally produced The City of Tayabas is now being developed as the first organic city in the Philippines
Threat River water source may carry agro-chemical residues availability of free synthetic fertilizers and pesticides from external institutions threat in unstable marketing system of organic products climate threats
Table 6. SWOT Matrix of the Potential of Brgy. Ilaya, Ilasan Tayabas City, Quezon for Promoting Organic Farming
V. RECOMMENDATIO R ECOMMENDATION N Criterion
Advantages
Disadvantages
Social or Cultural Acceptability
> organic farming is already accepted and popular among farmers
> Organic farming is labor intensive
>Larger portion of the barangay is already in organic farming compared to conventional
>the city of Tayabas is being developed as an agricultural city
Technical Feasibility
>The farmers already have existing knowledge on producing their own organic fertilizer >The brgy. has its own vermicompost >Organic farming is most relevant to small sized farms >There is rich source of clean water from rivers which is essential in organic farming
>Organic products are not yet popular to the brgy. and some of the products are not even familiar to them yet >Landholding issues – issues –tenants tenants cannot shift to organic farming if land owners prefers conventional >There are few live stocks and crops which are source of manures >Farmers knowledge on organic agriculture is still not sufficient >The access to agro-chemical inputs is easier compared to organic inputs
Assessment
Recommendations to overcome Disadvantage > The advantages > Give seminars to outweigh other landholders disadvantages about the benefits because most in organic farming farmers have their own land to >have a promotion plow of organic products among consumers >improve the knowledge of general public on the benefits of organic products
>The advantages outweigh disadvantages
>improve farmers’ knowledge in organic agriculture >encourage them to raise livestocks which will not only be a source for organic fertilizers but additional source of income >improving on farmers’ capability to produce own fertilizer will reduce their need of agro-chemical inputs
Economic or Financial Viability
Environmental Soundness
Political or Institutional Support
>Off-farm source of income is lacking in the community
>the brgy. has no existing market for organic products >The marketing >There is increasing system of organic market demand for products is still organic products weak compared to the market for >Higher price for products of organic products conventional farming >organic production is >environmental ecological: it is soundness is not favourable to farmers always a main health and their concern of the environment: it enhance community which soil productivity, is overridden by preserves natural financial needs biodiversity, and mitigate greenhouse effect >there is existing farmer’s association and cooperative (Ilasan Multi-purpose cooperative) >There is existing organic farmer’s association (ILOFA) >The brgy. Captain and
brgy. Council have an
> the community is still accessible to agro-chemical companies
>Advantages outweigh disadvantages
>take advantage of low off-farm activities to promote organic farming >develop the organic market of the brgy.
>advantages outweigh the disadvantages
>advantages outweigh disadvantages especially because of the development of Tayabas as an organic City
>improve farmers understanding of the environmental benefits of organic farming and how they can be a help towards ecological agriculture esp. how it can benefit farmers health > policy regarding the limitation of access of agrochemical companies in the barangay and the strict regulation of agro-chemical products should be implemented
active participation in agriculturaldevelopment of the community> organic farming is supported by the national government
Table 7. STEEP Analysis Of The potential of Brgy. Ilaya Ilasan for Promoting Organic Far ming
Table 7 shows STEEP Analysis of the potential of Brgy. Ilaya Ilasan for promoting organic farming which includes the recommendations that will improve its potentials and overcome its disadvantages.
V. DOCUMENTATION
