Trade and Fiscal Incentives - National Agricultural and Fishery ...

4.2.51 The above results from respondents’ perceptions on ACEF, are reflective
of the general state of affairs of the ACEF credit facility. The fact that around PhP
2.7 billion are still unallocated, implies that the system of ACEF project loan
processing is flawed and has not really supported the agricultural modernization
efforts in the countryside.
Impact of AFMA Trade Component on Agriculture and Fisheries
4.2.52 The Regional consultations / workshops across the 16 Regions took two
days each. The workshops were focused on the general impact of AFMA
components (irrigation, postharvest, other infrastructures, credit, trade,
marketing, information, support, standardization and consumer safety, education,
research and development, and extension) taken as whole on at least five (5)
commodity groupings (rice, corn, (grains), high value commercial crops, livestock
and poultry, and fisheries). The AFMA impact assessment at the Regional level
covered discussions on general and qualitative impact, budget adequacy and
prioritization, assessment of level of implementation, priority issues and
concerns, priority focus of interventions, and proposals for improvement. The
succeeding discussions highlight the general assessment of the impact of trade
as a component of AFMA, on the five commodity groupings.
a. Trade and the Rice Subsector
4.2.53 The general impact of trade as a component of AFMA, reasons for impact,
and qualitative level of implementation, and proposals for improvement of trade
in the rice subsector are summarized in Table 4.2.16. Of the ten (10) Regions
that discussed the general impact of trade as a component of AFMA on the rice
subsector four (4) Regions (40%) indicated that trade component (including fiscal
incentives in terms of tariff free inputs of agricultural inputs) had no impact on the
rice subsector. The remaining 6 (60%) of the ten (10) Regions affirmed that trade
had low (1 to 3, on a scale of 10, 8 to 10 being high) impact on rice agribusiness
systems.
4.2.54 The major reasons cited for the no impact of trade on rice include: rice is
not competitive, high costs of fertilizer, rice smuggling (Region 2), no specific
program to address trade (Region 8), weak program (Region 10), untimely
importations and high costs of inputs (Region 11). On the other hand, the major
reasons cited for low impact of trade on the rice subsector were: rice importation
and its untimeliness have negative effect on rice production (Regions 4-B, 4-A,
11, and 12); high costs of inputs and limited availment of imported fertilizer
(Regions 9, 11, 12, and CARAGA); lack of information and awareness (Region
3); and guidelines of the rice program not properly implemented (CARAGA).
4.2 - 30