CARTOON BY: AARON PAUL C. CARIL
EDITORIAL
The ₱20 per kilo rice program:Beyond politics and promises
The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) has requested the temporary suspension of the government’s P20 per kilo rice program until after the May 12 elections. Initially launched in the Visayas, this initiative was part of President Marcos Jr.’s 2022 campaign pledge, dismissed by critics as unrealistic. Its rollout, so close to the elections in a voter-rich region, has raised suspicions of political maneuvering. The Department of Agriculture (DA) cites the need to clear National Food Authority (NFA) stocks for fresh supplies, with Leyte Gov. Jericho Petilla supporting this claim, noting warehouses are full. Eventhough the program aims to help struggling households with high food costs, the timing raises concerns about political motivations.
The government’s declaration of a food security emergency in February 2025 starkly responded to the dire situation. Despite global costs dropping and rice tariffs being cut from 35% to 15% in July, rice inflation hit 17.9% in September 2023, far above the government’s food inflation target. Regular and well-milled rice costs remain high, rising 19% and 20% year-over-year, leaving low-income families struggling. For many, rice makes up over 20% of their food budget. This crisis continues to push millions into deeper poverty and hunger, underscoring the urgent need for action.
The 2019 Rice Tariffication Law (RTL) replaced import limits with tariffs, intending to lower consumer prices and invest tariff revenue into agriculture via the Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund (RCEF). PhilRice projected a price drop of ₱2 to ₱7 per kilo, potentially improving child nutrition. However, the first year saw farmers lose an estimated ₱40 billion due to falling palay prices caused by increased imports. Critics argue retail prices didn’t drop significantly, with market intermediaries benefiting more than consumers. The RCEF was supposed to be a game-changer for small-scale farmers, offering them the machinery, seeds, credit, and training they need to succeed. But things haven’t gone as planned—delays, inventory problems, and distribution hiccups have made it tough for farmers to get the support they were promised. Many are either left out completely or dealing with unreliable seed supplies, making an already difficult job even harder.
While the RCEP was meant to boost market competitiveness and support farmers, the Philippines has instead become the world’s top rice importer for four consecutive years, exposing it to volatile global prices. Cheap imports have forced farmers to shift to other crops, slashing local rice production and reducing farm incomes. Market intermediaries, who are supposed to facilitate trade, are profiting the most, yet no government office monitors them properly, leading to exploitation and market inefficiencies. Delays in RCEF disbursement, irregular procurement, and poor oversight contribute to ongoing failures in delivering benefits to farmers and consumers.
A long-term strategy is paramount, whether through policy reform or better implementation. Some farmer groups want the RTL repealed to strengthen domestic production, but there are ways to improve within the current framework. To secure the future of Philippine agriculture, the government must tackle high production costs, particularly fertilizer expenses. Strengthening infrastructure—such as storage facilities and farm-to-market roads—will enable farmers to sell their harvests at fairer prices. Cutting out unnecessary middlemen and promoting direct-to-consumer initiatives like Kadiwa can boost farmers’ incomes while keeping rice prices affordable for consumers.
The RCEF must be managed effectively to ensure seeds reach farmers on time, machinery remains in good condition, and individual smallholders—not just cooperatives—get the support they need. The government must prioritize providing the farmers access to affordable credit and fertilizers should be prioritized alongside innovations that promote smarter, more efficient farming methods. A well-planned, forward-thinking strategy isn’t just preferable; it’s a necessity.
Beyond short-term fixes, the government must introduce a sustainable approach that outlasts political shifts, addressing production costs and market inefficiencies. The focus must shift toward lasting agricultural reforms benefiting farmers and securing affordable food for all, and this shift must be a priority for the government.