PROTECTING COTTAGE INDUSTRIES WITH EXCLUSIVITY RIGHTS
PROTECTING COTTAGE INDUSTRIES WITH EXCLUSIVITY RIGHTS
What happened to the National Cottage
Industries Development Authority (NACIDA)? I know it was abolished, but was it
replaced? Some online sources suggest that the Cottage Industry Technology
Center (CITC) was established to take its place under the Department of Trade
and Industry (DTI). However, a visit to the DTI website yields no evidence of
CITC being one of its attached agencies. Even more puzzling is the fact that
the CITC has no official website, and a private company seems to have taken
over its previous online domain.
The story doesn’t end there. The same
unfortunate fate seems to have befallen the Technology and Livelihood Resource
Center (TLRC). Like NACIDA, it was abolished without any clear successor. The
absence of these agencies is a double whammy for the growth of cottage
industries in the Philippines. Their abolition left a significant gap in the
support system those small-scale entrepreneurs once relied on.
Could it be that the Bureau of Small and
Medium Enterprise Development (BSMED) is now serving as the de facto
replacement for NACIDA and TLRC? BSMED's functions do overlap somewhat with
those of the abolished agencies. But perhaps the real issue lies in definitions.
Are cottage industries synonymous with MSMEs? Or are they strictly limited to
micro and small businesses?
India offers an interesting model to consider.
Certain cottage industries there are exclusively reserved for micro and small
enterprises, protecting them from competition with medium and large-scale
corporations. This legal protection ensures that small producers can maintain
their market niche and survive against larger competitors.
Does the Philippines have a similar system?
While some laws do support micro and small businesses, it remains unclear
whether specific industries are reserved exclusively for them. Previous
attempts to pass stronger laws to protect cottage industries were halted in
Congress, possibly due to resistance from big business interests. This begs the
question: Should we revive those legislative efforts to create clear
protections for cottage industries?
Furthermore, the Cooperative Development
Authority (CDA) and BSMED could work more closely to provide targeted support
to cottage industries. After all, many cottage industries operate as
cooperatives. Yet, it remains uncertain whether BSMED even considers
cooperatives as part of its mandate.
There also appears to be a gap in BSMED’s
focus. Its name implies a priority on small and medium enterprises, with no
explicit mention of micro enterprises. Could it be that micro enterprises are
being left behind? This alone might justify the revival of NACIDA and TLRC to
specifically cater to the needs of micro enterprises and cottage industries.
Additionally, a comprehensive new law could be
crafted to declare certain products as exclusive to cottage industries. Such
legislation could also modernize the definition of cottage industries to
include home-based services, particularly in the digital economy. After all,
why shouldn’t work-at-home (WAH) professionals providing online services be
considered part of a modern cottage industry?
We must ask ourselves: Are we doing enough to
protect and grow our cottage industries? Rebuilding support systems and
ensuring exclusivity rights for small producers could be the first steps in
revitalizing this vital sector. It's time to prioritize our local
entrepreneurs, ensure fair competition, and give cottage industries the robust
support they deserve.
Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres
iseneres@yahoo.com, 09088877282,
senseneres.blogspot.com
05-07-2025
Comments
Post a Comment