RICE AS THE BAROMETER OF FOOD SECURITY
RICE AS THE BAROMETER OF FOOD SECURITY
It is already obvious that our rice farmers are forced to sell their palay harvests at prices lower than their production costs. Imagine this: farmers spend around ₱20–₱22 per kilo to produce palay, but are forced to sell at ₱10–₱14 per kilo. That is a straight loss of about ₱10 per kilo. Who would keep farming under such conditions?
Now, we hear proposals about selling rice at ₱20 per kilo to more consumers. Good news for the urban poor perhaps—but what about the rural poor, the farmers themselves? If they keep selling at a loss, eventually they will stop planting. What happens to food security then?
This leads us to a bigger question: what should really be the definition of food security?
Too often, food security in the Philippines is reduced to the size of the rice inventory. But what good is rice without viands to eat it with? Shouldn’t food security also mean a reliable supply of poultry, meats, fruits, vegetables, fish, and even root crops? In truth, food security should be defined holistically—not only in terms of quantity (consumption) but also in terms of quality (nutrition).
We should also include in that definition access to potable water, cooking fuel, and electricity, because what use is rice if you can’t cook it?
Palay Prices and the Role of Government
The palay price crisis did not come from nowhere. The Rice Tariffication Law (RTL) stripped the National Food Authority (NFA) of its buffer stocking and price stabilization role. The NFA’s 2026 budget is pegged at ₱11.18 billion, but once you deduct personnel and operating expenses (~₱6 billion), only about ₱5 billion remains for palay procurement. That’s enough to buy just 320,000 tons of palay—or a measly 1.6% of national output.
Now compare that with our neighbors:
India’s Food Corporation procures 30–40% of rice output every year.
Thailand’s rice pledging scheme once covered 20–25% of production.
If they can do it, why can’t we?
Some experts suggest that the Philippines should aim to procure at least 20% of palay output, roughly 4 million tons. That would require ₱100 billion for procurement plus another ₱100 billion for warehouse infrastructure. A steep price, yes—but is it any steeper than the social cost of losing our rice farmers to bankruptcy and migration?
Rice as the Barometer
Dr. Ted Mendoza is right: rice is the barometer of our food security. If our rice farmers are suffering, then the entire food system is in crisis. When rice prices collapse at the farmgate, it signals a larger problem of market stabilization and government intervention.
But let us not stop there. The 1996 World Food Summit gave us a globally accepted definition of food security that still applies today. It has four dimensions:
Availability – Is there enough food produced, stored, or imported to meet demand?
Access – Can people afford and physically reach the food they need?
Utilization – Is the food being consumed in a way that supports health? This includes nutrition, water, and cooking methods.
Stability – Are these conditions reliable over time, or are they vulnerable to shocks like typhoons, wars, or inflation?
Notice how rice only addresses the first dimension—availability. But access, utilization, and stability are just as critical.
A Call for Holistic Food Security
The truth is, food security should mean food sovereignty. We should not only ensure that rice is cheap and abundant; we should also ensure that farmers, fisherfolk, and food producers live in dignity. After all, how can we expect food producers to continue feeding the nation if they themselves cannot eat properly?
Food sovereignty means that communities should have control over how their food is produced, distributed, and consumed. It means strengthening farmer cooperatives, investing in local food systems, and promoting diversified farming—not just rice monoculture. It also means linking food security to environmental sustainability, because there is no food security in the long run without healthy soils, clean water, and stable ecosystems.
So yes, rice is the barometer of food security—but let us not mistake the barometer for the whole climate. If rice tells us that farmers are in crisis, then the entire food system is under stress.
The solution? Restore the government’s Market Stabilization Role. Ensure fair farmgate prices. Build strategic warehouses. Invest not just in rice, but in poultry, vegetables, and fisheries. And above all, treat farmers not as charity cases, but as partners in securing the nation’s future.
Because food security is not just about keeping rice cheap for consumers. It is about ensuring that both producers and consumers can live with dignity, health, and resilience. (With credits to Dr. Ted Mendoza).
Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres
iseneres@yahoo.com, senseneres.blogspot.com
12-26-2025
Comments
Post a Comment