top of page
Search

Impact of Farm-to-Market Roads on Farmland Conversion in the Philippines

  • 2 days ago
  • 7 min read

Updated: 1 day ago

Farm-to-market roads (FMRs) are vital rural infrastructure linking agricultural communities to markets. The Philippine government’s FMR development programme is ambitious – targeting ~131,000 km of FMRs nationwide; authorities reported ~51% completed (~67,329 km) as of 8 January 2024.¹ (https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/893418/marcos-says-51-of-target-131-000-kms-of-farm-to-market-roads-finished/story/) A government bulletin echoed the same figures that day.² (https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1216516) OneNews/Philippine Star later reported the Secretary of Agriculture ordered a comprehensive FMR audit (2021–2025) and quoted farmer leaders noting that some FMRs have “unfortunately initialized land conversions,” leaving farmers suddenly “surrounded by subdivisions.”³ (https://onenews.ph/articles/farm-to-market-road-projects-up-for-audit)

These roads aim to reduce transport costs, cut post-harvest losses, and improve farmers’ incomes. However, alongside these benefits, FMR projects have shown an unintended consequence: they can accelerate the loss of agricultural land by spurring land-use conversion and speculation. This report examines how FMRs may be contributing to farmland reduction – particularly in high-value crop areas like the mango heartland of Guimaras – and recommends stronger policy actions to curb idle or speculative land conversion. The goal is to ensure that new infrastructure truly boosts farming communities instead of inadvertently paving the way for subdivisions and fallow fields.³

Farm-to-Market Roads and the Loss of Agricultural Land

Evidence from farmer groups and local officials suggests that new FMRs can trigger land-use conversion in their vicinity. In some cases, improved road access raises land values and attracts real estate development, leading owners to sell or reclassify farmlands. The OneNews/Philippine Star piece noted both the audit directive and the concern that FMRs can be associated with conversion pressures.³

This dynamic is a growing concern in mango-growing areas like Guimaras, renowned for producing the country’s sweetest mangoes. Guimaras is so important to the mango industry that it was declared a special quarantine zone in 1993 to keep out mango pests, with strict regulatory measures to protect the island’s orchards.¹⁴ (https://pcaarrd.dost.gov.ph/index.php/quick-information-dispatch/2940-guimaras-mango-stakeholders-adhere-to-regulatory-measures) In 2022, Guimaras Mango became the Philippines’ first Geographical Indication (GI) product – formal recognition of quality and origin with traceability implications.¹⁵ (https://accralaw.com/publications/protecting-place-preserving-pride-why-geographical-indications-matter-to-the-philippines/)

Ironically, the same improved access meant to help farmers deliver prized Guimaras mangoes to market has also fuelled land speculation on the island. In 2021, local mayors publicly warned about a land-selling spree in Guimaras triggered by anticipated infrastructure (notably a bridge to Iloilo): farmland was being sliced into houselots and sold illegally as future residential subdivisions without conversion permits.⁴ (https://www.panaynews.net/guimaras-lands-sell-like-hotcakes-but-mayors-say-its-illegal-call-for-probe/) A companion report described a province-wide mayors’ resolution and cited around 30 unapproved subdivision projects, with warnings to prospective buyers.⁵ (https://dailyguardian.com.ph/guimaras-mayors-warn-vs-rampant-illegal-sales-of-residential-lots/)

Wider regional reporting corroborates the link between infrastructure expansion and farmland loss. In Western Visayas (which includes Guimaras and Iloilo), planners identified massive farm conversion as a leading cause of declining agricultural output; new highways, farm roads, ports and urban expansion brought rapid growth in subdivisions and commercial enclaves on former farmlands, with once-rural towns outside Iloilo City seeing residential villages “sprouting” after new links were built.¹⁶ (https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/842031/land-conversion-leads-to-agri-drop) Advocacy groups, citing the National Irrigation Administration, warned that the Philippines may be losing ~165,000 ha of irrigated prime agricultural land each year to conversion – far exceeding official approvals and implying that much farmland is being diverted or idled informally beyond regulators’ radar.⁷ (https://www.ibon.org/addressing-the-rampage-of-land-use-conversion/)

Concurrently, DAR Region VI (covering Guimaras) has intensified enforcement against premature/illegal conversions – e.g., subdivisions or structures on farmlands without a DAR Conversion Order – issuing warnings and show-cause orders.⁶ (https://mb.com.ph/2024/11/24/dar-steps-up-crackdown-vs-illegal-land-conversion-in-western-visayas) ⁵ (https://www.panaynews.net/dar-warns-against-premature-illegal-land-conversion-in-wv/) These moves underline the need to pair FMR roll-outs with land-use safeguards.

Rules That Shape (or Enable) Conversion

CARP (RA 6657) governs conversion of agricultural land. Section 65 allows conversion only after five (5) years from award and only when the land has ceased to be economically feasible for agriculture or the locality has become urbanised; DAR has exclusive authority to approve or disapprove such conversions.⁸ (https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1988/ra_6657_1988.html) DAR Administrative Order 01 (1999) sets out procedures and defines premature conversion, while DAR AO 03-A (2021) updates requirements (including DA certifications on prime/SAFDZ status, notices, bonds, and ocular inspection).⁹ (https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/10/42510) ¹⁰ (https://storage.googleapis.com/request-attachments/RbwCNLpnPYIaUwlFo1v9JKelmRGrNGvpOdaxrckYIASo24qNd7en5RoG7FL8zqbneRbNgCktK3h7DNb1FxyqDO6FDOsjwfOVbERK/DAR%20AO%2003-A%202021.pdf) In practice, some owners allow farms to idle or present them as “uneconomic” to qualify for conversion pathways – exactly the behaviour targeted by recent Region VI warnings.⁶ ⁵

Beyond conversion, the concept of idle/abandoned agricultural land exists in administrative usage and systems (e.g., DAR’s Land Information System), grounding stronger policy on duty to cultivate.¹⁸

Stronger Actions to Prevent Idling and Speculative Conversion

Objective: keep fertile land in active agriculture; deter speculative idling and premature conversion.

1) Enforce a “Cultivate or Lease” Duty (national standard). Define an enforceable Cultivation Duty for agriculturally-zoned land: owners must either actively cultivate or lease to an accredited farmer/co-op. Verification via geotagged evidence and seasonal checks; apply permit holds (no reclassification/conversion processing) where duty is breached, consistent with DAR authority under CARP.⁸–¹⁰ ¹⁸

2) Make the Idle Land Tax bite (uniform and automatic). LGUs can levy an Idle Land Tax, but implementation is patchy and definitions vary. Standardise a national template (e.g., baseline 3% of assessed value, rising with duration of idleness), require audited idle-land inventories, and earmark proceeds for local agri support.¹¹ (https://cpbrd.congress.gov.ph/pb2016-02-idle-land-tax-implementation-issues-and-challenges/) See also international technical guidance gaps on property taxation/definitions.¹² (https://www.imf.org/external/np/seminars/eng/2013/asiatax/pdfs/philippines.pdf)

3) Post-FMR Land-Use Audits (12 and 24 months).For every new FMR, DA runs follow-up land-use audits on parcels within a corridor to track: cultivation status, reclassification motions, DA soil-suitability certifications, and premature conversion indicators; escalate to temporary reclassification moratoria when red flags breach thresholds. This supports the ongoing national FMR audit drive.¹ ³

4) Tighten DA soil-suitability certifications. Require current field agronomy evidence (multi-year yield records, independent soil tests, remote-sensing time series) before DA issues “not prime/not suitable” certifications. Where wilful neglect is found, impose a five-year bar on conversion applications plus penalties.⁹ ¹⁰

5) Strengthen CARP enforcement and anti-flip controls. Digitally enforce no-sale/transfer periods and conversion prohibitions on CLOA/EP titles (Registry of Deeds e-clearance gate). Treat illegal transfers as void, restore titles, and pursue facilitators. Use cease-and-desist and show-cause in corridors with repeated violations; recent jurisprudence affirms time-bound ARB transfer restrictions.¹⁴ (https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2023/mar2023/gr_248650_2023.html) ⁶ ⁵ ⁸–¹⁰

Stronger Actions

Objective: for prime mango estates (e.g., Guimaras) and comparable belts, tie tenure to performance and stewardship. This section integrates the structured yield/lease and registration/pesticide controls.

A. Yield-to-Potential (“Lease-to-Produce”) Standard

  • Potential Yield (PY): DA sets PY/ha by agro-climatic zone and orchard class; update every 3 years.

  • Minimum Realised Yield (MRY): estates ≥5 ha must average ≥60% of PY over a rolling 3-year window (force-majeure exemptions).

  • Cure or Lease: if MRY < 60% for two consecutive seasons, the owner must either (i) execute a DA-approved rehabilitation plan, or (ii) lease the entire property to an accredited operator for ≥5 years under standard terms (no partial leases).

  • Enforcement: failing cure triggers permit holds, idle-land levy, and, in egregious cases, temporary custodianship by an accredited co-op (with judicial oversight).

(Context on yield gaps: rice farmers, on average, attain only ~50–70% of attainable yields in trials; analogous gaps for mango are plausible and should be benchmarked.)¹⁷ (https://www.fao.org/3/x0490e/x0490e00.htm)

B. Grower Registration + Packhouse Gatekeeping

  • Mandatory Grower Registration Number (GRN) (DA/FPA), tied to parcel ID; renewal every 2 years with GAP/IPM competency.

  • Packhouses/exporters may accept fruit only from registered growers; GRN printed on delivery and export documents. Violations: fines and accreditation suspension.

  • Unregistered growers: seizures at packhouse and trading bans for repeat offences.

  • For GI areas like Guimaras Mango, registration strengthens traceability and quality compliance.¹⁵ ¹⁴

C. Chemical Pesticide Controls (IPM-first)

  • Positive list of FPA-registered actives; enforce PHIs/MRLs; require spray diaries and random residue tests at packhouses/checkpoints.

  • Ban off-label cocktails and grey-market imports; enforce buffer rules near settlements/schools.

  • Penalties: escalating fines, GRN suspension, and harvest embargo for repeated breaches.

  • Align with Guimaras’ long-standing pest-exclusion and IPM regime supporting its premium reputation.¹⁴

D. Five-Year Whole-Farm Lease Standards (if owners won’t operate)

  • Term & Scope: ≥5-year whole-farm lease; register with DAR (for CARP lands) and annotate on title/Tax Declaration. Sub-leasing prohibited.

  • Operator Eligibility: DA-accredited entities with GRN in good standing; GAP-certified (or obtain within 12 months).

  • Performance: Year-2 ≥60% PY, Year-3+ ≥70% PY (unless force majeure). Quarterly production and residue reports to owner & DA.

  • Pricing & Security: rent indexed to land value and expected net margin; performance bond equal to one season’s OPEX; step-in rights for a DA-approved custodian on default.

  • CARP Safeguards: No sale; lease only under DAR templates with fair caps and farmer protections; all leases recorded in a DAR e-registry.¹⁴ ⁸–¹⁰

Conclusion

FMRs should serve farms first. Without guardrails, they can unintentionally catalyse land speculation and reduce the farm base precisely where crops like Guimaras mango have strategic value. The combined package in this consolidated report – Cultivate or Lease, a real Idle Land Tax, post-FMR audits, tighter DA certifications, tough CARP enforcement, and yield-to-potential regime with five-year whole-farm leases where owners won’t operate – keeps fertile land productive, curbs premature conversion, and aligns infrastructure with food security.

References

  1. GMA News — “Marcos says 51% of target 131,000 kms of farm-to-market roads finished” (Jan 8, 2024). https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/893418/marcos-says-51-of-target-131-000-kms-of-farm-to-market-roads-finished/story/

  2. Philippine News Agency — “PBBM finishes 51% of farm-to-market road network program” (Jan 8, 2024). https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1216516

  3. OneNews / Philippine Star — “Farm-To-Market Road Projects Up For Audit” (with farmer quotes on conversion) (2025). https://onenews.ph/articles/farm-to-market-road-projects-up-for-audit

  4. Panay News — “Guimaras lands sell like hotcakes; but mayors say it’s illegal, call for probe” (Apr 23, 2021). https://www.panaynews.net/guimaras-lands-sell-like-hotcakes-but-mayors-say-its-illegal-call-for-probe/

  5. Daily Guardian — “Guimaras mayors warn vs rampant ‘illegal’ sales of residential lots” (Apr 14, 2021). https://dailyguardian.com.ph/guimaras-mayors-warn-vs-rampant-illegal-sales-of-residential-lots/

  6. Manila Bulletin — “DAR steps up crackdown vs illegal land conversion in Western Visayas” (Nov 24, 2024). https://mb.com.ph/2024/11/24/dar-steps-up-crackdown-vs-illegal-land-conversion-in-western-visayas

  7. IBON Foundation — “Addressing the rampage of land use conversion” (2017) — cites NIA estimate on annual loss of irrigated prime agricultural land. https://www.ibon.org/addressing-the-rampage-of-land-use-conversion/

  8. Lawphil — Republic Act No. 6657 (CARP), Sec. 65 (Conversion of Lands). https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1988/ra_6657_1988.html

  9. Supreme Court e-Library — DAR Administrative Order No. 01, s. 1999 (Revised Rules on Land Use Conversion). https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/10/42510

  10. DAR (PDF) — Administrative Order 03-A (2021) (amendments to conversion rules). https://storage.googleapis.com/request-attachments/RbwCNLpnPYIaUwlFo1v9JKelmRGrNGvpOdaxrckYIASo24qNd7en5RoG7FL8zqbneRbNgCktK3h7DNb1FxyqDO6FDOsjwfOVbERK/DAR%20AO%2003-A%202021.pdf

  11. CPBRD (Congress) — “Idle Land Tax: Implementation Issues and Challenges” (2016). https://cpbrd.congress.gov.ph/pb2016-02-idle-land-tax-implementation-issues-and-challenges/

  12. IMF — “Property Tax Reforms in the Philippines” (2013). https://www.imf.org/external/np/seminars/eng/2013/asiatax/pdfs/philippines.pdf

  13. Panay News — “DAR warns against premature, illegal land conversion in WV” (Nov 19, 2024). https://www.panaynews.net/dar-warns-against-premature-illegal-land-conversion-in-wv/

  14. PCAARRD, DOST — “Guimaras mango stakeholders adhere to regulatory measures” (2012). https://pcaarrd.dost.gov.ph/index.php/quick-information-dispatch/2940-guimaras-mango-stakeholders-adhere-to-regulatory-measures

  15. ACCRALAW — “Protecting place, preserving pride: Why geographical indications matter to the Philippines” (2025). https://accralaw.com/publications/protecting-place-preserving-pride-why-geographical-indications-matter-to-the-philippines/

  16. Philippine Daily Inquirer — “Land conversion leads to agri drop” (2017). https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/842031/land-conversion-leads-to-agri-drop

  17. FAO — Sebastian et al., “Bridging the Rice Yield Gap in the Philippines” (1999). https://www.fao.org/3/x0490e/x0490e00.htm

  18. DAR Land Information System (LIS) — Idle/abandoned land concept and data system (accessed for definitional basis). https://lis.dar.gov.ph/

 

 
 
 
bottom of page