THE PLACE OF DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION IN ORGANIC AGRICULTURE:

AN ANALYSIS

Proposed by: Mr. VERLINO D. BADDU, Ph.D.

Instructor 1, CSU-Sanchez Mira

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction

Development communication is a term which emanated within the parameters of

agricultural communication as it primarily involved communication of agricultural developments
(Kumar, 2011).
Quebral (2006), on the other hand, defines development communication as an “art and
science of human communication applied to the speedy transformation of a country and the mass of its
people from poverty to a dynamic state of economic growth that makes possible greater social equality
and the larger fulfilment of the human potential.” It is an important tool to reach out to people and to
bring to them new insights, technology, processes, and systems that are aimed at developing further
their communities.
Knowledge and information are essential for people to successfully respond to the
opportunities and challenges of social, economic and technological changes. But to be useful, knowledge
and information must be effectively communicated to people.
Meanwhile, the Republic Act 10068, also known as the Organic Agriculture Act of 2018,
mandates that the State has to promote, propagate, develop further and implement the practice of
organic agriculture in the Philippines that will cumulatively condition and enrich the fertility of the soil,
increase farm productivity, reduce pollution and destruction of the environment, prevent the depletion
of natural resources, further protect the health of farmers, consumers, and the general public, and save
on imported farm inputs(RA 10068, 2009).
As a means to this end, the law also requires a nationwide educational and promotional
campaign on the use, processing, and adoption of organic agriculture systems as a viable alternative.
This, therefore, calls for the involvement of an academic exercise in the form of development
communication in order to promote viable organic agriculture in all levels.
Organic agriculture is considered as one of the livelihood options in many rural areas in the
Philippines, and this therefore includes the whole Cagayan Valley (Maghirang, De La Cruz, & Villareal,
2011). In connection to this, the Department of Agriculture Regional Office 02 (DA-RF02) envisions the
region to become a “premier organic agriculture region”, hence aiming to become a key player in
sustaining enough organic supplies in the markets through its agricultural inputs. In order to reach this
goal, there is an increasing pressure to double the efforts and maximize all possible interventions that
will help DA-R02 reach its target of converting 27,203 hectares of agricultural lands to be dedicated in
organic agriculture by the year 2022. In its annual narrative report for 2017, DA-RF02 highlighted the
different interventions provided in attaining the Organic Agriculture Program goals which include
production support services, market development services, extension support, education and training
services, and agricultural and fishery machinery, equipment and facilities support services.
It is evident, though, that among the reported interventions, the role of development
communication has never been highlighted. Fraser & Villet (2018) argues that there is a strong link
needed between research, extension and farmers but such seems difficult to achieve.
Consequently, there had been a lot of research and development projects as well as
extension activities conducted along organic agriculture, but the transfer of technology has produced
inadequate results. There still exist a relatively limited number of organic agriculture practitioners in the
northwestern most part of Cagayan and this is somewhat a manifestation of the weaknesses in
transferring technologies to the communities. For instance, service municipalities of the Cagayan State
University – Sanchez Mira campus, that include Pamplona, Sanchez Mira, Claveria and Sta. Praxedes,
present a difficulty in terms of increasing the frequency of adopters which in turn posts a risk on the
sustainability of organic agriculture in this part of the region.
This observation now leads to the question on what could be the missing link. Looking at
the ideas of Fraser and Villet (2018), development communication could be an answer. There must be a
stronger bond among the three important players in the field: the researcher, the extensionist, and the
farmer. Communication would play a very vital role in the promotion of organic agriculture because a
better agricultural knowledge and information system would correctly identify, sort and match the
needs and existing technical know-how of all three groups involved. As a result, appropriate technology
packages could be developed and disseminated, and would probably be rapidly adopted because of the
farmers' contribution in developing them. An additional result of such a consultation process would be
that researchers could focus their work primarily on those technical problems confronting farmers for
which there is no ready solution available.
The researchers and extensionists are in place, but the agriculturists must be put in the
picture. On this ground, the researcher deems it necessary to explore the place of development
communication in organic agriculture by analyzing the extent of involvement of the agriculturists
practicing either the conventional or organic farming in the promotion and technology-transfer of
organic agriculture practices.

Conceptual Framework
The philosophy of Paulo Freire that communication is conceived as a dialogue and
participation for the purpose of creating cultural identity, trust, commitment, ownership and
empowerment, which in turn guided the Integrated Model of Communication for Social Change (IMCSC)
served as the underlying principle for the conceptual framework of this study(Figueroa, et.al, 2017;
Carcitto & Dinbabo, 2017). It tries to practically explore how development communication can foster
collective action among the agriculturists in order to promote the organic agriculture in this part of the
nation.
The Input-Process-Output framework shall be adopted in this study wherein the current
exposure of the agriculturists to development communication tools and activities shall serve as one of
the inputs in this study. Knowing their preferences on how they want to participate in the development
communication process to promote organic agriculture shall serve as the process in this study. Figueroa,
et.al. (2017) emphasized that the process is as important as the outcomes – the act of having the
people come together to decide what they want and how they will obtain what they gives real definition
to social change and eventually demonstrates success, especially for marginalized members in the
society.
The following paradigm shows the framework of this study:

Input Process Output

current exposure of the agriculturists Knowing their preferences on how Development Communication
to development communication tools they want to participate in the program to promote organic
and activities development communication process agriculture involving the agriculturists
to promote organic agriculture
Statement of the Problem
Generally, this study aims to determine the exposure of the agriculturists in the different
development communication media and activities that promote organic agriculture and to find out their
preferred ways of participation in the development communication process.
1. What agricultural practice do the respondents primarily adopt?
2. What is the extent of the respondents’ exposure to the following development communication
media and practices that promote organic agriculture?
a. Mass Media
b. IEC materials
c. Web Resources
d. Extension Activities
e. Dialogues/open forum
f. Meetings
3. What are the preferred ways of participation by the respondents in the development
communication on the promotion of organic farming?
4. Is there a significant difference in the extent of exposure of the respondents to development
communication in organic agriculture when grouped according to their agricultural practices?
5. Is there a significant difference in the preferred ways of participation by the respondents in the
development communication on the promotion of organic farming when grouped according to
their agricultural practices?

Research Hypotheses
1. There is no significant difference in the extent of exposure of the respondents to development
communication in organic agriculture when grouped according to their agricultural practices.
2. There is no significant difference in the preferred ways of participation by the respondents in
the development communication on the promotion of organic farming when grouped according
to their agricultural practices?
 Significance of the Study
This study will serve as an opportune time for the agriculturists to promote organic
agriculture through their possible participation in the development communication process.
It will also be beneficial to the researchers and extensionists since the data will give light to
coming up with better activities and tools for technology transfer in organic agriculture.
Furthermore, the data may be of help to improve the initiatives under the National Organic
Agriculture Program (NOAP) and the Department of Agriculture so as to make organic agriculture more
adoptable by the Filipino agriculturists.

Scope and Delimitation

The proposed study is delimited in determining the extent of exposure to development
communication tools and activities of the agriculturists. These tools and activities are limited to mass
media, IEC materials, web resources, extension activities, dialogues/open forum, and meetings.
Furthermore, the preferred ways of the agriculturists’ participation in the development communication
process on promoting organic agriculture.
This study will be involving only the agriculturists from Pamplona, Sanchez Mira, Claveria,
and Sta. Praxedes and will be conducted for the A.Y. 2019.

Definition of Terms

The following terms are operationally defined based on the parameters of this study:

Agriculture practice refers to whether the farmer-respondents are practicing either conventional or
organic agriculture.

Extent of exposure to development communication pertains to how often do the respondents have an
access to different development communication tools and activities such as IEC materials,
web resources, extension activities, dialogues/open forums and meetings.

Development communication refers to the use of communication pathways in order to promote

development. In this case, it pertains to how communication can be harnessed in
promoting organic agriculture to a wider possible adopters of such agriculture practice.

Preferred ways of participation in the development communication refers to how the farmers would
want to become part of the development communication process in order to promote
organic agriculture.
 METHODOLOGY

Research Design

The descriptive design will help provide the answers to the problems identified in this
study. This descriptive research, therefore, will obtain information regarding the extent of the farmers’
exposure to development communication as well as their preferred way of participating in the
development communication process.

Locale of the Study

This study will be conducted in the municipalities of Pamplona, Sanchez Mira, Claveria, and
Sta. Praxedes being the immediate service localities of the RDE unit of CSU-Sanchez Mira.

Respondents and Sampling Procedure

The farmers, practicing either the conventional or organic agriculture , from the four
municipalities will compose the population for this study. The researcher will be getting the actual
number of farmers from the Municipal Agrarian Office of the respective municipalities. Since there is a
limited number of organic agriculture practitioners, the total population sampling will be adopted for
such group. On the other hands, the Slovin’s Formula will be utilized in computing the sample from the
total population of conventional farmers then the simple random sampling will be used to identify the
samples.

Research Instrument

A questionnaire will be developed, validated and utilized as the primary tool in gathering
the data for this study. The indicators shall be asking the respondents about how much they are exposed
to various development communication tools and activities as well as on how they prefer to participate
in the process of promoting organic agriculture through development communication.

Data Gathering Procedure

The respondents will be asked to tick their responses on each given indicator in the
questionnaire that will be personally floated by the researcher or his/her research enumerators.

Statistical Treatment

The researcher will employ frequency and percentage distribution in dealing with the data
on farming practices of the agriculturists.
 Weighted means will be used to describe the respondents extent of exposure to
development communication tools and activities along organic agriculture. Meanwhile, the five-point
Likert scale will be used in describing their responses:

Scale Range Description Transposed Value

5 4.21 – 5.0 Always Very High Extent
4 3.41 – 4.20 Often High Extent
3 2.61 – 3.40 Sometimes Moderate Extent
2 1.81 – 2.60 Seldom Low Extent
1 1.00 – 1.80 Never Very Low Extent

Moreover, the preferred participation of the respondents on the promotion of organic

agriculture through organic farming will be dealt with using frequency, percentage distribution and later
on will be ranked for presentation.
The T-test will also be used in testing the differences between the two groups of
respondents: those who are practicing conventional agricultural and those who have adopted the
organic practices.

LITERATURE CITED

Republic Act 10068 AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND PROMOTION OF ORGANIC
AGRICULTURE IN THE PHILIPPINES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES (2009). Congress of the Philippine.
Retrieved from http://organic.da.gov.ph/images/downloadables/Republic_Act_No_10068.pdf

Kumar, R. (2011). DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION: A PURPOSIVE COMMUNICATION WITH SOCIAL

CONSCIENCE-AN INDIAN PERSPECTIVE. Article Global Media Journal-Indian Edition (Vol. 2).
Retrieved from http://www.caluniv.ac.in/global-mdia-journal/Winter Issue December 2011
Articles/AR-3 Kumar.pdf

Maghirang, R. G., De La Cruz, R., & Villareal, R. L. (2011). How Sustainable Is Organic Agriculture in the
Philippines ? Trans. Nat. Acad. Sci. & Tech. (Philippines), 33(2), 289–321. Retrieved from
http://www.nast.ph/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=252&tmpl=component
&format=raw&Itemid=7

Fraser, C., & Villet, J. (2018). Communication: a key to human development. Retrieved from
http://www.fao.org/docrep/t1815e/t1815e01.htm#fore.

Carciotto, S., & Dinbabo, M.F. (2017). Role of Development Communication in Fostering Social Change:
Evidence from Lesotho. Journal of Communication, 4 (2), 65-70. Retrieved from
https://www.tandfonline.com.

Figueroa, M.E., Kincaid, D. L., Rani, M., & Lewis, G. (2017). Communication for Social Change: An
Integrated Model for Measurig the Process and Its Outcomes. The Rockefeller Foundation: New
York.
 QUESTIONNAIRE
Survey Questionnaire

1. Which agriculture practice do you adopt?: [ ] Conventional [ ] Organic

What organic agricultural commodities do you produce?

______________________________________________________________________________

2. Below are some development and communication tools and activities on promoting organic
agriculture. Please determine your extent of exposure to such indicator by ticking the box
corresponding to your response based on the scale below.

Point Descriptive Value

5 Always (On a regular basis)
4 Often
3 Sometimes
2 Seldom
1 Never

Activities in Organic Farming 5 4 3 2 1

Development communication tools on organic agriculture
I. Mass Media promoting organic agriculture
1. Television programs on organic agriculture
2. Radio programs on organic agriculture
3. Newsletters/Gazettes
4. Magazines
5. Journals
6. Other periodicals, please
specify:___________________________________
____
II. IEC Materials
1. Pamphlets
2. Flyers
3. Manuals
4. Others, please
specify:____________________________________
III. Web resources
1. YouTube videos
2. Blogs
3. NOAP website
4. DA website
5. Other sites promoting organic agriculture, please
specify: ___________________________________
 IV. Dialogues/Open Forum on Organic Agriculture
V. Extension Activities on Organic Farming
1. Techno-Demo Farms
2. Trainings on Organic Agriculture
3. Others, please specify:________________________

Please determine how you want to participate in the development communication Yes No
process in promoting organic agriculture in the community.
1. Participant in a dialogue/meetings on deciding how to promote organic
agriculture.
2. Serve as resource person during trainings in the community.
3. Develop a techno-demo farm where I will be doing demonstrations when
needed.
4. Be part in developing IEC materials on organic agriculture using the local
language.
5. Contributor of articles in newsletters and other periodicals
6. Facilitator of community dialogues/meetings on the promotion of organic
agriculture.
7. Serve as motivational speaker in gatherings on the promotion of organic
agriculture
8. Be a member of a consultative body on the promotion of organic agriculture.
9. Develop blogsites and contribute in websites/blogsites promoting organic
agriculture
10. Upload videos promoting organic agriculture.
11. Maintain a facebook page promoting organic agriculture.
Other ways of participation, please identify:
 Annex B

Schedule of Activities

Activities Aug.- Jan February Mar Apr May June July

Dec. 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2018
2018
Preparation of the full blown proposal and x
submission for funding
Development and finalization of the instruments to x
be used
Gathering of Data x x x
Data encoding, analysis and interpretation x
Finalization of the manuscript and report x x
Presentation of the research in in-house review and x
in local, national or international research fora
Submission for publication of research x
 Annex C

Budgetary Requirements

Items Estimated Budget

Personnel Services (Research 45,000.00
Enumerator, Statistician, etc)
Transportation Expenses 25,000.00
Office Supplies 10,000.00
Travel Expenses 20,000.00
Registration for Presentation & 30,000.00
Publication Fees
Estimated Total Budget 130,000.00