1

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Study

Corn, also known as maize, has played a significant role in human history,

primarily as a source of sustenance for humans and animals. Corn has primarily served as

a protein source for livestock since its inception. In recent decades, corn is seen as a rich

source of both energy and protein.. Purdue University's Dr. Mike Ladisch believes corn's

next important function will be as a chemical raw material. "Corn is a fantastic source of

highly pure sugars and starches," according to Ladisch, who said that developments in

biochemical and chemical engineering, a wide range of novel goods may be created from

these sugars and starches.

Maize is the second to the rice as the most important crop in the Philippines, with

one-third of Filipino farmers, or 1.8million, depending on maize as their major source of

livelihood.Yellow maize is the primary source of feed for the Philippines’ animal

industry, and is being increasingly used by the manufacturing sector. Production of Corn

in Mountain Province decreased by 306 metric tons.

According to the PSA, the probable corn production for October to December

2020, based on standing crop as of 01 November 2020, may reduce to1.68 million metric

tons, lower by -0.4 percent than the estimated corn production of 1.69 million metric tons

as of 01 October 2020. The updated estimate of corn production for October to December

2020 may be higher by 1.4 percent from the previous year's same period level of 1.66

million metric tons.

Aside from rice, corn is considered as another staple crop in the Philippines. The

declining production in corn resulted in the decline of the agricultural sector’s real GDP.
 2

In 2018, the real GDP growth of the agricultural sector was only 0.9 percent, three

percent lower than the previous year.

In 2020, the production value of corn in the Philippines amounted to 97.67 billion

Philippine pesos, reflecting a decrease from the previous year. Corn production in the

country reached its peak in 2018.

The production of corn from April to June 2020, estimated at1,352.56 thousand

metric tons, was 15.4 percent higher than the 1,172.19 thousand metric tons output in the

same period of 2019.Likewise, harvest area increased to 390.86 thousand hectares or by

3.7 percent, from 377.04 thousand hectares in the same period a year ago. Yield per

hectare was also higher at 3.46 metric tons compared to 3.11 metric tons in the same

period of 2019.

During the first half of 2020, the average farm gate price of yellow corn was

PhP12.41 per kilogram, which represents an annual drop of 11.2 percent from its

previous year’s average farmgate price of PhP13.97 per kilogram. Average price was

highest in June at PhP12.73 per kilogram. At wholesale trade, the January to June 2020

average price of yellow corn was PhP21.20 per kilogram. This was higher by 8.0 percent

from the previous year’s same period average wholesale price of PhP19.62 per kilogram.

This period’s monthly wholesale price was highest in January at PhP21.90 per kilogram

and lowest in May at PhP19.53 per kilogram.

From the PSA, price monitoring survey, the average retail price of yellow corn of

PhP 24.88 per kilogram from January to June 2020 was 0.7 percent higher than the

previous year’s price of PhP 24.69 per kilogram. During the period, the highest price was

quoted in June at PhP 25.68 and the lowest was in May at PhP23.68 per kilogram.
 3

Mountain Province produced 5,565 metric tons of corn in the first quarter of

2021. This is 306 metric tons lower than the production in 2020 with 5,871 metric tons or

5.21 percent decrease in production.

The area harvested for corn in the first quarter of 2021 remained at 1,533 hectares

which is similar to the area harvested in the same quarter of 2020. By crop type, there

was no white corn area harvested in the province on the said quarter.

The yield of corn, in metric tons per hectare, in Mountain Province decreased by

5.22 percent in the first quarter of 2021. The average yield in the said quarter of 2020 was

3.83 metric tons per hectare which decreased to 3.63 metric tons per hectare in the same

quarter of 2021. The decrease was only observed from yellow corn since there was no

recorded yield for white corn in January to March of 2020 and 2021.

Maize production peaks in highland locations from July to September, with the

lean months being January to June. Maize is also farmed in the rainfed lowlands, where it

is sown after the rice crop has been collected during the dry season. Maize production

after rice boosts irrigation system productivity during the dry season while also providing

essential grain during a lean period. Integrating animals into the system produces high-

value goods and boosts the profitability of small-scale maize farmers (FSSRI, 2000;

Eusebio and Labios, 2001)

Corn production in the country is determined by the environment and topography

of a given area. In 2018, corn production has decreased, resulting in a decrease in the

agriculture sector's real GDP which was recorded only 0.9%, down 3% from the previous

year.
 4

Corn's economic returns have fallen in comparison to other crops due to a loss in

demand and matching drop in prices. The maize crop's yield will most certainly be lower

in the next seasons. This is a conscious move prompted by market pressures. Corn

supplies have outpaced demand, leaving physical merchants, storage owners, and

transporters with less potential revenue.

According to a study from the US Department of Agriculture's Global

Agricultural Information Network (GAIN), the Philippines' corn production is expected

to decline, and the feed demand is hampered by the COVID-19 pandemic and African

Swine Fever (ASF). Corn production in the Philippines is expected to drop 3.6 percent to

8 million tonnes in the 2021-22 marketing year, down from 8.3 million the previous year.

The USDA blames the drop on the expected return of typical weather patterns, such as

typhoons.

Despite plummeting price and disappearing markets, farmers this year intend to

plant a large corn crop, according to USDA surveys.

B. Significance of the study

Generally, this study is significant to various group of people such as the farmers,

the policy making body, and research enthusiasts.

Specifically, the group of farmers will benefit from this study as they will be

provided with knowledge to solve their problems in corn production, and possible

alternative course of action to take to be able to gain higher yield of corn amidst the

pandemic. This will help them handle and overcome properly the disaster brought by the

pandemic.
 5

On the other hand, through the result of this study, the policy making body will be

provided an informational background that may serve as a concrete basis on crafting

policies related to competitiveness enhancement of productivity and efficiency for the

farmers to produce higher and generate more income.

Similarly, this study will be beneficial to research enthusiasts as they will be

provided with more research ideas related to development of a resilient corn industry in

Mountain, Province. The results presented in this study will be a concrete basis on

crafting follow-up researches.

C. Statement of the problem

Generally, the study aimed to assess the short-term effect of COVID 19 pandemic

on selected corn producing communities in Paracelis, Mountain Province. Specifically, it

aimed to answer the following problems:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:

a. Age

b. Gender

c. Civil Status

d. Highest Educational Attainment

e. Household size

f. Years of experience in farming

g. Training and seminars attended

h. Income per cropping before Covid-19 Pandemic

i. Income per cropping after Covid-19 pandemic

j. Average yield per hectare

 6

2. What is the farm management profile of the respondents as to the following;

a. Land area devoted in corn production

b. Soil type

c. Topography

d. Seeds produced

e. Volume of seeds planted

f. Irrigation system/Source

g. Crop production practice

h. Source of labor

i. Purpose of production

3. What is the level of effect of the pandemic COVID-19 in the management

or utilization of farm inputs?

4. What is the economic gap caused by the COVID- 19 Pandemic in terms of

the following;

a. Average yield

b. Market price

c. Profit/Return on Investment

5. What is the relationship between demographic profile and the change in

average yield before and during the pandemic COVID-19?

6. What are the factors affecting corn production?

7. What are the constraints encountered by the corn growers?

D. Objectives of the Study
 7

Generally, this study was conducted to assess the immediate effect of Covid-19

Pandemic on corn production at Paracelis, Mountain Province.

Specifically, it aimed to fulfil the following objectives:

1. To determine the socio-demographic profile of the respondents in terms of;

a. Age

b. Gender

c. Civil Status

d. Educational Attainment

e. Years in Farming

f. Training and seminars attended

g. Land area devoted in corn production

2. Describe the farm management profile of the respondents as to the
following;

a. Soil type

b. Topography

c. Seeds produced

d. Volume of seeds planted

e. Irrigation system/Source

f. Crop production practice

g. Source of labor

h. Purpose of production

i. Yield in kg. per hectare before and after COVID19

 8

j. Variety of corn

3. Determine the level of effect of the pandemic COVID-19 in the

management or utilization of farm inputs;

4. Determine the economic gap caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic in terms

of the following;
a. Average yield
b. Market price

c. Profit/Return on Investment

5. Determine the relationship between demographic profile and the change in

average yield before and during the pandemic COVID-19;

6. Determine the factors affecting corn production in the midst of Pandemic

7. Identify the constraints encountered by the corn growers.

E. Scope and Delimitation of the study

This study focused on corn producing communities in selected Barangays of

Paracelis, Mountain Province as affected by COVID-19 pandemic. The primary

data was taken from both male and female corn farmers regardless of tenurial

status. Whereas, the secondary data was taken from the municipal agricultural

office.

F. Definition of terms

Assessment.is the evaluation or estimation of the nature, quality or the

ability of someone or something.

 9

Agriculture. the science or practice of farming, including cultivation of the

soil for the growing of crops and the rearing of animals to provide food, wool, and

other products.

Covid-19 (Coronavirus disease) .is an infectious disease caused by the

SARS CoV-2 virus

Communities. A group of people living in the same place or having a

particular characteristic in common.

Decline. a gradual and continuous loss of strength, numbers, quality, or

value

Enthusiasts. a person who is very interested in a particular activity or

subject.

Inception. the establishment or starting point of an institution or activity

Inferential. characterized by or involving conclusions reached on the basis

of evidence and reasoning.

Production. is an action of making or manufacturing from components or

raw materials

Plummeting. to fall straight down very quickly from a high position

Short term. occurring over or involving a relatively short period of time

Sustenance. food and drink regarded as a source of strength; nourishment

Utilization. an act or instance of making practical or profitable use of something
Zea mays. also called Indian corn or maize or the scientific name of corn.
 10

II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter is a comprehensive review of local and foreign studies literature that

is related to the objectives and methodology of the assessment of the short effect of

COVID19 Pandemic on corn production

A. Foreign Studies

Corn plays a significant part in the world economy, with the United States

producing 370 million tons of maize from 36 million hectares (harvested 33.08 million

hectares in 2017), accounting for more than one-third of global corn output; more than 92

percent of this being GM corn (Sandhu 2020). Corn is the world's second-largest

agricultural crop after sugarcane and wheat, with global production of 1.06 billion tons

on 187 million hectares. It is mostly utilized as animal feed in industrialized countries,

followed by ethanol and other industrial purposes. In some countries, corn is consumed

directly by humans. There is some evidence of a reduced unfavorable health impact of

corn intensity related with local organic production in organic maize production

(Scialabba, 2020). As mentioned in the study by Panikkai and Al (2019), the national
 11

economy is strongly reliant on the expansion of national corn cultivation, and the

expansion of production is heavily reliant on the expansion of corn planting area.

COVID-19 has hampered grain crop production of the three primary grain crops

—rice, wheat, and corn—due to obstruction of spring plowing and a lack of crop

production resources. Crop production resources include seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, and

other agricultural inputs within the prescribed time period, which is becoming

increasingly difficult due to ongoing COVID-19 control measures, such as prohibiting

companies from resuming work and closing roads, which have been in effect since late

January. According to a survey conducted by the China Seed Association, approximately

40% of seed businesses have stopped selling seeds since the epidemic. Meanwhile, due to

city lockdowns, crop production resources are hard to access communities. Only 3.3

percent of seed retailers have been open since early February this year, according to

reports. As a result, during the spread of this novel coronavirus, a scarcity of crop

production resources has become one of the major roadblocks to agricultural production.

Due to quarantine and closures across the country following the emergence of COVID-

19, agricultural labor is in limited supply. Agricultural work is a related high-frequency

word. China's agricultural industry is well recognized to rely significantly on human

labor. As a result, the low-automation production model's flaws were highlighted as a

result of the agricultural labor scarcity. Many agricultural firms require a lot of labor

during spring plowing due to restrictions on people's movement, but it's difficult for

laborers to return to work or for businesses to acquire new workers, posing a substantial

obstacle for agricultural productivity (Pan D, Yang J, Zhou G, Kong) (2020).

 12

On the market side, the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on agricultural

production, including crop and animal products, depends on the product, the location, and

the economic status of the impacted location (Laborde et al., 2020). In the midst of the

COVID-19 outbreak, a study from the University of Illinois Extension shows little

demand for corn for ethanol production. Corn used for ethanol production could lose 120

million to 170 million bushels over the next two months if gasoline usage dips (Lisa

Gibson, 2020).

The majority of maize produced in the United States and around the world is used

for animal feed, such as poultry, hogs, and cattle. According to the most recent data,

around 65 percent of maize produced globally will be utilized for animal feed (USDA)..

However, as a result of the spread of COVID-19, many meatpacking companies in the

United States were forced to close, and maize feed demand decreased. Similarly, corn is

the primary source of ethanol fuel, and as a result of COVID-19 lockdowns altering our

lifestyles, including reduced driving, gasoline consumption has dropped dramatically.

The first week of April saw the lowest gasoline demand in the United States, dropping 48

percent from the previous year (US Energy Information Administration).

The national economy is strongly reliant on the expansion of national corn

cultivation, and the expansion of production is heavily reliant on the expansion of corn

planting area. The increase in national corn production, as well as the contributions of

GDP and revenue obtained by maize farmers, are becoming an intrinsic aspect of the

national corn development model towards the regional economy. The increase in grain

production contributed to the improvement in the national economy (Panikkai and Al,

2019).
 13

Corn prices will reflect the ongoing uncertainty about the economic repercussions

of short-term attempts to control the epidemic. A significant economic downturn that

leads to a worldwide recession allows prices to continue to fall (University of Illinois).

According to the USDA, corn utilization for fuel ethanol production increased

significantly in October compared to the previous month and the same period in 2020. In

October 2021, total corn eaten for alcohol and other purposes was 521 million bushels, up

14% from the previous month and up 8% from October 2020. Corn for fuel alcohol

production totaled 469 million bushels in October, rising 15% from September and 8%

from the previous year's October. In October, 91.3% of corn was consumed for dry

milling fuel production and 8.7% for wet milling fuel production, respectively.

During the coronavirus epidemic, the maize market has dried up, and farmers are

worried that they won't be able to sell this year's crop (EVANSVILLE, Ind., April 29

(UPI). This is because of the struggles on shipments of products as stated by the director

of trade policy and biotechnology for the U.S. Grains Council, a Washington, D.C. -

based trade organization that represents the corn, sorghum and barley industries. As the

COVID-19 pandemic turns into a global crisis, countries are taking measures to contain

the pandemic. The shipping industry is already reporting slowdowns because of port

closures, and logistics hurdles could disrupt the supply chains in the coming weeks. This

policy brief provides recommendations on measures to consider in order to keep the

supply chain alive in these times of crisis. (FAO, 2020).

B. Local Studies
According to Tampus (2019), corn cultivation was discovered to be a very

outstanding source of income for farmers. Corn is preferred over grain because it is easier
 14

to grow, requires less effort, and has a higher market demand for food. Sweet corn is

traditionally cultivated in the Philippines by direct seeding, but new research from the

University of Vermont in the United States and the Eastern Cape in South Africa has

found that transplanting methods of crop have increased agronomic and economic

outputs (Escasinas, 2019).

Agricultural output fell by 1.5 percent in the second quarter of 2021, compared to

a 0.5 percent increase in the same time of 2020, according to the Philippine Statistics

Authority. Crop production, on the other hand, increased by 3.1 percent. Production of

palay and corn increased by 1.2 percent and 6.3 percent, respectively.

Amid lack of government support, the Philippines has been slacking in corn

production. The situation has gone so bad that importation has already become a

necessity.

Roger Navarro, president of the country’s largest group of corn producers

Philippine Maize Federation (PhilMaize), said in an interview that the corn output in the

Philippines has been insufficient for some time, and it has been unable to meet demand

for feedstuffs. Harvests are beset by problems with quality and quantity. As a result, as

the economy slowly recovers from the Covid 19 outbreak, there isn't enough maize to

support the increase in the chicken business and the recovery of hogs from African Swine

Flu. The Philippine Association of Feed Millers Inc. (PAFMI) has expressed worry over

a lack of local maize output and urged the government and local farmers to address the

urgent need to ensure the country's supply is reliable and consistent.

For those who are already fed up with quarantine lockdowns and movement

limitations, the global COVID-19 epidemic continues to hinder any form of normalcy.
 15

The African Swine Fever (ASF), a succession of natural disasters, and a global increase

in input prices (corn, soybeans, fertilizer, gasoline, and so on) have exacerbated the

situation in agriculture (Dar, 2021).

C. Conceptual Framework

The figure shows the inputs needed in the conduct of this study, the processes to

be undertaken during the implementation, and lastly, the expected outputs that the study

will deliver.

Fig. 1. Conceptual Framework of the Study

Inputs Process Output

Human Resource Development and Demographic and
(researcher, panelist, and presentation of farm profile of Rice
respondents) research proposal; farmers

Financial Resource Formulation of self- Assessed short-term

structured effects of the
School Supplies
questionnaire COVID-19
Self-made structured pandemic on selected
Collection of data
questionnaire corn producing
Consolidation of communities in
Primary and secondary
Data Paracelis, Mountain
data
Data Analysis Province
Statistical tools for data
Interpretation of Identified factors
analysis
results affecting corn
production
Preparation of write-
Report/Manuscript
 16

FEEDBACK MECHANISM

III. METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the methodology that was used in this study to fulfill the stated

objectives.

A. Research Design
To get a significant result, certain methods and design were used in doing the

study. In this study, descriptive and inferential research was applied as the design as the

study aims to analyze and discuss the short term effect of COVID19 virus in corn

producing communities in Paracelis, Mt. Province.

B. Time and place of the Study

This study was conducted in the selected corn producing barangays of Paracelis,
Mountain Province last April 2022.
C. Respondents of the study
 17

The respondents of this study were male and female corn farmers in the selected

Barangays of Paracelis, Mountain Province regardless of tenurial status.

Figure 2. The Figure shows the Map of Place of the Respondents.

The researcher used Slovin`s formula to get the total number of respondents of

this study.

Slovin`s formula

n = N / (1+Ne2).

Where:

n= sample size

N= the total population size

e= margin of error

n = 5590 / (1+5590(0.10)2).

n= 99.55

A total of 99 respondents were selected from the top 3 barangays in Paracelis with

highest registered farmers. 50 farmers in barangay Anonat, 35 farmers in barangay

Buringal and 14 farmers in barangay Palitud.

18
 19

D. Data Gathering Instruments

The main instrument used in this study was a self-made structured

questionnaire which was designed to gather responses from respondents regarding the

short-term effect of COVID-19 pandemic on their production.

E. Data Gathering Procedure

The survey was personally conducted through face to face interviews where each

questionnaire has an attached letter personally appealing to the individual respondents for

their cooperation in this endeavour.

F. Method of Data Analysis and Statistical Treatment

All the data needed were collected, analysed, interpreted and presented in tables.

The study was done with the aid of SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) for

both the descriptive statistics and inferential statistics was used. This study allow the

application of frequency distribution, central tendency or weighted mean, percentages,

correlational and regression analysis.

The table below indicates the specific statistical analysis tool to be used in the

analysis of the objectives.

Table 1. Statistical Tools for Data Analysis

Objectives Statistical　 Tool Used

1. To determine the socio- Frequency of distribution,

demographic profile of the respondents in percentages, central tendency

terms of;
 20

a. Age

b. Gender

c. Civil Status

d. Educational Attainment

e. Years in Farming

f. Training and seminars attended

g. Land area devoted in vegetable

farming

2. Describe the farm management Frequency of distribution, percentages,

central tendency
profile of the respondents as to the

following;

a. Land area devoted in vegetable

farming

b. Soil type

c. Topography

d. Seeds produced

e. Volume of seeds planted

f. Irrigation system/Source

g. Crop production practice

 21

h. Source of labor

i. Purpose of production

3. Determine the level of effect of the Frequency of distribution, percentages,

pandemic COVID-19 in the management central tendency

or utilization of farm inputs;

4. Determine the economic gap Percentages

caused by the Covid 19 Pandemic in terms

of the following;

a. Average yield

b. Market price

c. Profit/Return on Investment

5. Determine the relationship Correlational analysis

between demographic profile and the

change in average yield before and during

the pandemic COVID-19;

6. Determine the factors affecting Regression analysis

corn production

7. Identify the constraints Frequency of distribution, percentages,

encountered by the corn growers. central tendency

 22

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

A. Socio-economic Profile of respondents

The Table presents the socio-demographic profile of the corn farmers in terms of

age, sex, and civil status, and household size, monthly household income before and

during the pandemic COVID-19, educational background, and number of years in rice

farming.

Age. The age of the respondents range from below 25 to 59 years old. As shown

in the Table of socio-demographic profile, the highest frequency was obtained by age

bracket of 40-44 years old with 34.34%; followed by age brackets 30-34 years old, 35-

39 years old, 25-29 years old, 50-54 years old, 45-49 years old, and 55-59 years old

with 22.22%, 21.21%, 11.11%, 6.06%, 3.03%, and 2.02%, respectively. The mean age

of the respondents is 38 years old, thus implies that corn farming is relatively common

for farmers belonging to age 30 to 44, or from young adult to middle adult. These two

groups of farmers are known to be characterized by high level of productivity,

creativity, and adaptability.

Sex. Most of the respondents was male (78%) while 22% was female. The

result implies that corn farming in the locality is dominated by male gender which is

known to be less vulnerable with regards to physical and manual farm labor. This could

also be attributed to the social perception that farming is mostly for male.
 23

Civil status. As presented in the table below 93% were married and seven

percent (7%) were single. This implies that agriculture, specifically corn faming, serves

as one important source of income for the households in the locality.

Household size. Based on the result, the respondents have a household size that

ranges from one to fifteen with mean of seven (7). The highest frequency (43.43%) was

observed under the bracket 4 to 6 household size; followed by 7 to 9 with 31.31%, 10

to 12 with 20.20%, 1 to 3 with 4.04%, and 13 to 15 with one percent (1.01%) only.

This implies that from his/her family members, and not independently engaging with

regards to farm management decisions and labor.

Monthly household income before COVID-19. As presented in the Table,

50.51% of the corn farmers are earning household income averaging at below

10,957Php household income before the occurrence of the pandemic COVID-19;

43.43% of them are receiving an average of Php10,957 to Php21,914; 4.04% are

receiving an average of Php 21,914 to Php 43828, and 2.02% are receiving an average

of Php43,828 to Php76,669P.With the data gathered, the computed mean monthly

household income is Php12,451.09. The result implies the agricultural households

belong to the low income segment of the society, thus very much vulnerable to

poverty incidence.

Monthly household income during COVID-19. As indicated in the Table,

during the pandemic COVID-19, majority (49.49%) of the respondents have a

household income averaging at below Php10,957, 45.45% have Php10,957 to

Php21,914, and 5.05% have Php21,914 to Php43828. The computed mean household
 24

income is Php11,233.94. Clearly, the income of the farmers has declined for about

10% when the pandemic occurred.

Educational background. Based on the table of results below, the educational

background of the respondents is from primary to master studies. The highest

frequency was obtained by education level of secondary (not graduate) with 38.38%,

followed by the levels primary (graduate), tertiary not graduate, secondary graduate,

primary not graduate and masteral graduate with similar percentage, vocational with

24.24%, 20.20%, 12.12%, 2.02%, and 1.01%, respectively. The result implies that the

corn farmers in the locality has attended formal education and were provided with

basic knowledge that they can use to rationalize on farming management and decision.

Number of years in farming. The experience of the corn farmers ranges from 5-

25 years with mean average of 16.31 years. Most of them (59.59%) fall under bracket 16

to 20; followed by bracket 11 to 15 with 27.27%, bracket 20 to 25 with 7.07%, and

lastly, bracket 5 to 10 with 6.06%. It is, therefore, impliedd that majority of the

respondents have been dealing with or practicing corn production for a very long time

and it serves as a traditional source of income or an occupation. Suggested, moreover,

that the corn farmers have become expert through experience and have been exposed to

various production technologies extended by private or public sector.

Table 2. Socio-demographic Profile of the Respondents

Profile F (n=99) Percentage (%)

Age

25-29 11 11.11
 25

30-34 22 22.22

35-39 21 21.21

40-44 34 34.34

45-49 3 3.03

50-54 6 6.06

55-59 2 2.02

Mean 38

Sex

Male 77 78

Female 22 22

Civil status

Single 7 7

Married 92 93

Separated _ _

Widowed _ _

Household size

1-3 4 4.04

4-6 43 43.43

7-9 31 31.31

10-12 20 20.20

13-15 1 1.01

Mean 7

Household income before pandemic

 26

below P10957 50 50.51

P10957-P21914 43 43.43

P21914-43828 4 4.04

P43828-76669 2 2.02

Mean 12,451.09PhP

Household income during pandemic

below P10957 49 49.49

P10957-P21914 45 45.45

P21914-43828 5 5.05

Mean 11,233.94PhP

Educational background

Primary(not graduate) 2 2.02

Primary( graduate) 24 24.24

Secondary(not graduate) 38 38.38

Secondary(graduate) 12 12.12

Vocational 1 1.01

Tertiary (not graduate) 20 20.20

Masteral(grad) 2 2.02

No. of years in corn production

5-10 6 6.06

11-15 27 27.27

16-20 59 59.59
 27

20-25 7 7.07

Mean 16.32

B. Farm Profile of the Respondents

The Table III presents the farm profile of the respondents in the locality of

Paracelis, Mountain Province in terms of tenurial status, land topography, source of labor,

purpose of production, productivity as measured by average yield in kilogram, type and

variety and volume of seeds planted, type of farm soil, production management practice,

and source of irrigation.

Tenurial status. As presented in the table, most (93.94%) of the farmers were the

owner of the farm being utilized for corn production; while 5.05% were farmer-tenant

and 1.01% were lessee. This implies that land owners do utilize their available land

resource, actively investing and personally engaging in corn production.

Land topography. Corn production in the area is mostly situated common in

areas with sloping topography as indicated in the table of results. Highest frequency was

obtained in the sloping topography with 59.60%, flat with 33.33%, or hilly 7.01%.

Source of labor. The result revealed that the labor force for corn production in

the area is came from the family members (46.46%). Some of them were hired laborers

from their neighborhood (29.29%) or enter into a verbal agreement or contract of farm

labor which is commonly termed as kabisilya or pakyawan (18.18%). Very few (6.06%)

employs other farmers which is called bayanihan. The results implies that the source of

labor done by the corn farmers was from family labor. This could be attributed to the
 28

economic limitation of the farmers, particularly the low income level. Employing family

members for farm labor will give them implicit cost, which means that they are not

forced to have cash on hand or credit just to pay for the wages. Such practice will help

them to save and will reduce their burden as they do not have the feeling of being

indebted.

Purpose of production. Subsistence and income generation are the primary

purposes of all (100%) farmers in producing corn. This implies that the farmers’

households provide corn for their own consumption and, at the same time earn income

from their production as they produce and then sell their harvests.

Seeds planted. Hybrid corn seeds are 100% planted by corn farmers as indicated

in the result. This could be attributed to the characteristics of hybrid seeds such as high

yielding, pest and disease resistant, drought resistant. Promotional strategies of the seed

companies or producers may also influence the farmers in adopting hybrid seeds for their

production.

Types of seeds. Yellow corn seeds indicated to have dominated the production of

corn in the locality. As shown in the table of results, all (100%) of the corn farmers

indicated adoption of yellow corn seeds for their production.

Volume of seeds planted (kg). Seeds are packed with a quantity of 10kg. The

result revealed that most of the farmers (88.88%) planted 10kg of seeds for one hectare

farm. Some (10.10%) planted 20kg of seeds for two hectare farm, while only 1.01% was

indicated planting 5kg for half hectare farm.

Type of soil. Ninety four percent (94%) of the corn farmers are cultivating a loam

type of soil, sandy loam and clay loam (2.02%), and clay (1.01%). This implies that the
 29

most common type of soil in the area is loam which is also referred to as agricultural soil

as it includes an equilibrium of all three types of soil materials, being sandy, clay, and

silt, and it also happens to have humus. The said type of soil was match with the

identified and registered type of soil in Municipal Agriculturist office in Paracelis,

Mountain province.

Production management practice. All (100%) of the respondents are

practitioners of inorganic farming. This could be attributed to seed preference of the

farmers which is hybrid, known to have higher yield when applied with inorganic

fertilizers, and chemicals for pest and disease control.

Source of irrigation. All (100%) of the respondents highly depend on rain to

irrigate their corn field. This could be attributed to the topography which was found to be

sloping. Mostly, this topography are rainfed since bringing water to the upper level area

require use of water pump which is generated by fuel, thus, may incur additional expense

on the part of the farmers.

Table 3. Farm Profile of the Respondents

Profile F (n=99) Percentage

Tenurial status

Owner/landlord 93.94

Farmer tenant 5 5.05

Lessee 1 1.01

Land Topography

Sloping area 59 59.60

Flat area 33 33.33

 30

Hilly 7 7.07

Source of labor

Hired laborers from neighborhood 29 29.29

Kabisilya or pakyawn 18 18.18

Family labor 46 46.46

Exchange labor with other farmer 6 6.06

Purpose of production

Subsistence and cash(income) 99 100

Seeds planted

Hybrid 99 100

Types of seeds planted

Yellow 99 100

White _ _

Volume of seeds planted(kg)

5 1 1.01

10 88 88.88

20 10 10.10

Mean 10.96

Type of soil

Loam 94 94.95

sandy loam 2 2.02

Clay 1 1.01

Clay loam 2 2.02

 31

Production management practice

Inorganic 99 100

Source of irrigation

Rainfed 99 100

C. Level of Effect of the Pandemic Covid-19 in the Production Management

Table 4 presents the level of effect of the pandemic COVID-19 in the production

management, specifically on selection of seeds, planting, fertilization, irrigation, and pest

and disease control.

Selection of seeds. As gleaned in the table of results, under selection of seeds,

farmers who used to grow inbred seeds strongly agreed to shift to growing hybrid seeds

(WM=4.9). This is true to the reflected type of seeds under the farm profile of the

respondents (Table IV). Furthermore, they strongly agreed to continue using hybrid seeds

(WM=4.8). These imply that corn farmers strongly disagree to shift from hybrid to inbred

(WM=1.44) and to continue growing inbred seeds (WM=1.5). This clearly indicates the

objective of the farmers to increase their yield primarily to generate income.

Planting. The corn farmers strongly agree to continue employing direct seeding

(M=5).This is due to the fact that transplanting is widely not adopted as perceived to be

inapplicable for corn production.

Fertilization. The corn farmers are undecided with regards to continuing

application of inorganic fertilizers (M=3.2). This could be attributed to high input costs,
 32

especially this time of pandemic when the farmers experience economic difficulties. They

are also undecided with regard to shifting from inorganic farming to organic (M=2.9).

They disagree to lessen their application of fertilizers (M=2.1). Likewise, they disagree to

not apply fertilizer at all (M=1.3). This indicates confusion or uncertainty of farmers

related to the use of either organic or inorganic fertilizers. With the result, if they decide

to apply inorganic fertilizer, they will probably not lessen the amount of fertilizer to be

applied.

Pest and Disease Control (weeds, insects, rodents, mollusc, fungi, etc.). The

farmers agree to combine chemical, physical, and cultural method of pest and disease

control (M=3.6). With the effort of the authorities under the agriculture sector to promote

the Integrated Pest Management (IPM), the corn farmers seem knowledgeable about the

technology. However, the effectiveness of chemical control seems to be actually

experienced by the farmers as they were agreeing to continue application of chemicals

(M=3.4), making them undecided whether to lessen their chemical application or not

(M=2. They disagree to stop applying chemicals at all.

Table 4. Level of Effect of the Pandemic Covid-19 in the Management or Utilization of

Farm Inputs
Production management WM DM

Selection of seeds

I will continue using hybrid seeds 4.8 SA

I will continue using certified inbred seeds. 1.44 SD

I will shift from hybrid to certified inbred seeds. 1.5 SD

Planting

I will continue to employ direct seeding. 5 SA

 33

Fertilization

I will continue to use organic fertilizers. 1.7 SD

I will continue to use inorganic fertilizers. 3.2 U

I will shift from inorganic to organic fertilizers. 2.9 U

I will lessen my application of fertilizer. 2.1 DA

I will not use fertilizer at all. 1.3 SD

Pest and Disease Control (weeds, insects, rodents, mollusk, fungi, etc.)

I will continue to use chemicals to control pests. 3.4 A

I will lessen the application of chemicals. 3.1 U

I will practice different methods of controlling pest 3.6 U

(chemical, physical and cultural method of pest control).

I will not use synthetic chemicals at all. 2.1 DA

Legend: Weighted Mean (WM); Descriptive Meaning (DM); Strongly agree (SA); Agree
(A); Undecided (U); Disagree (DA), and Strongly Disagree (SD)

D. Problems Encountered by the Farmers during the Pandemic COVID-19

The farmers were asked to identify the problems they encountered relevant to

corn production and rate them according to the perceived extent of seriousness. The

Table presents the ranked various problems along with the weighted mean and

descriptive meaning.

Very Serious Problems Encountered by the Farmers during the Pandemic COVID-19

As gleaned from the table of results, corn farmers experience very serious

problems that limits the corn farmers to have an efficient and highly profitable

investment on corm. These very serious problems come from the economic and
 34

environmental aspect such the highly-priced inputs (WM=5), delay transportation.

(WM=4.7), lack of capital (WM=4.5), very low market price (WM=4.3), low quality of

harvests (WM=4.2), weather condition (WM=4.2). With the increasing prices of farm

inputs, the farmers may limit the quantity of inputs to be applied such as fertilizer,

thereby decreasing the productivity as the crop may experience soil nutrient deficiency.

Farm to market road, as well, is being perceived as a very serious problem since the

farmers are experiencing difficulties on transporting their harvests from farm to market.

This may also incur additional costs for the farmers which makes the lack of capital as

one of the very serious and discouraging problems. Very low quality of harvest may be

caused by pests and post-harvest activities, and the unpredictable weather condition. This

is perceived as a very serious problem since it greatly affect the market price of the

product which results to a very low profit. Economically, these problems are very much

discouraging and may influence the farmers in deciding whether to expand or not,

continue producing corn or shifting to other crop.

Serious Problems Encountered by the Farmers during the Pandemic COVID-19

The serious problems identified based on the results of the study are both

technical/operational and social related. The technical-related serious problems are the

high occurrence pests and diseases (WM=3.9), rapid growth of wild weeds (WM=3.8),

unavailability of farm machineries in the locality (WM=3.7), high losses during

harvesting (WM=3.6), soil nutrient deficiency (WM=3.6), lack of water supply

(WM=3.4). These problems directly affect the production or yield of the farmers. On the

other hand, the lack of trainings and seminars on production (WM=3.6) are social-related

as they affect how farmers manage or operate their farm in terms of production.
 35

Technical and social related problems are crucial as they may generally affect the

productivity and viability of corn production at all levels.

Moderately Serious Problems Encountered by the Farmers during the Pandemic

COVID-19

Moderately serious problems identified by the farmers come from political and

technical/operational aspect. Political problems are the lack of government support

(WM=3.3) and lack of training and seminars on Pest and Disease Management

(WM=3.2). Government support programs cover agricultural extension services which

provides training and seminars on various areas such as production, pest and disease

management, marketing, financial, and others for the development or enhancement of the

farmers knowledge and skills.

Lack of buyers (WM=3.0) and high level of damaged grains during post-harvest

(WM=2.6) are negatively affecting the operation of the farmers, thereby decreasing the

return of investment or profitability of the farmers. Corn, when not dried after harvesting

will germinate or will affect the quality of the grains, thus will turn to be an economic

loss for the farmers.

Slightly Serious Problems Encountered by the Farmers during the Pandemic COVID-19

Technically, the unavailability of labor during production and harvesting

(WM=2.3) and unavailability of good quality seeds for planting (WM=2.2) are problems

but are perceived as slightly serious. This means that labor and source of good quality

seeds for planting is not a problem that could give seriously affect the production.
 36

The problems identified, regardless of their extent of seriousness should be taken

into account by the policy makers and the authorities under the agriculture sector. With

the general weighted average (GWM=3.6) of all the problems identified from different

areas, interpreted as serious, it is suggested that a more holistic support program that

provides assistance for the corn farmers in various aspects should be crafted and

implemented.

Table 5. Problems encountered under COVID-19 PANDEMIC

Problems encountered under COVID-19 Pandemic WM DM Ranks

Lack of capital 4.5 VS 3

High occurrence pests and diseases 3.9 S 6

Rapid growth of wild weeds 3.8 S 7

Soil nutrient deficiency 3.6 S 9

Lack of water supply 3.4 S 10

Highly-priced inputs 5 VS 1

Weather condition 4.2 VS 5

Low quality of harvests 4.2 VS 5

High losses during harvesting 3.6 S 9

High level of damaged grains during post-harvest 2.6 MS 14

Unavailability of labor during production and harvesting. 2.3 SS 15

Unavailability of good quality planting materials 2.2 SS 16

Lack of training and seminars on Pest and Disease 3.2 MS 12

Management

Lack of training and seminars on production 3.6 S 9

 37

Poor Farm to Market Road 4.7 VS 2

Lack of buyers 3 MS 13

Very low market price 4.3 VS 4

Unavailability of farm machineries in the locality 3.7 S 8

Lack of government support 3.3 MS 11

GWM 3.6 S

*Legend: VS-Very Serious; S-Serious; MS-Moderately Serious; SS-Slightly serious

E. Relationship between Problems Encountered and Average Yield and Change

in Yield Before and During the Pandemic COVID 19

Kendall's Tau_b correlation analysis was performed to determine the relationship

of the problems encountered by farmers to the average yield and change in yield. Table 6

presented the result.

During the pandemic COVID 19, the corn producers in Paracelis, Mt. Province

were affected as they were confronted by various problems. Of all the problems they

encountered, the unavailability of good quality planting materials, lack of trainings and

seminars on production, and the delay on transport were found to be influential on the

productivity level of the farmers.

Specifically, the relationship between the average yield (5-year baseline data) and

the lack of trainings and seminars on production was revealed having negative but very

weak relationship (τb = -.273, n=99, p=0.038). This implies that the more frequent the

trainings and seminars are, the yield is likely to decrease. As the pandemic limiting the

people to engage in activities daily, the farmers were given more time to manage or take
 38

care of their crop. Applying the principle of tender loving care is essential to be able to

increase the yield. Furthermore, with the personal experience of farmers have been

helping them to become expert on corn farming. They have overcome so many

challenges in the past, this pandemic which caused decline on their economic condition

may have forced the m to become creative on corn production to be able to yield high

even without provision of trainings and seminars during the pandemic COVID-19.

On the other hand, the relationship between the change in yield and unavailability

of good quality planting materials and delay on transportation were found to be

significantly affecting the production of corn in the locality.

Specifically, the unavailability of good quality planting materials have negative

but very weak relationship (τb = -.249, n=99, p=0.047) with the change in yield. This

suggests that unavailability of good quality planting materials tend to increase the change

in yield. This could be attributed to farmer's high level of adoption to new seeds available

in the market such as the one being called, "labos" or unbranded hybrid seed.

The delay on transportation has positive but very weak relationship (τb = .289,

n=99, p=0.019) with the change in yield, suggesting therefore that the more delays, the

more the change in yield is. This is due to the fact that when inputs such as fertilizers and

pest controls are delayed, the yield will decrease as it had delayed application of

important inputs needed in the growth and development of the crop.

Table 6.Relationship of Problems Encountered on the Average Yield and Change in

Yield before and during the Pandemic COVID-19

Kendall's     Average Change in Yield

tau_b Yield (FY (Between FY

 39

2018-2022) 2018-2019 and

FY 2021-2022)

Unavailability of good Correlation -0.134 -.249*

quality planting materials Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.271 0.047

N 41 39

Lack of trainings and Correlation -.273* -0.146

seminars on production Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.038 0.28

N 41 39

Delay transportation Correlation 0.08 .289*

Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.504 0.019

N 41 39

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

F. Test of Relationship between Demographic Profile and Change in Average

Yield

The Table 7 reflects the results of the non-parametric (Kendall’s tau b) tests

conducted to determine the relationship between the demographic profile of the

respondents and the change in the average yield. Tests for normality of data

(Kolmogorov-Smirnov), along with other assumptions required for parametric test of

correlation are reflected in Appendix 1.

 40

The socio-demographic profile of the respondents such as educational attainment,

household size, household income, age, and years in corn farming, sex, and civil status

were tested pairwise with the change in average yield.

The result reveals that of all the seven (7) variables tested at α=0.05, only the

educational attainment has a significant (τb = -0.183, n=99, p=0.016), but very weak and

negative relationship with the change in average yield (i.e., yield difference post and pre-

pandemic). This implies that the respondents with higher educational attainment tend to

have a lower change in average yield. Conversely, those with lower educational

attainment is likely to have higher change in average yield.

Table 7. Test of Relationship between Socio-demographic Profile and Change in Average

Yield
Average
Educ. HH Yrs of Civil
household Age Sex
attainment size experience Status
income

Correlation
-.183* 0.012 -0.143 -0.022 -0.010 -
Coefficient -

Sig. (2-
0.016 0.874 0.067 0.769 0.901 -
tailed) -

N 99 99 99 99 99 - -

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

G. Factors Affecting Corn Production in Paracelis, Mt. Province

Presented in Table 8 the model summary of the multiple regression analysis

conducted to determine the factors affecting production in the area. It can be noted that

the adjusted coefficient of determination value is 0.715 which indicates that 71.5% of the
 41

variations in the model can be explained by the independent or predictor variables and the

remaining 28.5% is not accounted for by the regression model. Also, the Durbin-Watson

value (1.5< d=1.670 <2.5) indicates that there is no first order autocorrelation in the

multiple regression model.

Table 8. Multiple Regression Model Summary

Model Summaryb

Adjusted R Std. Error of the Durbin-

Model R R Square Square Estimate Watson

1 .871a .758 .715 609.62517 1.670

a. Predictors: (Constant), quantity of pesticides, educational background, average

household income, land topography, volume of seeds, years in farming, source of
labor, age, tenurial status, sex, civil status, quantity of herbicide, household size,
quantity of fertilizer, land area (ha)
b. Dependent Variable: Yield (2022)

H. Test of Significance of the Regression Model

Table 9 presents the ANOVA table indicating whether the overall regression

model is a good fit for the data. The table specifies the statistical significance of the

regression model, F (15, 83) = 17.361, p < 0.05) which indicates that, overall, the model

is a good fit for the data. This means that the regression model statistically and

significantly predicts the outcome variable, corn yield.

Table 9. Test of Significance of the Regression Model

ANOVAa

Si

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F g.

 42

1 Regression 96780461.878 15 6452030.792 17.361 .0

00
b

Residual 30846356.303 83 371642.847

Total 127626818.182 98

a. Dependent Variable: Yield (2022)

b. Predictors: (Constant), quantity of pesticides, educational background, average
household income, Land_topography Volume of seeds, years in farming, Source of
labor, age, tenurial status, sex, civil status, quantity of herbicides, household size,
quantity of fertilizer, land area

I. Parameter Estimates of the Multiple Regression Model

In Table 10, the parameter estimates of the multiple regression conducted to

predict corn yield from the demographic and farm profile of the respondents are

presented. It is revealed that of all the predictor variables entered to the model, the land

area is the only factor identified to be a significant predictor of corn yield, t(83)= 0.614,

p<0.05. This implies that for every 1-hectare increase in the land area, corn yield is

expected to increase by 0.614 kg.

Also reflected in the table are the estimates for the variation inflation factor (VIF),

a measure of the amount of multicollinearity among the multiple regression variables. All

VIF values indicates no violation of multicollinearity, thus such assumption for multiple

regression analysis is maintained in the model.

Table 10. Parameter Estimates of the Multiple Regression Model

Coefficientsa
 43

Standardized

Model Coefficients t Sig. Collinearity Statistics

Beta Tolerance VIF

1 (Constant) .968 .336

Age -.021 -.373 .710 .860 1.163

Sex .105 1.796 .076 .837 1.194

Household size .023 .363 .717 .699 1.430

Civil Status -.043 -.761 .449 .895 1.118

Educational -.042 -.718 .475 .827 1.209

Background

Years in Farming -.021 -.370 .712 .851 1.175

Household Income .011 .200 .842 .893 1.120

Tenurial Status .039 .671 .504 .849 1.177

Land Topography -.082 -1.443 .153 .890 1.124

Source of labor -.070 -1.231 .222 .875 1.143

Land area .614 4.751 .000 .171 5.851

Type of seeds .282 2.219 .029 .177 5.643

Quantity of seeds -.043 -.712 .479 .768 1.302

a. Dependent Variable: FP_Yield_2022

 44

V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A. Summary

The study focused on investigating or assessing the short-term effect of the

Pandemic COVID-19 in corn production of Paracelis, Mountain Province. This was

conducted on April 27, 2022.

Ninety-nine (99) respondents were interviewed after agreeing to participate and

provide personal information about their socio-demographic profile, farm profile, level of

effect the pandemic COVID-19 in the management or utilization of farm inputs,

problems encountered under COVID-19 Pandemic, cost of production and market price.

The range of the age of respondent is from 25 to 59. Majority belong to age

bracket 40-44. Their mean age is 38, dominated by male (77.77%) as female only have

(22.22%). Most of them are married with mean household size of 7 and a mean monthly

income averaging at Php12451.08 before the occurrence of pandemic COVID-19 and

averaging 11233.93 during the pandemic which implies that the farmers are experiencing

economic or financial difficulties at this time of pandemic. The level of formal education

of farmers is from primary to masteral. However, most of the farmers fall under

secondary level of education and did not graduate. In terms of farming experience, they

have a mean years 16.32 years.

 45

The farm profile, indicates that majority of the farmers are the owner (tenurial

status) of a farm which is mostly sloping (farm topography). Family members of the

farmers is the most common source of labor. The purpose of farmers in producing corn is

to meet their need for their own consumption (subsistence) and to generate income (cash

income). All farmers are planting hybrid yellow corn (type and variety of seeds planted)

inorganically (production management practice) with mean seed volume of 10.95 kgs,

dependent of rain as source of irrigation.

In farm management, the farmers strongly agree to shift from certified inbred to

hybrid or continue planting hybrid seeds and employ direct seeding. They are generally

undecided whether to use inorganic fertilizers or not. Likewise, they are undecided

whether to shift from inorganic to organic fertilizer. They disagree to lessen application

of fertilizer or to stop applying at all.. For pest and disease control, the farmers agreed to

combine chemical, physical, and cultural method. As they actually experienced the

effectiveness of chemical control, they agreed to continue using chemicals and undecided

to lessen the quantity of application. They disagreed to stop applying chemicals at all.

The problems identified by the farmers are economic, environmental, political,

and technical/operational related. The very serious problems are the highly-priced inputs

(WM=5), delay tranportation (WM=4.7), lack of capital (WM=4.5), very low market

price (WM=4.3), low quality of harvests (WM=4.2), weather condition (WM=4.2). The

serious problems identified are the high occurrence pests and diseases (WM=3.9), rapid

growth of wild weeds (WM=3.8), unavailability of farm machineries in the locality

(WM=3.7), high losses during harvesting (WM=3.6), soil nutrient deficiency (WM=3.6),

lack of water supply (WM=3.4), and lack of trainings and seminars on production
 46

(WM=3.6). The moderately serious problems are the lack of government support

(WM=3.3) and lack of training and seminars on Pest and Disease Management

(WM=3.2), lack of buyers (WM=3.0) and high level of damaged grains during post-

harvest (WM=2.6). The slightly serious problems are the unavailability of labor during

production and harvesting (WM=2.3) and unavailability of good quality seeds for

planting (WM=2.2).

In correlational analysis, the educational attainment was found to have a

significant (τb = -0.183, n=99, p=0.016), but very weak and negative relationship with

the change in average yield (i.e., yield difference post and pre-pandemic), implying that

that the respondents with higher educational attainment tend to have a lower change in

average yield. Conversely, those with lower educational attainment is likely to have

higher change in average yield.

The factors affecting the production of corn farmers in the locality of Paracelis,

Mt. Province was determined by employing multiple regression analysis using variables

from socio-demographic (age, sex, civil status, household size, household income before

and during the pandemic COVID-19, educational background, and number of years in

farming) and farm profile (tenurial status, land topography, source of labor, land area,

volume of seeds, type of seeds, and yield. It is revealed that the land area is the only

factor identified to be a significant predictor of corn yield, t(83)= 0.614, p<0.05. This

implies that for every 1-hectare increase in the land area, corn yield is expected to

increase by 0.614 kg.

B. Conclusion
 47

The study assessed the effect of COVID-19 pandemic corn producing

communities. The emphasis on the findings will focus on aspects that shows effect or

influence of the pandemic COVID-19 to the farmers or production. Economically, the

farmers experienced difficulties as their income level displayed about 10% decrease since

the pandemic occurred. In terms of farm management particularly on the selection of

seeds, planting, fertilization, irrigation and pest and disease control, the farmers are

generally undecided which means unstable and less control on their actual operation. The

farmers are being confronted by challenges which arise from various aspect, from

economic, environmental, social, political, and technical/operational.

Land area was identified as a significant predictor of corn yield, t(83)= 0.614,

p<0.05, implying that for every 1-hectare increase in the land area, corn yield is expected

to increase by 0.614 kg.

C. Recommendation

Considering the findings of the study, the following recommendations were made

to address the issues or problems on corn production and improve the corn industry in the

locality:

1. A holistic support program for corn farmers should be crafted. This must include the

following;

a) Production support such as provision of machineries, distribution of high

yielding seeds, and other farm inputs;

b) Infrastructure such as establishment of farm to market roads and solar dryer,

irrigation facilities;

c) Financial support which includes grants, loan programs that has zero interest;
 48

d) Establishment of market linkage, promotion of corn; and

e) Agricultural extension services (AES) to provide trainings on various

technologies relevant to different areas as the following:

i. Production

ii. Pest control

iii. Marketing

iv. Financial literacy

v. Value-adding and enterprise development

vi. Climate change

2. Conduct of value chain analysis of corn industry and Development of roadmap of corn

industry.
 49

LITERATURE CITED

Adhikari J., Timsina J., Khadka S.R., Ghale Y., Ojha H. COVID-19 impacts on
agriculture and food systems in Nepal: Implications for SDGs. Agricultural
Systems.

Agricultural Economist, CIMMYT- Philippines Office, IRRL, Los Banos, Laguna,

Philippines

BAS. 2005a. Crops Statistics of the Philippines, 1990-2004. Bureau of

Agricultural Statistics, Department of Agriculture, Philippines.

Chad E, Hart, Dermot J. Hayes, Keri L. Jacobs, Lee L. Schulz, John M. Crespi

Excerpts from Crops Statistics of the Philippines 2012-2016, ISSN-2012-0487

Farming Systems Agronomist, ASC, CA, University of the Philippines

Food production, Treatment, Diagnosis 2022 Manila Bulletin Nations Leading

Newspaper

Gerpacio R..,J. D. Labios R. V. Labios, and E. I. Diangkinay, 2004, Miaze in the

Philippines; Production Systems, Constraints, and Research Priorities,
Mexico, D, F,.CIMMYT

https://www.upi.com/top_News/US/2020/01/06/Young_Dolph-
suspect/3411641451754

https://www.ststistica/751372/philippines-corn-production

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095311920633664
 50

https://psa.gov.ph/content/crops-statistics-philippines-national-and-regional

H P Jiang, D Q Yang, C R GUO

Impact of COVID-19 on China's agricultural development and countermeasures

John Shutske, Extension Specialist, Biological Systems Engineering and Director of

the UW Center for Agricultural Safety and Health, University of
Wisconsin-Madison

Mark Stephenson, Director of Dairy Policy Analysis and Director of the Center for
Dairy Profitability, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences and Division
of Extension, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Mountain Province Agricultural Statistics Performance: Palay and Corn, First Quarter,
2020-2021Statista Research Department, Oct 1, 2021

Nestor C. Altoveros and Teresita H.Borromeo THE STATE OF THE PLANT

GENETIC RESOURCES FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURE OF THE
PHILIPPINES (1997 - 2006) A COUNTRY REPORT Department of
Agriculture Bureau of Plant Industry

Philippine Statistics Authority, Palay and Corn Production Survey (PCPS)

Reform, 3 (2020), pp. 5-13

Saint Mary’s College Of California/BIOL/BIOL119/RRL ON CORN.docx-corn

SARS-CoV-2, Pandemic, COVID-19, Animal healthcare, Human healthcare,

2021;186:102990. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102990. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

 51

VI. APPENDICES

Appendix 1. Research Instruments

Appendix 2. SPSS Outputs for Tests of Normality (Demographic Characteristics)

Tests of Normality
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic Df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Age .179 99 .000 .918 99 .000
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Tests of Normality

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
educ_bground .285 99 .000 .841 99 .000
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
Tests of Normality
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic Df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
hh_size .267 99 .000 .855 99 .000
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Tests of Normality
 52

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
yrs_farming .345 99 .000 .797 99 .000
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Tests of Normality
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
HH_income_ave .262 99 .000 .840 99 .000
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Tests of Normality
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Chage_Ave_Yield .140 99 .000 .949 99 .001
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Appendices 3. SPSS Output Correlations between socio-demographic and change in

average yield

NONPAR CORR
/VARIABLES=Chage_Ave_Yield educ_bground hh_size HH_income_ave age
yrs_farming
/PRINT=KENDALL TWOTAIL NOSIG
/MISSING=PAIRWISE.

Correlations
Chage_Ave educ_bgr hh_s HH_incom yrs_far
_Yield ound ize e_ave age ming
Kend Chage_ Correlatio 1.000 -.183 .012
*
-.143 -.0 -.010
all's Ave_Yie n 22
tau_b ld Coefficien
t
Sig. (2- . .016 .874 .067 .76 .901
tailed) 9
N 99 99 99 99 99 99
 53

educ_bgr Correlatio -.183* 1.000 .186* .043 -.1 -.089

ound n 41
Coefficien
t
Sig. (2- .016 . .030 .613 .08 .313
tailed) 9
N 99 99 99 99 99 99
hh_size Correlatio .012 .186* 1.00 .172 .12 .190*
n 0 8
Coefficien
t
Sig. (2- .874 .030 . .050 .13 .035
tailed) 1
N 99 99 99 99 99 99
HH_inco Correlatio -.143 .043 .172 1.000 .08 -.060
me_ave n 2
Coefficien
t
Sig. (2- .067 .613 .050 . .33 .502
tailed) 3
N 99 99 99 99 99 99
age Correlatio -.022 -.141 .128 .082 1.0 .108
n 00
Coefficien
t
Sig. (2- .769 .089 .131 .333 . .213
tailed)
N 99 99 99 99 99 99
yrs_farm Correlatio -.010 -.089 .190* -.060 .10 1.000
ing n 8
Coefficien
t
Sig. (2- .901 .313 .035 .502 .21 .
tailed) 3
N 99 99 99 99 99 99
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

CORRELATIONS
 54

/VARIABLES=Chage_Ave_Yield sex
/PRINT=TWOTAIL NOSIG
/MISSING=PAIRWISE.

Correlations

Chage_Ave_Yield sex
Chage_Ave_Yield Point Biserial Correlation 1 .132
Sig. (2-tailed) .194
N 99 99
Sex Point Biserial Correlation .132 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .194
N 99 99

CORRELATIONS
/VARIABLES=Chage_Ave_Yield civil_stat
/PRINT=TWOTAIL NOSIG
/MISSING=PAIRWISE.

Correlations
Chage in Average
Yield civil_stat
Chage_Ave_Yield Point Biserial Correlation 1 -.087
Sig. (2-tailed) .391
N 99 99
civil_stat Point Biserial Correlation -.087 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .391
N 99 99

GET
FILE='C:\Users\jays\Downloads\Stat A_students\Maguiting\Maguiting_correlation.sav'.
DATASET NAME DataSet1 WINDOW=FRONT.
REGRESSION
/MISSING LISTWISE
/STATISTICS COEFF OUTS R ANOVA COLLIN TOL
/CRITERIA=PIN(.05) POUT(.10)
/NOORIGIN
/DEPENDENT FP_Yield_2022
 55

/METHOD=ENTER age sex hh_size civil_stat educ_bground yrs_farming

HH_income_ave FP_tenurial_stat
FP_Land_topog FP_Source_labor FP_Puropose_prod FP_Land_area FP_Vol_seeds
FI_QTY_seeds.

Appendix 4. Multiple Regression Analysis on Socio-demographic profile, farm

profile, and production

Notes
Output Created 18-JUN-2022 10:19:08
Comments

Input Data C:\Users\jays\Downloads\Stat A_students\

Maguiting\Maguiting_correlation.sav
Active Dataset DataSet1

Filter <none>

Weight <none>

Split File <none>

N of Rows in Working 99
Data File
Missing Definition of Missing User-defined missing values are treated as
Value missing.
Handling Cases Used Statistics are based on cases with no missing
values for any variable used.
 56

Syntax REGRESSION
/MISSING LISTWISE
/STATISTICS COEFF OUTS R ANOVA
COLLIN TOL
/CRITERIA=PIN(.05) POUT(.10)
/NOORIGIN
/DEPENDENT FP_Yield_2022
/METHOD=ENTER age sex hh_size civil_stat
educ_bground yrs_farming HH_income_ave
FP_tenurial_stat
FP_Land_topog FP_Source_labor
FP_Puropose_prod FP_Land_area FP_Vol_seeds
FI_QTY_seeds.
Resources Processor Time 00:00:00.02
Elapsed Time 00:00:01.45
Memory Required 14192 bytes
Additional Memory 0 bytes
Required for Residual
Plots

[DataSet1] C:\Users\jays\Downloads\Stat A_students\Maguiting\

Maguiting_correlation.sav

Warnings
For models with dependent variable FP_Yield_2022, the following variables are
constants or have missing correlations: FP_Puropose_prod. They will be deleted from
the analysis.

Variables Entered/Removeda
Model Variables Entered Variables Removed Method
 57

1 FI_QTY_seeds, . Enter
educ_bground,
FP_Land_topog,
HH_income_ave,
civil_stat,
FP_Source_labor,
yrs_farming,
FP_tenurial_stat, age, sex,
FP_Vol_seeds, hh_size,
FP_Land_areab
a. Dependent Variable: FP_Yield_2022
b. All requested variables entered.

Model Summary
Std. Error of the
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Estimate
1 .870 a
.757 .720 603.53468
a. Predictors: (Constant), FI_QTY_seeds, educ_bground, FP_Land_topog,
HH_income_ave, civil_stat, FP_Source_labor, yrs_farming, FP_tenurial_stat, age, sex,
FP_Vol_seeds, hh_size, FP_Land_area

ANOVAa
S
i
g
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F .
1 Regression 96665218.451 13 7435786.035 20.414 .
0
0
0
b

Residual 30961599.731 85 364254.114

Total 127626818.182 98
a. Dependent Variable: FP_Yield_2022
b. Predictors: (Constant), FI_QTY_seeds, educ_bground, FP_Land_topog,
HH_income_ave, civil_stat, FP_Source_labor, yrs_farming, FP_tenurial_stat, age,
sex, FP_Vol_seeds, hh_size, FP_Land_area
 58

Coefficientsa
Standardiz
ed Collinear
Unstandardized Coefficient ity
Coefficients s Statistics
V
Toleran I
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig. ce F
1 (Constant) 1021.897 1055.798 .968 .336
age -17.470 46.834 -.021 -.373 .710 .860 1
.
1
6
3
sex 286.424 159.458 .105 1.796 .076 .837 1
.
1
9
4
hh_size 30.074 82.752 .023 .363 .717 .699 1
.
4
3
0
civil_stat -190.393 250.188 -.043 -.761 .449 .895 1
.
1
1
8
educ_bground -31.376 43.711 -.042 -.718 .475 .827 1
.
2
0
9
 59

yrs_farming -35.076 94.783 -.021 -.370 .712 .851 1

.
1
7
5
HH_income_ 27.342 136.709 .011 .200 .842 .893 1
ave .
1
2
0
FP_tenurial_s 150.661 224.546 .039 .671 .504 .849 1
tat .
1
7
7
FP_Land_top -148.469 102.870 -.082 -1.443 .153 .890 1
og .
1
2
4
FP_Source_la -83.506 67.811 -.070 -1.231 .222 .875 1
bor .
1
4
3
FP_Land_are 1875.870 394.828 .614 4.751 .000 .171 5
a .
8
5
1
FP_Vol_seed 104.113 46.915 .282 2.219 .029 .177 5
s .
6
4
3
 60

FI_QTY_seed -142.776 200.636 -.043 -.712 .479 .768 1

s .
3
0
2
a. Dependent Variable: FP_Yield_2022

Collinearity Diagnosticsa
Co Variance Proportions
nd h
M Ei iti h
o Di ge on (C _ ci edu yrs HH_ FP_t FP_ FP_S FP_ FP_ FI_
d me nv In on as si vil c_b _fa inco enuri Land ource Lan Vol QT
e nsi alu de sta ge z _s gro rmi me_a al_st _top _labo d_ar _see Y_s
l on e x nt) ex e tat und ng ve at og r ea ds eeds
1 1 13. 1. .00 . . .0 .0 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00
00 00 00 0 0
8 0 00
2 .19 8. .00 . . .0 .0 .05 .00 .00 .00 .32 .14 .00 .00 .00
7 13 00 2 0
0 07
3 .17 8. .00 . . .0 .0 .46 .00 .00 .00 .00 .22 .00 .00 .00
7 57 00 0 0
2 10
4 .15 9. .00 . . .0 .0 .08 .00 .00 .03 .04 .09 .03 .02 .05
6 11 00 1 0
8 00
5 .10 11 .00 . . .0 .0 .00 .00 .00 .02 .33 .02 .01 .00 .03
0 .3 04 1 0
98 19
6 .08 12 .00 . . .0 .0 .02 .01 .00 .25 .28 .27 .00 .00 .05
2 .5 00 9 0
61 22
7 .07 13 .00 . . .3 .0 .08 .02 .00 .01 .01 .16 .01 .00 .00
7 .0 10 5 0
22 68
 61

8 .06 14 .00 . . .0 .0 .00 .01 .00 .13 .00 .02 .03 .02 .59
6 .0 00 0 1
74 20
9 .05 15 .00 . . .3 .0 .07 .01 .00 .18 .00 .01 .00 .00 .00
1 .9 50 1 0
29 93
10 .03 19 .01 . . .0 .1 .06 .15 .02 .17 .01 .05 .00 .01 .24
6 .1 11 3 0
22 18
11 .02 21 .00 . . .0 .1 .08 .67 .03 .01 .00 .01 .01 .00 .00
7 .9 00 8 0
98 06
12 .01 32 .01 . . .0 .4 .00 .00 .43 .05 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00
2 .4 00 3 7
94 61
13 .00 38 .01 . . .0 .0 .01 .00 .02 .00 .00 .01 .74 .78 .02
9 .7 00 5 6
73 10
14 .00 71 .97 . . .0 .2 .08 .13 .50 .13 .00 .00 .17 .17 .01
3 .6 00 1 5
95 17
a. Dependent Variable: FP_Yield_2022

Appendix 5. Plates

Documentation during the Conduct Of Data Gathering

62
63
 64

CURRICULUM VITAE
PERSONAL DATA
Name :AISA P. MAGUITLING
Birthday :June 17, 1999
Birthplace :Anonat, Paracelis, Mountain Province;
 65

Address :Anonat, Paracelis, Mountain Province

Civil status :Single
Gender :Female
Citizenship :Filipino
Parents
Father`s Name :Aladin D. Maguitling
Mother`s Name :Teresita P. Maguitling

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
Elementary : Anonat Elementary School
:Anonat, Paracelis, Mountain Province
2007-2012
Secondary(Junior) :Anonat National Agricultural and
Vocational High School
:Mulliang, Anonat, Paracelis, Mountain,
Province
2012-2016
Secondary(Senior) :Roxas National High School
:Roxas, Isabela
2016-2018
Tertiary : Isabela State University
:Roxas, Isabela
Course :Bachelor of Science in Agribusiness