CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Rationale of the Study

It is in the agricultural sector that the basic problems of the Filipinos are rooted. Farmers’ unrest over land ownership and low productivity have gone hand in hand through the decades. Peasants have been in the forefront of the Filipinos’ struggle to own their lands. This is because approximately one-third of the Philippine land area of 30 million hectares is agricultural, and ownership and/or control over them has been largely monopolized by the landed class (Borras, 2006). January 2007 figures show that while agriculture accounts for 36.7 percent of the country’s work force, this sector contributed a measly 8.2 percent to the economy (http://www.bulatlat.com, 2007).
The land ownership disputes in the country have persisted for centuries. In fact, some sectors would assert that it has worsened because of different decrees created by the executive government, supported by the laws passed in congress; unfair division of production; higher taxes; low wages for the farm workers in the haciendas and farm corporations; high rental for farm machineries; and high price of fertilizers and pesticides (Kalagayan ng Magbubukid sa Laguna primer, Nd). 
The province of Laguna is rife with such struggles. Land reform laws are being circumvented to preserve land ownership and marginalize the peasants. For instance, 43,598 hectares of prime agricultural lands in Southern Tagalog covering the provinces of Cavite, Laguna, Batangas, Rizal, and Quezon have been and still are being converted into export-oriented and import-dependent industrial and commercial zones (Mariano, 2004).
Where there are social conflicts, national democratic organizations tend to come into being. They multiply because of the need of the farmers and other basic sectors to fight for their rights, for social justice, and for change (http://www.bulatlat.com/about.htm, 2008).
In Laguna, two such organizations of peasants are at the forefront of fighting for farmers’ rights – the Pagkakaisa at Ugnayan ng mga Magsasaka sa Laguna (PUMALAG) and the Mamamayang Nagmamalasakit sa Kalikasan at Kaligtasan ng Buhay (MNKKB). These organizations “assert the people’s right to know and the right of expression. To fight for freedom, they believe that such assertion of rights must be advanced by information, ideas and theories that shall liberate one’s mind from neocolonial demagoguery that glorifies globalization as well as from conservatism that venerates elitist rule” (http://www.bulatlat.com/about.htm, 2008).
If one looks at the goals of these farmers’ groups, it is very much in keeping with the developmental, participatory, and empowering role of development communication. Just like development communicators, these social organizations also use the principles of communication to bring about developmental changes and empowerment in the communities.
As Quebral (2008) defined it, development communication is “the art and science of human communication linked to a society's planned transformation from a state of poverty to one of dynamic socio-economic growth that makes for greater equity and the larger unfolding of individual potential.” 
Hence, it is interesting to find out how national democratic organizations like these farmers’ groups conceptualize and use the process of communication to bring about participation and empowerment in peasant communities. 

Statement of the Problem

The Alyansa ng mga Magbubukid sa Ikalawang Distrito ng Laguna (ALMAPILA-Farmers Alliance in the Second District of Laguna) was created in 1987 in response to the great clamor of the farmers in the province to address their land and agricultural production issues after the “Mendiola Massacre” on January 2, 1987. Majority of the victims came from the province (personal correspondence, September 2008) 
Two years after the incident, with the worsening agrarian situation, the leaders of ALMAPILA reorganized themselves to encourage more farmers to join in their struggle. Another organization was formed to connect the farmers from the first district of Laguna – the PUMA or the Pamprobinsyang Ugnayan ng mga Magsasaka sa Laguna. PUMA was also a response to the then government’s counter-insurgency program HABOL-TAMARAW.
Because of the overwhelming call to unite all farmers in the province, the first congress of peasants for the whole of Laguna was held in 1998. This brought to life the Pagkakaisa at Ugnayan ng mga Magsasaka sa Laguna (PUMALAG). Since then, PUMALAG has been in the forefront of the peasant struggle in the province.
Meanwhile, Sierra Madre Water Corporation, a private corporation, conducted a feasibility study in 1995 in preparation for a dam project to be built in the town of Pangil, Laguna. The municipal council of Pangil approved the proposal, which was supported by the town mayor. This angered the residents of the town, and they undertook subsequent actions to oppose the project.
As a result of the community organizing activities of some concerned barangay (village) leaders, the Mamamayang Nagmamalasakit sa Kalikasan at Kaligtasan ng Buhay (MNKKB) was established to create alliances with other sectors within the town of Pangil.
This study explored the communication strategies adopted by PUMALAG and MNKKB to organize the communities to achieve their ‘development goals.’ 
How different or similar are these approaches from the principles of development communication? How different are their conceptions of the goals of development in the communities? 
Can these messages possibly be only propaganda which has been described as an “attempt to influence the opinion – especially social opinion – and conducted in such a manner that the persons who adopt the opinions and behavior indicated do so without themselves making any definite search?” (Rao, 1971). Or are these more persuasive in nature?



Objectives of the Study

General Objective
This study aimed to document and describe the communication strategies used by two farmers’ organizations in organizing the rural communities of farmers in the Fourth District of Laguna to critically respond to two development projects in the province.
 
Specific Objectives:
1.    To determine the effects of two government projects – the Napindan Hydraulic Control Structure and the Pangil River Dam projects – on farmers in the Fourth District of Laguna;  
2.    To discuss the communication strategies adopted by PUMALAG and MNKKB in organizing the community to critically respond to the two development projects; and
3.    To describe the effects of these communication strategies on the communities’ responses to the two development projects.




Significance of the Study

The study aims to look at conditions of the peasants in the Fourth District of Laguna, outlining the agricultural problems in general, and focusing mainly on the effects of two projects – one by a government agency and another by a private corporation. Hence, it attempts to benefit the farmers and fisher folks by giving them a voice in the study.
This study also tackles the communication strategies used in community organizing and social mobilization by two national democratic organizations or farmers’ groups, not government agencies or the academe. Hence, these may not be in the mainstream development efforts. Nevertheless, it can highlight which elements of communication would best work for ‘politically activating’ peasant communities.  
Thus, the findings of this study may provide community organizers with principles that they may find relevant in developing their capabilities for communicating about change and struggles for ‘development’. The findings may also contribute to the theory and praxis of development communication among peasant groups. After all, studying social communication is not just about analyzing the concepts of communication; it is more of analyzing the social aspects of society which affect people’s manner of communicating with each other.  




Limitations of the Study

Agricultural issues should ideally be studied in a broader context to understand the deeper social aspects that affect the lives of farmers, but this study mainly focused on the communication factors that organize rural communities. It must be understood, however, that community organizing can never be detached from the socio-economic-political and even cultural aspects of the community within which it occurs. 
Because of time and financial constraints, the study also limited its scope to data from two cases in the Fourth District of Laguna. The country, however, is rich with many other stories of farmers’ organizations and struggles for emancipation.