Last week, I wrote about Republic Act (RA) 12215, also known as the Philippine Agriculturists Act, which, in very simple terms, requires anyone engaged in agriculture to be a licensed agriculturist, and what that could mean for the industry. I also interviewed Samantha Geraldine De los Santos, assistant professor at the Institute for Governance and Rural Development at the University of the Philippines, Los Baños, and Muneer Hinay, founder of Zamboanga-based non-government organization Kids Who Farm (KWF), last year for their initial thoughts on the matter.

We discussed what most people understood the law to mean and how it can both help and hinder our agricultural industry. “...you cannot box [agriculture] into a particular set of policies. It has to be understood on a broader scale because when you talk of agriculture, it’s really the science of human survival,” Hinay said in Taglish. “We promote growing your own food, but we also recognize that (the industry) should be professionalized, and that’s where some issues really came up.”

There is a worry that a blanket implementation of the law without proper examination and consideration of the nuances involved in actual on-ground practice might risk discouraging people—especially those from other disciplines or those who may not have had agriculture as a first choice in life—from entering or staying in an industry already experiencing an exodus, as well as collaboration across disciplines.

It also risks emphasizing the “industry” part of agriculture at the expense of its equally important social and collaborative aspects, which a lot of people don’t realize is key to understanding . “It’s not just about the technology or the expertise, it’s also about recognizing that there are communities who will be affected,” De los Santos said.

Folks have also pointed out a bias against non-conventional agricultural practices such as organic and indigenous farming techniques, as these are either traditional practices or do not have an equivalent board certification.

Affected parties have been given three years to comply with the license requirement, a time span that many argue is not enough. “Hopefully, they will reconsider the three year timeline. Maybe they can extend it to five years or perhaps they would also look at what if they would just apply this for those who would graduate from the agriculture courses starting this year,” De los Santos said. “I know a lot of our graduates who, while they took courses like computer science or biology, when they realize… our agriculture still has a promising future… they’re now prevented from doing farming because what if later on, our government will look for a license to operate from them? Why are you operating a farm, you’re not even a licensed agriculturist, right?”

There is no need for these scenarios to play out. While the law has already been passed, the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) are still being crafted, and this is where inclusion can happen. “I hope that if there will be implementing rules and regulations or amendments, they would provide opportunities for people to join the agriculture sector because the agriculture sector, for me, is not just for those who finished a BS Agriculture course. Agriculture is for everyone. We benefit from it. We get food [and other products] from it,” De los Santos said. “So I hope that the law, instead of closing it off to other people, encourages and engages the citizens to protect our local agriculture sector and support it.”

Hinay echoes this sentiment. “Agriculture isn’t limited to those with a degree. What will happen to our greater advocacy to make everyone participate in agriculture and the food system? Will it discourage others? [What about] farmers who are experts in practical applications? Our organic farmers aren’t agriculturists, but they are dedicated to their craft of promoting healthy, nature-friendly farming practices. Will they be excluded? Or even us, where we have young people teaching one another, what will happen to them? These are apprehensions, but they cannot be answered unless there’s an IRR… That’s when we’ll know if there’s a direct impact on our initial thoughts and if our questions are answered.”

It’s sadly common knowledge that the average age of the Filipino farmer is in their 50s, with farmers discouraging their children from following their footsteps because of the industry’s association with poverty. Despite this, there have been a small but growing number of young people who have found their way into farming through unconventional channels such as microbiology and robotics, young people who, depending on how the law is implemented, may be discouraged from engaging in agriculture. “It’s such a shame because there are young ones who are now being more interested in agriculture, finding solutions, then all of a sudden, you’re going to prevent them because they have to take the six foundational subjects that they don’t have because they come from a different course,” De los Santos said. “So I hope we find a way to encourage the young ones because if this law is going to prevent the young people from joining the agriculture sector, then I don’t think our agriculture sector will be able to revitalize itself in the next 5-10 years.”

This is why the IRR is important. While RA 12215 may be a good step towards uplifting our agriculture sector, we must also ensure that it does not exclude the marginalized, nor does it discourage folks from other sectors from joining or contributing to the industry.

As Hinay said, “When it comes to crafting and implementation of the IRR, just like any other law that can benefit us, we still need to be vigilant, we should voice out our concerns regarding this, and continuously support our agri sector in whatever ways we can.”