“MAP Insights” Column in BUSINESSWORLD - 14 July 2009
A DUAL TRAINING SYSTEM APPROACH FOR
AGRICULTURE ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Dr. Jose Rene C. Gayo
Last June, we welcomed the first batch of college students in a program that will train them to become
agriculture entrepreneurs at the MFI Farm Business School in Jalajala, Rizal. This program is in partnership with
the University of Rizal System and the Management Association of the Philippines.
One hundred years ago, the first batch of college students in a program that will train them to become
agriculture scientists were also welcomed in the campus of the University of the Philippines.
History of Agriculture Education in the Philippines
Formal agricultural education was introduced in the Philippines towards the first half of the 19th century.
In 1821, the Spanish colonial government established the first farm school in the country in an attempt to promote
agricultural development. In 1889, the Manila Agricultural School was established primarily to train skilled
farmers and farm overseers, and to undertake studies concerning Philippine agriculture. In 1885 and 1889, the
Ateneo Municipal and the University of Santo Tomas also began offering agricultural courses, respectively.
During the American colonial rule, a greater push was made for agricultural education throughout the
country. Settlement farm schools, which later became provincial agricultural or rural high schools were
established throughout the country. In 1907, the Americans established the Central Luzon Agricultural School
(now the Central Luzon State University) offering secondary agricultural education. In 1909, the University of the
Philippines offered the first higher (college) agricultural education --- a bachelor's degree in agriculture
Thus, we see that agricultural education in the Philippines has a long history --- 188 years to be exact. It is
no wonder why the Philippines became known, and it still is, the premier agricultural education and research
center in Asia. Thanks to institutions like UPLB, IRRI, SEARCA, and SEAFDEC, we continue to host
international students and researchers who have contributed to the phenomenon we call the Green and Blue
Revolutions. These revolutions continue to this day and will continue in the future to feed people the world over.
Given these accomplishments, however, is it not ironic that the Philippines is now a net importer of food
even with such basic commodities as rice, corn, and sugar? Is it not ironic, that the poorest of the poor are the
farmers, the fishermen, and the "kaingeros"? These people depend on agriculture as their livelihood. My question
then is what has agriculture education done for these Filipinos who make up about half our of labor force?
Koreans, Thais, Malaysians, Taiwanese, and many other Asian nationals came to the Philippines to learn
agriculture and continue to do so. These countries today are at the forefront in agricultural development. Contrast
this to the Philippine experience. The obvious question then is: what went wrong in Philippine agriculture? The
answer is not that simple since the problem is complex. But let me limit myself to one factor ---manpower
training and education.
When we look deeper into our agricultural education experience, one can see a bias for "science" or
"research" rather than the "practical" application of scientific agriculture. Filipino agricultural scientists are tops in
the world. You see them occupying high posts in international bodies, professors in leading agricultural
universities, and top-notch consultants. They lead in the number of publications in scientific journals and as
speakers in international conferences. We did our job well in producing academicians and scientists.
Philippine agricultural education, however, tended too much toward producing scientists and researchers.
The irony is that we forgot that those engaged in farming as a profession (not just for a living) have to make
money out of agriculture. I do not see any problem with scientists and researchers; we need them. But if our
agricultural educators continue to think that agricultural education is just for that, they are digging their own
graves and, unfortunately, are burying with them the future of agriculture in this country.
Today, agriculture is the least attractive career choice for those pursuing higher education. Enrollment
statistics show that since 1980, the share of agriculture over total enrollment at the post-secondary has declined.
The figures are even more alarming at the collegiate level. Less and less students are taking up agriculture.
Schools of agriculture in the universities are becoming "ghost" schools. UPLB, the premier agricultural university
in the country, shows a similar trend.
The bottom line: agriculture as a profession has lost its appeal. A typical farmer today would not even
advise his son to take agriculture; any other course but agriculture. They say "why go to agriculture when there is
no money in farming"?
Worldwide experience shows that people do make money in agriculture. Examples abound: the Dutch cut
flower producers, the Finnish tree farmers, the Thai orchid farmers, and Taiwanese aquaculture farmers. These
farmers are multimillionaires. Closer home, we hear examples of asparagus farmers in South Cotabato, papaya
growers in Bukidnon, orchid growers in Davao, and ornamental plant growers in Bulacan. They too make good
money out of farming.
The key for success in these agricultural ventures is entrepreneurial and management know-how. The
problem with Philippine agriculture policymakers is their myopia in technology forgetting that it is just one
element in developing agriculture. Technology can always be bought from consultants and suppliers. Technology
is available anywhere in the world even at times for free. That is why the Koreans, the Thais, the Taiwanese, and
Malaysians came here to study. But when they went back home, they combined their technical know-how with
entrepreneurship and management skills to develop their agricultural sector. Thailand is now the world's major
exporter of rice; Malaysia is a big player in rubber and palm oil, and Taiwanese aquaculture products like
shrimps, eels, and groupers are major export items to Japan.
NEEDED: A PARADIGM SHIFT
Given the current realities for agriculture and food security, agricultural education must REINVENT itself
to be relevant. It is not just a question of changing names and titles in our agricultural curriculum. What is needed
is a change of mindsets, a paradigm shift, a radical change in the way we educate our farmers and future farm
entrepreneurs.
For agricultural education to be relevant today and in the future, focus has to be given to its "practical"
side --- how to make money out of agriculture. As in any business, management know-how and entrepreneurial
talent are needed. Skeptics may say, can we teach farmers to be businessmen and entrepreneurs? The answer is
YES. This is what business and management schools have done to industry and commerce. The very same
business and management principles equally apply to agriculture. Let this be very clear in our mind: agriculture
is a business.
The paradigm shift needed in agriculture education demands a new type of educational approach. Instead
of students spending time in classrooms or laboratories, they have to spend more time in actual, hands-on work in
real agricultural ventures.
THE DIPLOMA IN AGRICULTURE ENTREPRENEURSHIP
At this point, let me describe to you a training program we have started this school year. This is a result of
interviews and interactions with agricultural entrepreneurs and educators who have pioneered in this approach we
now call the Dual Training System. If such a system has been proven successful in industry and services, I see no
reason why it cannot work in agriculture but with some adaptations.
Curriculum Design
The Diploma in Agriculture Entrepreneurship (DAE) draws experience from the successful
implementation of the Family Farm Schools (FFS) and the Dualtech Training Center in the Philippines. By
design, the FFS adopts a dual training system where education is given at the school and at the students' family
farm. In the case of Dualtech, it is basically a post-secondary offering; students spend their internship or
practicum at the factory. The other important input for DAE's curricular design is the feedback gathered from
entrepreneurs through interviews and workshops.
In our curriculum design for DAE we were very specific as to its output: graduates of this program will
venture into agricultural projects as agriculture entrepreneurs or they can be hired as farm supervisors or
managers. Keeping this objective in mind, the curriculum is made up of two parts: the courses of study and the
practicum. The courses of study are biased towards management know-how and the development of
entrepreneurial skills. Values formation is another important component as well as technical agriculture and
general education subjects.
The practicum is the heart and soul of the DAE program. It includes a worked out, coherent system of
practical field training periods that will expose students to the rudiments of agriculture entrepreneurship and
management.
Schedule of Students' Daily Tasks
One major consideration for program design is to give the students the discipline and the mental make-up
for the world of work as agriculture entrepreneurs and as farm managers. In this light, the schedule of the training
program has to simulate the rigors of actual work situation. This is the whole essence of the dual training system.
Thus by design our school is a residential campus. This will afford students to have a work period early
morning and late afternoon. Mid-day is spent for classroom work..
Support Facilities for DAE Program Implementation
It is quite obvious that aside from good teachers, the quality of training will depend on good materials and
facilities, more so if the program stresses a lot of practical hands-on training. Towards this end, there is one
indispensable "facilities" in this Program, the school farm enterprises.
Since the students will be doing extensive farm practice, it is a must that the school offering this Program
has a number of farm enterprises (not just projects to emphasize that these should be economically viable and ongoing concerns) on campus. A minimum of 10 hectares are required as long as these are intensively utilized.
Provisions should be made to have several types of farm enterprises and facilities for crops, livestock, fisheries,
and agroforestry projects. This is important to expose students to the different types of farming activities. Since
many of the students will come from families with small farm holdings (a great majority of Philippine farms are)
what needs to be demonstrated in these farm enterprises are the various types of farming systems. Owing to its
smallness, the ideal Filipino farm would be an integrated farm to derive more income from it and to maximize the
use of farm resources available including labor.
These school farm enterprises should be operated as a going-business concern. This is the only way to
show students that indeed there is money in farming. There will be two types of farm enterprises in the campus:
those managed by teachers/staff and those managed by students. Regarding the first category, these farm
enterprises will be assigned to a faculty member (one project for each) who will act as its farm manager and
operator. The faculty member is totally responsible for it and will give them an opportunity to manage a real farm
enterprise. In many cases, it has been said that teachers are simply academicians whose knowledge is just from
the books and without any practical work experience outside the classroom or the academe. This is partly true.
But to be fair with our educators, there are also a good number of them who can back up their teaching with
practical experience. Thus, it is hoped that this scheme will help remedy the situation. The faculty member's
experience in the actual running of an enterprise is in itself a learning experience what they can transmit to their
students. Given this continuing exposure to actual farm management experience, they will also be in a better
position to supervise or give advice to students doing the practicum. The teachers' experience acting as
consultants to students or as supervisors/farm managers will also give them invaluable know-how for their
extension and consultancy work. An ideal situation is for faculty members to be actively involved in extension
projects and training programs for farmers and agribusinessmen in the areas around their schools. These
experiences will all redound to better classroom learning. On the other hand, with their extension and consultancy
work, the relevance of the school with respect to its surrounding communities will be more appreciated if they
provide such extension and consultancy services. This will also make our agricultural schools truly “centers for
agricultural and rural development”.
Regarding the second type of farm enterprises that will be established in the school, these are to be
managed by students themselves. These farm enterprises, run and managed by students, are really a way to initiate
students into entrepreneurship while they are still in school and that they be properly guided in their "learning
steps". This is the best way to teach entrepreneurship: let them run their own business themselves. "Learning by
doing" is still the best educational methodology.
CONCLUSION
The Diploma in Agriculture Entrepreneurship answers the need for a relevant program that will prepare
the future agriculture entrepreneurs (not just farmers). Lest it be misconstrued---DAE is not an agricultural
program rather it is a business management program applied to agriculture. While the focus of most programs is
the "know-how", the DAE puts a premium on the "do-how". Thus, in its curriculum design, the practicum is
considered the heart and soul of the program. This is what the dual training system is all about. We are at the
dawn to reinvent agriculture education in the country.
For those DAE graduates who may want to finish a college degree, they will have an option to move on
and finish the Bachelor of Science in Entrepreneurial Management major in Farm Business that will be offered at
the University of Rizal System, Pililia Campus.
(The article reflects the personal opinion of the author and does not reflect the official stand of the Management
Association of the Philippines. The author is Chair of the MAP AgriBusiness and Countryside Development Committee,
and Vice President and Farm Business Institute Group Head of the MFI Foundation.
Feedback at
map@globelines.com.ph. For previous articles, please visit <map.org.ph>.)
G:\map insights\2009\rgayo - 14July2009.doc:mel