Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), enacted through Republic Act No. 6657 on June 10, 1988, constitutes the Philippine government's systematic initiative to redistribute agricultural lands to landless farmers and regular farmworkers, targeting all public and private agricultural lands irrespective of tenurial arrangements or commodities produced, with the explicit policy aim of advancing , , and equitable access to land as a productive resource. Envisioned under President Corazon Aquino's administration as a of post-People Power reforms, CARP incorporated mechanisms such as voluntary land offers to the government, compulsory acquisition at market values, and alternative stock distribution options for corporate landowners, while mandating support services like credit, infrastructure, and training to enable beneficiaries' transition to viable farming. Over its initial 10-year timeline—later extended by Republic Act No. 9700 (CARPER) in 2009 to 2028—the program distributed approximately 4.8 million hectares to around 4.8 million beneficiaries, ostensibly fulfilling over 90% of its land acquisition targets by 2018 and altering tenure patterns in favor of smallholder ownership. However, empirical evaluations grounded in micro-level data underscore profound shortcomings: CARP fragmented average farm sizes by 37% and depressed agricultural output per hectare by 17%, as smaller plots proved inefficient for mechanization and scale economies, exacerbating rural underproductivity and failing to deliver sustained poverty reduction despite initial income gains for some recipients. Controversies persist around CARP's design and execution, including landowner circumventions via legal loopholes, chronic underfunding of post-distribution support (which limited credit access and technical aid to below 20% of needs in many cases), and that perpetuated , with quantitative analyses deeming it a net economic failure that hindered overall agricultural growth without comparable productivity boosts seen in peer reforms elsewhere. These outcomes reflect causal dynamics where compulsory redistribution overlooked farm-specific efficiencies and market incentives, fueling ongoing land disputes and calls for policy abandonment in favor of targeted productivity enhancements.

Historical Origins

Pre-1988 Agrarian Policies

Prior to the enactment of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program in , Philippine agrarian policies were characterized by fragmented and limited initiatives aimed at addressing tenancy and land concentration, primarily in response to rural unrest and political pressures. These efforts began in the post-independence era but achieved modest redistribution, often constrained by elite resistance, inadequate funding, and narrow scope targeting only specific crops or regions. The Land Reform Act of 1955 (Republic Act No. 1400), signed during President Ramon Magsaysay's administration on June 4, 1955, marked an early comprehensive attempt to establish a policy. It declared the state's intent to create conditions enabling tenants to become landowners or leaseholders on reasonable terms, establishing the Land Tenure Administration to purchase and resell estates exceeding 300 hectares for individuals or 600 hectares for corporations to bonafide farmers. Implementation was hampered by insufficient government funds and legal challenges from landowners, resulting in only about 120,000 hectares distributed by the early . Subsequent policies under Presidents and expanded on these foundations but retained limitations. The of 1963 (Republic Act No. 3844) abolished share tenancy for all agricultural crops, converting tenants into leaseholders with secure rights and setting maximum lease rents at 25-30% of harvest value; however, it exempted export cash crops like and , covering primarily Central Luzon lands and benefiting fewer than 100,000 tenants due to slow adjudication. Under martial law, President issued Presidential Decree No. 27 on October 21, 1972, decreeing the emancipation of tenants on and corn lands by transferring ownership of up to seven hectares per qualified , with landowners retaining no more than seven hectares. This applied exclusively to private tenanted lands devoted to and corn under sharecrop or lease systems, requiring tenants to pay amortized costs over 15 years at 6% interest, and led to the distribution of approximately 1.2 million hectares to over 800,000 beneficiaries by 1986. Critics noted its exclusion of other crops and lands, which shielded major landlords in export agriculture, though it represented the most significant pre-1988 redistribution effort amid Marcos's authoritarian control. From 1972 to 1988, complementary decrees like Presidential Decree No. 85 (1974) incentivized voluntary land transfers with tax exemptions, while operations under the —formed in 1978—focused on certificate of land transfer issuance and support services, yet overall progress stalled due to corruption allegations, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and the 1983-1985 economic , leaving tenancy rates high at around 40% of farmland.

Enactment under Aquino (1988)

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, formally Republic Act No. 6657, was signed into law by President Corazon C. Aquino on June 10, 1988, establishing the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) as the state's mechanism for redistributing public and private agricultural lands to promote , rural industrialization, and improved living standards for landless farmers. The legislation mandated coverage of approximately 10.3 million hectares of agricultural land over a 10-year period, including and corn lands under prior presidential decrees, regardless of tenurial arrangements or crop types. Enactment followed intense political pressure amid agrarian unrest, particularly after the Mendiola Massacre on January 22, , when security forces fired on approximately 15,000 farmers marching to to demand land redistribution, resulting in 13 deaths and numerous injuries. Aquino's administration, which had pledged comprehensive reform during the 1986 EDSA Revolution campaign against , initially delayed action due to opposition from agrarian elites, including her family's estate, leading to a legislative compromise that incorporated voluntary offers from landowners (VOS) and retention limits of up to 5 hectares per family. The bill originated in the Eighth Congress, with the Senate and House versions reconciled before presidential approval, reflecting a moderated approach compared to more radical proposals from farmer groups and leftist organizations that sought immediate expropriation without full market-value compensation. The law took effect on July 15, 1988, 15 days after its publication in the Official Gazette, and created the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) to oversee implementation, alongside support agencies for credit, infrastructure, and training. Critics, including peasant advocates, argued from the outset that provisions allowing stock-sharing alternatives to land transfer diluted the reform's emancipatory potential, prioritizing elite interests over tenant rights—a view substantiated by subsequent low distribution rates in private estates during the Aquino era.

Program Framework

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) was established through Republic Act No. 6657, enacted on June 10, 1988, which serves as its primary legal foundation. This legislation, signed into law by President Corazon C. Aquino, instituted a systematic redistribution of agricultural lands to qualified beneficiaries, encompassing all public and private agricultural lands regardless of tenurial arrangement or crop type. The law's scope targeted approximately 10.3 million hectares of land, with implementation mechanisms including voluntary offers, compulsory acquisition, and summary administrative proceedings for disputes. The core objectives of , as articulated in Section 2 of RA 6657, center on pursuing to promote , industrialization, and . Specifically, the program aims to liberate tillers from the bondage of the by providing them of the land they till or equitable shares in its production, thereby improving their living conditions and enabling participation in national industrialization. It seeks to redistribute excess lands beyond retention limits—set at 5 hectares per landowner—to landless farmers and farmworkers, while ensuring support services such as , , and training to sustain productivity. These goals are framed within a policy of equitable access to land as a means to reduce and foster rural industrialization, with the state committing to just compensation for landowners based on considerations. Subsequent amendments, notably Republic Act No. 9700 in , extended CARP's timeline to June 30, 2014, and refined provisions on land acquisition and beneficiary support without altering the foundational objectives of land redistribution and . The program's legal framework emphasizes farmer participation through cooperatives and prioritizes agricultural lands unsuitable for industrial use, balancing reform with national and imperatives.

Land Acquisition Mechanisms

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program () employed three principal modes for acquiring agricultural lands: voluntary offer to sell (VOS), voluntary land transfer (VLT), and compulsory acquisition (CA). These mechanisms, established under No. 229 (1987) and codified in Republic Act No. 6657 (1988), prioritized voluntary methods to expedite distribution while providing compulsory options for non-compliant landowners, subject to just compensation determined by factors including the land's productivity, , and tax declarations. Acquisition targeted tenanted lands exceeding retention limits—five hectares per qualified owner—and idle or underdeveloped parcels, with Phase I emphasizing voluntary offers from high-priority estates like and plantations. Under VOS, landowners could proactively offer eligible agricultural lands to the (DAR) for purchase and redistribution, receiving incentives such as exemption from and an additional 5% cash payment beyond standard compensation. The process required landowners to register offers within specified periods, followed by DAR valuation using guidelines from the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC), which considered local sales data and crop yields; accepted offers led to payment via the (LBP) trust account, enabling DAR possession and title transfer to the Republic. This mode facilitated faster implementation, as it bypassed disputes, though uptake was limited by landowners' preferences for higher private valuations. VLT, also known as the direct payment scheme, allowed landowners to negotiate and transfer lands directly to qualified farmer-beneficiaries, bypassing full government intermediation, provided the agreement was approved by DAR and terms matched or exceeded government offers. Initially restricted to submissions within the first year of CARP's implementation, this mechanism required mutual consent on price and conditions, with DAR ensuring beneficiary eligibility and equitable distribution; payments were financed through beneficiary amortizations to LBP over 30 years at 6% interest, offering a 2% rebate for punctual compliance. VLT aimed to reduce administrative burdens but often encountered challenges from mismatched valuations and beneficiary identification delays. Compulsory acquisition served as the default for lands not acquired voluntarily, enabling DAR to mandatorily expropriate excess holdings after identifying coverage via surveys and notices published in newspapers. Landowners received a 15- to 30-day response period to accept or reject the DAR's valuation offer; rejection triggered administrative hearings or judicial appeals, with payment deposited into an LBP trust fund upon which DAR could take possession and secure transfer certificates of title. Compensation across modes followed a formula blending cash (10-30% upfront, scaled by land size), LBP bonds redeemable over 10 years, stock shares in corporations, or credits, ensuring landowners retained to improvements and crops at . Exemptions applied to lands over 18% slope, forests, or those vital for national development, preserving ecological and strategic priorities.

Beneficiary Selection and Support Services

Beneficiary selection under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program () is governed by Section 22 of Republic Act No. 6657, which prioritizes agricultural lessees and share tenants first, followed by regular farmworkers, seasonal farmworkers, other farmworkers, actual tillers or occupants of public lands, collective organizations of the above, and finally other individuals directly working on the land but not qualifying under prior categories. Basic qualifications require beneficiaries to be Filipino citizens with the willingness, aptitude, and ability to cultivate the land productively; they must not own more than three hectares of elsewhere and cannot be children of landowners or absentees. The (DAR) holds authority for identification, screening, and selection, involving registration, validation of claims, and exclusion of disqualified parties such as those with prior land ownership exceeding limits or lacking tillage involvement. Support services form a core component of to enhance and , including access to , farm inputs, extension services, and like farm-to-market roads and systems. The DAR's Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Development Services Program (ARBDSP) specifically targets farm improvement, organizational strengthening for agrarian reform organizations (), facilitation, and partnerships for food production. Additional services encompass marketing assistance, technical training, and rural , often coordinated with foreign-assisted projects to address post-distribution challenges like low yields due to inadequate inputs. Empirical assessments indicate these services are critical for viability, as awards alone often fail without complementary and extension, with studies noting persistent among beneficiaries lacking such support.

Implementation Timeline

Aquino Administration (1988–1992)

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), enacted through Republic Act No. 6657 on June 10, 1988, and effective from June 15, 1988, marked the Aquino administration's primary effort to redistribute approximately 10.3 million hectares of agricultural land to landless farmers and farmworkers over a 10-year period. The law established mechanisms for voluntary offers to sell, compulsory acquisition, and stock distribution options, with an initial funding allocation of ₱50 billion to support land acquisition and beneficiary support services. Implementation began under the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), targeting both private agricultural lands (about 3.8 million hectares) and public domain lands (about 6.5 million hectares managed partly by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources). From 1988 to 1992, distributed approximately 2.2 million hectares nationwide, benefiting around 1.1 million agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs), achieving about 21.4% of the overall target. However, the majority of distributed land consisted of government-owned or areas, with private agricultural lands comprising only about one-fourth of the total, as compulsory acquisition of private holdings progressed minimally and no significant expropriations occurred in the first three years. Regional variations were notable; for instance, Region I accomplished 49.9% of its targets, while Regions V and VI lagged at 7.5% and 9.5%, respectively, reflecting disparities in land availability and administrative capacity. Support services, including and , were provided to ARBs via Certificates of Land Ownership Awards (CLOAs), but delivery was uneven due to funding shortfalls, with the Agrarian Reform Fund remitting only 53% of projected amounts. Implementation faced substantial obstacles, including bureaucratic delays from multi-agency coordination involving DAR, the , and registries of deeds, which created backlogs in surveys, valuations, and title transfers. Landowner resistance was acute, particularly through exemptions for plantations (often via stock distribution) and legal challenges to valuations, which 405 in 1990 shifted to the Land Bank, exacerbating delays for over 9,000 claim folders covering 127,000 hectares. Leadership instability, with four DAR secretaries amid scandals, further slowed progress, while high transaction costs and incomplete land titling hindered voluntary transfers. Despite these issues, innovations like the LISTASAKA system streamlined some processes, setting the stage for accelerated distribution in subsequent years, though critics noted the program's non-redistributive tilt toward public lands limited its impact on private tenancy inequities.

Ramos to Arroyo Administrations (1992–2009)

During the Ramos administration (1992–1998), the (DAR) shifted focus toward accelerating land acquisition and distribution by prioritizing voluntary offers from landowners and establishing Agrarian Reform Communities (ARCs), which integrated land titles with , , and to improve beneficiary viability. This approach aimed to address implementation bottlenecks from the Aquino era, with Secretary Ernesto Garilao emphasizing bundled services to sustain reform gains. Cumulative land distribution under CARP reached approximately 4 million hectares by mid-1998, representing about 57% of the targeted private agricultural lands, though progress relied heavily on government-owned lands rather than contested private estates. The Estrada administration (1998–2001) widened coverage to additional landless peasants and fast-tracked acquisition processes, distributing 182,762 hectares during its tenure amid efforts to balance economic development with social equity in rural areas. However, political instability, including Estrada's and ouster in January 2001, disrupted sustained momentum, with distribution relying on existing mechanisms like stock distribution options and arrangements that critics argued diluted direct transfers. Under the Arroyo administration (2001–2009), implementation grappled with the program's original 1998 deadline extensions and mounting backlogs, as landowners increasingly pursued conversions to evade redistribution, with over 20,000 hectares of converted annually in some periods. The "Strong Republic" initiative distributed 250,000 hectares by emphasizing voluntary land transfers and ventures, yet overall progress lagged targets due to legal challenges, underfunding, and preference for market-assisted mechanisms over compulsory acquisition. By end-2002, cumulative distribution exceeded 5.82 million hectares benefiting around 3 million agrarian reform beneficiaries, though independent assessments highlighted discrepancies between notices of coverage and actual titled lands, with private haciendas remaining largely untouched. No. 151 in 2002 further promoted farmer cooperatives and credit access, but persistent elite resistance and inadequate support services limited effective tenure security.

CARPER Extension (2009–2014)

Republic Act No. 9700, known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program Extension with Reforms (CARPER), was signed into law on August 7, 2009, by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, extending the land acquisition and distribution provisions of the original Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) until June 30, 2014. The legislation refined acquisition mechanisms by prioritizing compulsory processes for large estates, enhanced support services such as credit and infrastructure for beneficiaries, and imposed stricter penalties for violations including land conversions and corporate evasions. It allocated funding from sources like the Agrarian Reform Fund, emphasizing completion of remaining targets covering private agricultural lands exceeding five hectares, public lands, and unsettled claims. Under the extension, the (DAR) intensified efforts amid the transition from the Arroyo to the Aquino administration in 2010, with President committing in 2012 to distribute all remaining lands by the deadline, targeting approximately 962,000 hectares still undistributed at that point. Annual accomplishments included 111,889 hectares distributed to 63,755 agrarian reform beneficiaries in 2011, contributing to cumulative distributions approaching 4.8 million hectares by . In the first quarter of alone, DAR acquired and distributed 26,421 hectares, reducing the backlog but leaving over 513,000 hectares pending as the program expired. Challenges during implementation included landowner resistance through legal injunctions and appeals, insufficient funding amid competing priorities, and delays in surveys and titling, which slowed progress below targets. Bureaucratic hurdles and elite capture further hampered efficiency, as noted in congressional reviews, preventing full completion despite reforms. Section 30 of RA 9700 allowed ongoing resolution of pre-2009 cases, enabling land distribution to continue selectively after June 30, 2014, though new acquisitions ceased. By the period's end, CARPER had advanced coverage for hundreds of thousands of farmers but underscored persistent gaps in achieving equitable redistribution.

Intended Mechanisms and Operations

Distribution Targets and Coverage

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), established by Republic Act No. 6657 on June 10, 1988, set a national target of redistributing approximately 10.3 million hectares of to qualified beneficiaries over an initial 10-year implementation period. This scope encompassed both and lands, with distribution prioritized in phases to address immediate needs in staple crop areas while progressively covering broader agricultural holdings. Covered lands included all alienable and disposable public domain areas devoted to or suitable for agriculture, irrespective of crops produced or location, as well as private agricultural lands exceeding owner retention limits of five hectares. Private lands were subject to coverage regardless of tenurial status (e.g., tenanted or owner-operated) and commodity type, supplemented by government-foreclosed properties, idle or abandoned agricultural lands, and voluntary offers to sell. Exclusions applied to non-agricultural classifications such as mineral lands, forests, residential, commercial, or industrial zones, ensuring focus on viable farming areas. Phase One targeted rice and corn lands under prior decrees (e.g., Presidential Decree No. 27), idle lands, and voluntary offers within four years, while subsequent phases addressed larger private estates (over 50 hectares initially, then down to 24-hectare retention thresholds). Eligible beneficiaries comprised landless farmers and regular farmworkers directly tilling the soil, with priority given to agricultural lessees and share tenants, followed by regular and seasonal farmworkers, other tillers, and qualified cooperatives or collectives. Qualification required residency in the same or as the , willingness and capacity to cultivate, and absence of prior ownership beyond homestead limits. Awards were limited to a maximum of three hectares per individual or family, distributable as contiguous tracts or multiple parcels, with provisions for to promote viability on smaller or fragmented holdings. This framework aimed to empower approximately 2.8 million potential recipients by transferring ownership while integrating support for production loans and services.

Financing and Compensation

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program () was financed through the Agrarian Reform Fund (ARF), initially established under No. 229 and further detailed in Section 63 of Republic Act No. 6657 (1988). Funds were drawn from the national budget via continuing appropriations, proceeds from sales by the Asset Privatization Trust, receipts from the for recovered ill-gotten wealth, disposition of foreign country properties, official foreign grants and concessional financing, and other unappropriated government funds. These sources supported land acquisition, distribution, and support services during the initial 10-year period from 1988 to 1998. In 1998, Republic Act No. 8532 augmented funding by up to ₱50 billion from comparable sources, including asset sales and recovered assets, to extend CARP operations through 2008 and address shortfalls. Compensation for acquired lands was administered by the (LBP) in coordination with the (DAR), adhering to the principle of just compensation under Section 18 of RA 6657. Valuation incorporated multiple factors per Section 17, including the land's acquisition cost, current as reflected in tax declarations, assessed value, net income from the property, the owner's sworn valuation, and broader social and economic benefits to the nation. Landowners received a cash portion scaled by holding size—25% for estates over 50 hectares, 30% for 24–50 hectares, and 35% for 24 hectares or less—with the remainder paid via negotiable government financial instruments or LBP bonds bearing market-determined interest rates, redeemable in cash or applicable to es, loans, or further land acquisitions. Alternative options included shares of stock in government-owned or controlled corporations or tax credits convertible to cash. Voluntary offers to sell earned an additional 5% cash incentive under Section 19. The LBP advanced compensation payments, which the government amortized over time, while agrarian reform beneficiaries repaid the government in 30 equal annual installments at 6% interest, with provisions for government assumption of mortgages up to the compensation value. Despite these mechanisms, payment processes frequently encountered delays due to valuation disputes and funding constraints, resulting in protracted litigation; for instance, in the case, courts in 2025 ordered ₱28.49 billion in compensation plus interest for 6,453 hectares expropriated in 1989, highlighting systemic lags in finalizing claims. Such delays stemmed from discrepancies between initial DAR-LBP valuations and judicial reviews, often requiring supplemental interest computations from the date of taking.

Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Development and Reform (ARBDR) Provisions

The Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Development and Reform (ARBDR) provisions, primarily outlined in Republic Act No. 9700 (CARPER) enacted on August 7, 2009, emphasize integrated support services to enhance the productivity, organizational capacity, and economic viability of agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs). These provisions allocate at least 40% of annual agrarian reform appropriations to support services during the program's five-year extension, prioritizing credit facilities, infrastructure development, and technical assistance to transition ARBs from land recipients to sustainable farmers. The Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) oversees implementation, ensuring services such as land titling, reduced-interest credit, and extension programs reach ARBs, with a focus on forming cooperatives for collective resource access. Credit support constitutes 30% of support services funding, with one-third directed toward initial capitalization for new ARBs and two-thirds for ongoing needs of existing ones, administered through institutions like the at concessional rates not exceeding 6% annually. Training programs receive 5% of funds for seminars on farm management, technology adoption, and organizational skills, aiming to build ARB capacity for independent operations. Infrastructure initiatives include access roads, irrigation systems, post-harvest facilities, and marketing infrastructure, integrated with national development plans to link ARBs to markets. Extension services promote , including research on low-cost inputs like organic fertilizers, while the (DAR) facilitates ARB organization and education to foster self-reliance. Reform measures address gender equity, mandating equal access for rural women to credit, training, and participation in ARB organizations, with DAR required to establish a women's desk for grievance resolution and rights protection. Provisions encourage subdivision of collective Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs) into individual titles to enhance tenure security and incentivize investment, though implementation has varied by region. The Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Development Sustainability Program (ARBDSP), administered by DAR's Bureau of Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Development (BARBD), extends these efforts post-distribution, focusing on community viability through policy formulation, technical assistance, and empowerment initiatives for ARBs and their organizations.
Key ARBDR Support Service Allocation (CARPER)Percentage of FundsPrimary Focus
Credit Facilities30%Concessional loans for capitalization and operations
Training and Seminars5%Capacity building in and
Infrastructure and Extension ServicesRemaining balanceRoads, , market , and tech transfer
These provisions aim to mitigate post-distribution challenges like low by linking to comprehensive , though delivery has historically covered only about 44% of ARBs comprehensively.

Empirical Impacts

Positive Outcomes and Achievements

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) achieved substantial land redistribution, transferring approximately 5.05 million hectares—equivalent to 16% of the ' total land area—to around 2.6 million agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs) by 2014. This included the distribution of about 2.5 million hectares of alienable and disposable public lands, alongside the issuance of stewardship rights under programs like the Integrated Social Forestry initiative. These transfers formally ended tenancy arrangements for many farmers, converting them from sharecroppers or leaseholders to owners through Certificates of Land Ownership Awards (CLOAs), thereby reducing landlessness in targeted areas. Empirical assessments indicate that beneficiaries experienced higher real per capita incomes and lower poverty incidence compared to non-beneficiaries between 1990 and 2000, with positively associated with reduction through improved access to assets. Micro-level studies attribute these gains to increased household investments in farming inputs and , such as and farm-to-market roads facilitated by complementary support services. For instance, one analysis estimated an average annual income uplift of approximately 9,294 for a family of five among ARBs, linked to secure enabling credit access and crop diversification. In select regions, such as former haciendas, beneficiaries reported enhanced living standards through collective organizations that provided marketing support and production assistance, leading to sustained agricultural output in and sectors. These outcomes were bolstered by ARB programs, which delivered and financial , contributing to localized reductions in incidence and higher per capita expenditures among reformed households. Overall, while aggregate productivity challenges persisted, CARP's tenure security mechanisms demonstrably empowered millions by formalizing property rights and fostering initial for smallholder farmers.

Economic Shortcomings and Productivity Declines

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), implemented from 1988 onward, contributed to significant land fragmentation, reducing average farm sizes by approximately 30% between 1981 and 2002, which exacerbated inefficiencies in agricultural operations due to lost and heightened transaction costs. This fragmentation resulted in an average agrarian reform beneficiary (ARB) farm size of 1.2 hectares, often below viable economic thresholds for or diversification, leading to persistent underinvestment in inputs and . Empirical analyses indicate that CARP-induced reallocations caused a 17% decline in aggregate agricultural productivity, primarily through misallocation of land to less efficient smallholders and distortions in occupational and technological choices, with data showing an 11.6% drop in output between 1989 and 1993. Total factor productivity in Philippine agriculture grew at a meager 0.13% annually from 1980 to 1998, lagging far behind regional peers like Thailand (0.87%) and Indonesia (1.49%), with reformed areas exhibiting lower yields—such as sugar production 31% below non-ARB levels in 1994–1997 and coconut yields 40% under national averages post-2009. Bank lending to contracted sharply, from 5.88% of total loans in 2001 to 2.49% in 2010, as tenure insecurities from collective Certificates of Land Ownership Awards (covering 70% of distributed ) and Section 27 resale restrictions deterred formal access and drove reliance on informal markets with interest rates up to 60%. These constraints amplified productivity losses, with estimates attributing up to PHP 340 billion in forgone farm output to CARP's effects in 2019 alone, underscoring a failure to translate land redistribution into sustained economic gains. Despite distributing 5.05 million hectares by 2014, the program's economic outcomes included elevated rates among ARBs (54% in 2009 versus 36% for all farmers), highlighting systemic inefficiencies in support mechanisms like and .

Poverty and Social Effects

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) was implemented with the explicit goal of alleviating through land redistribution to farmers and landless laborers, aiming to foster economic independence and in agrarian communities. Despite distributing approximately 5.05 million hectares to over 3 million beneficiaries by 2014, the program's impact on proved limited, as incidence remained nearly unchanged at around 46.3% in 1988 and 47.0% by 2000, reflecting stagnation amid broader . Among agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs), poverty rates showed only marginal improvement, declining from 47.6% in 1990 to 45.2% in 2000, while rising from 55.1% to 56.4% for non-beneficiaries during the same period, suggesting selective but insufficient relief. By the , poverty incidence in CARP-covered communities reached 54%, higher than the national rural average, as many ARBs grappled with unproductive smallholdings averaging 1-2 hectares, inadequate , and limited access to or markets, resulting in a persistent "landed poor" class reliant on subsistence farming. Socially, enhanced tenure security for some beneficiaries, correlating with modest increases in household investments in education, health, and physical assets, as well as greater participation in local structures. However, these gains were offset by fragmentation of landholdings, which discouraged and scale efficiencies, exacerbating income volatility and prompting rural-to-urban among younger ARBs, with rural out-migration rates rising to 20-30% in reform areas by the early . Empirical assessments link these outcomes to CARP's failure to integrate land transfer with productivity-enhancing supports, such as extension services or , allowing underlying issues like pressure on and weak property enforcement to sustain social inequities.

Controversies and Criticisms

Land Fragmentation and Inefficiency

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program () led to extensive land fragmentation by subdividing estates into small holdings, with awards capped at 3 hectares per under the 2009 CARPER extension, often resulting in parcels averaging 1.2 hectares. This process reduced the national average farm size by 37 percent, as large-scale operations were dismantled to distribute among multiple claimants, including heirs and tenants. By 2012, the typical farm had shrunk to 1.29 hectares, limiting the scope for efficient . Fragmentation diminished through the erosion of , as small plots hindered , , and adoption of high-yield inputs that favor contiguous land. Empirical assessments show a 17 percent drop in average output per attributable to these dynamics, with in affected sectors stagnating or declining. For instance, coconut production among reform beneficiaries in agrarian reform communities underperformed national averages by 40 percent, while sugar yields lagged by 8 percent, reflecting constrained investment and reliance on low-yield subsistence methods. CARP's prohibitions on unrestricted and long-term leasing prevented market-driven , forcing inefficient underground transactions where 7 to 100 percent of beneficiaries reportedly mortgaged or sold holdings illegally due to uneconomic sizes. Capital scarcity among smallholders exacerbated idleness, with only 17 percent of agrarian reform beneficiaries meeting amortization payments, leading to widespread defaults and an estimated P340 billion in forgone output in 2019. These constraints perpetuated a cycle of low technical efficiency, as fragmented operations prioritized risk aversion over scalable production, contributing to the ' persistent underperformance in and other crop yields relative to regional benchmarks.

Elite Capture and Corruption

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) in the Philippines has been undermined by elite capture, whereby influential landowners, politicians, and local power brokers manipulated implementation mechanisms to retain de facto control over redistributed lands or divert benefits away from intended tenant farmers. Political elites, often landowners themselves, lobbied for exemptions under provisions allowing voluntary offers to sell or stock distribution options, enabling large estates to evade compulsory acquisition; for instance, between 1988 and 2016, the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) approved conversion orders for 97,592 hectares of CARP-covered lands, frequently expedited through influence rather than merit-based evaluation. This persistence of elite influence stems from entrenched patronage networks, where local officials prioritize alliances with powerful families over equitable distribution, resulting in incomplete coverage of targeted haciendas and perpetuation of land inequality. Corruption within DAR and related agencies further facilitated elite capture, with documented irregularities in beneficiary selection and title issuance. A 2024 Commission on Audit (COA) report revealed that DAR awarded Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs) to unqualified individuals, including retired police officers and minors, in violation of CARP eligibility criteria requiring active tenant farmers; such misallocations allowed proxies or allies of elites to claim lands intended for the landless, undermining the program's redistributive intent. Bribery and bureaucratic favoritism enabled illegal land conversions from agricultural to non-agricultural use, with DAR personnel reportedly processing expedited approvals for fees, as highlighted in governance assessments of rural development agencies. Additionally, two former DAR secretaries were held liable by COA in 2017 for misusing P70 million in agrarian reform funds on unallowable expenses, such as unauthorized personnel allowances, reflecting systemic graft that diverts resources from support services for legitimate beneficiaries. These practices have led to widespread issuance of fraudulent or irregularly obtained CLOAs, enabling elites to indirectly reclaim or control awarded through fictitious beneficiaries or post-distribution sales prohibited under but enforced weakly. Independent analyses indicate that such , compounded by elite resistance, has confined effective redistribution to smaller holdings while large estates remain concentrated, as evidenced by persistent land ownership favoring politically connected families. Despite measures like DAR's internal audits, the program's reliance on local implementation—vulnerable to capture by dynastic politicians—has sustained these issues, with reports estimating thousands of fake titles circulating in regions like , further eroding trust in the reform's integrity.

Conflicts with Property Rights and Market Incentives

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), implemented from 1988, authorized compulsory acquisition of agricultural lands exceeding a five-hectare retention limit per landowner, with compensation calculated based on factors including acquisition cost, assessed value, and productivity, often resulting in valuations disputed by owners as undervalued relative to market prices. This state-mandated transfer without landowner consent has been critiqued as a violation of rights, fostering legal challenges, delays in implementation, and resistance from affected proprietors who viewed the process as coercive expropriation rather than fair . By enforcing retention caps and redistributing holdings into smaller parcels, disrupted market-driven land allocation, fragmenting estates and eroding incentives for capital-intensive investments such as or soil improvement, as smallholder beneficiaries faced scale limitations and credit constraints. Quantitative assessments reveal that the reform shrank average farm sizes by 34% and depressed by 17% upon implementation, primarily through resource misallocation that favored equity over efficiency in land and labor use. These dynamics compounded tenure uncertainties, where ongoing claims and restrictions on resale or leasing further diminished long-term investment motives, contrasting with voluntary exchanges that align with productive capabilities and signals for optimal deployment. Post-CARP evaluations underscore how such interventions perpetuated a cycle of inefficiency, with redistributed lands yielding lower output per compared to unreformed areas, highlighting the tension between redistributive mandates and incentive-compatible property regimes.

Evaluations and Legacy

Key Studies and Data Assessments

A 2009 World Bank assessment of the (), drawing on household surveys and village-level data from beneficiary areas, concluded that the program generated modest reductions among recipients, with beneficiary households experiencing average increases of 10-15% relative to non-beneficiaries after controlling for location and endowments, though these gains were attenuated by incomplete and inadequate services such as and . The analysis highlighted that 's impact on was positive but smaller than anticipated, estimating a net reduction in incidence by approximately 2-3 percentage points attributable to the program between and , limited by factors including fragmentation and of benefits. Quantitative modeling by Adamopoulos and Restuccia (2020), utilizing micro-level farm data from the Philippine (1980-2012) and a structural framework calibrated to CARP's ceilings and redistribution rules, estimated that the program reduced aggregate by 16% through enforced farm size reductions below efficient scales, as smallholder plots under 2 hectares—prevalent post-CARP—exhibited yields 20-30% lower than larger operations due to fixed costs in and . Their indicated that relaxing ceilings could have boosted by up to 12%, underscoring causal links between fragmentation and output declines independent of tenure security effects. The Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) 2018 review of CARP's 30-year implementation, based on administrative data showing 4.8 million hectares redistributed to 3 million beneficiaries by 2014, found mixed economic outcomes: while land access improved tenure security for 60% of recipients, farm productivity stagnated with rice yields in reformed areas averaging 3.5 tons per hectare versus 4.2 in non-reformed regions, attributed to insufficient extension services and market access. A PIDS impact evaluation using CARP-IA household surveys (2002-2010) reported beneficiary poverty rates declining from 45% to 35% in targeted communities, yet persistent gaps in irrigation coverage (only 40% of awarded lands irrigated) and credit uptake (under 20% formal loans) constrained broader gains. A 2020 PIDS study on parcelization of certificates of land ownership award (CLOAs), analyzing from 1,200 households pre- and post-2014 reforms, demonstrated that subdividing holdings into individual titles increased household incomes by 18% and investments by 25%, suggesting that CARP's initial models exacerbated inefficiencies resolvable through targeted post-reform adjustments. These findings align with FAO-documented challenges in , where in beneficiary selection and heterogeneous regional enforcement—e.g., only 70% in sugar lands—complicate , necessitating mixed-methods approaches combining surveys with satellite yield data for robust evaluations.

Debates on Policy Efficacy

Scholars and policymakers remain divided on the overall efficacy of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) in achieving its goals of poverty alleviation, equitable growth, and agricultural development. Proponents highlight modest gains in beneficiary incomes and localized poverty reductions, particularly in areas with complementary support services like infrastructure and credit access. For instance, agrarian reform beneficiaries (ARBs) experienced a 12.2% increase in real per capita income from 1990 to 2000, alongside a slight decline in poverty incidence from 47.6% to 45.2% over the same period, contrasting with rising poverty among non-ARBs. These outcomes were attributed to enhanced tenure security enabling investments in physical capital, though benefits were largely confined to organized Agrarian Reform Communities (ARCs) where irrigation and roads were improved. However, such assessments often emphasize that redistribution alone proved insufficient without sustained public investments, as isolated land transfers failed to generate scalable productivity gains. Critics, drawing on econometric analyses, contend that CARP's structural flaws—such as enforced smallholder fragmentation and land market restrictions—caused net economic harm by distorting and stifling efficiency. A quantitative study found that CARP reduced average farm sizes by 34% between 1981 and 2002, elevating the share of sub-one- plots from 23% to 40%, which in turn lowered agricultural output per by 17% through misallocation to less skilled operators and barriers to rental or sales that prevented consolidation. This inefficiency manifested in stagnant growth of just 0.13% annually from 1980 to 1998, lagging far behind regional peers like (0.87%) and (1.49%), with sharp declines in key sectors such as (40% below national yields) and (8% below). Moreover, while CARP distributed over 5 million s by 2014, it inadvertently fostered a "landed poor" class, with 54% of ARC beneficiaries remaining below the poverty line in 2009—higher than the 36% rate for all farmers—exacerbated by suppression from caps that drove informal lending at rates up to 60% per season. The debate underscores a core tension: CARP's equity-focused redistribution enhanced short-term access for some 3 million beneficiaries but undermined long-term viability by prioritizing equal division over scale economies, with indicating limited poverty eradication and persistent rural underperformance. reviews of available data similarly note scant rigorous quantification of CARP's "opportunity-enhancing" effects on broader , highlighting implementation gaps and the absence of transformative growth despite decades of effort. This has fueled calls to dismantle remaining restrictions, arguing that market-led adjustments could mitigate productivity losses to as low as 6% while preserving tenure gains.

Post-2014 Developments and Alternatives

Following the expiration of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program Extension with Reforms (CARPER) on June 30, 2014, the (DAR) issued directives to continue land acquisition and distribution for parcels already covered by notices of coverage issued prior to the deadline, without requiring a new legislative extension. This administrative continuation allowed processing of approximately 304,412 hectares of remaining undistributed land identified as of 2014, though actual distribution lagged significantly thereafter. For instance, only 9,223 hectares were distributed in 2023, reflecting persistent delays attributed to legal disputes, landowner resistance, and administrative bottlenecks. Under the Duterte administration (2016–2022), efforts focused on accelerating completion of pending distributions and enhancing support services such as credit access and infrastructure, yet progress remained slow, with agrarian reform described as "unfinished business" due to unresolved claims and limited improvements in rural productivity. The Marcos Jr. administration (2022–present) has maintained momentum through initiatives like the Gawad Agraryo awards in September 2025, where President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. highlighted beneficiaries as "models of hope," while DAR's 2026 budget proposals emphasize ongoing land titling and soil health schemes amid a reduced allocation from ₱28 billion to ₱17 billion. However, ongoing land settlement has constrained shifts toward broader rural development, including infrastructure and market access, as resources remain tied to redistribution targets. Proposals for alternatives to CARP's compulsory acquisition model have gained traction, advocating market-assisted land reform (MASL) involving voluntary transfers subsidized by government, as explored in analyses favoring willing-buyer-willing-seller mechanisms over mandatory redistribution to mitigate evasion and inefficiency. Economists like Victoria Fabella have argued for phasing out CARP entirely post-2014, redirecting efforts to secure property rights, provide extension services, and enable farm consolidation to counteract fragmentation-induced productivity losses documented in studies showing CARP's role in reducing agricultural output by limiting scale economies. Recent market-oriented initiatives, such as the Support to Parcelization of Land for Individual Titling (SPLIT) proposal backed by the World Bank, aim to subdivide collective titles into individual holdings to facilitate leasing and sales, though critics contend this undermines farmer cooperatives and risks elite recapture without addressing causal drivers of inequality like weak enforcement. Empirical assessments indicate MASL variants have yielded mixed results globally and in Philippine pilots, often favoring wealthier participants over landless tenants due to information asymmetries and bargaining power disparities.

References

  1. [1]
    R.A. 6657, as amended - Department of Agrarian Reform
    It is the policy of the State to pursue a Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). The welfare of the landless farmers and farmworkers will receive the ...
  2. [2]
    EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 229 - PROVIDING THE MECHANISMS ...
    The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) shall cover, regardless of tenurial arrangement and commodity produced, all public and private agricultural ...
  3. [3]
    Department of Agrarian Reform
    The program implements strategic initiatives such as enhancing farm productivity support, strengthening organizational capacity, and improving access to credit.
  4. [4]
    [PDF] The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program after 30 Years
    Dec 11, 2017 · It adopted the UN definition of land reform which considers “an integrated program of measures designed to eliminate obstacles to economic and ...
  5. [5]
    REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9700 - Supreme Court E-Library
    An Act Strengthening the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), Extending the Acquisition and Distribution of All Agricultural Lands.
  6. [6]
    CARP did more harm than good to farm sector, says economist
    Aug 21, 2020 · Based on a study, the program reduced the country's average farm size by 37 percent and the average output per hectare by 17 percent, resulting ...
  7. [7]
    [PDF] Land Reform and Productivity: A Quantitative Analysis with Micro Data
    The 1988 Philippine land reform reduced average farm size by 34% and agricultural productivity by 17% on impact.Missing: controversies | Show results with:controversies<|separator|>
  8. [8]
    Balancing land reform and productivity
    Jul 27, 2020 · Authors Tasso Adamopoulos and Diego Restuccia found that the 1988 Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) significantly hindered agricultural productivity.
  9. [9]
    [PDF] Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP): Time to Let Go
    This paper revisits the record of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program. (CARP) in the Philippines over its quarter-century existence.
  10. [10]
    [PDF] Is Land Reform a Failure in the Philippines? An Assessment on CARP
    This paper attempts to provide a historical presentation on how land reform in the Philippines has progressed beginning from the colonial rule up to the present ...
  11. [11]
    Public Policy and Agrarian Reform in the Philippines Under Marcos
    Major agrarian reform was first pursued (Starner, 1961) during the administration of Ramon Magsaysay (1954-1957). Through passage of the Agricultural land ...
  12. [12]
    R.A. 1400 - LawPhil
    This Act shall be known as the "Land Reform Act of 1955." Section 2. Declaration of policy. It is the declared policy of the State to create and maintain an ...
  13. [13]
    Philippine Land Reform Act of 1955 - Jur.ph
    The Land Reform Act of 1955 in the Philippines aimed to distribute agricultural lands to landless citizens through the establishment of the Land Tenure ...
  14. [14]
    Agrarian Reform History
    Agrarian Reform History, Pre-Spanish Period, Spanish Period, First Philippine Republic, American Period, Commonwealth Period, Japanese Occupation
  15. [15]
    P.D. No. 27 1972 - LawPhil
    Statutes -DECREEING THE EMANCIPATION OF TENANTS FROM THE BONDAGE OF THE SOIL, TRANSFERRING TO THEM THE OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND THEY TILL AND PROVIDING THE ...
  16. [16]
    PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 27 - Supreme Court E-Library
    This shall apply to all tenant farmers of private agricultural lands primarily devoted to rice and corn under a system of share-crop or lease-tenancy.
  17. [17]
    The Marcos Agrarian Reform Program: Promises and Contradictions
    Covering only rice and corn made Marcos' agrarian reform vulnerable to criticisms that the real intent was to target oligarchs and at the same time protecting ...
  18. [18]
    R.A. 6657 - LawPhil
    Eighth Congress. Republic Act No. 6657 June 10, 1988. AN ACT INSTITUTING A COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN REFORM PROGRAM TO PROMOTE SOCIAL JUSTICE AND ...
  19. [19]
    AN ACT INSTITUTING A COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN REFORM ...
    —The Comprehensive Agrarian reform Law of 1988 shall cover, regardless of tenurial arrangement and commodity produced, all public and private agricultural lands ...
  20. [20]
    The Long Road to Agrarian Reform in the Philippines
    Aug 16, 2013 · Republic Act (RA) 6657 or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL), was signed into law by President Corazon C. Aquino on 10 June 1988 in ...
  21. [21]
    [PDF] Republic Act No. 6657
    It is the policy of the State to pursue a. Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). The welfare of the landless farmers and farmworkers.
  22. [22]
    The Mendiola Massacre: Decades on, Philippine Land Reform ...
    Jan 22, 2021 · Protesters reenact the 1987 Mendiola Massacre during a rally on Jan. 22, 2021 in Manila, Philippines. Protesters also accused the government of Philippine ...
  23. [23]
    Mendiola massacre against farmers demanding genuine ... - Ej Atlas
    Mar 15, 2022 · Mendiola massacre against farmers demanding genuine land reform, Manila, The Philippines ... (CARP) was finally enacted in 1988.[6][7].
  24. [24]
    35 years of deception and disgrace: Whither to after CARP?
    Jun 10, 2023 · In the first place, the Cory Aquino regime was only compelled to enact CARP to pacify protests after the Mendiola Massacre in 1988 and to block ...
  25. [25]
    DAR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 19 - Supreme Court E-Library
    6657, known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL), shall have four (4) years from the date of effectivity of the CARL on 15 June 1988, or until 15 ...Missing: details | Show results with:details<|separator|>
  26. [26]
    [PDF] Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (RA No. 6657)
    Apr 30, 2022 · Republic Act No. 6657 or the Comprehensive Agrarian reform Law was enacted into a law on June 10, 1988 by former President Corazon Aquino.
  27. [27]
    R.A. 9700 - LawPhil
    Aug 7, 2009 · R.A. 9700 strengthens CARP, extends land acquisition/distribution, and aims to promote social justice and landless farmers' welfare.Missing: key | Show results with:key
  28. [28]
    Executive Order No. 229 - LawPhil
    EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 229 July 22, 1987. PROVIDING THE MECHANISMS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE AGRARIAN REFORM PROGRAM.
  29. [29]
    Revised-Resettlement-Framework-Support-to-Parcelization-of ...
    RA 6657 specifies qualified CARP beneficiaries in the following order of priority: (1) agricultural lessees and share tenants; (2) regular farmworkers; (3) ...
  30. [30]
    Land Redistribution per Secs. 22 to 27 of RA 6657, as amended
    Jun 25, 2014 · A basic qualification of a beneficiary shall be his willingness, aptitude, and ability to cultivate and make the land as productive as possible.
  31. [31]
    Department of Agrarian Reform
    The identification of actual and potential beneficiaries under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) is vested in the Secretary of Agrarian Reform ...Missing: criteria | Show results with:criteria
  32. [32]
    [PDF] GAIN Report - USDA Foreign Agricultural Service
    Oct 27, 1998 · At the heart of the CARP is its land tenure improvement program which includes land acquisition and distribution of lands to landless ...
  33. [33]
    DAR Services - Department of Agrarian Reform
    It consists of two key elements: (1) the adjudication of agrarian reform cases, and (2) the delivery of agrarian legal assistance. Together, these mechanisms ...
  34. [34]
    37749-013: Agrarian Reform Communities Project II
    CARP includes support services to be provided to ARBs with a view to reducing their poverty and improving the sustainability of their landholdings. ADB has ...
  35. [35]
    CARP seen unsustainable without support services
    Sep 14, 2022 · AGRARIAN REFORM beneficiaries (ARBs) need support services to sustain them and keep them productive after they have been awarded land, ...<|separator|>
  36. [36]
    [PDF] DAR, Land Reform-Related Agencies and the CARP - EconStor
    ... CARP:A Study of Government and Alternative. Approaches to. Land Acquisition and Distribution. Lourdes 5. Adriano. DISCUSSION PAPERSERIES NO. 94-13. The PIDS ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  37. [37]
    the case of Philippine agrarian reform[11] - E.A. Guardian
    Agrarian reform has had a significant impact on farmer beneficiaries. Increased per capita incomes, reduced poverty incidence, higher investments in physical ...
  38. [38]
    [PDF] Choosing a Mechanism for Land Redistribution in the Philippines
    The Philippines' current land reform program (CARP) is ineffective. Market-assisted land reform is being considered, but the document argues for expediting ...
  39. [39]
    1935 Constitution - DAR - LIS - Department of Agrarian Reform
    The DAR, under the leadership of President Fidel V. Ramos and Secretary Ernesto D. Garilao, pursued the "development of agrarian reform communities (ARCs) as ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  40. [40]
    [PDF] Agrarian Reform & Philippine Political Development
    The task of the current administration is to finish land reform in the program's remaining balance of 3.466 million hectares wherein 1.592 million hectares are ...
  41. [41]
    [PDF] THE PHILIPPINES COUNTRY BRIEF: PROPERTY RIGHTS AND ...
    Soil type, topography, government policy, and regional conflict between Christians and Muslims were also determinants in the patterns of agricultural activity.
  42. [42]
    Landlessness And Peasant Woes: A Lingering Calamity
    Oct 21, 2009 · Under the Arroyo administration, more than 20,000 hectares of agricultural lands ... CARP through a market-assisted land reform towards ...
  43. [43]
    [PDF] The right to food under the Arroyo administration - PhilRights
    The Strong Republic was able to distribute 250,000 hectares of land under CARP; sold rice at P14/kilo in 1,000 rolling stores; allocated P24 billion for ...
  44. [44]
    [PDF] The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program After 30 Years
    The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) was introduced almost three decades ago with the approval of Republic Act (RA) 6657, also known as the ...
  45. [45]
    Strengthening and Extending CARP Law - Jur.ph
    The Act comprehensively strengthens CARP by extending its coverage, refining its mechanisms, enhancing support services, imposing strict penalties, ensuring ...Missing: key | Show results with:key
  46. [46]
    PNoy promises to complete land distribution by 2014 - Rappler
    Jun 14, 2012 · Under CARPER, 961,974 hectares of agricultural land remain to be distributed. The country's rich families maintain control over 107,639 ...
  47. [47]
    DAR to Cover All Landholdings Under CARPER by 2014 The ...
    Jun 7, 2012 · Thus, 111,889 hectares were actually distributed to 63,755 agrarian reform beneficiaries last year. Delos Reyes explained that the remaining ...
  48. [48]
    [PDF] 25 Years of CARP - Senate of the Philippines
    2009, Congress extended the program's implementation until June 2014 by virtue of Republic Act 9700 – An Act. Strengthening the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform ...
  49. [49]
    The unfinished implications of 'finished' land reform: Local ...
    Initial studies in the Philippines suggested CARP seemed to promote equity and reduce poverty (Llanto and Ballesteros, 2003). Redistribution of land has ...
  50. [50]
    [PDF] CPBRDNotes - Congress
    CARP, based on the 1987 Constitution, aimed to redistribute land to landless farmers. As of 2014, 304,412 hectares remained to be distributed.Missing: key | Show results with:key
  51. [51]
    [PDF] REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9700 (August 7, 2009)
    Jun 23, 2018 · "The agrarian reform program is founded on the right of farmers and regular farmworkers, who are landless, to own directly or collectively the.Missing: targets accomplishments
  52. [52]
    Land distribution to continue even after lapse of CARP Law
    Jul 2, 2014 · Land distribution will continue beyond June 30, 2014 as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) did not end last Tuesday.
  53. [53]
    Land administration, management woes still plague CARP
    Nov 29, 2018 · To date, over 4.8 million hectares of private and non-private agricultural land have been distributed under the program, benefitting around 2.8 ...
  54. [54]
    Republic Act No. 8532 - LawPhil
    Republic Act No. 8532 strengthens the CARP by providing augmentation funds, amending the CARP Law of 1988, and authorizing additional funding up to P50 billion.
  55. [55]
    Augmentation of Fund for CARP Implementation - Jur.ph
    Republic Act No. 8532 provides additional funding for CARP implementation until 2008, with sources including sales of assets, recovered ill-gotten wealth, and ...
  56. [56]
    Implementation mechanisms of CARP - Jur.ph
    Government assumes mortgages up to landowner compensation value. Payment Terms for Beneficiaries. Payments made in 30 equal annual installments at 6 ...
  57. [57]
    Court orders gov't to pay Hacienda Luisita P28B - News - Inquirer.net
    Jun 19, 2025 · CA has ordered the gov't to pay Hacienda Luisita Inc. P28.49 billion as just compensation for land in Tarlac expropriated in 1989.
  58. [58]
    Valuing Just Compensation: The Time of Taking and Factors Under ...
    Mar 27, 2023 · The main legal issue is determining the just compensation for land acquired under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), specifically ...
  59. [59]
    Philippines - Agrarian Reform Communities Development Project
    The Agrarian Reform Communities Development Project will assist the Government of the Philippines in strengthening farmer organizations in Agrarian Reform ...
  60. [60]
    BARBD | DAR ARBDSP - Wix Studio
    BARBD is in-charge with the formulation of policies, plans and programs, provision of technical assistance in developing viable agrarian communities.
  61. [61]
    [PDF] Philippine Agrarian Reform in the 21st Century
    Indeed land distribution under the Aquino administration has been moving at a snail's pace; ... 2 Focus on the Global South (with the Save Agrarian Reform ...
  62. [62]
    [PDF] Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP): Time to let go
    Feb 2, 2014 · By June 2014, CARP shall have acquired and distributed 16% of the total Philippine land area of ... economic welfare impact of land reform in the ...<|separator|>
  63. [63]
    Land Reform: What Has Been Its Impact after 30 Years?
    Jan 16, 2018 · CARP has also supported the distribution of about 2.5 million hectares of alienable and disposable lands and the issuance of stewardship rights ...
  64. [64]
    The CARP After 30 Years: What Have We Accomplished?
    While the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) has accomplished much in the past 30 years in terms of land reformed area and number of beneficiaries ...
  65. [65]
    Impact of Agrarian Reform on Poverty - ResearchGate
    We review the data being used to argue that the Philippines' comprehensive agrarian reform program (carp) has failed in economic terms. We find that ...
  66. [66]
    [PDF] Agrarian Reform and Poverty Reduction in the Philippines
    May 30, 2007 · This finding demonstrates that the positive micro-level effects of the program could only be translated into higher long-term incomes and lower ...
  67. [67]
    Has agrarian reform improved the living standards of beneficiaries ...
    Aug 1, 2022 · income increase of Php 9,294 per year for a family of five. Table 1 ... of the first round of CARP IA studies. Final. 42. Second, the WB ...
  68. [68]
    Agrarian Reform and Poverty Reduction in the Philippines
    PDF | On Jan 1, 2007, Arsenio M. Balisacan published Agrarian Reform and Poverty Reduction in the Philippines | Find, read and cite all the research you ...
  69. [69]
    Growth, Inequality and Poverty Reduction in the Philippines
    Land reform is positively associated with growth and poverty reduction while higher agricultural terms of trade facilitate poverty reduction. The “growth ...
  70. [70]
    Land Reform, Rural Development, and Poverty in the Philippines
    The goal of this report is to take stock of the existing evidence on the impact of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) on poverty.Missing: positive | Show results with:positive
  71. [71]
    [PDF] Poverty in the Philippines. Causes Constraints, and Opportunities
    Philippines. The rural poverty incidence (47.0% of families in 2000) remained virtually unchanged since 1988 (46.3% of families). The urban poverty.
  72. [72]
    [PDF] Impact of Agrarian Reform on Poverty
    the different components of the comprehensive agrarian reform program. ... Originally, the total area of this coverage was calculated to be 10.3 million hectares.<|control11|><|separator|>
  73. [73]
    CARP did more harm than good to farm sector, says economist
    Aug 21, 2020 · According to economist and national scientist Raul Fabella, the government lost as much as P340 billion in forgone farm production in 2019 due to CARP.
  74. [74]
    PIDS: agri growth stunted by shrinking farm size, low productivity
    Dec 31, 2021 · The country's vital agriculture sector is not expected to grow by much due to factors such as shrinking farm size and declining productivity.
  75. [75]
    [PDF] GOVERNANCE IN AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
    Bureaucratic corruption within DAR was also reported to have escalated to such a degree that even DAR personnel would process and expedite conversion cases.
  76. [76]
    agrarian reform - Philippine Institute for Development Studies
    The completion of the CARP, resolution of agrarian reform issues, and provision of adequate support services to farmers, including physical infrastructure, ...
  77. [77]
    DAR awarded farm lots to retired cops, minors — COA - Philstar.com
    Dec 6, 2024 · ... CORRUPTION SCANDAL · MONSOON SEASON · DUTERTE ICC TRIAL · INFLUENCE OPERATIONS · EXPLAINERS · FACT CHECKS · CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENT · VIDEOS.
  78. [78]
    2 ex-DAR secretaries liable for misuse of P70 million – COA - Rappler
    Oct 8, 2017 · ... DAR personnel, which are not allowable expenses under agrarian reform laws. ... Corruption in the Philippines · SEE ALL OF ABOUT RAPPLER · Team ...
  79. [79]
    KMP reminds DAR: CARP is a fake and failed program
    Aug 11, 2021 · No genuine land reform under Duterte KMP reminds DAR: CARP is a fake ... Certificates of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs).” “DAR attempts to ...
  80. [80]
    DENR MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. 2000-11
    ... fake and illegal titles, the guidelines below apply exclusively to illegal titles based on Certificates of Land Ownership Awards (CLOAs), Certificates of Land ...
  81. [81]
    Land Valuation Disputes: Navigating Just Compensation in Agrarian ...
    Aug 9, 2023 · The Philippine government's Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) aims to redistribute agricultural land to landless farmers. A core ...
  82. [82]
    [PDF] Challenges in Compulsory Acquisition of Lands Under the ... - SciMatic
    The study dealt with the challenges encountered in the implementation of compulsory acquisition of lands under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) ...
  83. [83]
    The effects of land reforms on farm size and agricultural productivity
    Jul 8, 2019 · Land reforms reduce average farm size and agricultural productivity by misallocating land and labor, with a 34% farm size reduction and 17% ...Missing: positive outcomes
  84. [84]
    Productivity Impacts of Agrarian Reform in the Philippines Over Time
    Oct 22, 2018 · This paper reviews the impacts of land and agrarian reform programs in the Philippines to agricultural productivity based on several studies conducted over ...Missing: stagnation | Show results with:stagnation
  85. [85]
    Land reform, rural development, and poverty in the Philippines
    The goal of this report is to take stock of the existing evidence on the impact of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) on poverty, to examine theMissing: sources | Show results with:sources
  86. [86]
    [PDF] Impact of Agrarian Reform on Poverty - EconStor
    Survey data that will be used are: 1) data from the household survey of the CARP-Impact Assessment (CARP-IA) project being conducted by Dr. Gordoncillo's team, ...Missing: peer- reviewed
  87. [87]
    [PDF] Boosting agricultural productivity through parcelization of collective ...
    Dec 26, 2020 · In terms of household- and village-level data, CARP's impact on poverty appeared to be positive albeit modest. The estimated average per ...
  88. [88]
    Issues and problems related to impact assessment of agrarian ...
    The Philippines Republic Act No. 6657, which institutes the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), declares two objectives in its title: to promote ...
  89. [89]
    [PDF] World Bank Document
    More importantly, land reform implementation following the 1988 CARP appears to have consolidated the gains from the first phase of land reform but was much ...