Philippine banks fail to provide adequate credit to agriculture, fisheries
MANILA, Philippines—Philippine banks have failed to extend credit to Philippine farmers and fishermen, contributing to a huge financial gap in the agriculture sector and leaving farmers in the grip of usurers who charge exorbitant interests that plunge them into debt.
This was among the findings of industry players and government officials at Thursday’s Agriculture and Fisheries Credit Summit, which was aimed at finding ways to expand credit to farmers and fishermen who want to modernize their livelihood.
Conference participants cited the insufficient credit line to agriculture workers as a major hindrance in the development of the country’s farming and fisheries industries.
A briefing paper prepared by the Agriculture Credit Policy Council (ACPC), an agency of the Department of Agriculture, said Philippine farmers and fishermen have a huge and increasing but unmet need for credit.
Filipino farmers and agriculture workers require capital to increase their productivity and improve their facilities, but they have no source for it. At present, ACPC said, the credit gap in the sector is about P252 billion, 2.47 percent higher than the credit gap in 2009.
The paper also noted that more and more Filipino farmers are borrowing for their businesses, but that they rely heavily on the informal lending sector instead of banks.
The ACPC said banks must allocate 25 percent of their loanable funds to agriculture and agrarian reform under Presidential Decree 717. In the last two years, however, not only did banks fail to reach this mandatory level, their lending compliance actually declined, the paper said.
“In spite of the banking sector’s large amount of funds that are available for lending, access to formal credit by smallholders in the agriculture sector remains limited,” the ACPC said.
As of September 2010, “banks lent a total of P522 billion, a decline of 8 percent from last year’s level. This reflects 19 percent of the total loanable funds, or 6 percentage points short of the total credit requirement. Banks’ compliance slid down by 15 percent as compared to previous year,” the ACPC paper said.
There are various reasons for the banks’ low lending rate, according to conference participants.
Raul Montemayor, Federation of Free Farmers national manager, said Filipino farmers and fishermen, who are mostly smallholders, are still considered by banks as risky borrowers who often default on their loans.
Filipino farmers also balk at the banks’ high interest rates, the ACPC said. They also complain of the stringent and voluminous requirements asked by financial institutions so that some of them fake documents to be able to submit them, the agency said.
The ACPC also noted that most of the commercial and universal banks are located at urban areas, which are inaccessible to farmers and fisherfolks in the rural areas.
Montemayor and ACPC said small farmers and fishermen go to informal sources to tide them over.
“Informal sources/lenders are those not being regulated by the BSP [Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas] or any regulating body. These include input suppliers, millers, traders, friends and relatives, and landowners who are not supervised by the government. They typically impose exorbitant interest rates in exchange for non-requirement of documents and/or collateral,” the ACPC said.
Montemayor said Filipino farmers’ reliance on loan sharks is a dangerous habit that leaves them deeper in debt. Most of the borrowers are subsistence or one-crop planters who are vulnerable to a lot of risks like extreme weather. When their crops are destroyed, they are forced to run to informal lenders again, despite their inability to pay the high interest rates, Montemayor explained.
Meanwhile, the ACPC is urging the government to release the long-overdue funds allocated for them under the Agriculture and Fisheries Modernization Act (AFMA) of 1997.
Jovita Corpuz, ACPC chief, said the ACPC’s Agro-Industry Modernization Credit and Financing Program should have been appropriated the amount of P2 billion for its first year of implementation and P1.7 billion every year for the next six years.
The funds have not reached the ACPC. The credit line is currently financed by loanable funds and past due loans from terminated agricultural directed credit programs collected by ACPC.
“If we were able to get the P12 billion, it would have gone a long way in providing financing to unorganized small farmers and fisherfolks,” Corpuz said.
Corpuz said the government recognizes that small Filipino farmers and fishermen need accessible funds to improve their lot.
Under a five-year plan discussed at the conference on Thursday, the government said it planned to increase the proportion of borrowing farmers and fishers from formal sources to 85 percent from 57 percent by 2016, or an increase of 28 percent in the incidence of formal borrowing among small farming and fishing household borrowers.
“In terms of the number of small farmers and fishers, the goal is to increase credit outreach by more than 800,000 farmers and fishing households,” the ACPC paper said.
http://business.inquirer.net/13591/philippine-banks-fail-to-provide-adequate-credit-to-agriculture-fisheries
As what we can all observe, Philippines is an agricultural country. If we look at some of the provinces here in the Philippines, we can clearly observe that most of the citizens' jobs involve farming, and fishing. So, in the article above, I can say that I am really disappointed that the Philippine banks failed to give loans to our local farmers. If we look back at our previous class lecture, it was mentioned that enable for an economy to achieve economic growth, people should increase their investments. The question is how our local farmers will and fisher folks be able to invest if the Philippine banks itself could not lend them money? How will they be able to improve their farming if they do not have one of the primary resources such as money? As what have Raul Montemayor said in the above article, farmers and fishermen are "still considered by banks as risky borrowers who often default on their loans." Though their reason for not being able to do so is sadly in fact a fact, still they should have given those farmers and fisher folks a chance. The recently mentioned statements lead me to a mind-opening question. If the banks could not give loans to the farmers because most of them default at it, so, why do our farmers could no longer pay their loans? Well, I think, it is because of the government's taxation. It is not only taxation that eats up our local farmers’ money, but also other so many registration fees regarding on farming. There are so many of those fees that there is little left for improving their land. With little left finances for their land, it would be obvious that harvest would also become so little. With little harvest, they will then have little profit from it. With little profit, then they could no longer pay their loans. It's just cause and effect. If there are so many fees for farmers to pay such as government taxes, effect would then be the farmers default on their loans.
To achieve economic growth, I suggest that the government should reduce their taxes and improve their ways regarding registration fees on farmers. In that way, they will have enough money for their farming and fishing, and also have some progress in their work. If that ever happens, banks will no longer be hesitant in lending at our farmers and fisher folks.
