The Agrarian Reform Communities Development Project
(ARCDP2) reported significant increases in crop yields post-implementation. For
instance, hybrid rice yields increased by 30%, and traditional corn yields rose
by 131%. -FFTC Agriculture Platform
ARBs residing in ARCs had better access to basic services
such as potable water and sanitary toilets, and higher ownership of household
assets compared to non-ARBs. -FAOHome
A study by Adamopoulos and Restuccia (2014) found that
agricultural productivity under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program
(CARP) fell by 17%, alongside a 34% reduction in average farm size. -AmericanEconomic Association
Despite land redistribution, a 2014 paper by Raul Fabella
noted that poverty incidence among ARBs in ARCs stood at 54% in 2011, higher
than the national average for farmers. This led to the characterization of ARBs
as the "landed poor." -UP School of Economics
While Agrarian Reform Communities (ARCs) have led to notable improvements in poverty reduction, agricultural productivity, and access to services for beneficiaries, challenges such as declining farm sizes, reduced overall productivity, and persistent poverty among ARBs highlight the need for policy adjustments. Addressing land market restrictions and providing sustained support services are crucial for enhancing the economic impact of agrarian reform in the Philippines.
Key policy adjustments made after 2010 in
the Philippines aimed at improving the incomes of Agrarian Reform
Beneficiaries (ARBs):
✅1. Agrarian Reform Community
Connectivity and Economic Support Services (ARCCESS) Program.
*Year Implemented: 2011
*Lead Agency: Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR)
Objective: Enhance productivity and income of ARBs by
supporting ARB organizations (ARBOs) through: Enterprise
development, Common Service
Facilities (CSFs) like tractors and post-harvest equipment and Business
development services and training.
Impact: Helped ARBs transition from subsistence to
commercial farming in many ARCs by integrating them into value chains and
improving productivity.
✅ 2. Agrarian Production Credit
Program (APCP).
*Year Implemented: 2012
*Lead Agencies: DAR, Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP),
Department of Agriculture (DA)
*Objective: Provide accessible and affordable credit to
ARBs for production inputs and agri-enterprises.
*Loan features: Low interest, no collateral for
accredited ARBO members
*Impact: Bridged financing gaps for ARBs who previously
relied on informal, high-interest sources.
✅ 3. Partnership Against Hunger
and Poverty (PAHP)
*Year Implemented: 2014(pilot); expanded thereafter
*Lead Agencies: DAR, Department of Social Welfare and
Development (DSWD), DA
*Objective: Link ARBs and ARBOs to institutional buyers
(e.g., feeding programs, schools) to ensure markets for their produce.
*Impact: Provided consistent income sources and market
assurance for many farmer groups.
✅ 4. Split Project (Support to
Parcelization of Lands for Individual Titling)
*Year Implemented: 2020 (funded by the World Bank)
*Lead Agency: DAR
*Objective: Fast-track the parcelization of collective
Certificate of Land Ownership Awards (CLOAs) into individual titles.
*Rationale: Individual titles give ARBs greater
security, enabling access to loans, land-based investments, and formal markets.
*Target: 1.3 million hectares to be titled to 1.1
million ARBs by 2024.
*Impact: Aims to improve land tenure security and
farmer confidence in long-term investment.
✅5. Executive Order No. 75,
Series of 2019
*Issued By: President Rodrigo Duterte
*Purpose: Mandates the distribution of government-owned
lands suitable for agriculture to qualified beneficiaries.
*Scope: Accelerated land distribution through
administrative means, expanding the land reform coverage without judicial
delays.
✅ 6. Republic Act No. 11953 or
the “New Agrarian Emancipation Act”
*Signed Into Law: July 2023
*Key Provision: Condones ₱57.6 billion in unpaid
debts of over 600,000 ARBs
*Goal: Free ARBs from amortization burdens and
encourage reinvestment in agriculture.
*Impact: Expected to boost income by removing financial
constraints tied to land repayment obligations.

In general, the ARC strategy has had a positive impact on poverty reduction, such as: (1) Faster Poverty Reduction in ARC Areas. A study by Ballesteros and dela Cruz (2016) from the
Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) showed that poverty
incidence declined faster in ARC barangays compared to non-ARC areas between
1990 and 2010. Poverty incidence dropped by 28.3 percentage points in ARC
areas, slightly outperforming non-ARC barangays. This suggests that the integrated approach of providing land
and support services (infrastructure, credit, training) had measurable effects
on household welfare; and (2) Improved Income and Welfare Indicators. The Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) reported that ARBs
in ARC areas generally had higher incomes, more assets, and better access to
services (e.g., potable water, electricity, schools). World Bank evaluations (such as of ARCDP1 and ARCDP2) found
that ARC strategies helped transition subsistence farmers to market-oriented
production, boosting incomes and reducing vulnerability.

📌 Conclusion
The ARC strategy has contributed to poverty reduction among farmers by integrating land reform with support services and infrastructure development. However, its effectiveness depends heavily on sustained government support, cooperative development, and access to markets. In well-functioning ARCs, poverty reduction has been substantial; in weaker or poorly supported areas, gains were limited.