Agriculture is one of the key sectors that got a substantial boost in funding under the recently signed 2026 General Appropriations Act (GAA). The Marcos Jr administration claims this as part of its people-centered, pork-free and transparent budget.
In his budget signing speech, Pres. Marcos indicated that the higher allocation for agriculture will sustain the momentum in food security, modernize supply systems, support farmers and fisherfolk’s livelihoods, and invest in farm-to-market roads (FMRs). But a closer look reveals that the agricultural budget is not pork-free and insufficient to meaningfully improve food security and rural livelihoods.
Bigger allocations
Under the 2026 GAA, the agriculture and agrarian reform sector budget rose to Php297.5 billion — almost Php50 billion higher than the Php248 billion in the 2025 GAA and Php41 billion more than the Php256 billion proposed in the 2026 National Expenditures Program (NEP). The Department of Agriculture (DA) receives the biggest share at 62.4% or Php185.8 billion, followed by the National Irrigation Administration (NIA) at 21.3% or Php63.2 billion, and the Department of Agrarian Reform at a distant third with 5.7% or Php16.8 billion.
Comparing the 2026 GAA to the NEP — particularly after the realignment of flood control funds — the biggest increases went to the DA (Php31.8 billion) and NIA (Php18.2 billion), along with notable hikes for the Philippine Fisheries Development Authority (PFDA; Php2.4 billion) and Philippine Crop Insurance Corporation (PCIC; Php2 billion).
The bulk of the DA budget is concentrated in the Office of the Secretary (OSEC), which absorbs 89.1% or Php165.5 billion. The largest allocations under the DA-OSEC go to: production support services (21.5% or Php35.6 billion), mainly the National Rice Program (Php26.4 billion); farm-to-market roads (FMRs; 19.9% or Php33 billion); Rice Competitive Enhancement Fund (RCEF; 18.1% or Php30 billion); and the Presidential Assistance for Farmers and Fisherfolk and the Rice for All Program (both 6% or Php10 billion).
Relative to the 2026 NEP, the most significant increases under the DA-OSEC are in FMRs (Php17 billion) and Presidential Assistance to Farmers and Fisherfolk (Php10 billion).
Pork persists
Substantial increases in the agricultural budget are concentrated in programs prone to corruption, anomalies, and political patronage. Following the controversy surrounding flood control projects, large funds have merely been shifted from these to other sectors — like agriculture — where similar risks persist. In agriculture, these include “hard pork” or infrastructure like FMRs and irrigation projects, and “soft pork” such as social and production assistance for farmers and fisherfolk.
Under the DA, allocations for the construction, repair and improvement of FMRs surged to Php33 billion in 2026, up by Php9.8 billion from Php23 billion in the 2025 GAA, and by Php17 billion from Php16 billion in the 2026 NEP. Large shares are earmarked for projects in Central Luzon (Php4.9 billion), Eastern Visayas (Php4.4 billion), Cagayan Valley (Php3.8 billion) and SOCCSKSARGEN (Php3.6 billion). Central Luzon and Eastern Visayas were previously identified as having among the highest number of overpriced FMR projects.
The underperformance and anomalies in prior FMR projects are also telling. The DA reports that only 67% (3,135) of the 4,810 FMR projects worth Php76.5 billion from 2021 to 2025 were completed. Hundreds remain pending (817) or ongoing (677), while dozens were deferred (34). The DA’s audit also revealed at least nine ghost FMR projects worth Php125 million. Budget watchdog People’s Budget Coalition have also warned that the “very rounded figures” for 820 out of 870 FMR projects in the 2026 budget indicate that these are not properly costed and could be vulnerable to misuse.
Irrigation projects face similar concerns. The National Irrigation Administration’s (NIA) Php63.2 billion budget is Php6.1 billion lower than its Php69.4 billion in the 2025 GAA, but Php18.2 billion higher than the Php45.1 billion proposed in the 2026 NEP. Yet the agency only had a 62% accomplishment rate as of 2024 and has already come under fire for irregularities in irrigation projects.
In 2023, the Senate investigated alleged anomalies in Php121-billion worth of NIA projects, including prolonged delays and payment of maintenance fees for unfinished works. The same year, COA flagged NIA for irregularly awarding 269 infrastructure contracts worth Php2.9 billion — many to contractors with deficient eligibility documents or through flawed bidding processes. COA again cited the agency in early 2025 for delayed implementation of 161 contracts worth Php2.04 billion, many of which were due for completion in 2021-2023. Another 75 projects worth Php5.06 billion were suspended or given extensions.
Also notable is the Php2.4 billion-increase in the PFDA due to the reallocation of flood control funds. Most of the government corporation’s Php4.5 billion budget goes to the construction, rehabilitation and improvement of fish ports (Php2.1 billion) and deep-water ports for fish and agri-industrial projects (Php2.4 billion) — infrastructure that may also be susceptible to irregularities and corruption.
Soft pork under presidential discretion
Large portions of the agricultural budget are earmarked for programs that can be considered “soft pork” and subject to presidential discretion. The Php10-billion Presidential Assistance for Farmers and Fisherfolk in the 2026 GAA is a new program inserted by the Congress amid realignment of flood control funds.
In addition, Php15 billion — or half of the Php30 billion Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund (RCEF) — is earmarked for “Other Priority Programs, Activities and Projects”, likewise subject to presidential approval. Combined, at least Php25 billion in DA funds are under discretionary control of the president, prone to potential corruption and political patronage.
The sharp increases in the budgets of the DA-Philippine Carabao Center (PCC) and National Dairy Authority (NDA) budgets during the bicameral conference also raises concerns. Most of the additional funds are earmarked for the milk feeding component of the Department of Education’s School Based Feeding Program. The PCC budget more than doubled — from just Php971 million in the 2026 NEP to Php2.1 billion in the GAA — with over half going to the milk feeding. The NDA budget jumped nearly fourfold, from Php531 million to Php2.4 billion, with almost 80% allocated to the same program, despite COA findings of delays or non-delivery of milk to target schools.
Falling short
While the 2026 agricultural budget is substantially bigger, previous boosts in allocations under the Marcos Jr administration have failed to deliver promised improvements in production and livelihoods.
Agriculture’s share of the national budget increased only marginally — from 3.9% in 2025 to 4.4% in 2026. This remains far below the shares of debt servicing (14%), defense (6.3%), and the controversial Department of Public Works and Highway (7.8%). Given agriculture’s long-standing decline, its level of prioritization in the national budget is clearly insufficient.
Past increases have also failed to deliver meaningful gains, indicating that allotted funds are not enough and fail to prioritize what is needed most in the agriculture sector. Despite a Php44-billion increase in 2023 and Php60.3-billion increase in 2024, the sector’s share to gross domestic product (GDP) fell from 8.9% in 2022 to 8.0% in 2024 — the lowest on record. Growth has been weak and volatile — rising slightly from 0.5% in 2022 to 1.2% in 2023, then contracting by 1.6% in 2024.
Employment in agriculture grew by 318,000 to 11.2 million in 2023, but then suffered a 1.1-million job loss to 10.1 million employed in 2024. Average daily basic pay in agriculture remains the worst among all sectors at Php367 as of 2025. Farmers and fisherfolk are also still among the poorest basic sectors at 27% and 27.4%, respectively, as of 2023.
Failing rice
The shortcomings of the 2026 budget are most evident in the rice sector. The government continues to uphold the Rice Tariffication Law (RTL), which has undermined domestic production and farmers’ livelihoods while turning the Philippines into the world’s largest rice importer. Yet it continues to underfund meaningful rice industry development and support for producers.
The Makabayan bloc’s Rice Industry Development Act (RIDA) or House Bill (HB) 578, for instance, proposes an estimated Php185 billion over three years (or Php62 billion annually) followed by an annual allotment of at least Php27 billion. This is to ensure the development of the rice industry, boost productivity, achieve self-sufficiency, raise farmers’ incomes, and make rice affordable to the public.
By contrast, the Php30-billion RCEF covers less than half of one year’s requirement and remains dependent on tariffs generated by rice imports that hurt local farmers and production.
Proposals to strengthen the National Food Authority (NFA) capacity for large-scale palay procurement are similarly ignored. The NFA’s Php11.3-billion budget for 2026 is only a fraction (11%) of around Php103.3 billion needed annually over three years to procure at least 25% of total palay production to stabilize farmgate and retail prices. Irrigation funding also falls far short of NIA estimates that at least Php220 billion is needed per year to irrigate 1.2 million hectares of farmland to attain rice self-sufficiency. The NIA budget of Php63.2 billion under the 2026 GAA is only 29% of this projection.
Even the Php23-billion rice subsidy for the President’s Benteng Bigas Meron Na! program — Php10 billion of which comes from the DA’s Rice for All Program — is tokenistic. Using the DA’s own eligibility cap of 30 kilos per month and assuming a subsidy of Php20 per kilo — given that average nationwide prices of regular milled rice now exceed Php41 per kilo — IBON estimates that the budget can support around 15 million beneficiaries for only about two and a half months. To provide the same subsidy to 15 million beneficiaries for an entire year, the program would require Php108 billion, nearly five times the proposed allocation. However, beyond the tokenism, the intervention in rice should be about making production cheaper so that it becomes affordable for all.
Beyond bigger budgets
The 2026 agriculture budget shows that higher allocations alone do not make spending people-centered. Funds remain concentrated in pork-prone infrastructure and short-term token assistance rather than long-term investments that genuinely strengthen domestic agriculture and improve production, incomes and food security.
Ultimately, a bigger budget will not be enough to revitalize agriculture if it is based on a neoliberal framework that prioritizes profit-driven interests and political patronage. A truly dynamic and meaningful agricultural budget — and even the national budget — must be anchored on a comprehensive plan for genuine agrarian reform, rural development and national industrialization. This also requires a government with the political will to push for such bold reforms in the interest of the Filipino people.