Enhancing the Implementation of Common Service Facility (CSF) Under DAR-Agrarian Reform Community Connectivity and Economic Support Services (ARCCESS) Program in Ocampo, Camarines Sur, Philippines

This study evaluated the implementation of the Common Service Facility (CSF) under the Department of Agrarian Reform–Agrarian Reform Community Connectivity and Economic Support Services (DAR-ARCCESS) Program in Ocampo, Camarines Sur. The CSF comprised farm machinery and equipment, including four-wheel-drive tractors, a hauling truck, and hand tractors, utilized by Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Organizations (ARBOs) to enhance members’ economic productivity. A descriptive-evaluative research design was employed, involving officers and members from selected ARBOs. Data were collected through structured questionnaires and focus group discussions.
Results indicated that the implementation of the CSF was generally perceived as highly acceptable in terms of ease of operation, cost-effectiveness, and accessibility. However, availability of units and policy implementation were rated as moderately acceptable. Key challenges identified included limited-service coverage, low rental competitiveness, scheduling constraints, inadequate financial record-keeping, insufficient maintenance practices, and lack of trained or permanent operators.
To address these issues, the study recommends strengthening promotional strategies, increasing member engagement, developing second-line operators, enforcing operational policies such as job order documentation, enhancing operator capacity through continuous training, and institutionalizing regular financial reporting. These measures are expected to improve the efficiency, sustainability, and overall impact of the CSF under the DAR-ARCCESS Program.

Common Service Facility, DAR-ARCCESS Program, agrarian reform beneficiaries, farm mechanization

1. AFMA Primer Accessed December 2013 at hhttp://nafc.da.gov.ph/afma/primer [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. AFMech Law Accessed December 2013 at http//.www.gov.ph/2013/06/05republic-act-no-10601/. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Agricultural and Fisheries Modernization Act of (AFMA) 1997. Accessed in December 2013 at http://nafc.da.gov.ph/afma/ra 8435.pdf. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. AMDP (Agricultural Mechanization Development Program). 2002. AMDP brochure. Institute of Agricultural Engineering, College of Engineering and Agro-Industrial Technology, University of the Philippines at Los Baños. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. A.T Mosher, ‘‘Some Policy Issues and Research Needs’’ Experience in Farm Mechanization in South East Asia. Edited by Herman Southworth and Milton Berneth, page 335, 1974, published by the Agricultural Department Council, 630 Fifth Avenue, New York. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Bautista, E. U., 2003. Mechanizing rice production and postharvest operations in the Philippines: present status, prospects, and challenges. Philippine Agricultural Mechanization Bulletin, 10(2): 27-39. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Clarke, L.J., 2000. Strategies for Agricultural Mechanization Development: The Roles of Private Sector and the Government, Available at https://ecommons.cornell.edu/bitsream/handle/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Davis (1986), “Theory of Reasoned Action,” Retrieved August 24, 2018, from http://www.cios.org/encyclopedia/persuasion/Gtheory_1reasoned.htm [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Dela Cruz, R. SM. 2010. Consolidation and Large-Scale Mechanization of Corn Farms: The Case of Quirino and Isabela. PHilMech Journal. Vol. 2, No.1. Philippine Center for Postharvest Development and Mechanization. CLSU Compound, Science City of Muñoz, Nueva Ecija. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Dela Cruz, R.S., and S. B Bobier 2016.Farm Power Available Utilization in Philippine Agriculture, PostHarvest, and Mechanization Journal page 1-16. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Department of Agriculture. 2014. Rice and Corn Mechanization and Post-harvest Masterplan FY2014-2022. The Government of the Philippines. Manila. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Department of Agriculture. 2011. Rice mechanization: On-farm and Postharvest Mechanization Programs (2011-2016). The Philippines. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Erlang, A.K. (1929), “Queuing Theory,” Retrieved August 24, 2018, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queueing_Theory. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Medrano et al., Rice Combine Harvester: Its Effects to the Livelihood of Rice Field Tenants, Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, Vol.4, No.4 November 2016. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. PCARRD-DOST. 2009. Agricultural Mechanization in the Philippines, Los Baňos, Laguna [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. PCARRD-DOST (Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research and Development of Science and Technology), 2002. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. R & D Status and Directions (2000 and beyond) Agricultural Engineering, Los Baňos, Laguna. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources and Development 2009. Agricultural Mechanization in the Philippines Book Series No. 179/2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. PhilMech website Accessed in December 2013 at http://www.philmech.gov.ph. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Rogers, Everett (2003), “Adoption & Diffusion Innovation Theory”, Retrieved August 24, 2018 from https:// extensinaus.com.au/extension- practice/diffusion of innovations theory adoption and diffusion. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Rodulfo, VA.; Amongo, RM, RM, C.; Larona MV.L., Status of Philippine Agricultural Mechanization and Its Implication for Global Competitiveness. Phil. Agric. Mech. Bull., 5(1): 3-13, 1998. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Rostow, Whitman (1996), “Modernization Theory,” Retrieved August 24, 2018, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modernization_theory [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. UPLB-BAR. National Farm Mechanization Needs Survey and Analysis Report: Terminal Report. Los Baňos, Laguna: Institute of Agricultural Engineering, CEAT, UPLB, 2001. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]