Introduction
Poverty has always been one of the Philippines’ most persistent
challenges, cutting across generations and governments. Despite periods of
economic growth, millions of Filipinos still struggle to afford basic needs, a
situation driven by overpopulation, corruption, poor education, and weak
governance. Over the years, the state has tried to address inequality through
agrarian reform programs, constitutional provisions, and various tax policies.
Each of these efforts had its share of progress and setbacks, but together they
reveal a pattern that is hard to ignore: good intentions, poor execution.
Agrarian reform was supposed to uplift farmers yet ended up benefiting the
elite in many cases (Tadem, 2015). The Constitution promises fairness, yet it
often protects those already in power, while the tax system favors the working
and middle classes more than the wealthy. Poverty remains widespread not
because the country lacks laws or reforms, but because those in charge either
fail to enforce them properly or use them for their own advantage. Poverty in
the Philippines persists not because reforms are lacking, but because
corruption, inequality, and weak implementation prevent them from creating
real change.
Agrarian Reform and Poverty
Agrarian reform in the Philippines was introduced with high hopes of
breaking the cycle of rural poverty. Its main goal was to make land ownership
more equitable by redistributing agricultural lands to landless farmers, thereby
promoting social justice and rural development (EA Guardians, 2025). The
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), enacted under President
Corazon Aquino through Republic Act No. 6657, aimed to provide farmers not
just land but also access to support services such as credit, infrastructure, and
training to boost productivity (Reyes, 2002). In theory, it was a promising
attempt to empower those who had long been marginalized by an unfair
system.
In practice, however, CARP’s success has been uneven. Some
beneficiaries experienced genuine improvements in their living conditions, but
many others faced new burdens. Rising costs of farming inputs, limited access
to modern equipment, and inadequate government support made it difficult
for small farmers to sustain their livelihoods. Many ended up selling their land
back to wealthy landlords or corporations, reversing whatever progress had
been made (Ocampo, 2020). While agrarian reform has achieved partial
redistribution of land, it has not fully translated into economic empowerment.
In the end, it reduced poverty on paper but not in reality, as inequality in rural
