Research Utilization

Paul Icamina

A very good and affordable source of protein is swimming into the cold climate of the Cordillera heartland.

The Philippine Council for Agriculture, Aquatic and Natural Resources Research and Development (PCAARRD), Department of Science and Technology, has approved a P4.1-million grant to determine the best strain of tilapia suited for the Cordilleras.

Tilapia is an affordable source of protein, vitamins, minerals and essential fatty acids. It is currently cultured in fish terraces similar to the rice terraces; however, the cold climate is not the best condition for growing the warm water species.

The Cordilleras is hungry for more fish, so much so that dried fish is a premium commodity in the high mountains, especially in times of typhoons when landslides shut down roads and the fish supply.

PCAARRD puts the level of fish sufficiency in the Cordilleras at 8 percent. That is way too small in a place where fish consumption is 28 kilograms per person per year.

Next to milkfish, tilapia is the country’s second most important food fish, according to the Bureau of Fish and Aquatic Resources (BFAR). The Philippines is the world’s fourth largest producer of tilapia.

The gap is filled largely by fish imported from nearby Pampanga and as far as Batangas. Thus, increased production of tilapia is expected to help bridge the supply-demand gap for fish and fishery products in the Cordilleras.

The use of genetically improved strains offers promising prospects for better performance during tilapia culture, according to PCAARRD scientists.

Dr. Ruth Diego, aquaculture scientist of the Benguet State University (BSU), will lead the research team that will evaluate and identify the best performing strain of Nile tilapia under the cool climate of Benguet, Ifugao, Kalinga and Mountain Province.

The four strains are Genetically Improved Farmed Tilapia (GIFT), Genetically Enhanced Tilapia with Excellent Qualities (GET-EXCEL), Freshwater Aquaculture Center Selected Tilapia (FAST) and a locally grown tilapia. They will be grown in ponds during the wet and dry seasons in these provinces.

Dr. Rene Pinkihan of Ifugao State University and Dr. EpiphaniaMaquilang of the Mountain Province State Polytechnic College are cooperating with BSU to conduct the field trials for a year and a half.

GIFT is the first tropical aquaculture species to undergo genetic improvement based on selective breeding programs for salmon and trout established in Norway in the 1970s. 

Selective breeding chose the parents of the next generation to improve performance for certain traits considered important during production and marketing.

In the GIFT method, tilapia is reared in separate enclosures until they are big enough to be tagged with a microchip that allows researchers to identify individual fish and track their growth in a bigger communal pond. An improved strain is adapted and multiplied.

The first generation of GIFT was bred to grow fast and survive well, the two desirable traits in production. Fast-growing fish reach harvestable size quicker, enabling faster restocking and cost-effective production.

An improved strain of tilapia grew up to 85 percent faster. From the Freshwater Aquaculture Center of the Central Luzon State University in Muñoz, Nueva Ecija, seeds of the highly productive strain were given to the Philippines, Bangladesh, China, Thailand and Vietnam.

GIFT and GIFT-derived strains now account for 68 percent of tilapia production in the Philippines.

The first generation GIFT came from wild Nile tilapia sourced in Egypt, Ghana, Kenya and Senegal and farmed Nile tilapia from Israel, Singapore, Taiwan and Thailand. The GIFT strain is now in its 14th generation.

GET-EXCEL tilapia uses a superior breed which has an advantage of 38.12 grams in growth and 10 percent increase in survival compared with other improved commercial strains of tilapia. The technology uses family selection and rotational mating scheme.

FAST is another name for new breeds of fast-growing, better-surviving tilapia bred at the Freshwater Aquaculture Center.

The country now has its first CubeSatellite, Maya 1.

It was unveiled recently y by the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) in cooperation with Japan’s Kyushu Institute of Technology (Kyutech) and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA).

Maya 1 is scheduled to be handed over to JAXA on April 1 at the Tsukuba Space Center. Japanese space scientists will then conduct final tests on the CubeSat’s space-worthiness before it is shipped to the International Space Station in June.

From the Japanese Experiment Module, Japan’s laboratory facility at the space station, it will be released in July into Low Earth orbit or an altitude of 2,000 kilometers or less.

Maya 1, which weighs 1 kilogram, is different from the Diwata 1 and 2 satellites each weighing about 50 kg. Diwata 1 has been in Low Earth orbit for two years now and has generated more than 15,000 images, including that of the ongoing Mayon Volcano eruption. 

Diwata 2’s deployment is expected in late 2018.

The Maya 1 CubeSat is a miniaturized satellite for space research about the size of a small balikbayan box. About a kilogram in weight, it is made from off-the-shelf components that can be bought in commercial electronic shops.

Named after the Philippine sparrow, Maya 1 is part of the Joint Global Multi-Nation BIRDS  Satellite Project, a cross-border university project led by Kyutech. 

Maya 1’s missions is to collect data and capture images, programmed to target soil monitoring for agricultural applications. Data such as temperature and humidity from sensors can be forwarded from the remote stations to the Mission Control Center in Kyutech where the downloaded data are transferred to a central server for future processing and distribution to users, including researchers in the Philippines.                

The CubeSat will send beacons at15-second intervals during the first few months of operation. Because they are in the amateur band, ground stations all over the world could track the satellite as it passes overhead.

The development of CubeSats in the Philippines can be a viable option for schools and universities as an educational platform because of relatively lower development cost.

On Monday, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) through its Science, Technology, Research, and Innovation for Development (STRIDE) program in partnership with InangLupa held the workshop/forum “Advancing the Agribusiness Innovation Ecosystem” that resulted in an impressive exchange of ideas on how to advance the agribusiness innovation ecosystem in the Philippines.

Among others, major presentations were made by representatives from USAID-STRIDE through Dr. David Hall and the Department of Trade and Industry by Assistant Secretary Rafaelita Aldaba. Dr. Hall is chief of party of USAID-STRIDE.

The intensive exchange of ideas during the workshop/forum will make it necessary for me to write a third part on the issue of assessing the agribusiness innovation ecosystem, which will come out next Friday.

For the second part of this column-series, I will discuss what Dr. Hall presented that is a summary of findings of the STRIDE report “Agribusiness Innovation Ecosystem Assessment.”

In his presentation, Dr. Hall, chief of party of USAID-STRIDE, emphasized that “research has to be industry-led and need-drive,” which I have also emphasized many times in my past columns.

His presentation was based on the assessments made by Ellie Turner and Liz Eckert, both having impressive knowledge and expertise in agriculture, food security, and postharvest, among others.

The purpose of the assessment was to identify the strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities in the agribusiness innovation ecosystem, and how connected are its actors and stakeholders. After those, interventions were identified to improve the agribusiness innovation ecosystem.

Their assessment covered the value chains of three high-value crops in mango, coffee, and cacao. It involved 63 semi-structured interviews (24 private sector, 15 university, 17 government, and seven others).

A total of five findings were generated from the assessment and points to at least two major issues also based on my own assessment: there is a disconnect between the research efforts of the academe and institutions, and the needs of industry; and there is a need to improve commercialization efforts for research outputs with the government also performing a major or pivotal role.

Here are also some salient points worth pointing out from Dr. Hall’s presentation:

• The mindset that agricultural innovations are public goods actually hinder access to those who need them, particularly smallholder farmers;

• There is limited public information about the academe when it comes to expertise, research, and innovation, and businesses do not perceive the academe as potential partners or are not relevant to the industry;

• Researchers must be given funding support for technology demonstration and dissemination;

• There are no incentives for the extension system that hinders technology transfer; and

• The registration process for new agricultural products should be sped up to encourage more innovation.

Key recommendations

From the report itself, let me point out and elaborate interesting points from the “Key Findings and Recommendations,” which will help address much of the issues I have raised so far.

One finding is universities and funding agencies should make it clear as to who is responsible for classifying a technology, whether it is social or commercial. This will also help address the issue of eventually commercializing technologies with even the private sector getting involved in the process.

When it comes to establishing an effective extension system, the report said that besides incentives, there is also a need to put in place monitoring and feedback mechanisms, with the latter involving the smallholder beneficiaries.

On the weak link between the academe and industry, the report said private companies involved in agribusiness cannot identify academic experts in technical areas, which hampers value adding efforts in the industry.

State colleges and universities also do not communicate adequately through their websites and social media channels their expertise and accomplishments in the field of agricultural research and extension.

Obviously, something needs to be done to resolve the disconnect between the agro-industrial sector and academe.

One of the solutions identified in the report is to allow university researchers to enter into consulting assignments with the industry, which is also a good measure to bolster the salaries of those in the teaching profession. Members of the academe can also have consultation arrangements with local government units for delivering farm extension services to smallholders.

When it comes to sharing technologies, the report recommended developing revenue-sharing guidelines and protocols that will improve mutual trust between universities and industry.

On the part of government research institutions, it was recommended that the Department of Agriculture (DA)-Bureau of Agricultural Research and the Department of Science and Technology (DOST)-Philippine Council for Agriculture, Aquatic and Natural Resources Research and Development (PCAARRD) establish and maintain websites and webpages to keep the public informed about their tested technologies that are ready for commercialization. I would also add the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) to the equation.

And when it comes to coordinating research for development efforts, the government offices involved in technology transfer, like the DA-Agricultural Training Institute (ATI), should be involved in appreciating the research during the earlier stages so they can respond better on how to eventually transfer the technology being developed to smallholders and stakeholders.

There are a lot more that can be discussed from the STRIDE report but I will reserve them, for subsequent columns.

Inclusive growth from agribusiness

The STRIDE report should eventually lead to a Unified and Inclusive Agribusiness System, which I believe cannot be realized unless government support efforts to make agripreneurship take root in the Philippines. And I commend the DTI for including agribusiness in the Philippine Inclusive Innovation Strategy, and the Innovation Roadmap, which builds on the strengths of each region in the Philippines for the farm commodities they can produce efficiently.

According to the presentation made by Assistant Secretary Aldaba of the DTI, among the problems identified by the roadmap when it comes to farm production are lack of postharvest facilities and farm-to-market roads, old harvesting technologies, and high prices of inputs. For value adding, the constraints include lack of raw material supply, high cost of investment for processing facilities, and lack of technology in processing.

And let me add that for many decades, too much resources and support have been devoted by the government for rice and corn production, which has resulted in a largely mono-cropping farming system in the Philippines.

Aldaba also presented three phases to make the country’s agriculture sector competitive also in the international market.

Phase 1 from 2014 to 2017, where focus was given on the planting of more rubber, coconut, mangoes, coffee, cacao, banana, and other high-value crops. Also, supply chain gaps were addressed alongside the strengthening of value adding and agro-processing. I don’t know if these targets were accomplished.

Under the second phase covering 2018 to 2021, efforts will continue to strengthen the supply chains and upgrading commodity clusters based on high-value crops. Also, the systems for research, access to technologies, financing, regulation, and certification system will be vastly improved.

For Phase 3 covering 2022 to 2025, the Philippines will be promoted as an agribusiness regional hub and increase its participation in the global value chain as a supplier of semi-processed or finished farm products.

Looking at what were discussed in the workshop/forum, it is obvious we still have a long way to go before the country will have a unified and inclusive agribusiness system. But let us all remain unfazed because we can achieve that dream one step at a time, especially if all actors and stakeholders cooperate.

Again, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to USAID-STRIDE for the holding of the workshop/forum that I believe will help jumpstart more exchange of ideas in other venues on how the country can generate more wealth from agribusiness, and reduce poverty.

Susan De Leon

QUEZON CITY, March 21 (PIA) -- “There are no anomalies in the printing of passports,” this was guaranteed by Chairman Michael J. Dalumpines, also the acting chief operating officer of the Asian Productivity Organization or APO productions amidst the controversy recently thrown at the agency.

In an interview by PIA-NCR, Dalumpines said the APO Production Unit strictly follows proper procedures in its task to print the Philippine passports.

Dalumpines added that APO cannot be blamed for the delay in the processing of passport applications since they are capable to print the passports within the prescribed timeline.

“Once the processed applications are given to us, we do the printing immediately. APO can print 28,000 passports per day,” Dalumpines said.

On the issue of entering a Joint Venture Agreement (JVA) with a private entity, the United Expression Corporation (UGEC), Dalumpines said they adhere to the guidelines set forth by the National Economic & Development Authority (NEDA), Department of Science & Technology (DOST), Department of Budget Management (DBM), Governance Commission for GOCCs (GCG), and the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel (OGCC).

He further stressed that APO is on top in the management and printing of passports, while UGEC only provides financing and provision of machineries and supplies.

Dalumpines added APO also passed the performance conducted by the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency (NICA).

He also confirmed that the security paper used in passport printing is being sourced from Slovenia, but it doesn’t add up to the alleged “slow processing of passports.”

“The lead time for materials sourced from Slovenia is usually thirty (30) to forty-five (45) days. In any event, we are able to ensure that any raw materials sourced abroad arrive in the Philippines with enough time for APO to comply with its delivery schedule as agreed upon with DFA,” Dalumpines said.

The Philippine passport is printed in Asian Productivity Organization or APO Productions under the Presidential Communications Operations Office (PCOO) since 2015.

On August 15, 2016, the new generation e-passport was released by the DFA with advanced security features such as the upgraded microchip to capture the personal data of the applicant, invisible ultraviolet (UV) fluorescent ink and thread, and elaborate design when subject to UV light. Security inks were also used to print the passports to prevent forgery.

Other security features include watermarks, perforated passport numbering, embedded security fibers among others. Aside from making the new e-passport tamper proof, each page of the document depicts Philippine artifacts, cultural icons, historic places, renowned tourist destinations, and even lyrics of the national anthem. (EPC/SDL/PIA-NCR)