Government spending on food security remains heavily weighted toward agricultural interventions, underscoring the need to align budget allocations with efforts to improve food affordability, nutrition, and service delivery, according to a study presented at a webinar organized by the ²ÝÝ®ÊÓƵ (PIDS).
The study, "," examined government spending trends from 2015 to 2025 and analyzed the 2026 budget alongside selected indicators of food security outcomes.
PIDS Senior ²ÝÝ®ÊÓƵ Fellow Briones and Supervising ²ÝÝ®ÊÓƵ Specialist Agnes Kristine Quilinguing found that agricultural development appropriations grew from Php 89 billion in 2015 to Php 278 billion in 2026, an average annual increase of about 11%.
In the 2026 budget, agricultural interventions accounted for roughly 3.4% of the national budget, or Php 231.5 billion. Social protection programs related to food security received Php 68.9 billion, equivalent to 1.01% of the national budget.
These programs include agricultural development initiatives, supplementary feeding, school-based feeding, nutrition supplementation, and other anti-hunger interventions.
The findings highlight the importance of examining not only how much the government allocates to food security, but also how these resources translate into improved access to safe and nutritious food.
Bigger budgets do not automatically ensure better outcomes
The school-based feeding program was among the fastest-growing allocations, more than doubling in 2026 to Php 25.7 billion and accounting for over half of social protection program allocations.
For Briones, larger budgets must be matched by policies that improve productivity, support farmers’ incomes, and keep food affordable.
He called for “the right incentives in place for all of the key actors, private sector, farmers, government, within a well-thought-out and rational programming and policy framework.”
He also stressed the need to balance domestic production with imports where necessary, while supporting commodities in which Filipino farmers can compete.
Strengthening coordination and monitoring
The study identified coordination and accountability as key challenges in assessing food security spending.
Responsibilities are distributed across national government agencies and local government units, making it difficult to track how allocations contribute to common objectives.
“Increasing access to nutritious food is not solely the responsibility of [the Department of Agriculture (DA)],” Quilinguing said, noting the roles of other national agencies and local government units in delivering agricultural and social protection programs.
She recommended mapping the agencies involved, establishing a food security budget tag, and a unified results framework for the 2028 National Expenditure Program to improve coordination and track outcomes across programs.
The study also found differences in budget execution among agencies. In 2024, the Department of Social Welfare and Development disbursed 88.1% of its appropriations covered by the analysis, while the Department of Education disbursed 86.2%. The corresponding rates were 62.5% for the DA, 64.1% for the Department of Agrarian Reform, and 61% for the National Nutrition Council.
Enrique Dela Cruz, executive assistant at the DA, stressed that spending figures alone cannot establish whether interventions are effective.
“You will only get what you are willing to measure,” he said, warning that annual tracking of obligations and disbursements can obscure longer-term outcomes.
He called for program-level evidence linking actual spending and unit costs to changes in agricultural yields, food prices, and diets.
He also urged policymakers to assess investments in vegetables, fruits, legumes, fish, and other nutritious foods, rather than focusing primarily on rice and calorie availability.
Novel Bangsal, executive director of the Budget and Tax ²ÝÝ®ÊÓƵ Bureau of the House of Representatives’ Congressional Policy and Budget ²ÝÝ®ÊÓƵ Department, further highlighted the need to connect public spending with development targets.
“Of the 534 [Philippine Development Plan] targets, 212, or about 40%, are off track,” he said.
Meanwhile, the study recommends stronger coordination among national agencies and between national and local governments, as well as a monitoring and evaluation system that systematically tracks inputs, outputs, outcomes, and eventual impacts.
The findings underscore the need to assess food security spending against measurable improvements in food availability, accessibility, utilization, and stability, rather than relying solely on budget allocations and program outputs.
The full study is available at . Watch the webinar playback at . ### — MJCG
