FINDING AND PLANTING LOCALLY ADAPTED SEEDS

 FINDING AND PLANTING LOCALLY ADAPTED SEEDS

In an ideal world, our farmers would plant only locally adapted seeds—the ones that have evolved and thrived in our specific soils, climates, and micro-ecosystems. These are the seeds that have learned, through time, how to live in harmony with the rain, the wind, and the sun of their own homeland.

But in the real world, our farmers are often forced to plant whatever seeds are available—many of which come from foreign suppliers or hybrid systems that demand expensive fertilizers and chemicals. They know, deep inside, that these “imported” seeds may not give the yields they hope for, but what choice do they have when local seeds are hard to find, or when they’re told that the foreign varieties are “superior”?

The Real Problem: Information and Influence

As I see it, the root of this issue is not just about supply and cost—it’s about information and influence.
If our farmers truly knew that locally adapted seeds could perform better under their natural conditions—without the heavy dependence on imported inputs—they might never have abandoned them in the first place.

Sadly, many have been, for lack of a better term, “seed-brainwashed.” Over decades, commercial marketing and institutional policies have convinced them that imported hybrid seeds are the only way to achieve higher yields. In the process, traditional seed varieties—our heirloom rice, native corn, and local vegetables—were sidelined, and with them, much of our biodiversity and food sovereignty.

Isn’t it time to ask: What does it take to help our farmers break free from these foreign influences?

Seed Sovereignty is Food Independence

Around the world, the movement for seed sovereignty is gaining strength. The idea is simple but powerful: communities should control their own seeds, save them, share them, and replant them.

In the Philippines, organizations such as MASIPAG (Magsasaka at Siyentipiko para sa Pag-unlad ng Agrikultura) and Global Seed Savers Philippines have been doing excellent work in helping farmers reclaim this right. They promote the saving and sharing of locally adapted and heirloom seeds—a quiet revolution in the name of resilience.

It’s not just about nostalgia for old varieties. Locally adapted seeds are often more resistant to pests, diseases, and extreme weather, because they’ve co-evolved with local conditions for generations. In a time of climate change, that makes them our first line of defense against hunger.

Where to Find Local Seeds Today

Fortunately, several initiatives are now helping bring these seeds back to our communities:

• The “Sow, Grow, Share” Seed Library Initiative of the Ilocos Norte Agricultural College (INAC) and Energy Development Corporation (EDC) have built a community-based seed library that promotes biodiversity and food security.
  
  

• The Department of Agriculture (DA), through Administrative Order No. 09, Series of 2021, is encouraging the local production of hybrid rice seeds to enhance climate resilience.
  
  

• Allied Botanical Corporation, a Filipino company, distributes regionally adapted vegetable seeds nationwide.
  
  

• And many LGUs, barangay agriculture offices, and state universities—like UP Los Baños and Visayas State University—run small seed banks or trial plots for native crops.
  
  

These are positive developments, but we need to go further. Every barangay should have its own community seed bank, supported by cooperatives and linked through an inter-barangay exchange network.

A Barangay-Level Model for Seed Sovereignty

Here’s a simple framework that can work anywhere:

1. Seed Mapping: Identify which traditional seeds used to grow well in your locality. Talk to elders, farmers, and local cooks.
   
   

2. Seed Trials: Plant small batches in different microclimates—near rivers, uplands, shaded areas—to see which ones thrive best.
   
   

3. Seed Bank: Build a modest storage area using low-cost climate control to keep seeds viable for the next season.
   
   

4. Education and Training: Conduct workshops on seed saving, drying, and proper labeling.
   
   

5. Legal Protection: Explore how to protect indigenous seed names and varieties under intellectual property frameworks.
   
   

Technology Can Help Too

Digital tools could play a big role in connecting local seed networks. A national seed registry website could list available local varieties, locations of seed banks, and farmer testimonials. The Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) could easily host such a platform, integrating it into the national e-agriculture strategy.

Imagine a simple web-based app that lets a farmer in Nueva Ecija find locally adapted mung bean seeds from Ilocos, or a barangay in Samar exchange heirloom rice with a cooperative in Bukidnon. That’s technology serving sustainability—not replacing it.

Our Way Back to Food Independence

The path to food independence starts with the seed. If we continue to depend on imported or genetically modified seeds, we will always be tied to foreign supply chains and input systems. But if we rebuild our local seed diversity, we reclaim not just our food security, but also our cultural identity and economic freedom.

It is not too late. We still have farmers who remember the taste and resilience of native crops. We still have NGOs, scientists, and cooperatives working quietly in the background. What we need now is policy support, local action, and national pride.

Because every time a Filipino farmer plants a locally adapted seed, he is not just growing food—he is growing freedom.

Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres

iseneres@yahoo.com, senseneres.blogspot.com

09088877282/02-18-2026

A BETTER WAY TO MANAGE OUR PUBLIC BUS SYSTEMS

 A BETTER WAY TO MANAGE OUR PUBLIC BUS SYSTEMS

When I lived in New York, I noticed something remarkable about their bus system. Every bus, no matter the color or company, seemed to move with precision — arriving at designated stops at predictable times. The buses were owned by different operators, yet they all appeared to belong to a single, unified network.

It turns out, the City of New York builds the bus stops and runs the computerized scheduling system, while allowing multiple private bus companies to operate under one coordinated framework. Passengers do not care who owns which bus; what matters to them is that the buses arrive on time, the fares are standard, and the routes are reliable.

The Global Standard: Unified Branding, Private Operations

Many world cities have adopted this model of public branding, private operations — a clear division of roles that keeps the system efficient and accountable.

In London, for example, all buses carry the familiar red Transport for London (TfL) branding, even though they are run by multiple private operators under strict performance-based contracts. The government sets the routes, fares, and schedules; the companies handle the driving, maintenance, and customer service.

In Singapore, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) also uses a Bus Contracting Model. Private operators like SBS Transit and SMRT bid for routes but operate under a unified schedule and branding. This model keeps service quality high while keeping costs competitive through open bidding.

Even Las Vegas and Los Angeles contract out most of their bus operations to private companies while maintaining a common public identity. The same happens in Hong Kong, where several franchised bus companies operate under a shared government-supervised framework.

This system works because of division of labor — the government focuses on regulation, infrastructure, and coordination, while the private sector focuses on operations, efficiency, and innovation.

Our Situation: The “Free-for-All” Model

In contrast, the bus system in the Philippines, especially in Metro Manila, is still operating in what I would call a “free-for-all” mode. Every bus company runs its own schedule, stops wherever it wants, and competes for passengers on the street.

As a result, commuters never know when the next bus will arrive or where it will stop. Schedules are unpredictable, boarding areas are chaotic, and traffic congestion is made worse by buses loading and unloading anywhere they please.

We have, quite literally, a public transportation system without public management.

A Modular Way Forward

It doesn’t take rocket science to fix this — just organization and coordination. The same buses can run on the same roads, but in a systematic and predictable way.

Here’s one simple proposal:

• DPWH (Department of Public Works and Highways) should build and maintain standardized bus stops and shelters.
  
  

• DOTr (Department of Transportation) should regulate the routes, schedules, and operators.
  
  

• DICT (Department of Information and Communications Technology) should handle the computerized scheduling system and real-time tracking.
  
  

This division of labor plays to each agency’s strength. The DPWH already has the expertise in building public infrastructure. The DOTr already manages transport operations and franchising. The DICT can easily deploy smart systems for scheduling, digital payments, and passenger information.

Such a setup does not require huge capital investments — just coordination, digitalization, and political will.

Bus Stops and Behavior

The lack of standardized bus stops also shapes commuter behavior. Because passengers can hail buses anywhere, drivers are forced to stop anywhere. This creates inefficiency and danger. Once fixed stops are built and strictly enforced, the system will begin to regulate itself.

In Seoul, for example, bus stops are spaced consistently and linked to digital signs that tell passengers how many minutes before the next bus arrives. This predictability encourages discipline and confidence among commuters.

Human Side of the System

Equally important is the human side — the drivers. Under the current system, most bus drivers are paid on a boundary basis, meaning they must meet a daily quota before earning anything for themselves. This encourages reckless driving, racing, and overloading.

Under a unified system, the hiring and training of drivers could be standardized. Drivers can receive fixed salaries, benefits, and regular hours, while operators are rewarded for safety, punctuality, and passenger satisfaction.

The Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) could be tasked to review the labor practices of bus operators to ensure compliance with professional standards.

Digital Transformation for Commuters

Imagine if Metro Manila had a bus app similar to London’s TfL Go or Singapore’s MyTransport.SG, showing commuters exactly when the next bus would arrive. With the DICT’s expertise, this could easily be developed and integrated into the national e-government platform.

Technology is not the problem. The problem is the fragmentation of authority and the lack of coordination between agencies.

Final Thoughts

What I am proposing is not new, not expensive, and not complicated. It is simply a matter of learning from global best practices and applying them in a local, sensible way.

We can have the same buses on the same roads — but moving on time, on schedule, and in service to the public. It’s not too much to ask.

Our people deserve a transport system that respects their time and dignity. A little order, a little coordination, and a little compassion can go a long way toward making that happen.

Because when buses move better, cities live better.

Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres

iseneres@yahoo.com, senseneres.blogspot.com

09088877282/02-17-2026

BUILDING RAILWAYS WITHOUT TRAINS

 BUILDING RAILWAYS WITHOUT TRAINS

Please do not get me wrong. The railways will still have trains running on them. What I am proposing is that the railways and the trains should be built by two separate agencies — not lumped under one overburdened bureaucracy.

To go straight to the point: the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) should build the railways, while the Department of Transportation (DOTr) should build and operate the trains.

That is how it already works on our highways. The DPWH builds the roads, and the DOTr regulates the vehicles. The logic is simple: one agency takes care of infrastructure, the other handles transport systems and operations. So why can’t we do the same for railways?

Division of Labor, Not Duplication of Work

This is not about creating bureaucratic overlap — it’s about functional specialization. The DPWH has the engineering expertise for land acquisition, bridges, tunnels, and track alignment. The DOTr, on the other hand, knows rolling stock, signaling systems, and commuter operations.

If both functions remain under one roof, one tends to lag behind the other. We have seen this many times: expensive rail projects completed without enough trains, or trains delivered years before the tracks are ready. A clear division of labor could change that.

In other countries, this separation of functions is standard practice. In Singapore, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) builds and maintains the rail infrastructure, while private operators like SMRT and SBS Transit manage the trains. In the Netherlands, ProRail builds the tracks, while NS (Nederlandse Spoorwegen) operates the trains. Both systems work — efficiently and transparently.

Learning from the World, Building Our Own

We have long depended on imported trains. Since the first locomotive was invented in 1804 — yes, more than two centuries ago — many nations have learned to build their own trains. After 221 years, perhaps it’s time the Philippines caught up.

Why should we continue to import something that we can learn to manufacture ourselves? Making train coaches is not very different from making bus bodies — and we are already good at building those. In fact, Filipino companies like Santarosa Motor Works and Del Monte Motor Works have been manufacturing world-class bus bodies for years.

The more challenging part may be building the train engines, but that is not beyond the capability of Filipino scientists and engineers. With proper funding and collaboration with universities and local manufacturers, we could start a Philippine Rolling Stock Industry — an entirely new industrial sector that would create jobs, boost local innovation, and reduce dependence on imports.

Trains and Technology

Let’s not forget that our neighbors have already moved far ahead. Japan has mastered the bullet train. China is already running maglev (magnetic levitation) trains that float on air. Even Indonesia, which once looked to us for technical guidance, has started developing its own rolling stock and assembly plants through PT INKA (Industri Kereta Api).

So, the question is: when will we start?

We could begin with something more modest, like tramways — the lower-tech cousin of modern railways. These are cheaper, easier to maintain, and can serve provincial towns and smaller cities where a full-scale railway would be overkill. Tramways also promote tourism and local commerce.

Governance and Efficiency

Dividing responsibility between DPWH and DOTr is not just practical — it’s good governance. Each agency can focus on its strengths. DPWH can handle civil works and infrastructure rollout, while DOTr can focus on transport operations, rolling stock procurement, and public service delivery.

This modular approach also allows for staggered budgeting: DPWH can frontload spending for infrastructure, while DOTr can allocate funds for trains and technology as demand grows. It also enables adaptive procurement — letting us buy or build trains that match modern standards instead of being locked into outdated specs by the time the tracks are finished.

Of course, coordination will be key. There should be a Joint Planning Board between DPWH and DOTr, aligned on route design, train specs, and community impact. Local governments, particularly in provinces hosting new rail lines, must also be consulted to ensure integration with land use plans and social needs.

A Vision for the Future

If we can separate the way we build railways and operate trains, we can move faster, spend smarter, and govern better. It’s time we learned from the best — and then built our own.

We can begin small, one line at a time. But the goal should be bold: a Philippine-built train system that runs on Philippine-built railways.

Because in the end, it’s not about the trains or the tracks — it’s about our capacity to innovate, to adapt, and to stop depending on others for what we should have built ourselves a long time ago.

The technology is already there. What we need now is political will, strategic division of labor, and a nation that dares to believe that it can finally build — not just railways, but the trains that will run upon them.

Ramon Ike V. Seneres, www.facebook.com/ike.seneres

iseneres@yahoo.com, senseneres.blogspot.com

09088877282/02-16-2026