Colonial policy, ecological transformations, and agricultural “improvement”: comparing agricultural yields and expansion in the Spanish and U.S. Philippines, 1870–1925 CE

David Max Findley (), Noel Amano, Ivana Biong, Greg Bankoff, Patricia Irene Dacudao, Francis Gealogo, Rebecca Hamilton, Ruel Pagunsan and Patrick Roberts ()
Additional contact information
David Max Findley: Max Planck Institute of Geoanthropology
Noel Amano: Max Planck Institute of Geoanthropology
Ivana Biong: University of the Philippines Diliman Campus
Greg Bankoff: Ateneo de Manila University
Patricia Irene Dacudao: Ateneo de Manila University
Francis Gealogo: Ateneo de Manila University
Rebecca Hamilton: Max Planck Institute of Geoanthropology
Ruel Pagunsan: University of the Philippines Diliman Campus
Patrick Roberts: Max Planck Institute of Geoanthropology

Palgrave Communications, 2024, vol. 11, issue 1, 1-15

Abstract: Abstract Burgeoning global trade and colonial policies promoted transformations in land use and agriculture throughout tropical regions in the 19th and 20th centuries, but the local and regional ecological consequences of landscape changes are still being identified and analysed. The Philippine Archipelago, which experienced successive colonial regimes across more than 7100 islands, exemplifies the multiplicity of ecological outcomes produced by these transformations. To better characterise diverse landscape change, we use colonial censuses and datasets to assess land use, production and agricultural yields in the Philippines during the late Spanish and early U.S. colonial periods (ca. 1870–1925). Our novel digital, quantitative analysis indicates that, at the national and provincial scales, agricultural production and land use increased for all major crops in both periods, while agricultural yields were mostly constant. Our results suggest that colonial investments to “improve” Philippine agriculture, specifically their efforts to increase production per hectare, were not effective. Our provincial-scale analysis also confirms the importance of distinct labour patterns, geographies and socio-political arrangements in defining this period’s ecological consequences, and we provide quantified and historically contextualised data in a format amenable to ecologists to promote future, localised historic ecological research.

Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-024-03310-z Abstract (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03310-z

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/palcomms/about

DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-03310-z

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Palgrave Communications from Palgrave Macmillan
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().