Interventions and Development Strategies for Sustainable Transformation of Upland Agricultural Systems in  West Sumatra, I...
Outline of The Presentation <ul><li>Background & Objectives </li></ul><ul><li>Methodology </li></ul><ul><li>Regional Overv...
Background Food Insecurity Poverty Land Resources Degradation Challenges
Background <ul><li>Annual rate of deforestation  1.6 -2.4  Mha </li></ul>Number of people living below poverty line (in mi...
Research Problems <ul><ul><ul><li>P olemical issues centered around  the  common pool resources  (CPR)   along with  conti...
Research Problems <ul><li>Lack  of comprehensive empirical knowledge about  role and effectiveness  of CPR institution s  ...
General Objectives <ul><li>Extend  understanding and the frontier of scientific and policy debate in sustainable developme...
Specific Objectives <ul><li>Examine  and understand  vulnerability of farmers’ livelihoods and their resource base degrada...
Analytical Framework (P) Physical characteristics of resource (P) External Framework Conditions: Knowledge& Tech. characte...
Main Steps Households interviews (n=137)  and Key Persons Interviews  Preliminary watersheds surveys Data analysis and pre...
Selection of the study site and households sample <ul><li>Watershed & Village selection (Purposive Sampling): </li></ul><u...
Sample Composition 26   households 19   households Agricultural Extension Target Group 49   households 43   households Non...
Households Sample  by agricultural extension category 45 92 Total 4 19 Muaro Sungai Lolo 9 30 Silayang 14 20 Pintu Padang ...
Population & household sample Nagari (Village) Population Households Number of households interviewed Lubuak Gadang 1256 3...
Data Analysis <ul><li>Qualitative Anaysis: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Politico-Institutional Framework </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><...
Regional Overview
Study Area :  Sub-district Mapat Tunggul
Natural Landscape Hilly-Mountanious   Elevation: 250-650 m
Rainfall Pattern
Settlement pattern & population Village Muaro Sei.Lolo Village Lubuak Gadang Village  Silayang Village Pintu Padang
Farm households
Road condition in rainy season:  only 4WD Cars can enter and exit Poor road condition to Silayang & Sungai Lolo
Means of Transportation
Resource Governance & Land Tenure The Minangkabau Concept on  Common Property Resource and  Issues
Land Tenure (1) <ul><li>The Minangkabau’ s  notion of communal property  differs from that of the ‘open access’ natural re...
Land Tenure (2) <ul><li>The  adat pusako  involves a bundle of rights and duties to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>reap benefits f...
Land Tenure (3) <ul><li>The Indonesian Agrarian Law and the related Implementing Acts have been based on a narrow perspect...
Evolution of the Farming Systems and  Underlying Factors
Swidden rice cultivation system
Trend of yield of the swidden rice in the study area Yield in 1811= 1760 kg ha -1  (Marsden, 1811: 77) Yield in 1884=1100-...
The Swidden-fallow cycle Old Bush Lands ( Baluka Tuo ) 6-10 yrs of fallow f allow period Young Bush Lands  ( Baluka Mudo )...
Contrasting view of the  baluko tuo  and the  baluka mudo  in the ERW Baluka Tuo Baluka Mudo
Dutch Colonial Era <ul><li>Goal: Famine protection, Revenues/ Exports; </li></ul><ul><li>State domain policy (1870) but in...
Japanese Colonial Era (1942-1945) <ul><li>Goal: Food sufficiency, revenues/ exports </li></ul><ul><li>Agricultural diversi...
Early Independence Era (1945-1965) <ul><li>Goal: Basic needs, Revenues/ Exports, </li></ul><ul><li>Frequent Govt. interven...
New Order Era (1965-1997) <ul><li>Goal: Self sufficiency, cheap food, poverty alleviation, Revenues/ Exports, </li></ul><u...
Early Reform Era (1998 to date) <ul><li>Goal: Food security, social safety net, Revenues/ Exports, </li></ul><ul><li>Devel...
Recultivation of  bush fallow showing  a rubber-rice intercropping model
Newly Developed Intercropping models  Rubber-Cocoa Gambir-Rubber Rubber-patchouli Oil palm-Rubber
Shifting cultivation   Source: Own field study, 2002   Nagari Total Household Households engaged in shifting cultivation  ...
Tree crops cultivation Source: Own field study, 2002   Nagari House-hold Number Rubber Gambir     % Ha/household % Ha/hous...
Development of agricultural  cultivations  during 1994-2002 *  ProRLK report, 1994 ** Key persons interviews and own estim...
Significant Factors  Underlying Farming Systems Adjustments   <ul><li>Market participation dynamics  </li></ul><ul><li>Hou...
Final results of factor analysis Market participation dynamics Labor endowment Effectiveness of CRM Participation in CoLe ...
Factor Analysis <ul><li>F1-the expansion of forest cultivation for agriculture and the diversification of crops on existin...
Factor Analysis <ul><li>F4-this factor configuration suggests that  farmers’ participation in learning process influenced ...
Wetland rice production reduces forest pressure in Silayang?
Wetland rice production reduces forest pressure in Sungai Lolo?
Conclusions and Discussion Indebtedness Insufficient Food Low Income Low Yield Low Investment  Resource-base Degradation P...
Conclusions and Discussion <ul><li>Resource degradation is not a new issue in the East Rao Watershed, but </li></ul><ul><l...
Conclusions and Discussion <ul><li>Lack of cash and poor access to the modern inputs have been prevailing issues, but; </l...
Conclusions and Discussion <ul><li>The factor analysis suggests, under  such prevailing market dynamics as in the ER water...
Future Directions <ul><li>Enhance farmers’ market participation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Support community’s self-help initia...
Future Directions <ul><li>Enhance effectiveness of the community’s platforms in resource governance, conflicts resolution ...
Future Directions <ul><li>Develop flexible learning & promote  responsibility sharing among stakeholders at all levels: </...
Future Directions <ul><li>Support development to produce economic benefits that directly go into the hand of the poor peop...
Thank you very much
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Interventions and Development Strategies for Sustainable Transformation of Upland Agricultural Systems in West Sumatra, Indonesia

687 views
632 views

Published on

Upland Farming Systems Development in West Sumatra, Indonesia

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
687
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
19
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Interventions and Development Strategies for Sustainable Transformation of Upland Agricultural Systems in West Sumatra, Indonesia

  1. 1. Interventions and Development Strategies for Sustainable Transformation of Upland Agricultural Systems in West Sumatra, Indonesia Astia Dendi November 28, 2003
  2. 2. Outline of The Presentation <ul><li>Background & Objectives </li></ul><ul><li>Methodology </li></ul><ul><li>Regional Overview </li></ul><ul><li>Resource Governance and Land Tenure </li></ul><ul><li>Evolution of the Upland Farming System and Its Underlying Factors </li></ul><ul><li>Conclusions and Recommendations </li></ul>
  3. 3. Background Food Insecurity Poverty Land Resources Degradation Challenges
  4. 4. Background <ul><li>Annual rate of deforestation 1.6 -2.4 Mha </li></ul>Number of people living below poverty line (in million) % 1970 70 60 1996 11 1998 80 40 Source: Adapted from Tjiptoherjanto, 1999 Table: Trend of poverty in Indonesia 22
  5. 5. Research Problems <ul><ul><ul><li>P olemical issues centered around the common pool resources (CPR) along with continuing forest encroachment for agricultural expansion through slash and burn practices. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Inadequate understanding amongst policy makers and scholars about the driving forces, process and constraints of transformation of shifting cultivation towards more sustainable agricultural systems. </li></ul></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Research Problems <ul><li>Lack of comprehensive empirical knowledge about role and effectiveness of CPR institution s in upland context; and </li></ul><ul><li>H ow these together with other factors influence the human behavior, interactions and outcomes (farming systems adjustments and/or deforestation). </li></ul>
  7. 7. General Objectives <ul><li>Extend understanding and the frontier of scientific and policy debate in sustainable development </li></ul><ul><li>Suggest alternative interventions and development strategies toward sustainable (upland) agriculture. </li></ul>
  8. 8. Specific Objectives <ul><li>Examine and understand vulnerability of farmers’ livelihoods and their resource base degradation; </li></ul><ul><li>Examine and understand significant factors underlying the evolution of farming systems in the study area; </li></ul><ul><li>Suggest how farmers’ circumstances and practices might be modified toward a more sustainable agricultural systems. </li></ul>
  9. 9. Analytical Framework (P) Physical characteristics of resource (P) External Framework Conditions: Knowledge& Tech. characteristics of the resource users (K) Institutional characteristics (I) SoEc of the resource users (Ec) Market environments Policy-Inst. environment Physical infrastructure Outputs: Human Behavior & Interactions Agricultural Knowledge & Information (E) Outcomes Sustainability Performance
  10. 10. Main Steps Households interviews (n=137) and Key Persons Interviews Preliminary watersheds surveys Data analysis and presentation: Factor analysis, qualitative methods Case Studies Village s Survey Formulation of research questions & analytical framework
  11. 11. Selection of the study site and households sample <ul><li>Watershed & Village selection (Purposive Sampling): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Relevant with the study objectives, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Significance of the uplands cultivation, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Performance of the Clan Customary Council </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Link with agricultural extension services </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Households sample (Stratified Random Sampling) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>W & Wo agricultural extension services) </li></ul></ul>
  12. 12. Sample Composition 26 households 19 households Agricultural Extension Target Group 49 households 43 households Non Agricultural Extension Target Group Strong Customary Institutions Weak Customary Institutions
  13. 13. Households Sample by agricultural extension category 45 92 Total 4 19 Muaro Sungai Lolo 9 30 Silayang 14 20 Pintu Padang 18 23 Lubuak Gadang With AE (hh) Without AE (hh)
  14. 14. Population & household sample Nagari (Village) Population Households Number of households interviewed Lubuak Gadang 1256 304 41 Pintu Padang 1301 327 34 Silayang 3146 672 39 Muaro Sungai Lolo 3952 843 23 Total 9655 2146 137
  15. 15. Data Analysis <ul><li>Qualitative Anaysis: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Politico-Institutional Framework </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cause-effect links </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Multivariate techniques of Factor Analysis: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>define quantitative variables </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>convert these variables to a range of neutral scale to be comparable items; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>identify some inconsistency or outliers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>then perform multiple correlation and factor analysis </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Regional Overview
  17. 17. Study Area : Sub-district Mapat Tunggul
  18. 18. Natural Landscape Hilly-Mountanious Elevation: 250-650 m
  19. 19. Rainfall Pattern
  20. 20. Settlement pattern & population Village Muaro Sei.Lolo Village Lubuak Gadang Village Silayang Village Pintu Padang
  21. 21. Farm households
  22. 22. Road condition in rainy season: only 4WD Cars can enter and exit Poor road condition to Silayang & Sungai Lolo
  23. 23. Means of Transportation
  24. 24. Resource Governance & Land Tenure The Minangkabau Concept on Common Property Resource and Issues
  25. 25. Land Tenure (1) <ul><li>The Minangkabau’ s notion of communal property differs from that of the ‘open access’ natural resources (Hardin, 1968; Ostrom, 2002), </li></ul><ul><li>Rights of access and use of the natural resources are governed by customary norms and laws, so called adat pusako, and thus , are not left open for any one to use, </li></ul><ul><li>The adat pusako was considerably varied between the Minangkabau villages (nagari) and even between the sub-village within the same village. </li></ul>
  26. 26. Land Tenure (2) <ul><li>The adat pusako involves a bundle of rights and duties to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>reap benefits from the ‘fruits’ (products and values) generated from the land for livelihoods; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>regulate and supervise access to and use of the land resources; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>regulate and supervise the inheritance and transfer, or other forms of legal acts over the land resource; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>represent the adat community in relation with outsiders; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>maintain the relationship with/ socio-religious responsibilities to the past, the today’s and future generations respectively. </li></ul></ul>
  27. 27. Land Tenure (3) <ul><li>The Indonesian Agrarian Law and the related Implementing Acts have been based on a narrow perspective on the communal tenurial rights, </li></ul><ul><li>These legislations reduced the communal rights to mainly the right to “reap the benefit…” </li></ul><ul><li>However, the government lacks the resource and capacity to reinforce these legislations, </li></ul><ul><li>De facto , majority of peoples in the study area only recognized the customary authority as the highest tenurial authority, </li></ul>
  28. 28. Evolution of the Farming Systems and Underlying Factors
  29. 29. Swidden rice cultivation system
  30. 30. Trend of yield of the swidden rice in the study area Yield in 1811= 1760 kg ha -1 (Marsden, 1811: 77) Yield in 1884=1100-1760 kg ha -1 (Neumann, 1884)
  31. 31. The Swidden-fallow cycle Old Bush Lands ( Baluka Tuo ) 6-10 yrs of fallow f allow period Young Bush Lands ( Baluka Mudo ) 4-5 yrs of fallow fallow period Old Forests ( Rimbo ) Swidden fields 1-3 years of cultivation Slash and Burn Bare Land and/or Imperata Grassland ( Padang Lalang )
  32. 32. Contrasting view of the baluko tuo and the baluka mudo in the ERW Baluka Tuo Baluka Mudo
  33. 33. Dutch Colonial Era <ul><li>Goal: Famine protection, Revenues/ Exports; </li></ul><ul><li>State domain policy (1870) but ineffective, </li></ul><ul><li>Forced development of irrigation scheme for rice cultivation (1892-1902), </li></ul><ul><li>Restriction of rubber cultivation (ITA, 1934). (Dutch & Customary Institutions) </li></ul><ul><li>Highly diversified swidden rice cultivation systems, with 10-15 years fallow, </li></ul><ul><li>Tobacco and rubber were important, </li></ul><ul><li>Chicken and buffalo for subsistence, </li></ul>
  34. 34. Japanese Colonial Era (1942-1945) <ul><li>Goal: Food sufficiency, revenues/ exports </li></ul><ul><li>Agricultural diversification (LCs & OCs) </li></ul><ul><li>Removal of rubber cultivation restrictions? </li></ul><ul><li>Swidden rice remained important </li></ul><ul><li>Farmers did not adopt the legume crops and the oil crops, </li></ul><ul><li>Food habits, people resistance, limited and/or unsecured markets, </li></ul><ul><li>Chicken for subsistence, (buffallow??) </li></ul>
  35. 35. Early Independence Era (1945-1965) <ul><li>Goal: Basic needs, Revenues/ Exports, </li></ul><ul><li>Frequent Govt. interventions in the reorganization of the Village governance, </li></ul><ul><li>Introduction of the Basic Agrarian Law, 1960 overlooking the customary tenurial rights, </li></ul><ul><li>De facto , the Customary Clan Councils in ERW lifted the banning of forest clearance, </li></ul><ul><li>Better link to markets (engine boats) </li></ul><ul><li>Swidden rice cultivation remains important </li></ul><ul><li>Rubber and coffee were important source of incomes, </li></ul><ul><li>Shorter fallow period (6-8 years) </li></ul>
  36. 36. New Order Era (1965-1997) <ul><li>Goal: Self sufficiency, cheap food, poverty alleviation, Revenues/ Exports, </li></ul><ul><li>Centralistic and uniform village administrations </li></ul><ul><li>Restriction of forest clearance for tree crops cultivation by the CCC, </li></ul><ul><li>Development of 2 feeder roads </li></ul><ul><li>Development of irrigation schemes (1991-1997), </li></ul><ul><li>Promotion of the modern improved varieties of rubber </li></ul><ul><li>Development of Microhydro Power Plant in Silayang (1996-1997) </li></ul><ul><li>El-Nino phenomena (drought) in 1970s and 1997, </li></ul><ul><li>Emergence of few small-scale agroprocessing enterprises (Patchouli oil) </li></ul>
  37. 37. Early Reform Era (1998 to date) <ul><li>Goal: Food security, social safety net, Revenues/ Exports, </li></ul><ul><li>Development and Implementation of new local autonomy (Laws 22 and 25 of 1999) </li></ul><ul><li>Revitalization of the indigenous village governance system, </li></ul><ul><li>El-Nino phenomena(drought) extended, dramatic drop of the swidden rice yield </li></ul><ul><li>More farmers adopted wetland rice cultivation (Silayang and Sunagai Lolo), </li></ul><ul><li>Development of diversified farming systems (e.g. cocoa, gambir, candle nut, patchouli, orange), </li></ul><ul><li>Development of agroprocessing (patchouli and Gambir, coffee), </li></ul><ul><li>Chicken for subsistence, goat for commercial. </li></ul>
  38. 38. Recultivation of bush fallow showing a rubber-rice intercropping model
  39. 39. Newly Developed Intercropping models Rubber-Cocoa Gambir-Rubber Rubber-patchouli Oil palm-Rubber
  40. 40. Shifting cultivation Source: Own field study, 2002   Nagari Total Household Households engaged in shifting cultivation     % of all Ha/hh Lubuk Gadang 304 50-60 0.75-1.25 Pintu Padang 327 60-70 0.5-1 Silayang 672 60-75 0.75-1.5 Muaro Sungai Lolo 843 50-60 0.75-1.5 All study area 2122 65 0.5-1.5
  41. 41. Tree crops cultivation Source: Own field study, 2002   Nagari House-hold Number Rubber Gambir     % Ha/household % Ha/household Lubuk Gadang 304 90 1.5 0 0 Pintu Padang 327 70 1 0 0 Silayang 672 70 1.5 5 2 Muaro Sungai Lolo 843 60 2 30 2 All study area 2122        
  42. 42. Development of agricultural cultivations during 1994-2002 * ProRLK report, 1994 ** Key persons interviews and own estimate Nagari Total area (ha) Cultivated area (1994)* Cultivated area (2002)**   hectare % hectare % Lubuk Gadang 4250 950 22 1500-1600 35-38 Pintu Padang 2100 600 29 850-950 40-45 Silayang 21000 1720 8 2300-2500 11-12 Muaro Sungai Lolo 58300 5198 9 6300-6500 10-11 Total in study area 85650 8468 9.88 10950-11550 12-14
  43. 43. Significant Factors Underlying Farming Systems Adjustments <ul><li>Market participation dynamics </li></ul><ul><li>Household labor endowment; </li></ul><ul><li>Effectiveness of the community conflicts resolution mechanism; </li></ul><ul><li>Participation in collective learning; </li></ul><ul><li>Tenurial dynamics and security; and </li></ul><ul><li>Sustenance of food security </li></ul>
  44. 44. Final results of factor analysis Market participation dynamics Labor endowment Effectiveness of CRM Participation in CoLe Customary tenurial dynamics Sustenance of food security 0.67 sawacul -0.68 neworcha 0.68 k-tenur2 0.83 k-tenur3 0.66 busha 0.79 extcat -0.51 alangha 0.67 instcat 0.74 confresco 0.79 hhsize 0.84 activlab 0.50 forestha 0.51 yieldlev2 0.58 oldorcha -0.67 access 0.69 priceset Factor 6 Factor 5 Factor 4 Factor 3 Factor 2 Factor 1 Variable
  45. 45. Factor Analysis <ul><li>F1-the expansion of forest cultivation for agriculture and the diversification of crops on existing orchards are complementary strategy rather than a complete substitution. </li></ul><ul><li>F1-Remoteness from market and service center, in turn, may create the incentive to develop a more diversified farming systems. </li></ul><ul><li>F2- decision on FS adjustments is highly dependent upon internal labor asset rather than access to external labors. </li></ul><ul><li>F-3 effective customary tenurial institution and conflict resolution are significant for overall FS adjustment but insufficient incentive for farmer’s investment into existing marginal lands, </li></ul>
  46. 46. Factor Analysis <ul><li>F4-this factor configuration suggests that farmers’ participation in learning process influenced farmers’ decision to cultivate bush lands. </li></ul><ul><li>F5-investments in land are important to secure tenurial rights besides having the verbal permission from the customary authority, </li></ul><ul><li>F6-these strategies of food security was functionally alternative; farmers who have been successful in irrigated rice cultivation, are unlikely to extend forest clearance for swidden rice cultivation. </li></ul>
  47. 47. Wetland rice production reduces forest pressure in Silayang?
  48. 48. Wetland rice production reduces forest pressure in Sungai Lolo?
  49. 49. Conclusions and Discussion Indebtedness Insufficient Food Low Income Low Yield Low Investment Resource-base Degradation Poverty and Resource Degradation Trap Figure: A main perspective of poverty and resource degradation linkages
  50. 50. Conclusions and Discussion <ul><li>Resource degradation is not a new issue in the East Rao Watershed, but </li></ul><ul><li>The rate of degradation during the last 40 years was faster than during a hundred years in the 19 th century. </li></ul><ul><li>Shifting cultivators have not been static, but have continuously made adjustments under changing market & institutional environments, and innovation directions, </li></ul><ul><li>The peoples are of economically poor, but strongly want to be out of the poverty trap </li></ul>
  51. 51. Conclusions and Discussion <ul><li>Lack of cash and poor access to the modern inputs have been prevailing issues, but; </li></ul><ul><li>Many poor farmers successfully enriched their existing farming systems with high value crops and developed more dynamic farming systems; </li></ul><ul><li>Many poor farmers gradually develop their farming systems using available free inputs from friends and village traders as well as the accessible informal capital. </li></ul><ul><li>Investments are important to secure land tenure, </li></ul>
  52. 52. Conclusions and Discussion <ul><li>The factor analysis suggests, under such prevailing market dynamics as in the ER watershed, </li></ul><ul><li>there exists possibility for policy and interventions that focus first on the agricultural diversification and then on the organizations building to succeed in tackling the issues of poverty and environmental degradation, </li></ul><ul><li>provided that community members shared the perception of a secured customary tenurial rights. </li></ul>
  53. 53. Future Directions <ul><li>Enhance farmers’ market participation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Support community’s self-help initiatives and their indigenous values in developing a more dynamic farming systems and environment, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improve accessibility of the area, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improve access to resources & flexible investment capital, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Develop an effective quality control and market information systems </li></ul></ul>
  54. 54. Future Directions <ul><li>Enhance effectiveness of the community’s platforms in resource governance, conflicts resolution and responsibility sharing: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Furthering decentralization to village level </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Develop consistent land tenure policies that work for sustaining cultural pluralisms, sustainable economic growth and environment. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Develop consistent measures to address the intra-household dynamic issues effectively. </li></ul>
  55. 55. Future Directions <ul><li>Develop flexible learning & promote responsibility sharing among stakeholders at all levels: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Demand-driven and multiple sources of the AKI </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Use methodology developed from the true local culture of learning rather than the ‘exotic’ participatory methods, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Appropriate time frame, </li></ul></ul>
  56. 56. Future Directions <ul><li>Support development to produce economic benefits that directly go into the hand of the poor peoples, not only through the trickle down effects: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Support the establishment of primary industry closer to the farming families, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Develop appropriate and environment-friendly technology that work for small industries, </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Enhance sustainability of the existing community’s food security strategies. </li></ul>
  57. 57. Thank you very much

×