SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 24
Download to read offline
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 420 editor@iaeme.com
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)
Volume 10, Issue 1, January 2019, pp.420–443, Article ID: IJCIET_10_01_040
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=1
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316
©IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed
ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY
OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE IN EAST
JAVA BASED ON DEA INDEX
Abid Muhtarom
Islamic University of Lamongan, Faculty of Economics, Indonesia;
Airlangga University, Department of Economics, Indonesia
Tri Haryanto, Nurul Istifadah
Airlangga University,Department of Economics, Indonesia
ABSTRACT
The efficiency of food crop agriculture is a fairly common and used performance
parameter, efficiency measurement is widely used to answer the challenges of
calculating the size of agricultural crops. This research uses a method called Data
Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to measure technical efficiency. DEA method from one
company is a non-parametric analysis method which aims to measure the level of
efficiency relative to the productivity unit that has the same goal. The productivity unit
is here in the form of a decision-making unit (DMU) where the DMU in this study is
the food crop agriculture sub-sector 29 districts in East Java. The results of this study
can be studied as many as 93.
Keywords: DEA, Land, Labor, and productivity.
Cite this Article: Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah, Analysis of
Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index,
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), 10 (1), 2019, pp.
420–443.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=1
1. INTRODUCTION
East Java Province is one of the provinces in Indonesia that relies on the agricultural sector of
food crops as a driving force for the economy. East Java Province is known as a province that
has great attention to the progress of food crop agriculture . Large crop agricultural
productivity can increase regional GDP in aggregate in Bhattarai & Narayanamoorthy,
(2003) and Majid, (2004).The second largest East Java GRDP after the industrial sector is the
agricultural sector, where the Food Crop sub-sector provides a large contribution compared to
the agricultural and hunting services sub-sector, the Plantation sub-sector, the Livestock sub-
sector, and the Holtukultur Crop sub-sector.
Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 421 editor@iaeme.com
Agricultural land is needed in increasing the productivity of agricultural crops according
to Irz, Lin, Thirtle, & Wiggins, (2001). East Java Province has agricultural land which
continues to decline throughout the year because it is caused by experts in the function of land
to be residential and industrial. According to Bayyurt & Yılmaz, (2012) even though the
government carried out agricultural land regulation had a negative impact or continued to
decline. However, if the government does not provide a regulation to ban functional experts, it
can be ascertained that the productivity of agricultural crops will decline according toKheir-
El-Din & Heba El-Laithy, (2008).
In addition to agricultural land, the productivity of food crops is urgently needed, and also
requires labor to carry out their production according toTravers & Ma, (1994). Labor also has
a good and bad impact on increasing productivity in the agricultural sector. Because the
higher the number of workers with a little land area will have an impact on decreasing
agricultural productivity in Kheir-El-Din & Heba El-Laithy,(2008). East Java Province must
be aware of this phenomenon, because we know that more and more people cannot work in
the industrial sector and their services will enter the agricultural sector. The agricultural sector
is a sector that does not require high skills(Yutanto, Shonhadj, Ilham, & Ekaningtias, 2018).
Efficiency of food crop agriculture is a performance parameter that is quite often and
commonly used, efficiency measurement is widely used to answer the challenges of
difficulties in calculating measures of food crop agriculture performance. Calculation of the
level of land area, labor, irrigation and rainfall is usually used to show good performance
results, but this calculation is sometimes not included in the criteria of good food crop
agriculture that can answer the problems of food crop agriculture. Measurement of efficiency
of food crop agriculture can be done using nonparametric methods, in this case using an
approach to calculate the efficiency of food crop agriculture, namely Data Envelopment
Analysis (DEA) to analyze the level of efficiency of food crop agriculture from Districts in
East Java according toCooper, Seiford, & Zhu, (2011).
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
According toTravers & Ma, (1994) results of analysis of technological improvements,
prices, fertilizer and irrigation can increase agricultural productivity food crops and reduce
poverty .According to Irz et al., (2001)results of analysis of agricultural growth as well food
crops can be done by adding agricultural land, along with supporting tools.Agricultural
technology should be used to get more and more satisfying results.
According to(Bayyurt & Yılmaz, 2012) the results of the analysis of increasing irrigation
rates and literacy rates in rural areas are two factors, the most important of all is that they
know, the knowledge of agriculture and growing food crops so that it can reduce
poverty.According to Majid, (2004)the results of the analysis of factors in farmer income,
food prices, GINI ratio, labor, total population and inflation can reduce poverty.
According to Kheir-El-Din & Heba El-Laithy, (2008) TFP analysis results reduce
poverty by 0.241 percent , higher productivity of agricultural food crops will result in lower
poverty rates, -1,377 ,increase in yields do not benefit the poor, increase in land results in a
decrease in poverty by 1.464, increase THIS one percent G index will increase poverty by
1.62 percent.According to Bayyurt & Yılmaz, (2012) the results of government
regulation analysis havea positive effect on agricultural efficiency.
Education has a negative influence on agricultural efficiency food crops . The result can
be interpreted that the higher the level of education the more farmers leave the work of
farmers.According toDhrifi, (2014) analysis results of poverty reduction per capital income
of 0.25%, a decrease in household consumption expenditure by 0.21 points, which
Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 422 editor@iaeme.com
decreases poverty level,growth of foodcrop agriculture can reduce poverty by
32% , technology innovation reduces poverty by 18%.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This research uses a method namely Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to measure technical
efficiency. DEA method is a non-parametric analysis method that aims to measure the level of
technical efficiency relative to other production units that have the same objectives. The
production unit is here in the form of a decision making unit (DMU) where the DMU in this
study is a food crop agricultural sub-sector 29 districts in East Java.
This study focuses for 8 years ie in 2010 until 2017. The input variables used in this
research is the area of land and labor (labor), while Productivity become the output
variable. The Linear Programming (LP) function that is carried out in this approach uses the
assumption of output oriented , so the objective function that is applied is the maximizing
function of output with the input level that isceteris paribus. DEA analysis of this one
stage uses MaxDEA 7 Basic software .
In this measurement of technical efficiency, it will use output oriented measurement
with one measurement scale assumption, namely Variable Return to Scale (VRS) with a
DEA one stage approach . A sum is needed to be able to produce technical efficiency values
for each Regency in East Java based on VRS assumptions, but it is also intended to estimate
the value of the efficiency scores of each Regency in East Java from year 20 10 to 2017 .
3.1. Dea Model
The following is a model of technical efficiency analysis assuming VRS with the DEA one
stage approach : VRS Model Measurement of Technical Efficiency Oriented to Output
( Output Oriented )
Max Ф, λФ,
st-Фyi + Qλ ≥ 0
xi - Xλ ≥ 0
I1'λ = 1
λ ≥ 0 ………………… (3.1)
Where : Ф = efficiency score; λ = Ix1 vector constant or obstacle vector; yi = output
vector i; xi = input vector i; Q = Matrix ouput i keselu Ruhan; X = input matrix i overall
The model above is a VRS model with an output-oriented approach where the variable
ukkan shows the calculation of technical efficiency (Coelli, Prasada Rao, O’Donnell, &
Battese, 2005)with a value of Ф between 1 to ∞ (infinity), and Ф - 1 representing proportional
increase in output that can be achieved by DMU with a constant input quantity. λ is I x1
vector of constants and I1'λ = 1 is convexity constraint, with I 1 being I x1 vector of
one. Convexity constraints show that variable return to scale (VRS) which ensures that
companies are inefficient will only be compared with companies that have the same
scale. There is a note that 1 / Ф indicates the value of technical efficiency which assumes
values at interval levels 0 to 1.
Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 423 editor@iaeme.com
4. RESULT AND ANALYSIS
4.1 Results of Estimates on the efficiency of food crop agriculture in East Java
Province
The results of the estimation of technical efficiency describing food crop agriculture using
the DEA method one stage can be seen in graph I. The technical efficiency score ranges from
0 to 1. An assessment of score 1 shows that food crop agriculture reaches an efficient
condition. While food crop agriculture in an ineffective condition has a technical efficiency
score of less than 1.
Graph 1. Productivity of food
Based on Graph I, it can be seen that as many as 93.1 percent (29 districts) in East Java
Province in the period 2010-2017 have an average score of efficiency of less than 0 , 69,
while the rest have achieved an average technical efficiency of more than 0.31.
So that it can be said that food crop agriculture in 2010-2017 estimates inefficiency by 31
percent and has the potential to increase output by 69 percent so that the conditions are
efficient.
Graph I above shows the DEA one stage technical efficiency score in 2010-2017. On the
other hand, Sidoarjo Regency is the most inefficient DMU with the acquisition of an
efficiency score of 0.20-0.25 in 2010-2017. But there is also one Kabupaten Gresik that also
has an ineffective DMU from 29 Regencies in East Java with the acquisition of an efficiency
score of 0.28-0.35 in 2010-2017.
These two districts have a tendency to improve the efficiency of food crops throughout the
year according to Hanaa Kheir-El-Din and Heba El-Laithy (2008) . This is due to the
development of the center of the provincial capital of East Java to the area of Sidoarjo
Regency and Gersik Regency, making it an expert in the function of agricultural land which
used to be an agricultural area and a residential area. Sidoarjo regency has extensive
agricultural land, but because small-scale ownership (subsitaries) by the community makes a
choice to use agricultural land or sell at high prices to the owners of capital to be used as
settlements or industries. If food crops are implemented, the landowners will also be burdened
by high labor costs, rejecting (Irz et al., 2001; Travers & Ma, 1994).
Third, Gresik Regency is an area with almost the majority of its area being
industrial. Agricultural problems there are due to the large size of Litosol land where this type
of soil is very difficult for agriculture. High labor costs compared to agricultural products
make it an obstacle to agricultural productivity according to(Bayyurt & Yılmaz, 2012; Kheir-
El-Din & Heba El-Laithy, 2008),rejected Dhrifi, (2014).
Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 424 editor@iaeme.com
The technical estimation of food crop agriculture in East Java can be seen in Figure 1.
There are 8 efficient districts but in different years. First, Trenggalek District has an efficient
area since 2010-2012 and 2016, where inefficiency occurred in 2013-2015 and 2017. The
problem of food crop farming was broken down that year so that inefficiencies occurred were
experts in the function of land and labor in the high agricultural sector, although this area
contributed the largest regional income (Qi et al., 2018).
Figure 1. Agriculture east java food crops efficiency
Secondly, based on figure 1 efficiency occurred in 2010, 2012, 2014 and 2016, while in
2011, 2013 and 2015 there was inefficiency. The problem of food crop farming in Pacitan is
the area of small agricultural land and the small number of workers in the agricultural sector,
plus people who live a lot in subsitant agriculture for personal needs. Third, efficiency occurs
in Malang Regency in 2015, while in 2010-2017 except 2015 agricultural inefficiencies
occur. This problem occurs because the occurrence of expert land functions into settlements is
also due to the large workforce. Fourth, Magetan Regency in 2010 was an agricultural area,
but because experts in land functions were large enough to influence the productivity of
agricultural crops since 2011-2017 and mapping the lack of regional governance that had an
impact on agricultural areas where fertile land became settlements and tourism. Fifth,
Lumajang Regency in 2010 was an area similar to magetan but different types of soil and soil
fertility.
Sixth, Regency Jember in 2010 was East Java's rice barn, but the food crop sector, but the
existence of development made a good area for agriculture to turn into settlements and
industries, so that 2010-2017 continued to decline in productivity. Seventh, Blitar Regency in
2010 happened agricultural efficiency the same problem with Magetan Regency. Eighth,
Banyuwangi Regency in 2010,2013 and 2015 is one of the East Java Province rice barns
because in that year agricultural productivity increased with government regulations that
prohibited the construction of the (Agovino, Cerciello, & Gatto, 2018; Kaim, Cord, & Volk,
2018).
Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 425 editor@iaeme.com
5. CONCLUSION
This is due firstly, because of the development of the center of the provincial capital of East
Java to the area of Sidoarjo Regency and Gersik Regency, it has become an expert in the
function of agricultural land which used to be an agricultural area and a residential
area(Ilham, 2018).
Second, Sidoarjo Regency has extensive agricultural land, but because small-scale
ownership (subsiten) by the community makes a choice to use agricultural land or sell at high
prices to the owners of capital to be used as settlements or industries. If food crops are
implemented, the landowners will also be burdened by high labor costs, rejecting Irz et al.,
(2001); Travers & Ma, (1994).
Third, Gresik Regency is an area with almost the majority of its area
beingindustrial. Agricultural problems there are due to the large size of Litosol land where
this type of soil is very difficult for agriculture. High labor costs compared to agricultural
products make it an obstacle to agricultural productivity according to (Bayyurt & Yılmaz,
2012; Dhrifi, 2014; Kheir-El-Din & Heba El-Laithy, 2008).
ACKNOWLEDGE
Thank you to both parents and extended family, colleagues and siblings, Lamongan Islamic
University and Trunojoyo Madura University, Airlangga University Surabaya Partner and
staff. The Chair of the Doctoral Program in Economics, the Promoter who always supports
and assists in the joys and sorrows. BUDI-DN scholarships that provide financial assistance
REFERENCES
[1] Agovino, M., Cerciello, M., & Gatto, A. (2018). Policy efficiency in the field of food
sustainability. The adjusted food agriculture and nutrition index. Journal of Environmental
Management, 218, 220–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.04.058
[2] Bayyurt, N., & Yılmaz, S. (2012). The Impacts of Governance and Education on
Agricultural Efficiency: An International Analysis. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 58, 1158–1165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.1097
[3] Bhattarai, M., & Narayanamoorthy, A. (2003). Impact of Irrigation on Agricultural
Growth and Poverty Alleviation: Macro Level Analyses in India. Water Policy Research,
8.
[4] Coelli, T. J., Prasada Rao, D. S., O’Donnell, C. J., & Battese, G. E. (2005). An
introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis. An Introduction to Efficiency and
Productivity Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1007/b136381
[5] Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Zhu, J. (2011). Data Envelopment Analysis: History,
Models, and Interpretations. Handbook on Data Envelopment Analysis - International
Series in Operations Research & Management Science (Vol. 164). Springer
Science+Business Media, LLC 2011.
[6] Dhrifi, A. (2014). Agricultural Productivity and Poverty Alleviation: What Role for
Technological Innovation. Journal of Economic and Social Studies, 4(1), 131–151.
https://doi.org/10.14706/JECOSS11418
[7] Ilham, R. (2018). Improve Quality Of E-Loyalty In Online Food Delivery Services : A
CASE OF INDONESIA. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology,
96(15), 4760–4769.
[8] Irz, X., Lin, L., Thirtle, C., & Wiggins, S. (2001). Agricultural Productivity Growth and
Poverty Alleviation Theoretical expectations of the effects of agricultural growth on
poverty. Development Policy Review, 19(4), 449–466.
Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 426 editor@iaeme.com
[9] Kaim, A., Cord, A. F., & Volk, M. (2018). A review of multi-criteria optimization
techniques for agricultural land use allocation. Environmental Modelling and Software,
105(April), 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.03.031
[10] Kheir-El-Din, H., & Heba El-Laithy, H. (2008). Agricultural productivity growth
employment and poverty in Egypt. Working Paper Series, 129(129), 34.
[11] Majid, N. (2004). Reaching Millennium Goals: How Well Does Agricultural Productivity
Growth Reduce Poverty? Employment Strategy Papers, 38.
[12] Qi, X., Fu, Y., Wang, R. Y., Ng, C. N., Dang, H., & He, Y. (2018). Improving the
sustainability of agricultural land use: An integrated framework for the conflict between
food security and environmental deterioration. Applied Geography, 90(November 2017),
214–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2017.12.009
[13] Travers, L., & Ma, J. (1994). Agricultural productivity and rural poverty in China. China
Economic Review, 5(1), 141–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/1043-951X(94)90019-1
[14] Yutanto, H., Shonhadj, N., Ilham, R., & Ekaningtias, D. (2018). Development Of Parking
Accounting Information Systems Based. International Journal of Civil Engineering and
Technology, 9(8), 1013–1022.
Data source:
[15] https://jatim.bps.go.id/subject/162/produk-domestik-regional-bruto--kabupaten-kota-
.html#subjekViewTab3
[16] http://prasarana.pertanian.go.id/lahanmy/
[17] http://prasarana.pertanian.go.id/tenagakerjamy/?page=home
Table I Review of Previous Research
NO Researcher Country Method used Analysis Results
1 Lee Travers and Jun
Ma (1994)
China -DEA, Dependent variable
(Y): Food
cropproductivity and poverty
Independent variable
(X): technology, labor,
fertilizer and irrigation
-R 2 of 0.833
- food crop agricultural products (+)
-poverty (-)
-technology (-)
workforce (+)
-fertilizer (+)
- irrigation (-)
2 Xavier Irz, Lin Lin,
Colin Thirtle and Steve
Wiggins (2001)
South
Africa
-DEA
-Production: the number of
poor people, the level of
poverty, labor and land
-Poverty: value added / labor
and value added / land
-Proconductivity(+): the number of
poor (-), poverty (-), labor (+) and
land (+)
-Poverty (-): value added / labor (-)
and value added / land (-), R 2 =
0.088
3 Madhusudan Bhattarai
and A.
Narayanamoorthy, ( 200
3 )
India -DEA
-TFP
-Variable variable (Y):
Agricultural cropproductivity a
nd poverty
-Independent variable
(X): Irrigation, selling price,
land area and fertilizer
-costanta (+)
-R 2 = 0.53
- food crop agricultural products (+)
-poverty (-)
- irrigation (-)
-selling price (-)
-fertilizer (+)
- Extensive land area (+)
4 Majid, Nomaan (2004) Sub-
Saharan
Africa
-DEA
-TFP
Dependent variable (Y): Food
cropproductivity and poverty
Independent variable
- R 2 = 0.33
-costanta (+)
- food crop agricultural products (+)
-poverty (-)
- farmer's income (+)
Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 427 editor@iaeme.com
NO Researcher Country Method used Analysis Results
(X): farmer income, food
price, GINI ratio, labor, total
population, irrigation,
technology,
fertilizer,government
policyand inflation
- food prices (-)
-GINI ratio (-)
-labor (-)
-total population (-)
- technology (+)
- Irrigation (+)
-fertilizer (-)
-government policies (+)
-inflation(-)
5 Hanaa Kheir-El-Din and
Heba El-Laithy (2008)
Egypt -DEA
-TFP
Dependent variable (Y):
Productivity, poverty and
technical efficiency.
Independent variable (X):
Land, GINI labor, and capital
(capital input and livestock)
Study: all of Egypt
Productivity (-), poverty (-) and
technical efficiency (-).
Land (-), Labor (-), GINI (+) and
capital (capital input and livestock)
(-)
6 Nizamettin Bayyurta and
Senem Yilmaz (2012)
64 world
bank
countries
-DEA-CRS
-OLS fixed effect
dependent variable (Y) =
government regulation and
education
Independent variable (X):
Land area, fertility / fertilizer,
tractor, labor.
- R-sq: within = 0.0133
- government regulation (+)
-education(-)
-Surface area (-)
- fertility / fertilizer (+)
- tractor (-)
-labor(-).
7 Abdelhafidh
Dhrifi (2013)
Sub
Saharan
Afrika32
Countries
- Simultaneous Equation
Model, SSA, Data Panel
-Poverty:
agricultural cropproduction ,
capital per capita,
technological innovation,
farmer income, farmer
population, and infrastructure
-Agricultural growth:
agricultural production,
technological innovation,
inflation, export-import trade,
education, government
investment.
-Agricultural production:
economic growth,
technological innovation,
irrigation and agricultural
labor.
-Poverty (+): the productivity
offood crops (+), GDP perkapital
(+), Innovations in technology (+),
farmers' income (+), the population
of farmers (+), and infrastructure
(+), R 2 = 0.431, constants 0.213
-Growth in agriculture
(+):agriculturalproductivity (+),
technological innovation (+),
inflation (-), import-export trade
(+), education (+), government
investment (+), R 2= 0.383, -0.041
constants
-agricultural productivity(+):
economic growth (+), technological
innovation (-), irrigation (+) and
farm labor (+), R2 = 0.294, 0.022
constants.
Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 428 editor@iaeme.com
Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 429 editor@iaeme.com
Tabel II DEA Results Envelopment Model (score,Benchmark)
NO DMU Score
Benchmark
(Lambda)
Proportion
ate
Movement
(land)
Slack
Movemen
t (land)
Projecti
on
(land)
Propo
rtiona
te
Move
ment
(labor
)
Slack
Movement
(labor)
Projection
(labor)
Proportio
nate
Movemen
t
(producti
vity)
Slack
Movement
(productivity)
Projection
(productivity)
1 SIDOARJO_2011 0,201571
MALANG_2015(
0,404989);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,595011)
0 0 22692 0 -421678,632 977849,368
3160,117
99
0 3957,91799
2 SIDOARJO_2010 0,204003
MALANG_2015(
0,405323);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,594677)
0 0 22701 0 -394192,224 978277,776
3151,911
39
0 3959,70139
3 SIDOARJO_2012 0,210651
MALANG_2015(
0,360667);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,639333)
0 0 21498 0 -505991,167 921013,833
2937,421
26
0 3721,32126
4 SIDOARJO_2013 0,213571
MALANG_2015(
0,345521);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,654479)
0 0 21090 0 -551714,355 901592,645
2862,974
13
0 3640,47413
5 SIDOARJO_2017 0,220411
MALANG_2015(
0,321589);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,678411)
0 0
20445,28
571
0 -582846,082 870903,633
2738,479
53
0 3512,72095
6 SIDOARJO_2014 0,22089
MALANG_2015(
0,311816);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,688184)
0 0 20182 0 -623065,018 858370,982
2696,149
65
0 3460,54965
7 SIDOARJO_2016 0,250839
MALANG_2015(
0,209919);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,790081)
0 0 17437 0 -806747,626 727706,374
2185,014
94
0 2916,61494
8 SIDOARJO_2015 0,258042
MALANG_2015(
0,212888);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,787112)
0 0 17517 0 -776533,55 731514,45
2175,767
32
0 2932,46732
9 GRESIK_2016 0,28825
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,060424);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,772879);
MALANG_2015(
0,166697)
0 0 36541 0 0 890124
4221,532
73
0 5931,20273
10 GRESIK_2015 0,317403
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,063682);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,782051);
MALANG_2015(
0,154267)
0 0 36558 0 0 878367
4040,665
81
0 5919,54581
11 GRESIK_2014 0,320888
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,082423);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,781876);
MALANG_2015(
0,135701)
0 0 36875 0 0 866295
4033,351
5
0 5939,1515
12 GRESIK_2017 0,328159
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,084416);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,786941);
MALANG_2015(
0,128644)
0 0
36887,66
667
0 0 859676,167
3985,973
71
0 5932,91538
13 GRESIK_2013 0,332775
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,087471);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,790376);
MALANG_2015(
0,122154)
0 0 36925 0 0 854073
3956,941
19
0 5930,44119
14 GRESIK_2012 0,351362
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,101782);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,793882);
MALANG_2015(
0,104336)
0 0 37152 0 0 841034
3852,553
84
0 5939,45384
15 GRESIK_2011 0,358203
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,110713);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,800580);
MALANG_2015(
0,088707)
0 0 37275 0 0 828164
3810,797
19
0 5937,69719
16
BANGKALAN_201
6
0,359842
BLITAR_2010(0,
058751);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,665604);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,275645)
0 0 28089 0 0 629891
2851,272
24
0 4454,01224
17 GRESIK_2010 0,373751
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,118774);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,807835);
MALANG_2015(
0,073391)
0 0 37381 0 0 815278
3716,240
27
0 5934,13027
18
BANGKALAN_201
5
0,39906
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,729429);
PACITAN_2010(
0,053856);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,216715)
0 0 28480 0 0 622926
2693,133
63
0 4481,53363
19
BANGKALAN_201
4
0,424207
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,728268);
PACITAN_2010(
0,122598);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,149134)
0 0 28540 0 0 615818
2567,540
38
0 4459,14038
20
BANGKALAN_201
7
0,427032
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,736566);
PACITAN_2010(
0 0
28855,71
429
0 0 607746
2557,374
61
0 4463,38175
Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 430 editor@iaeme.com
NO DMU Score
Benchmark
(Lambda)
Proportion
ate
Movement
(land)
Slack
Movemen
t (land)
Projecti
on
(land)
Propo
rtiona
te
Move
ment
(labor
)
Slack
Movement
(labor)
Projection
(labor)
Proportio
nate
Movemen
t
(producti
vity)
Slack
Movement
(productivity)
Projection
(productivity)
0,223165);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,040268)
21
BANGKALAN_201
3
0,432337
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,741975);
PACITAN_2010(
0,227909);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,030116)
0 0 28985 0 0 608533
2544,351
96
0 4482,15196
22 SITUBONDO_2016 0,437081
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,244848);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,755152)
0
-
4183,7998
2
25963,20
018
0 0 481853
1947,455
2
0 3459,5652
23
BANGKALAN_201
2
0,443012
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,714864);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,069316);
PACITAN_2010(
0,215819)
0 0 29141 0 0 600337
2481,111
38
0 4454,51138
24
BANGKALAN_201
1
0,46083
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,671773);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,184059);
PACITAN_2010(
0,144168)
0 0 29375 0 0 592322
2387,961
1
0 4428,9611
25 PONOROGO_2016 0,465615
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,648731);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,351269)
0
-
3917,6761
8
30572,32
383
0 0 593848
2431,090
83
0 4549,32083
26 LAMONGAN_2016 0,466212
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,379738);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,620262)
0
-
36097,831
9
45043,16
806
0 0 827036
3549,456
17
0 6649,56617
27 PONOROGO_2015 0,474164
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,642734);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,357266)
0
-
4085,1164
9
30503,88
351
0 0 592185
2383,689
19
0 4533,13919
28 LAMONGAN_2015 0,477055
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,375104);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,624896)
0
-
36806,504
9
44915,49
514
0 0 825379
3470,002
41
0 6635,50241
29
BANGKALAN_201
0
0,480786
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,634853);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,263071);
PACITAN_2010(
0,102077)
0 0 29380 0 0 584395
2275,523
16
0 4382,63316
30 SITUBONDO_2015 0,480934
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,232886);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,767114)
0
-
4431,3100
5
25826,68
996
0 0 478536
1778,989
48
0 3427,28948
31 LAMONGAN_2013 0,517185
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,361862);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,638138)
0
-
37686,339
7
44550,66
032
0 0 820644
3184,314
17
0 6595,31417
32 LAMONGAN_2017 0,527432
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,358394);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,641606)
0
-
37752,311
1
44455,11
752
0 0 819404
3111,762
54
0 6584,78969
33 LAMONGAN_2012 0,529607
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,351582);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,648418)
0
-
38628,577
9
44267,42
214
0 0 816968
3087,714
17
0 6564,11417
34 TUBAN_2016 0,529828
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,346822);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,653178)
0
-
10121,718
1
44136,28
194
0 0 815266
3079,468
47
0 6549,66847
35 JOMBANG_2016 0,539477
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,342112);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,633209);
MALANG_2015(
0,024679)
0 0 41873 0 0 852516
2970,477
88
0 6450,22788
36 JOMBANG_2014 0,542393
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,003111);
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,374823);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,622066)
0 0 42544 0 0 840668
2977,439
02
0 6506,53902
37 TUBAN_2015 0,542684
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,332673);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,667327)
0
-
10895,517
3
43746,48
271
0 0 810207
2975,630
29
0 6506,73029
38 JOMBANG_2015 0,543054
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,348624);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,634634);
MALANG_2015(
0,016742)
0 0 41977 0 0 846762
2949,408
47
0 6454,60847
39
BOJONEGORO_201
6
0,543522
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,487110);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,512890)
0
-
29377,626
4
48001,37
357
0 0 865429
3184,126
18
0 6975,42618
40 JOMBANG_2013 0,545882
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,045427);
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,325106);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,629466)
0 0 42665 0 0 836128
2952,823
69
0 6502,32369
41 LAMONGAN_2011 0,546479
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,341058);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,658942)
0
-
38808,519
4
43977,48
056
0 0 813205
2962,475
77
0 6532,17577
Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 431 editor@iaeme.com
NO DMU Score
Benchmark
(Lambda)
Proportion
ate
Movement
(land)
Slack
Movemen
t (land)
Projecti
on
(land)
Propo
rtiona
te
Move
ment
(labor
)
Slack
Movement
(labor)
Projection
(labor)
Proportio
nate
Movemen
t
(producti
vity)
Slack
Movement
(productivity)
Projection
(productivity)
42 SITUBONDO_2014 0,552446
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,220145);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,779855)
0
-
5687,7097
25681,29
031
0 0 475003
1518,511
99
0 3392,91199
43 JOMBANG_2017 0,553479
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,056735);
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,307835);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,635430)
0 0
42613,57
143
0 0 833337,857
2898,175
43
0 6490,564
44
BOJONEGORO_201
5
0,553782
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,476301);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,523699)
0
-
29677,427
2
47703,57
281
0 0 861564
3097,922
05
0 6942,62205
45 PONOROGO_2017 0,554678
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,622860);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,377140)
0
-
4408,7832
1
30277,07
394
0 0 586673,857
1994,825
02
0 4479,51359
46 LAMONGAN_2010 0,555375
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,330313);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,669687)
0
-
39144,548
43681,45
197
0 0 809363
2889,866
85
0 6499,56685
47 TUBAN_2014 0,557353
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,317216);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,682784)
0
-
11474,376
2
43320,62
379
0 0 804680
2859,419
96
0 6459,81996
48 JOMBANG_2012 0,562619
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,106916);
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,245544);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,647540)
0 0 42687 0 0 826635
2832,771
18
0 6476,67118
49 MOJOKERTO_2014 0,563083
BLITAR_2010(0,
943567);
MALANG_2015(
0,019608);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,036824)
0 0 30489 0 0 748054
2195,435
35
0 5024,83535
50 MOJOKERTO_2013 0,563089
BLITAR_2010(0,
968468);
MALANG_2015(
0,005883);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,025648)
0 0 30599 0 0 737431
2199,415
2
0 5034,0152
51
BOJONEGORO_201
4
0,564857
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,463881);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,536119)
0
-
30130,609
1
47361,39
089
0 0 857123
3004,629
13
0 6904,92913
52 MOJOKERTO_2012 0,565384
BLITAR_2010(0,
920390);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,058019);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,021591)
0 0 30837 0 0 729918
2198,354
76
0 5058,15476
53 JOMBANG_2011 0,56647
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,204247);
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,138504);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,657249)
0 0 43119 0 0 819086
2812,085
6
0 6486,4856
54 PONOROGO_2014 0,567273
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,635352);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,364648)
0
-
4258,3602
1
30419,63
979
0 0 590138
1952,991
07
0 4513,22107
55 MOJOKERTO_2011 0,570558
BLITAR_2010(0,
746053);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,227490);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,026457)
0 0 31342 0 0 720510
2193,655
44
0 5108,15544
56 MOJOKERTO_2016 0,57098
BLITAR_2010(0,
836381);
MALANG_2015(
0,055877);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,107741)
0 0 29401 0 0 764529
2086,563
06
0 4863,55306
57 NGAWI_2016 0,571747
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,571229);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,428771)
0
-
17417,132
4
29687,86
759
0 0 572357
1858,704
91
0 4340,20491
58 MOJOKERTO_2017 0,571964
BLITAR_2010(0,
961115);
MALANG_2015(
0,008168);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,030718)
0 0
30518,85
714
0 0 738299,714
2149,537
83
0 5021,86068
59 TUBAN_2017 0,574383
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,297928);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,702072)
0
-
11962,651
7
42789,20
547
0 0 797783
2724,497
49
0 6401,28177
60 MOJOKERTO_2015 0,575066
BLITAR_2010(0,
857307);
MALANG_2015(
0,044995);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,097698)
0 0 29511 0 0 756438
2071,447
32
0 4874,74732
61 PONOROGO_2013 0,576134
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,625824);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,374176)
0 -4378,091
30310,90
9
0 0 587496
1902,103
36
0 4487,51336
62 TUBAN_2013 0,576678
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,301141);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,698859)
0
-
11978,263
3
42877,73
666
0 0 798932
2713,933
89
0 6411,03389
Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 432 editor@iaeme.com
NO DMU Score
Benchmark
(Lambda)
Proportion
ate
Movement
(land)
Slack
Movemen
t (land)
Projecti
on
(land)
Propo
rtiona
te
Move
ment
(labor
)
Slack
Movement
(labor)
Projection
(labor)
Proportio
nate
Movemen
t
(producti
vity)
Slack
Movement
(productivity)
Projection
(productivity)
63
BOJONEGORO_201
3
0,577841
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,449311);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,550689)
0
-
30541,043
46959,95
702
0 0 851913
2896,309
34
0 6860,70934
64 SITUBONDO_2017 0,578803
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,203570);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,796430)
0
-
5934,5711
1
25492,14
318
0 0 470407
1410,248
23
0 3348,19109
65 JOMBANG_2010 0,58032
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,287234);
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,044510);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,668256)
0 0 43430 0 0 811570
2722,704
94
0 6487,57494
66 PONOROGO_2012 0,581497
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,614840);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,385160)
0
-
4590,4483
30185,55
17
0 0 584450
1865,634
58
0 4457,87458
67
BOJONEGORO_201
7
0,585981
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,373402);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,626598)
0
-
29174,122
3
44868,60
982
0 0 824770,5
2745,089
02
0 6630,33777
68
BOJONEGORO_201
2
0,586682
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,433946);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,566054)
0
-
30985,359
2
46536,64
076
0 0 846419
2816,379
09
0 6814,07909
69 SITUBONDO_2013 0,588155
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,202463);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,797537)
0
-
5891,4913
2
25479,50
868
0 0 470100
1377,703
86
0 3345,20386
70 PONOROGO_2011 0,59212
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,602456);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,397544)
0
-
4734,7736
3
30044,22
637
0 0 581016
1804,650
4
0 4424,4604
71
BOJONEGORO_201
1
0,592984
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,416976);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,583024)
0
-
31566,902
6
46069,09
743
0 0 840351
2752,477
03
0 6762,57703
72 TUBAN_2012 0,593139
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,281735);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,718265)
0
-
12554,917
8
42343,08
222
0 0 791993
2584,439
24
0 6352,13924
73 NGAWI_2015 0,596576
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,566408);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,433592)
0
-
17573,156
3
29632,84
372
0 0 571020
1745,695
37
0 4327,19537
74
BONDOWOSO_201
6
0,597211
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,425009);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,574991)
0
-
5523,7919
7
28019,20
803
0 0 531811
1589,276
29
0 3945,67629
75 LAMONGAN_2014 0,60127
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,369103);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,630897)
0
-
37093,855
6
44750,14
445
0 0 823233
2638,508
27
0 6617,28827
76 MOJOKERTO_2010 0,605036
BLITAR_2010(0,
621251);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,337820);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,040928)
0 0 31453 0 0 711218
2015,612
64
0 5103,28264
77 TUBAN_2011 0,605183
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,262567);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,737433)
0
-
13087,022
9
41814,97
708
0 0 785139
2484,966
01
0 6293,96601
78
BOJONEGORO_201
0
0,610654
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,400084);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,599916)
0
-
33079,288
5
45603,71
152
0 0 834311
2613,022
63
0 6711,31263
79 SUMENEP_2016 0,618947
BLITAR_2010(0,
362937);
MALANG_2015(
0,163802);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,473261)
0 0 23187 0 0 770264
1475,478
3
0 3872,1083
80 TUBAN_2010 0,619344
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,243340);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,756660)
0
-
13626,746
1
41285,25
388
0 0 778264
2373,624
56
0 6235,61456
81 NGAWI_2014 0,619652
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,560154);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,439846)
0
-
18045,518
6
29561,48
142
0 0 569286
1639,422
86
0 4310,32286
82
TULUNGAGUNG_2
016
0,62034
BLITAR_2010(0,
667319);
MALANG_2015(
0,037545);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,295136)
0 0 25650 0 0 693650
1596,826
37
0 4205,93637
83 PONOROGO_2010 0,630246
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,590079);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,409921)
0
-
4897,0166
5
29902,98
335
0 0 577584
1623,615
68
0 4391,06568
84 PASURUAN_2016 0,634418
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,154783);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,486502);
MALANG_2015(
0,358715)
0 0 39319 0 0 1128999
2375,291
46
0 6497,28146
85
BONDOWOSO_201
5
0,634726
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,412326);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,587674)
0
-
5779,5331
4
27874,46
686
0 0 528294
1428,754
49
0 3911,45449
Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 433 editor@iaeme.com
NO DMU Score
Benchmark
(Lambda)
Proportion
ate
Movement
(land)
Slack
Movemen
t (land)
Projecti
on
(land)
Propo
rtiona
te
Move
ment
(labor
)
Slack
Movement
(labor)
Projection
(labor)
Proportio
nate
Movemen
t
(producti
vity)
Slack
Movement
(productivity)
Projection
(productivity)
86 SITUBONDO_2012 0,637501
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,190620);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,809380)
0
-
6886,6434
5
25344,35
656
0 0 466816
1201,049
24
0 3313,24924
87 PASURUAN_2015 0,639333
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,162203);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,491871);
MALANG_2015(
0,345925)
0 0 39422 0 0 1118511
2342,941
4
0 6496,1414
88 KEDIRI_2016 0,642276
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,204498);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,525387);
MALANG_2015(
0,270116)
0 0 39997 0 0 1055676
2319,794
78
0 6484,87478
89 PASURUAN_2014 0,642409
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,170228);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,497286);
MALANG_2015(
0,332486)
0 0 39535 0 0 1107580
2322,748
68
0 6495,54868
90 NGAWI_2013 0,643671
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,546952);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,453048)
0
-
18290,186
29410,81
397
0 0 565625
1523,199
88
0 4274,69988
91
BONDOWOSO_201
4
0,651993
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,398262);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,601738)
0
-
6051,0365
8
27713,96
342
0 0 524394
1348,005
95
0 3873,50595
92 SITUBONDO_2011 0,653067
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,174973);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,825027)
0
-
7135,2138
1
25165,78
62
0 0 462477
1134,829
06
0 3271,02906
93 NGAWI_2012 0,656869
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,535938);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,464062)
0
-
18516,872
6
29285,12
743
0 0 562571
1456,583
26
0 4244,98326
94 PASURUAN_2017 0,658154
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,180929);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,502604);
MALANG_2015(
0,316467)
0 0
39693,57
143
0 0 1095000,29
2221,269
39
0 6497,87367
95 KEDIRI_2015 0,659015
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,210976);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,527881);
MALANG_2015(
0,261144)
0 0 40096 0 0 1048822
2212,130
03
0 6487,47003
96 PASURUAN_2013 0,659916
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,172909);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,506767);
MALANG_2015(
0,320324)
0 0 39541 0 0 1095876
2204,692
88
0 6482,79288
97 PASURUAN_2012 0,671789
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,180761);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,513412);
MALANG_2015(
0,305826)
0 0 39646 0 0 1083766
2126,808
22
0 6480,00822
98
BONDOWOSO_201
3
0,672101
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,383292);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,616708)
0
-
6332,8698
5
27543,13
015
0 0 520243
1256,875
08
0 3833,11508
99 PASURUAN_2011 0,672327
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,211193);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,506303);
MALANG_2015(
0,282503)
0 0 40189 0 0 1071327
2137,416
72
0 6523,01672
100 KEDIRI_2014 0,673757
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,212640);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,533941);
MALANG_2015(
0,253418)
0 0 40099 0 0 1041372
2113,814
16
0 6479,26416
101 KEDIRI_2017 0,673794
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,246768);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,521609);
MALANG_2015(
0,231623)
0 0 40726 0 0 1031998,86
2131,634
13
0 6534,63413
102
BONDOWOSO_201
7
0,675048
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,380925);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,619075)
0
-
6344,3076
8
27516,12
089
0 0 519586,714
1243,502
02
0 3826,72916
103 KEDIRI_2013 0,680232
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,271835);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,504947);
MALANG_2015(
0,223218)
0 0 41218 0 0 1033095
2106,549
64
0 6587,74964
104 NGANJUK_2013 0,681707
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,026238);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,973762)
0
-
6074,1108
3
35303,88
917
0 0 700635
1775,039
58
0 5576,73958
105 NGANJUK_2016 0,682974
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,060111);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,939889)
0
-
3807,8733
8
36237,12
662
0 0 712747 1800,56 0 5679,54
Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 434 editor@iaeme.com
NO DMU Score
Benchmark
(Lambda)
Proportion
ate
Movement
(land)
Slack
Movemen
t (land)
Projecti
on
(land)
Propo
rtiona
te
Move
ment
(labor
)
Slack
Movement
(labor)
Projection
(labor)
Proportio
nate
Movemen
t
(producti
vity)
Slack
Movement
(productivity)
Projection
(productivity)
106 KEDIRI_2012 0,683286
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,273716);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,512134);
MALANG_2015(
0,214149)
0 0 41220 0 0 1024321
2083,323
84
0 6577,92384
107 NGAWI_2011 0,684893
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,525246);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,474754)
0
-
19053,896
3
29163,10
367
0 0 559606
1328,532
63
0 4216,13263
108
TULUNGAGUNG_2
015
0,685051
BLITAR_2010(0,
676306);
MALANG_2015(
0,032195);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,291499)
0 0 25679 0 0 689307
1325,029
42
0 4207,12942
109
TULUNGAGUNG_2
014
0,685319
BLITAR_2010(0,
690457);
MALANG_2015(
0,025378);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,284165)
0 0 25768 0 0 684531
1327,195
05
0 4217,59505
110 SAMPANG_2016 0,685972
BLITAR_2010(0,
333264);
MALANG_2015(
0,059851);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,606885)
0 0 19815 0 0 628652
1010,845
75
0 3218,96575
111 PASURUAN_2010 0,686807
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,214424);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,516090);
MALANG_2015(
0,269487)
0 0 40203 0 0 1058943
2038,986
34
0 6510,32634
112 KEDIRI_2011 0,687485
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,275763);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,519753);
MALANG_2015(
0,204484)
0 0 41223 0 0 1014986
2052,461
72
0 6567,56172
113 KEDIRI_2010 0,689922
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,277950);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,527219);
MALANG_2015(
0,194831)
0 0 41229 0 0 1005720
2033,364
76
0 6557,59476
114
TULUNGAGUNG_2
013
0,691581
BLITAR_2010(0,
700777);
MALANG_2015(
0,018406);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,280817)
0 0 25779 0 0 678482
1299,845
73
0 4214,54573
115 NGANJUK_2012 0,692323
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,011816);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,988184)
0
-
6574,4610
2
34906,53
899
0 0 695478
1702,369
62
0 5532,96962
116 SAMPANG_2015 0,693454
BLITAR_2010(0,
359627);
MALANG_2015(
0,047308);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,593065)
0 0 19985 0 0 619954
992,9941
62
0 3239,29416
117 NGAWI_2017 0,693839
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,818969);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,181031)
0
-
16232,783
3
32515,07
386
0 0 641054
1533,453
88
0 5008,65388
118 NGANJUK_2015 0,696319
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,050094);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,949906)
0
-
4194,8688
35961,13
12
0 0 709165
1715,537
83
0 5649,13783
119 NGANJUK_2017 0,697922
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,023711);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,976289)
0
-
5878,4568
8
35234,25
74
0 0 699731,286
1682,290
75
0 5569,06932
120
BONDOWOSO_201
2
0,700774
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,366476);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,633524)
0
-
6678,7743
4
27351,22
566
0 0 515580
1133,392
24
0 3787,74224
121 NGANJUK_2011 0,706653
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,996040);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,003960)
0
-
7323,1878
9
34535,81
211
0 0 690155
1609,426
03
0 5486,42603
122 NGAWI_2010 0,709762
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,514452);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,485548)
0
-
19251,072
4
29039,92
757
0 0 556613
1215,229
56
0 4187,00956
123 NGANJUK_2014 0,711369
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,038829);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,961171)
0
-
4616,2288
1
35650,77
119
0 0 705137
1620,650
24
0 5614,95024
124
TULUNGAGUNG_2
017
0,715204
BLITAR_2010(0,
610926);
MALANG_2015(
0,017357);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,371717)
0 0
24019,67
857
0 0 651960,75
1113,965
96
0 3911,45417
125 NGANJUK_2010 0,716052
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,976736);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,023264)
0
-
8287,4891
4
34315,51
086
0 0 684802
1543,069
22
0 5434,33922
126 SITUBONDO_2010 0,717109
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,159058);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,840942)
0
-
7325,8296
2
24984,17
039
0 0 458064
913,1988
21
0 3228,08882
Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 435 editor@iaeme.com
NO DMU Score
Benchmark
(Lambda)
Proportion
ate
Movement
(land)
Slack
Movemen
t (land)
Projecti
on
(land)
Propo
rtiona
te
Move
ment
(labor
)
Slack
Movement
(labor)
Projection
(labor)
Proportio
nate
Movemen
t
(producti
vity)
Slack
Movement
(productivity)
Projection
(productivity)
127 SAMPANG_2014 0,718519
BLITAR_2010(0,
381098);
MALANG_2015(
0,035739);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,583163)
0 0 20087 0 0 611135
914,4269
66
0 3248,62697
128
BONDOWOSO_201
1
0,718633
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,349253);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,650747)
0
-
6898,3293
2
27154,67
068
0 0 510804
1052,669
88
0 3741,26988
129
TULUNGAGUNG_2
012
0,729167
BLITAR_2010(0,
708890);
MALANG_2015(
0,012678);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,278432)
0 0 25781 0 0 673410
1140,431
12
0 4210,83112
130 SAMPANG_2017 0,731096
BLITAR_2010(0,
402867);
MALANG_2015(
0,023458);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,573675)
0 0
20175,57
143
0 0 601486,429
875,3231
03
0 3255,14739
131 SAMPANG_2013 0,732701
BLITAR_2010(0,
398975);
MALANG_2015(
0,023993);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,577032)
0 0 20115 0 0 601082
867,4169
78
0 3245,11698
132 SAMPANG_2012 0,737474
BLITAR_2010(0,
421379);
MALANG_2015(
0,012462);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,566159)
0 0 20236 0 0 592573
855,2418
14
0 3257,74181
133 MADIUN_2016 0,73754
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,176422);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,823578)
0
-
5293,6696
1
25182,33
04
0 0 462879
859,5406
75
0 3274,94068
134
TULUNGAGUNG_2
011
0,748748
BLITAR_2010(0,
724865);
MALANG_2015(
0,004482);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,270652)
0 0 25868 0 0 667377
1060,276
14
0 4219,97614
135
TULUNGAGUNG_2
010
0,754612
BLITAR_2010(0,
704549);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,022684);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,272768)
0 0 25873 0 0 661216
1033,756
13
0 4212,73613
136
BONDOWOSO_201
0
0,757591
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,331860);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,668140)
0
-
7145,8185
7
26956,18
144
0 0 505981
895,5401
78
0 3694,34018
137 MADIUN_2015 0,758799
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,169329);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,830671)
0
-
5485,6209
5
25101,37
905
0 0 460912
785,3009
87
0 3255,80099
138 SAMPANG_2011 0,760489
BLITAR_2010(0,
428745);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,019422);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,551833)
0 0 20485 0 0 583177
787,3890
59
0 3287,48906
139 MADIUN_2017 0,771211
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,259168);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,740832)
0
-
5966,3423
6
26126,62
193
0 0 485823,911
800,3514
08
0 3498,20373
140 PAMEKASAN_2016 0,772928
MALANG_2015(
0,044434);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,955566)
0 0 12979 0 -76031,6625 515501,338 461,6912 0 2033,2412
141 MADIUN_2014 0,772997
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,161070);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,838930)
0
-
5690,8652
8
25007,13
472
0 0 458622
734,0183
81
0 3233,51838
142
PROBOLINGGO_20
16
0,783125
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,001238);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,899489);
MALANG_2015(
0,099273)
0 0 35018 0 0 795939
1228,144
91
0 5662,92491
143 MADIUN_2013 0,789254
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,151788);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,848212)
0
-
5839,7975
4
24901,20
246
0 0 456048
676,1723
44
0 3208,47234
144 SAMPANG_2010 0,792026
BLITAR_2010(0,
314308);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,117047);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,568646)
0 0 20506 0 0 573832
680,0571
41
0 3269,90714
145 PAMEKASAN_2013 0,794465
MALANG_2015(
0,072980);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,927020)
0 0 13748 0 -17196,5317 552106,468
449,2221
79
0 2185,62218
146 PAMEKASAN_2015 0,795773
MALANG_2015(
0,055310);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,944690)
0 0 13272 0 -54853,5841 529448,416
427,1005
33
0 2091,30053
147 PAMEKASAN_2014 0,800701
MALANG_2015(
0,062140);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,937860)
0 0 13456 0 -38623,0092 538206,991
424,0610
01
0 2127,761
Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 436 editor@iaeme.com
NO DMU Score
Benchmark
(Lambda)
Proportion
ate
Movement
(land)
Slack
Movemen
t (land)
Projecti
on
(land)
Propo
rtiona
te
Move
ment
(labor
)
Slack
Movement
(labor)
Projection
(labor)
Proportio
nate
Movemen
t
(producti
vity)
Slack
Movement
(productivity)
Projection
(productivity)
148 PAMEKASAN_2017 0,800779
MALANG_2015(
0,070026);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,929974)
0 0
13668,42
857
0 -20358,2073 548318,793
432,2804
4
0 2169,85473
149 PAMEKASAN_2011 0,80685
BLITAR_2010(0,
025747);
MALANG_2015(
0,067930);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,906323)
0 0 14108 0 0 552845
433,4121
31
0 2243,91213
150 PAMEKASAN_2012 0,808409
BLITAR_2010(0,
004696);
MALANG_2015(
0,078902);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,916403)
0 0 13998 0 0 561016
427,7815
18
0 2232,78152
151
PROBOLINGGO_20
15
0,814367
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,003210);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,904631);
MALANG_2015(
0,092160)
0 0 35030 0 0 789253
1050,041
68
0 5656,54168
152 MADIUN_2012 0,814448
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,140031);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,859969)
0
-
6162,9619
5
24767,03
805
0 0 452788
589,4512
54
0 3176,75125
153 MADIUN_2011 0,824092
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,128008);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,871992)
0
-
6372,1718
1
24629,82
819
0 0 449454
553,1101
16
0 3144,31012
154
PROBOLINGGO_20
13
0,831918
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,063323);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,882037);
MALANG_2015(
0,054640)
0 0 36138 0 0 773657
967,3954
12
0 5755,49541
155 MADIUN_2010 0,835363
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,116118);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,883882)
0
-
6702,8589
5
24494,14
105
0 0 446157
512,3890
02
0 3112,229
156 PAMEKASAN_2010 0,835865
BLITAR_2010(0,
038954);
MALANG_2015(
0,058856);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,902190)
0 0 14118 0 0 544910
367,5320
59
0 2239,20206
157
PROBOLINGGO_20
14
0,839379
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,005614);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,909842);
MALANG_2015(
0,084544)
0 0 35049 0 0 782211
907,5890
89
0 5650,48909
158 SUMENEP_2015 0,840561
BLITAR_2010(0,
380694);
MALANG_2015(
0,156411);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,462895)
0 0 23330 0 0 765762
620,4472
8
0 3891,44728
159
PROBOLINGGO_20
17
0,841011
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,043084);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,894499);
MALANG_2015(
0,062417)
0 0
35744,85
714
0 0 773812
908,5016
03
0 5714,2316
160 SUMENEP_2017 0,84641
BLITAR_2010(0,
437585);
MALANG_2015(
0,135223);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,427192)
0 0
23855,28
571
0 0 754533,429
609,2463
28
0 3966,70919
161
PROBOLINGGO_20
12
0,855425
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,067817);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,885864);
MALANG_2015(
0,046320)
0 0 36198 0 0 766702
831,8641
43
0 5753,86414
162
PROBOLINGGO_20
11
0,871475
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,078614);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,886880);
MALANG_2015(
0,034507)
0 0 36376 0 0 758575
740,7305
75
0 5763,33058
163 SUMENEP_2014 0,872803
BLITAR_2010(0,
425997);
MALANG_2015(
0,142720);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,431283)
0 0 23834 0 0 760900
504,7625
25
0 3968,36253
164 MAGETAN_2016 0,886072
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,066370);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,790633);
PACITAN_2010(
0,142997)
0 0 22478 0 0 424511
318,6507
96
0 2796,9508
165 SUMENEP_2012 0,886323
BLITAR_2010(0,
464175);
MALANG_2015(
0,125476);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,410349)
0 0 24105 0 0 749485
455,0180
74
0 4002,71807
166 SUMENEP_2013 0,887744
BLITAR_2010(0,
446109);
MALANG_2015(
0,133645);
TRENGGALEK_
0 0 23977 0 0 754898
447,5081
35
0 3986,50814
Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 437 editor@iaeme.com
NO DMU Score
Benchmark
(Lambda)
Proportion
ate
Movement
(land)
Slack
Movemen
t (land)
Projecti
on
(land)
Propo
rtiona
te
Move
ment
(labor
)
Slack
Movement
(labor)
Projection
(labor)
Proportio
nate
Movemen
t
(producti
vity)
Slack
Movement
(productivity)
Projection
(productivity)
2010(0,420246)
167
PROBOLINGGO_20
10
0,889917
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,081772);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,892751);
MALANG_2015(
0,025477)
0 0 36405 0 0 750347
633,7454
1
0 5756,97541
168 SUMENEP_2011 0,891988
BLITAR_2010(0,
484073);
MALANG_2015(
0,116331);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,399596)
0 0 24242 0 0 743334
434,1834
35
0 4019,78344
169 BLITAR_2016 0,89375
BLITAR_2010(0,
945656);
MALANG_2015(
0,036675);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,017669)
0 0 30989 0 0 770524
544,3042
1
0 5122,85421
170 MAGETAN_2015 0,898076
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,059335);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,816553);
PACITAN_2010(
0,124112)
0 0 22589 0 0 423597
285,5785
31
0 2801,87853
171 JEMBER_2016 0,904621
JEMBER_2010(0,
896065);
MALANG_2015(
0,103935)
0 0 76862 0 -64153,2623 1595490,74
933,5673
21
0 9787,99732
172 JEMBER_2011 0,905622
JEMBER_2010(0,
999953);
MALANG_2015(
0,000047)
0 0 81284 0 -14887,3781 1578638,62
952,8108
4
0 10095,6808
173 BLITAR_2015 0,909708
BLITAR_2010(0,
952383);
MALANG_2015(
0,032050);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,015567)
0 0 30994 0 0 766478
462,3367
21
0 5120,43672
174 JEMBER_2014 0,916111
JEMBER_2010(0,
931986);
MALANG_2015(
0,068014)
0 0 78391 0 -46542,2376 1589663,76
830,0254
03
0 9894,3854
175 JEMBER_2015 0,916441
JEMBER_2010(0,
898438);
MALANG_2015(
0,101562)
0 0 76963 0 -53246,1704 1595105,83
818,4649
19
0 9795,02492
176 JEMBER_2012 0,917525
JEMBER_2010(0,
952567);
MALANG_2015(
0,047433)
0 0 79267 0 -22070,6486 1586325,35
821,0676
34
0 9955,33763
177 JEMBER_2013 0,918008
JEMBER_2010(0,
933537);
MALANG_2015(
0,066463)
0 0 78457 0 -33394,7618 1589412,24
811,6376
95
0 9898,9777
178 SUMENEP_2010 0,918698
BLITAR_2010(0,
499107);
MALANG_2015(
0,108178);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,392715)
0 0 24312 0 0 737091
327,3265
47
0 4026,03655
179 JEMBER_2017 0,925671
JEMBER_2010(0,
944649);
MALANG_2015(
0,055351)
0 0 78930 0 -33470,637 1587609,65
738,2248
3
0 9931,88912
180 BLITAR_2014 0,930122
BLITAR_2010(0,
962691);
MALANG_2015(
0,026274);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,011035)
0 0 31037 0 0 761960
358,0345
27
0 5123,73453
181 MAGETAN_2014 0,933804
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,053211);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,830563);
PACITAN_2010(
0,116225)
0 0 22599 0 0 422332
185,0412
63
0 2795,34126
182 MAGETAN_2013 0,934046
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,040630);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,877164);
PACITAN_2010(
0,082206)
0 0 22800 0 0 420711
184,9656
39
0 2804,46564
183 LUMAJANG_2015 0,938608
BLITAR_2010(0,
184789);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,800028);
MALANG_2015(
0,015183)
0 0 33991 0 0 715961
334,5793
92
0 5449,87939
184 LUMAJANG_2016 0,93861
BLITAR_2010(0,
220990);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,761919);
MALANG_2015(
0,017091)
0 0 33871 0 0 719682
333,8906
62
0 5438,88066
185 MAGETAN_2017 0,939044
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,038028);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,879975);
PACITAN_2010(
0,081997)
0 0
22772,42
857
0 0 420001
170,5360
77
0 2797,71036
Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 438 editor@iaeme.com
NO DMU Score
Benchmark
(Lambda)
Proportion
ate
Movement
(land)
Slack
Movemen
t (land)
Projecti
on
(land)
Propo
rtiona
te
Move
ment
(labor
)
Slack
Movement
(labor)
Projection
(labor)
Proportio
nate
Movemen
t
(producti
vity)
Slack
Movement
(productivity)
Projection
(productivity)
186 MAGETAN_2012 0,942177
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,030113);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,902295);
PACITAN_2010(
0,067593)
0 0 22828 0 0 418597
161,5907
49
0 2794,59075
187 BLITAR_2013 0,948622
BLITAR_2010(0,
970099);
MALANG_2015(
0,021050);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,008851)
0 0 31039 0 0 757337
263,0771
36
0 5120,37714
188 BLITAR_2017 0,948883
BLITAR_2010(0,
971651);
MALANG_2015(
0,019532);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,008817)
0 0 31028 0 0 755824,857
261,5881
22
0 5117,41098
189 LUMAJANG_2014 0,954935
BLITAR_2010(0,
066167);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,917223);
MALANG_2015(
0,016610)
0 0 34416 0 0 711828
247,7900
7
0 5498,49007
190
TRENGGALEK_201
4
0,956329
TRENGGALEK_
2012(0,736842);
TRENGGALEK_
2016(0,263158)
0 0 11755 0 -3090,52631 468003,474 73,9 0 1692,2
191 LUMAJANG_2013 0,960151
BLITAR_2010(0,
042691);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,943099);
MALANG_2015(
0,014210)
0 0 34489 0 0 708194
219,3179
61
0 5503,71796
192
TRENGGALEK_201
7
0,960736
TRENGGALEK_
2012(0,969925);
TRENGGALEK_
2016(0,030075)
0 0
11759,42
857
0 -2104,91729 465608,083
68,43571
4
0 1742,95143
193 MALANG_2011 0,963545
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,079859);
JEMBER_2010(0,
086815);
MALANG_2015(
0,833326)
0 0 43764 0 0 1674540
272,4530
32
0 7473,58303
194 MALANG_2010 0,964877
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,109914);
JEMBER_2010(0,
077037);
MALANG_2015(
0,813049)
0 0 43855 0 0 1656472
262,5656
36
0 7475,60564
195 LUMAJANG_2017 0,965226
BLITAR_2010(0,
079461);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,909595);
MALANG_2015(
0,010944)
0 0
34345,57
143
0 0 706511,571
190,6991
18
0 5484,02769
196
TRENGGALEK_201
3
0,965666
TRENGGALEK_
2012(0,894737);
TRENGGALEK_
2016(0,105263)
0 0 11758 0 -1611,21053 466380,789 59,28 0 1726,58
197
TRENGGALEK_201
5
0,969977
TRENGGALEK_
2012(0,421053);
TRENGGALEK_
2016(0,578947)
0 0 11749 0 -2285,1579 471248,842 48,74 0 1623,44
198 LUMAJANG_2012 0,972417
BLITAR_2010(0,
035563);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,955827);
MALANG_2015(
0,008610)
0 0 34491 0 0 701978
151,6314
01
0 5497,3314
199 BLITAR_2012 0,976501
BLITAR_2010(0,
980461);
MALANG_2015(
0,013788);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,005751)
0 0 31043 0 0 750928
120,2194
11
0 5115,91941
200 MAGETAN_2011 0,979252
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,016537);
MAGETAN_2010
(0,942619);
PACITAN_2010(
0,040845)
0 0 22944 0 0 416301
57,92556
4
0 2791,82556
201
BANYUWANGI_20
17
0,981441
BANYUWANGI_
2013(0,812049);
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,041531);
JEMBER_2010(0,
146420)
0 0
62786,85
714
0 0 1148621,76
160,8141
4
0 8665,17761
202 BLITAR_2011 0,983734
BLITAR_2010(0,
990268);
MALANG_2015(
0,006886);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,002846)
0 0 31046 0 0 744825
83,14484
7
0 5111,54485
203 PACITAN_2013 0,985807
PACITAN_2010(
0,100016);
PACITAN_2012(
0,869970);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,030015)
0 0 12763 0 0 366258
21,66182
8
0 1526,26183
204 MALANG_2017 0,986226
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,043289);
JEMBER_2010(0,
029821);
MALANG_2015(
0 0
40720,85
714
0 0 1707699,57
100,0966
88
0 7267,08383
Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 439 editor@iaeme.com
NO DMU Score
Benchmark
(Lambda)
Proportion
ate
Movement
(land)
Slack
Movemen
t (land)
Projecti
on
(land)
Propo
rtiona
te
Move
ment
(labor
)
Slack
Movement
(labor)
Projection
(labor)
Proportio
nate
Movemen
t
(producti
vity)
Slack
Movement
(productivity)
Projection
(productivity)
0,926890)
205 PACITAN_2017 0,988093
PACITAN_2010(
0,177972);
PACITAN_2012(
0,794474);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,027554)
0 0
12786,85
714
0 0 365647,143
18,18023
5
0 1526,86881
206 PACITAN_2015 0,988964
PACITAN_2012(
0,182732);
PACITAN_2014(
0,791235);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,026033)
0 0 12650 0 0 369710
16,65958
5
0 1509,55959
207
BANYUWANGI_20
16
0,989691
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,988620);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,001678);
MALANG_2015(
0,009703)
0 0 55398 0 0 1092594
84,02197
1
0 8150,52197
208
BANYUWANGI_20
12
0,990979
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,759120);
BANYUWANGI_
2013(0,219724);
JEMBER_2010(0,
021156)
0 0 62029 0 0 1065617
77,07234
8
0 8543,27235
209 PACITAN_2011 0,991028
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,001156);
PACITAN_2010(
0,978255);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,020589)
0 0 13039 0 0 361486
13,84235
4
0 1542,82235
210 LUMAJANG_2011 0,991335
BLITAR_2010(0,
006028);
LUMAJANG_201
0(0,989069);
MALANG_2015(
0,004903)
0 0 34580 0 0 696685
47,68433
6
0 5502,78434
211
BANYUWANGI_20
14
0,99251
BANYUWANGI_
2013(0,777558);
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,215040);
JEMBER_2010(0,
007402)
0 0 59070 0 0 1080701
62,82195
2
0 8387,52195
212 MALANG_2014 0,992807
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,018938);
JEMBER_2010(0,
016408);
MALANG_2015(
0,964654)
0 0 39739 0 0 1725799 51,80732 0 7202,25732
213 MALANG_2012 0,992825
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,070648);
JEMBER_2010(0,
014654);
MALANG_2015(
0,914698)
0 0 40537 0 0 1692269
52,01845
1
0 7250,36845
214 MALANG_2016 0,996415
MALANG_2015(
0,995880);
TRENGGALEK_
2010(0,004120)
0 0 38610 0 -19284,7055 1735561,29
25,49482
6
0 7112,14483
215
BANYUWANGI_20
11
0,996994
BANYUWANGI_
2010(0,893213);
BANYUWANGI_
2013(0,095374);
JEMBER_2010(0,
011413)
0 0 62130 0 0 1057294
25,66856
2
0 8540,36856
216 MALANG_2013 0,997395
BANYUWANGI_
2015(0,046693);
JEMBER_2010(0,
007307);
MALANG_2015(
0,946001)
0 0 39820 0 0 1709126
18,76407
2
0 7203,91407
217
BANYUWANGI_20
10
1
BANYUWANGI_
2010(1,000000)
0 0 62132 0 0 1048823 0 0 8531,98
218
BANYUWANGI_20
13
1
BANYUWANGI_
2013(1,000000)
0 0 59819 0 0 1074243 0 0 8432,8
219
BANYUWANGI_20
15
1
BANYUWANGI_
2015(1,000000)
0 0 55597 0 0 1086913 0 0 8165
220 BLITAR_2010 1
BLITAR_2010(1,
000000)
0 0 31048 0 0 738722 0 0 5107,01
221 JEMBER_2010 1
JEMBER_2010(1,
000000)
0 0 81286 0 0 1578631 0 0 10095,82
222 LUMAJANG_2010 1
LUMAJANG_201
0(1,000000)
0 0 34581 0 0 691253 0 0 5497,11
223 MAGETAN_2010 1
MAGETAN_2010
(1,000000)
0 0 23169 0 0 413958 0 0 2798,92
224 MALANG_2015 1
MALANG_2015(
1,000000)
0 0 38721 0 0 1740845 0 0 7134,14
225 PACITAN_2010 1
PACITAN_2010(
1,000000)
0 0 13040 0 0 359054 0 0 1532,82
226 PACITAN_2012 1
PACITAN_2012(
1,000000)
0 0 12765 0 0 363903 0 0 1516,2
227 PACITAN_2014 1
PACITAN_2014(
1,000000)
0 0 12652 0 0 368129 0 0 1498,6
228 PACITAN_2016 1
PACITAN_2016(
1,000000)
0 0 12599 0 0 370990 0 0 1486,72
229
TRENGGALEK_201
0
1
TRENGGALEK_
2010(1,000000)
0 0 11782 0 0 458523 0 0 1796,05
Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 440 editor@iaeme.com
NO DMU Score
Benchmark
(Lambda)
Proportion
ate
Movement
(land)
Slack
Movemen
t (land)
Projecti
on
(land)
Propo
rtiona
te
Move
ment
(labor
)
Slack
Movement
(labor)
Projection
(labor)
Proportio
nate
Movemen
t
(producti
vity)
Slack
Movement
(productivity)
Projection
(productivity)
230
TRENGGALEK_201
1
1
TRENGGALEK_
2011(1,000000)
0 0 11771 0 0 461973 0 0 1784
231
TRENGGALEK_201
2
1
TRENGGALEK_
2012(1,000000)
0 0 11760 0 0 465299 0 0 1749,5
232
TRENGGALEK_201
6
1
TRENGGALEK_
2016(1,000000)
0 0 11741 0 0 475576 0 0 1531,76
Tabel III DEA Results Envelopment Model (weights, Dual Values)
NO DMU Score Dual Price (land) Dual Price (labor)
Dual Price
(productivity)
v*
1 SIDOARJO_2011 0,201571 -5,00654E-05 0 0,000252658 0,136084
2 SIDOARJO_2010 0,204003 -5,00428E-05 0 0,000252544 0,136023
3 SIDOARJO_2012 0,210651 -5,32485E-05 0 0,000268722 0,144736
4 SIDOARJO_2013 0,213571 -5,4431E-05 0 0,00027469 0,14795
5 SIDOARJO_2017 0,220411 -5,64106E-05 0 0,00028468 0,153331
6 SIDOARJO_2014 0,22089 -5,72611E-05 0 0,000288971 0,155643
7 SIDOARJO_2016 0,250839 -6,794E-05 0 0,000342863 0,184669
8 SIDOARJO_2015 0,258042 -6,75727E-05 0 0,00034101 0,183671
9 GRESIK_2016 0,28825 -1,77721E-05 -1,92862E-07 0,0001686 -0,178919
10 GRESIK_2015 0,317403 -1,78071E-05 -1,93242E-07 0,000168932 -0,179271
11 GRESIK_2014 0,320888 -1,77483E-05 -1,92604E-07 0,000168374 -0,17868
12 GRESIK_2017 0,328159 -1,7767E-05 -1,92807E-07 0,000168551 -0,178867
13 GRESIK_2013 0,332775 -1,77744E-05 -1,92887E-07 0,000168622 -0,178942
14 GRESIK_2012 0,351362 -1,77474E-05 -1,92594E-07 0,000168366 -0,178671
15 GRESIK_2011 0,358203 -1,77526E-05 -1,92651E-07 0,000168416 -0,178723
16 BANGKALAN_2016 0,359842 -3,14142E-05 -4,93005E-07 0,000224517 0,192933
17 GRESIK_2010 0,373751 -1,77633E-05 -1,92767E-07 0,000168517 -0,178831
18 BANGKALAN_2015 0,39906 -2,67427E-05 -9,2872E-07 0,000223138 0,340155
19 BANGKALAN_2014 0,424207 -2,6877E-05 -9,33384E-07 0,000224259 0,341863
20 BANGKALAN_2017 0,427032 -2,68514E-05 -9,32497E-07 0,000224045 0,341538
21 BANGKALAN_2013 0,432337 -2,6739E-05 -9,28592E-07 0,000223107 0,340108
22 SITUBONDO_2016 0,437081 0 -2,81261E-06 0,000289054 0,355263
23 BANGKALAN_2012 0,443012 -2,08778E-05 -1,32517E-06 0,000224492 0,403949
24 BANGKALAN_2011 0,46083 -2,09983E-05 -1,33281E-06 0,000225787 0,40628
25 PONOROGO_2016 0,465615 0 -2,13887E-06 0,000219813 0,270162
26 LAMONGAN_2016 0,466212 0 -1,2764E-06 0,000150386 0,055626
27 PONOROGO_2015 0,474164 0 -2,1465E-06 0,000220598 0,271127
28 LAMONGAN_2015 0,477055 0 -1,2791E-06 0,000150705 0,055744
29 BANGKALAN_2010 0,480786 -2,12203E-05 -1,3469E-06 0,000228173 0,410574
30 SITUBONDO_2015 0,480934 0 -2,83909E-06 0,000291776 0,358608
31 LAMONGAN_2013 0,517185 0 -1,2869E-06 0,000151623 0,056084
32 LAMONGAN_2017 0,527432 0 -1,28895E-06 0,000151865 0,056173
33 LAMONGAN_2012 0,529607 0 -1,29301E-06 0,000152344 0,05635
34 TUBAN_2016 0,529828 0 -1,29587E-06 0,00015268 0,056475
35 JOMBANG_2016 0,539477 -1,6342E-05 -1,77343E-07 0,000155033 -0,164522
36 JOMBANG_2014 0,542393 -1,12027E-05 -4,41276E-07 0,000153692 -0,152424
37 TUBAN_2015 0,542684 0 -1,30442E-06 0,000153687 0,056847
38 JOMBANG_2015 0,543054 -1,63309E-05 -1,77223E-07 0,000154928 -0,164411
39 BOJONEGORO_2016 0,543522 0 -1,21677E-06 0,00014336 0,053028
40 JOMBANG_2013 0,545882 -1,121E-05 -4,41562E-07 0,000153791 -0,152523
41 LAMONGAN_2011 0,546479 0 -1,29934E-06 0,000153088 0,056626
42 SITUBONDO_2014 0,552446 0 -2,86786E-06 0,000294732 0,362242
43 JOMBANG_2017 0,553479 -1,12303E-05 -4,42362E-07 0,00015407 -0,152799
44 BOJONEGORO_2015 0,553782 0 -1,22252E-06 0,000144038 0,053278
45 PONOROGO_2017 0,554678 0 -2,1722E-06 0,000223239 0,274372
46 LAMONGAN_2010 0,555375 0 -1,30585E-06 0,000153856 0,05691
47 TUBAN_2014 0,557353 0 -1,31389E-06 0,000154803 0,05726
48 JOMBANG_2012 0,562619 -1,12544E-05 -4,43311E-07 0,0001544 -0,153127
49 MOJOKERTO_2014 0,563083 -3,18984E-05 -1,58329E-07 0,000199012 0,09099
50 MOJOKERTO_2013 0,563089 -3,18403E-05 -1,58041E-07 0,000198649 0,090825
51 BOJONEGORO_2014 0,564857 0 -1,22919E-06 0,000144824 0,053569
52 MOJOKERTO_2012 0,565384 -2,76621E-05 -4,34121E-07 0,000197701 0,169889
53 JOMBANG_2011 0,56647 -1,12374E-05 -4,4264E-07 0,000154167 -0,152895
54 PONOROGO_2014 0,567273 0 -2,15598E-06 0,000221571 0,272323
55 MOJOKERTO_2011 0,570558 -2,73914E-05 -4,29872E-07 0,000195765 0,168226
56 MOJOKERTO_2016 0,57098 -3,29562E-05 -1,6358E-07 0,000205611 0,094008
57 NGAWI_2016 0,571747 0 -2,24192E-06 0,000230404 0,283179
58 MOJOKERTO_2017 0,571964 -3,19173E-05 -1,58423E-07 0,000199129 0,091044
59 TUBAN_2017 0,574383 0 -1,3259E-06 0,000156219 0,057784
Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 441 editor@iaeme.com
NO DMU Score Dual Price (land) Dual Price (labor)
Dual Price
(productivity)
v*
60 MOJOKERTO_2015 0,575066 -3,28806E-05 -1,63204E-07 0,000205139 0,093792
61 PONOROGO_2013 0,576134 0 -2,16833E-06 0,000222841 0,273883
62 TUBAN_2013 0,576678 0 -1,32389E-06 0,000155981 0,057696
63 BOJONEGORO_2013 0,577841 0 -1,23712E-06 0,000145758 0,053914
64 SITUBONDO_2017 0,578803 0 -2,90617E-06 0,000298669 0,36708
65 JOMBANG_2010 0,58032 -1,12355E-05 -4,42566E-07 0,000154141 -0,152869
66 PONOROGO_2012 0,581497 0 -2,18274E-06 0,000224322 0,275704
67 BOJONEGORO_2017 0,585981 0 -1,2801E-06 0,000150822 0,055787
68 BOJONEGORO_2012 0,586682 0 -1,24558E-06 0,000146755 0,054283
69 SITUBONDO_2013 0,588155 0 -2,90876E-06 0,000298935 0,367408
70 PONOROGO_2011 0,59212 0 -2,19923E-06 0,000226016 0,277786
71 BOJONEGORO_2011 0,592984 0 -1,25507E-06 0,000147873 0,054697
72 TUBAN_2012 0,593139 0 -1,33616E-06 0,000157427 0,058231
73 NGAWI_2015 0,596576 0 -2,24866E-06 0,000231097 0,28403
74 BONDOWOSO_2016 0,597211 0 -2,46609E-06 0,000253442 0,311494
75 LAMONGAN_2014 0,60127 0 -1,28262E-06 0,000151119 0,055897
76 MOJOKERTO_2010 0,605036 -2,74175E-05 -4,30282E-07 0,000195952 0,168387
77 TUBAN_2011 0,605183 0 -1,34851E-06 0,000158882 0,058769
78 BOJONEGORO_2010 0,610654 0 -1,26465E-06 0,000149002 0,055114
79 SUMENEP_2016 0,618947 -4,13946E-05 -2,05464E-07 0,000258257 0,118078
80 TUBAN_2010 0,619344 0 -1,36113E-06 0,000160369 0,059319
81 NGAWI_2014 0,619652 0 -2,25746E-06 0,000232001 0,285142
82 TULUNGAGUNG_2016 0,62034 -3,81091E-05 -1,89156E-07 0,000237759 0,108706
83 PONOROGO_2010 0,630246 0 -2,21595E-06 0,000227735 0,279899
84 PASURUAN_2016 0,634418 -1,62237E-05 -1,76059E-07 0,000153911 -0,163331
85 BONDOWOSO_2015 0,634726 0 -2,48767E-06 0,000255659 0,314219
86 SITUBONDO_2012 0,637501 0 -2,93681E-06 0,000301819 0,370952
87 PASURUAN_2015 0,639333 -1,62265E-05 -1,7609E-07 0,000153938 -0,163359
88 KEDIRI_2016 0,642276 -1,62547E-05 -1,76396E-07 0,000154205 -0,163643
89 PASURUAN_2014 0,642409 -1,6228E-05 -1,76106E-07 0,000153952 -0,163374
90 NGAWI_2013 0,643671 0 -2,27628E-06 0,000233935 0,287518
91 BONDOWOSO_2014 0,651993 0 -2,51204E-06 0,000258164 0,317298
92 SITUBONDO_2011 0,653067 0 -2,97472E-06 0,000305714 0,37574
93 NGAWI_2012 0,656869 0 -2,29221E-06 0,000235572 0,289531
94 PASURUAN_2017 0,658154 -1,62222E-05 -1,76043E-07 0,000153897 -0,163316
95 KEDIRI_2015 0,659015 -1,62482E-05 -1,76325E-07 0,000154143 -0,163578
96 PASURUAN_2013 0,659916 -1,62599E-05 -1,76453E-07 0,000154255 -0,163696
97 PASURUAN_2012 0,671789 -1,62669E-05 -1,76528E-07 0,000154321 -0,163766
98 BONDOWOSO_2013 0,672101 0 -2,53851E-06 0,000260884 0,320641
99 PASURUAN_2011 0,672327 -1,61597E-05 -1,75364E-07 0,000153303 -0,162686
100 KEDIRI_2014 0,673757 -1,62688E-05 -1,76549E-07 0,000154339 -0,163785
101 KEDIRI_2017 0,673794 -1,61309E-05 -1,75053E-07 0,000153031 -0,162397
102 BONDOWOSO_2017 0,675048 0 -2,54275E-06 0,00026132 0,321176
103 KEDIRI_2013 0,680232 -1,60009E-05 -1,73641E-07 0,000151797 -0,161088
104 NGANJUK_2013 0,681707 0 -1,52194E-06 0,000179316 0,066327
105 NGANJUK_2016 0,682974 0 -1,4944E-06 0,000176071 0,065127
106 KEDIRI_2012 0,683286 -1,60248E-05 -1,73901E-07 0,000152024 -0,161328
107 NGAWI_2011 0,684893 0 -2,3079E-06 0,000237184 0,291512
108 TULUNGAGUNG_2015 0,685051 -3,80983E-05 -1,89103E-07 0,000237692 0,108676
109 TULUNGAGUNG_2014 0,685319 -3,80038E-05 -1,88633E-07 0,000237102 0,108406
110 SAMPANG_2016 0,685972 -4,97938E-05 -2,47154E-07 0,000310659 0,142037
111 PASURUAN_2010 0,686807 -1,61912E-05 -1,75706E-07 0,000153602 -0,163003
112 KEDIRI_2011 0,687485 -1,60501E-05 -1,74175E-07 0,000152264 -0,161583
113 KEDIRI_2010 0,689922 -1,60745E-05 -1,7444E-07 0,000152495 -0,161828
114 TULUNGAGUNG_2013 0,691581 -3,80313E-05 -1,8877E-07 0,000237274 0,108484
115 NGANJUK_2012 0,692323 0 -1,53398E-06 0,000180735 0,066852
116 SAMPANG_2015 0,693454 -4,94813E-05 -2,45603E-07 0,000308709 0,141146
117 NGAWI_2017 0,693839 0 -1,94272E-06 0,000199654 0,245386
118 NGANJUK_2015 0,696319 0 -1,50244E-06 0,000177018 0,065477
119 NGANJUK_2017 0,697922 0 -1,52404E-06 0,000179563 0,066419
120 BONDOWOSO_2012 0,700774 0 -2,56892E-06 0,00026401 0,324482
121 NGANJUK_2011 0,706653 0 -1,77354E-06 0,000182268 0,224017
122 NGAWI_2010 0,709762 0 -2,32395E-06 0,000238834 0,29354
123 NGANJUK_2014 0,711369 0 -1,51159E-06 0,000178096 0,065876
124 TULUNGAGUNG_2017 0,715204 -4,09782E-05 -2,03397E-07 0,000255659 0,116891
125 NGANJUK_2010 0,716052 0 -1,79054E-06 0,000184015 0,226165
126 SITUBONDO_2010 0,717109 0 -3,01429E-06 0,000309781 0,380738
127 SAMPANG_2014 0,718519 -4,93391E-05 -2,44897E-07 0,000307822 0,14074
128 BONDOWOSO_2011 0,718633 0 -2,60083E-06 0,000267289 0,328513
129 TULUNGAGUNG_2012 0,729167 -3,80648E-05 -1,88936E-07 0,000237483 0,10858
130 SAMPANG_2017 0,731096 -4,92403E-05 -2,44406E-07 0,000307206 0,140458
131 SAMPANG_2013 0,732701 -4,93925E-05 -2,45162E-07 0,000308155 0,140892
Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 442 editor@iaeme.com
NO DMU Score Dual Price (land) Dual Price (labor)
Dual Price
(productivity)
v*
132 SAMPANG_2012 0,737474 -4,92011E-05 -2,44212E-07 0,000306961 0,140346
133 MADIUN_2016 0,73754 0 -2,97117E-06 0,000305349 0,375291
134 TULUNGAGUNG_2011 0,748748 -3,79823E-05 -1,88527E-07 0,000236968 0,108345
135 TULUNGAGUNG_2010 0,754612 -3,32134E-05 -5,21241E-07 0,000237375 0,203983
136 BONDOWOSO_2010 0,757591 0 -2,63387E-06 0,000270684 0,332686
137 MADIUN_2015 0,758799 0 -2,98863E-06 0,000307144 0,377497
138 SAMPANG_2011 0,760489 -4,25611E-05 -6,67942E-07 0,000304184 0,261393
139 MADIUN_2017 0,771211 0 -2,78154E-06 0,000285861 0,351339
140 PAMEKASAN_2016 0,772928 -9,74576E-05 0 0,000491826 0,264902
141 MADIUN_2014 0,772997 0 -3,00923E-06 0,000309261 0,380098
142 PROBOLINGGO_2016 0,783125 -1,8614E-05 -2,01999E-07 0,000176587 -0,187395
143 MADIUN_2013 0,789254 0 -3,03272E-06 0,000311675 0,383065
144 SAMPANG_2010 0,792026 -4,279E-05 -6,71533E-07 0,000305819 0,262799
145 PAMEKASAN_2013 0,794465 -9,06628E-05 0 0,000457536 0,246433
146 PAMEKASAN_2015 0,795773 -9,47519E-05 0 0,000478171 0,257547
147 PAMEKASAN_2014 0,800701 -9,31283E-05 0 0,000469978 0,253134
148 PAMEKASAN_2017 0,800779 -9,13217E-05 0 0,00046086 0,248223
149 PAMEKASAN_2011 0,80685 -7,14308E-05 -3,5455E-07 0,00044565 0,203757
150 PAMEKASAN_2012 0,808409 -7,17869E-05 -3,56317E-07 0,000447872 0,204772
151 PROBOLINGGO_2015 0,814367 -1,8635E-05 -2,02227E-07 0,000176787 -0,187607
152 MADIUN_2012 0,814448 0 -3,063E-06 0,000314787 0,386891
153 MADIUN_2011 0,824092 0 -3,0946E-06 0,000318035 0,390882
154 PROBOLINGGO_2013 0,831918 -1,83146E-05 -1,9875E-07 0,000173747 -0,184381
155 MADIUN_2010 0,835363 0 -3,1265E-06 0,000321313 0,394912
156 PAMEKASAN_2010 0,835865 -7,1581E-05 -3,55296E-07 0,000446588 0,204185
157 PROBOLINGGO_2014 0,839379 -1,8655E-05 -2,02444E-07 0,000176976 -0,187808
158 SUMENEP_2015 0,840561 -4,11889E-05 -2,04443E-07 0,000256974 0,117492
159 PROBOLINGGO_2017 0,841011 -1,84469E-05 -2,00185E-07 0,000175002 -0,185713
160 SUMENEP_2017 0,84641 -4,04074E-05 -2,00564E-07 0,000252098 0,115262
161 PROBOLINGGO_2012 0,855425 -1,83198E-05 -1,98806E-07 0,000173796 -0,184434
162 PROBOLINGGO_2011 0,871475 -1,82897E-05 -1,9848E-07 0,000173511 -0,184131
163 SUMENEP_2014 0,872803 -4,03906E-05 -2,0048E-07 0,000251993 0,115214
164 MAGETAN_2016 0,886072 -3,32507E-05 -2,11051E-06 0,000357532 0,643342
165 SUMENEP_2012 0,886323 -4,00439E-05 -1,9876E-07 0,00024983 0,114225
166 SUMENEP_2013 0,887744 -4,02067E-05 -1,99568E-07 0,000250846 0,11469
167 PROBOLINGGO_2010 0,889917 -1,83099E-05 -1,98699E-07 0,000173702 -0,184334
168 SUMENEP_2011 0,891988 -3,98739E-05 -1,97916E-07 0,00024877 0,11374
169 BLITAR_2016 0,89375 -3,12881E-05 -1,553E-07 0,000195204 0,089249
170 MAGETAN_2015 0,898076 -3,31922E-05 -2,1068E-06 0,000356903 0,642211
171 JEMBER_2016 0,904621 -7,10872E-06 0 0,000102166 -0,453609
172 JEMBER_2011 0,905622 -6,89207E-06 0 9,90523E-05 -0,439785
173 BLITAR_2015 0,909708 -3,13029E-05 -1,55373E-07 0,000195296 0,089292
174 JEMBER_2014 0,916111 -7,03229E-06 0 0,000101067 -0,448732
175 JEMBER_2015 0,916441 -7,10362E-06 0 0,000102093 -0,453284
176 JEMBER_2012 0,917525 -6,98923E-06 0 0,000100449 -0,445984
177 JEMBER_2013 0,918008 -7,02903E-06 0 0,000101021 -0,448524
178 SUMENEP_2010 0,918698 -3,9812E-05 -1,97608E-07 0,000248383 0,113564
179 JEMBER_2017 0,925671 -7,00573E-06 0 0,000100686 -0,447037
180 BLITAR_2014 0,930122 -3,12827E-05 -1,55273E-07 0,00019517 0,089234
181 MAGETAN_2014 0,933804 -3,32698E-05 -2,11172E-06 0,000357738 0,643713
182 MAGETAN_2013 0,934046 -3,31616E-05 -2,10485E-06 0,000356574 0,641618
183 LUMAJANG_2015 0,938608 -2,28922E-05 -1,95891E-07 0,00018349 -0,08162
184 LUMAJANG_2016 0,93861 -2,29385E-05 -1,96287E-07 0,000183861 -0,081785
185 MAGETAN_2017 0,939044 -3,32417E-05 -2,10993E-06 0,000357435 0,643168
186 MAGETAN_2012 0,942177 -3,32788E-05 -2,11229E-06 0,000357834 0,643886
187 BLITAR_2013 0,948622 -3,13033E-05 -1,55375E-07 0,000195298 0,089293
188 BLITAR_2017 0,948883 -3,13214E-05 -1,55465E-07 0,000195411 0,089344
189 LUMAJANG_2014 0,954935 -2,26899E-05 -1,94159E-07 0,000181868 -0,080898
190 TRENGGALEK_2014 0,956329 -0,006772249 0 0,000590947 78,607789
191 LUMAJANG_2013 0,960151 -2,26683E-05 -1,93974E-07 0,000181695 -0,080821
192 TRENGGALEK_2017 0,960736 -0,006575054 0 0,00057374 76,31888
193 MALANG_2011 0,963545 -9,43415E-06 -3,25367E-08 0,000133805 -0,53264
194 MALANG_2010 0,964877 -9,43159E-06 -3,25279E-08 0,000133768 -0,532496
195 LUMAJANG_2017 0,965226 -2,27497E-05 -1,94671E-07 0,000182348 -0,081111
196 TRENGGALEK_2013 0,965666 -0,006637399 0 0,00057918 77,042535
197 TRENGGALEK_2015 0,969977 -0,007059084 0 0,000615976 81,937183
198 LUMAJANG_2012 0,972417 -2,26946E-05 -1,942E-07 0,000181906 -0,080915
199 BLITAR_2012 0,976501 -3,13305E-05 -1,5551E-07 0,000195468 0,08937
200 MAGETAN_2011 0,979252 -3,33117E-05 -2,11438E-06 0,000358189 0,644523
201 BANYUWANGI_2017 0,981441 -7,50356E-06 -6,11454E-08 0,000115404 -0,458642
202 BLITAR_2011 0,983734 -3,13573E-05 -1,55644E-07 0,000195636 0,089447
203 PACITAN_2013 0,985807 -9,03102E-05 -2,87605E-06 0,000655196 1,206003
Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 443 editor@iaeme.com
NO DMU Score Dual Price (land) Dual Price (labor)
Dual Price
(productivity)
v*
204 MALANG_2017 0,986226 -9,70222E-06 -3,34613E-08 0,000137607 -0,547775
205 PACITAN_2017 0,988093 -9,02743E-05 -2,8749E-06 0,000654935 1,205523
206 PACITAN_2015 0,988964 -0,000288566 -4,95715E-06 0,000662445 4,483065
207 BANYUWANGI_2016 0,989691 -1,29329E-05 -1,40347E-07 0,000122692 -0,130201
208 BANYUWANGI_2012 0,990979 -6,30933E-06 -1,17402E-07 0,000117051 -0,483533
209 PACITAN_2011 0,991028 -7,76811E-05 -2,69771E-06 0,000648163 0,988069
210 LUMAJANG_2011 0,991335 -2,26722E-05 -1,94007E-07 0,000181726 -0,080835
211 BANYUWANGI_2014 0,99251 -7,75195E-06 -6,31695E-08 0,000119225 -0,473825
212 MALANG_2014 0,992807 -9,78955E-06 -3,37625E-08 0,000138845 -0,552706
213 MALANG_2012 0,992825 -9,72459E-06 -3,35384E-08 0,000137924 -0,549038
214 MALANG_2016 0,996415 -2,78615E-05 0 0,000140605 0,075731
215 BANYUWANGI_2011 0,996994 -6,31148E-06 -1,17442E-07 0,000117091 -0,483698
216 MALANG_2013 0,997395 -9,7873E-06 -3,37547E-08 0,000138813 -0,552579
217 BANYUWANGI_2010 1 -8,54328E-06 -3,3652E-07 0,000117206 -0,116239
218 BANYUWANGI_2013 1 -8,43717E-06 -3,05034E-07 0,000118585 -0,167617
219 BANYUWANGI_2015 1 -1,291E-05 -1,40099E-07 0,000122474 -0,12997
220 BLITAR_2010 1 -2,44292E-05 -2,09042E-07 0,000195809 -0,087099
221 JEMBER_2010 1 -6,98377E-06 -2,40858E-08 9,90509E-05 -0,394295
222 LUMAJANG_2010 1 -1,91755E-05 -2,08092E-07 0,000181914 -0,193048
223 MAGETAN_2010 1 -3,32273E-05 -2,10902E-06 0,000357281 0,64289
224 MALANG_2015 1 -1,47754E-05 -1,60342E-07 0,000140171 -0,14875
225 PACITAN_2010 1 -7,8188E-05 -2,71532E-06 0,000652392 0,994516
226 PACITAN_2012 1 -9,09095E-05 -2,89513E-06 0,000659544 1,214006
227 PACITAN_2014 1 -0,000290676 -4,9934E-06 0,00066729 4,515851
228 PACITAN_2016 1 -0,000562478 -7,62692E-06 0,000672622 8,916174
229 TRENGGALEK_2010 1 -8,92427E-05 -4,4296E-07 0,000556777 0,254565
230 TRENGGALEK_2011 1 -0,000614044 0 0,000560538 6,227912
231 TRENGGALEK_2012 1 -0,00179272 0 0,000571592 20,082387
232 TRENGGALEK_2016 1 -0,00748159 0 0,000652844 86,841346

More Related Content

What's hot

Efficiency Production Cost of Goat Farming in the Lowland and the Highland Ar...
Efficiency Production Cost of Goat Farming in the Lowland and the Highland Ar...Efficiency Production Cost of Goat Farming in the Lowland and the Highland Ar...
Efficiency Production Cost of Goat Farming in the Lowland and the Highland Ar...
Agriculture Journal IJOEAR
 

What's hot (6)

11.[1 10]technical efficiency in agriculture in ghana analyses of determining...
11.[1 10]technical efficiency in agriculture in ghana analyses of determining...11.[1 10]technical efficiency in agriculture in ghana analyses of determining...
11.[1 10]technical efficiency in agriculture in ghana analyses of determining...
 
Efficiency Production Cost of Goat Farming in the Lowland and the Highland Ar...
Efficiency Production Cost of Goat Farming in the Lowland and the Highland Ar...Efficiency Production Cost of Goat Farming in the Lowland and the Highland Ar...
Efficiency Production Cost of Goat Farming in the Lowland and the Highland Ar...
 
2 musa andarawus socio economic analysis of paddy rice marketers in south...
2     musa andarawus socio economic analysis of paddy rice marketers in south...2     musa andarawus socio economic analysis of paddy rice marketers in south...
2 musa andarawus socio economic analysis of paddy rice marketers in south...
 
Determinants of seed cotton output evidence from the northern region of ghana
Determinants of seed cotton output  evidence from the northern region of ghanaDeterminants of seed cotton output  evidence from the northern region of ghana
Determinants of seed cotton output evidence from the northern region of ghana
 
Kathirvel
KathirvelKathirvel
Kathirvel
 
Growth and Instability in Food Grain production in Oisha
Growth and Instability in Food Grain production  in OishaGrowth and Instability in Food Grain production  in Oisha
Growth and Instability in Food Grain production in Oisha
 

Similar to Ijciet 10 01_040

Model Increasing Productivity and Sustainability of Lowland Rice Farming in T...
Model Increasing Productivity and Sustainability of Lowland Rice Farming in T...Model Increasing Productivity and Sustainability of Lowland Rice Farming in T...
Model Increasing Productivity and Sustainability of Lowland Rice Farming in T...
AI Publications
 
Analyze Production Efficiency and Scale Efficiency of Rice Farming Households...
Analyze Production Efficiency and Scale Efficiency of Rice Farming Households...Analyze Production Efficiency and Scale Efficiency of Rice Farming Households...
Analyze Production Efficiency and Scale Efficiency of Rice Farming Households...
ijtsrd
 
Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, ...
Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, ...Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, ...
Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, ...
Premier Publishers
 

Similar to Ijciet 10 01_040 (20)

Model Increasing Productivity and Sustainability of Lowland Rice Farming in T...
Model Increasing Productivity and Sustainability of Lowland Rice Farming in T...Model Increasing Productivity and Sustainability of Lowland Rice Farming in T...
Model Increasing Productivity and Sustainability of Lowland Rice Farming in T...
 
Technical efficiency in agriculture in ghana analyses of determining factors
Technical efficiency in agriculture in ghana analyses of determining factorsTechnical efficiency in agriculture in ghana analyses of determining factors
Technical efficiency in agriculture in ghana analyses of determining factors
 
Agricultural productivity growth and incidence of poverty
Agricultural productivity growth and incidence of povertyAgricultural productivity growth and incidence of poverty
Agricultural productivity growth and incidence of poverty
 
Analysis of resource use efficiency in smallholder mixed crop livestock agric...
Analysis of resource use efficiency in smallholder mixed crop livestock agric...Analysis of resource use efficiency in smallholder mixed crop livestock agric...
Analysis of resource use efficiency in smallholder mixed crop livestock agric...
 
Analyze Production Efficiency and Scale Efficiency of Rice Farming Households...
Analyze Production Efficiency and Scale Efficiency of Rice Farming Households...Analyze Production Efficiency and Scale Efficiency of Rice Farming Households...
Analyze Production Efficiency and Scale Efficiency of Rice Farming Households...
 
11.[1 10]technical efficiency in agriculture in ghana analyses of determining...
11.[1 10]technical efficiency in agriculture in ghana analyses of determining...11.[1 10]technical efficiency in agriculture in ghana analyses of determining...
11.[1 10]technical efficiency in agriculture in ghana analyses of determining...
 
Contributions of Productivity and Relative Price Changes to Wheat Profitabili...
Contributions of Productivity and Relative Price Changes to Wheat Profitabili...Contributions of Productivity and Relative Price Changes to Wheat Profitabili...
Contributions of Productivity and Relative Price Changes to Wheat Profitabili...
 
Crop Selection Method Based on Various Environmental Factors Using Machine Le...
Crop Selection Method Based on Various Environmental Factors Using Machine Le...Crop Selection Method Based on Various Environmental Factors Using Machine Le...
Crop Selection Method Based on Various Environmental Factors Using Machine Le...
 
Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, ...
Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, ...Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, ...
Technical Efficiency of Smallholder Sorghum Producers in West Hararghe Zone, ...
 
Development of Agriculture Sector in Bangladesh
Development of Agriculture Sector in BangladeshDevelopment of Agriculture Sector in Bangladesh
Development of Agriculture Sector in Bangladesh
 
Measurement of farm level efficiency of beef cattle fattening in west java pr...
Measurement of farm level efficiency of beef cattle fattening in west java pr...Measurement of farm level efficiency of beef cattle fattening in west java pr...
Measurement of farm level efficiency of beef cattle fattening in west java pr...
 
Efficiency and Competitiveness of Corn Farming in Sumbawa Regency
Efficiency and Competitiveness of Corn Farming in Sumbawa RegencyEfficiency and Competitiveness of Corn Farming in Sumbawa Regency
Efficiency and Competitiveness of Corn Farming in Sumbawa Regency
 
FARM-EASY
FARM-EASYFARM-EASY
FARM-EASY
 
Efficiency Analysis of Health Sector Expenditure Allocation in 2020 (Case Stu...
Efficiency Analysis of Health Sector Expenditure Allocation in 2020 (Case Stu...Efficiency Analysis of Health Sector Expenditure Allocation in 2020 (Case Stu...
Efficiency Analysis of Health Sector Expenditure Allocation in 2020 (Case Stu...
 
Input Structure Effect of Total Factor Productivity Growth of Animal Husbandry
Input Structure Effect of Total Factor Productivity Growth of Animal HusbandryInput Structure Effect of Total Factor Productivity Growth of Animal Husbandry
Input Structure Effect of Total Factor Productivity Growth of Animal Husbandry
 
Research on World Agricultural Economy | Vol.3,Iss.3 September 2022
Research on World Agricultural Economy | Vol.3,Iss.3 September 2022Research on World Agricultural Economy | Vol.3,Iss.3 September 2022
Research on World Agricultural Economy | Vol.3,Iss.3 September 2022
 
11.impact of input and output market development interventions in ethiopia
11.impact of input and output market development interventions in ethiopia11.impact of input and output market development interventions in ethiopia
11.impact of input and output market development interventions in ethiopia
 
7.[55 64]impact of input and output market development interventions in ethiopia
7.[55 64]impact of input and output market development interventions in ethiopia7.[55 64]impact of input and output market development interventions in ethiopia
7.[55 64]impact of input and output market development interventions in ethiopia
 
7.[55 64]impact of input and output market development interventions in ethiopia
7.[55 64]impact of input and output market development interventions in ethiopia7.[55 64]impact of input and output market development interventions in ethiopia
7.[55 64]impact of input and output market development interventions in ethiopia
 
Analysis of agricultural subsectors contribution growth rate in the agricultu...
Analysis of agricultural subsectors contribution growth rate in the agricultu...Analysis of agricultural subsectors contribution growth rate in the agricultu...
Analysis of agricultural subsectors contribution growth rate in the agricultu...
 

More from IAEME Publication

A STUDY ON THE REASONS FOR TRANSGENDER TO BECOME ENTREPRENEURS
A STUDY ON THE REASONS FOR TRANSGENDER TO BECOME ENTREPRENEURSA STUDY ON THE REASONS FOR TRANSGENDER TO BECOME ENTREPRENEURS
A STUDY ON THE REASONS FOR TRANSGENDER TO BECOME ENTREPRENEURS
IAEME Publication
 
BROAD UNEXPOSED SKILLS OF TRANSGENDER ENTREPRENEURS
BROAD UNEXPOSED SKILLS OF TRANSGENDER ENTREPRENEURSBROAD UNEXPOSED SKILLS OF TRANSGENDER ENTREPRENEURS
BROAD UNEXPOSED SKILLS OF TRANSGENDER ENTREPRENEURS
IAEME Publication
 
GANDHI ON NON-VIOLENT POLICE
GANDHI ON NON-VIOLENT POLICEGANDHI ON NON-VIOLENT POLICE
GANDHI ON NON-VIOLENT POLICE
IAEME Publication
 
A STUDY ON TALENT MANAGEMENT AND ITS IMPACT ON EMPLOYEE RETENTION IN SELECTED...
A STUDY ON TALENT MANAGEMENT AND ITS IMPACT ON EMPLOYEE RETENTION IN SELECTED...A STUDY ON TALENT MANAGEMENT AND ITS IMPACT ON EMPLOYEE RETENTION IN SELECTED...
A STUDY ON TALENT MANAGEMENT AND ITS IMPACT ON EMPLOYEE RETENTION IN SELECTED...
IAEME Publication
 
ATTRITION IN THE IT INDUSTRY DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC: LINKING EMOTIONAL INTE...
ATTRITION IN THE IT INDUSTRY DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC: LINKING EMOTIONAL INTE...ATTRITION IN THE IT INDUSTRY DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC: LINKING EMOTIONAL INTE...
ATTRITION IN THE IT INDUSTRY DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC: LINKING EMOTIONAL INTE...
IAEME Publication
 
INFLUENCE OF TALENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE A STUD...
INFLUENCE OF TALENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE A STUD...INFLUENCE OF TALENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE A STUD...
INFLUENCE OF TALENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE A STUD...
IAEME Publication
 
A STUDY OF VARIOUS TYPES OF LOANS OF SELECTED PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR BANKS...
A STUDY OF VARIOUS TYPES OF LOANS OF SELECTED PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR BANKS...A STUDY OF VARIOUS TYPES OF LOANS OF SELECTED PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR BANKS...
A STUDY OF VARIOUS TYPES OF LOANS OF SELECTED PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR BANKS...
IAEME Publication
 
ROLE OF SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT OF INDIA - PROBLEMS AND ...
ROLE OF SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT OF INDIA - PROBLEMS AND ...ROLE OF SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT OF INDIA - PROBLEMS AND ...
ROLE OF SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT OF INDIA - PROBLEMS AND ...
IAEME Publication
 
OPTIMAL RECONFIGURATION OF POWER DISTRIBUTION RADIAL NETWORK USING HYBRID MET...
OPTIMAL RECONFIGURATION OF POWER DISTRIBUTION RADIAL NETWORK USING HYBRID MET...OPTIMAL RECONFIGURATION OF POWER DISTRIBUTION RADIAL NETWORK USING HYBRID MET...
OPTIMAL RECONFIGURATION OF POWER DISTRIBUTION RADIAL NETWORK USING HYBRID MET...
IAEME Publication
 
APPLICATION OF FRUGAL APPROACH FOR PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT - A CASE STUDY OF...
APPLICATION OF FRUGAL APPROACH FOR PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT - A CASE STUDY OF...APPLICATION OF FRUGAL APPROACH FOR PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT - A CASE STUDY OF...
APPLICATION OF FRUGAL APPROACH FOR PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT - A CASE STUDY OF...
IAEME Publication
 

More from IAEME Publication (20)

IAEME_Publication_Call_for_Paper_September_2022.pdf
IAEME_Publication_Call_for_Paper_September_2022.pdfIAEME_Publication_Call_for_Paper_September_2022.pdf
IAEME_Publication_Call_for_Paper_September_2022.pdf
 
MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF SURFACE ROUGHNESS AND WHITE LATER THICKNESS IN WIRE-...
MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF SURFACE ROUGHNESS AND WHITE LATER THICKNESS IN WIRE-...MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF SURFACE ROUGHNESS AND WHITE LATER THICKNESS IN WIRE-...
MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF SURFACE ROUGHNESS AND WHITE LATER THICKNESS IN WIRE-...
 
A STUDY ON THE REASONS FOR TRANSGENDER TO BECOME ENTREPRENEURS
A STUDY ON THE REASONS FOR TRANSGENDER TO BECOME ENTREPRENEURSA STUDY ON THE REASONS FOR TRANSGENDER TO BECOME ENTREPRENEURS
A STUDY ON THE REASONS FOR TRANSGENDER TO BECOME ENTREPRENEURS
 
BROAD UNEXPOSED SKILLS OF TRANSGENDER ENTREPRENEURS
BROAD UNEXPOSED SKILLS OF TRANSGENDER ENTREPRENEURSBROAD UNEXPOSED SKILLS OF TRANSGENDER ENTREPRENEURS
BROAD UNEXPOSED SKILLS OF TRANSGENDER ENTREPRENEURS
 
DETERMINANTS AFFECTING THE USER'S INTENTION TO USE MOBILE BANKING APPLICATIONS
DETERMINANTS AFFECTING THE USER'S INTENTION TO USE MOBILE BANKING APPLICATIONSDETERMINANTS AFFECTING THE USER'S INTENTION TO USE MOBILE BANKING APPLICATIONS
DETERMINANTS AFFECTING THE USER'S INTENTION TO USE MOBILE BANKING APPLICATIONS
 
ANALYSE THE USER PREDILECTION ON GPAY AND PHONEPE FOR DIGITAL TRANSACTIONS
ANALYSE THE USER PREDILECTION ON GPAY AND PHONEPE FOR DIGITAL TRANSACTIONSANALYSE THE USER PREDILECTION ON GPAY AND PHONEPE FOR DIGITAL TRANSACTIONS
ANALYSE THE USER PREDILECTION ON GPAY AND PHONEPE FOR DIGITAL TRANSACTIONS
 
VOICE BASED ATM FOR VISUALLY IMPAIRED USING ARDUINO
VOICE BASED ATM FOR VISUALLY IMPAIRED USING ARDUINOVOICE BASED ATM FOR VISUALLY IMPAIRED USING ARDUINO
VOICE BASED ATM FOR VISUALLY IMPAIRED USING ARDUINO
 
IMPACT OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE ON HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AMONG...
IMPACT OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE ON HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AMONG...IMPACT OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE ON HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AMONG...
IMPACT OF EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE ON HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AMONG...
 
VISUALISING AGING PARENTS & THEIR CLOSE CARERS LIFE JOURNEY IN AGING ECONOMY
VISUALISING AGING PARENTS & THEIR CLOSE CARERS LIFE JOURNEY IN AGING ECONOMYVISUALISING AGING PARENTS & THEIR CLOSE CARERS LIFE JOURNEY IN AGING ECONOMY
VISUALISING AGING PARENTS & THEIR CLOSE CARERS LIFE JOURNEY IN AGING ECONOMY
 
A STUDY ON THE IMPACT OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PERFO...
A STUDY ON THE IMPACT OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PERFO...A STUDY ON THE IMPACT OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PERFO...
A STUDY ON THE IMPACT OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PERFO...
 
GANDHI ON NON-VIOLENT POLICE
GANDHI ON NON-VIOLENT POLICEGANDHI ON NON-VIOLENT POLICE
GANDHI ON NON-VIOLENT POLICE
 
A STUDY ON TALENT MANAGEMENT AND ITS IMPACT ON EMPLOYEE RETENTION IN SELECTED...
A STUDY ON TALENT MANAGEMENT AND ITS IMPACT ON EMPLOYEE RETENTION IN SELECTED...A STUDY ON TALENT MANAGEMENT AND ITS IMPACT ON EMPLOYEE RETENTION IN SELECTED...
A STUDY ON TALENT MANAGEMENT AND ITS IMPACT ON EMPLOYEE RETENTION IN SELECTED...
 
ATTRITION IN THE IT INDUSTRY DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC: LINKING EMOTIONAL INTE...
ATTRITION IN THE IT INDUSTRY DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC: LINKING EMOTIONAL INTE...ATTRITION IN THE IT INDUSTRY DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC: LINKING EMOTIONAL INTE...
ATTRITION IN THE IT INDUSTRY DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC: LINKING EMOTIONAL INTE...
 
INFLUENCE OF TALENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE A STUD...
INFLUENCE OF TALENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE A STUD...INFLUENCE OF TALENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE A STUD...
INFLUENCE OF TALENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE A STUD...
 
A STUDY OF VARIOUS TYPES OF LOANS OF SELECTED PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR BANKS...
A STUDY OF VARIOUS TYPES OF LOANS OF SELECTED PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR BANKS...A STUDY OF VARIOUS TYPES OF LOANS OF SELECTED PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR BANKS...
A STUDY OF VARIOUS TYPES OF LOANS OF SELECTED PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR BANKS...
 
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF MECHANICAL AND TRIBOLOGICAL RELATION OF NYLON/BaSO4 POL...
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF MECHANICAL AND TRIBOLOGICAL RELATION OF NYLON/BaSO4 POL...EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF MECHANICAL AND TRIBOLOGICAL RELATION OF NYLON/BaSO4 POL...
EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF MECHANICAL AND TRIBOLOGICAL RELATION OF NYLON/BaSO4 POL...
 
ROLE OF SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT OF INDIA - PROBLEMS AND ...
ROLE OF SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT OF INDIA - PROBLEMS AND ...ROLE OF SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT OF INDIA - PROBLEMS AND ...
ROLE OF SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT OF INDIA - PROBLEMS AND ...
 
OPTIMAL RECONFIGURATION OF POWER DISTRIBUTION RADIAL NETWORK USING HYBRID MET...
OPTIMAL RECONFIGURATION OF POWER DISTRIBUTION RADIAL NETWORK USING HYBRID MET...OPTIMAL RECONFIGURATION OF POWER DISTRIBUTION RADIAL NETWORK USING HYBRID MET...
OPTIMAL RECONFIGURATION OF POWER DISTRIBUTION RADIAL NETWORK USING HYBRID MET...
 
APPLICATION OF FRUGAL APPROACH FOR PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT - A CASE STUDY OF...
APPLICATION OF FRUGAL APPROACH FOR PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT - A CASE STUDY OF...APPLICATION OF FRUGAL APPROACH FOR PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT - A CASE STUDY OF...
APPLICATION OF FRUGAL APPROACH FOR PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT - A CASE STUDY OF...
 
A MULTIPLE – CHANNEL QUEUING MODELS ON FUZZY ENVIRONMENT
A MULTIPLE – CHANNEL QUEUING MODELS ON FUZZY ENVIRONMENTA MULTIPLE – CHANNEL QUEUING MODELS ON FUZZY ENVIRONMENT
A MULTIPLE – CHANNEL QUEUING MODELS ON FUZZY ENVIRONMENT
 

Recently uploaded

Kuwait City MTP kit ((+919101817206)) Buy Abortion Pills Kuwait
Kuwait City MTP kit ((+919101817206)) Buy Abortion Pills KuwaitKuwait City MTP kit ((+919101817206)) Buy Abortion Pills Kuwait
Kuwait City MTP kit ((+919101817206)) Buy Abortion Pills Kuwait
jaanualu31
 
DeepFakes presentation : brief idea of DeepFakes
DeepFakes presentation : brief idea of DeepFakesDeepFakes presentation : brief idea of DeepFakes
DeepFakes presentation : brief idea of DeepFakes
MayuraD1
 
scipt v1.pptxcxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx...
scipt v1.pptxcxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx...scipt v1.pptxcxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx...
scipt v1.pptxcxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx...
HenryBriggs2
 
notes on Evolution Of Analytic Scalability.ppt
notes on Evolution Of Analytic Scalability.pptnotes on Evolution Of Analytic Scalability.ppt
notes on Evolution Of Analytic Scalability.ppt
MsecMca
 

Recently uploaded (20)

Kuwait City MTP kit ((+919101817206)) Buy Abortion Pills Kuwait
Kuwait City MTP kit ((+919101817206)) Buy Abortion Pills KuwaitKuwait City MTP kit ((+919101817206)) Buy Abortion Pills Kuwait
Kuwait City MTP kit ((+919101817206)) Buy Abortion Pills Kuwait
 
Online electricity billing project report..pdf
Online electricity billing project report..pdfOnline electricity billing project report..pdf
Online electricity billing project report..pdf
 
kiln thermal load.pptx kiln tgermal load
kiln thermal load.pptx kiln tgermal loadkiln thermal load.pptx kiln tgermal load
kiln thermal load.pptx kiln tgermal load
 
Computer Networks Basics of Network Devices
Computer Networks  Basics of Network DevicesComputer Networks  Basics of Network Devices
Computer Networks Basics of Network Devices
 
DeepFakes presentation : brief idea of DeepFakes
DeepFakes presentation : brief idea of DeepFakesDeepFakes presentation : brief idea of DeepFakes
DeepFakes presentation : brief idea of DeepFakes
 
School management system project Report.pdf
School management system project Report.pdfSchool management system project Report.pdf
School management system project Report.pdf
 
A Study of Urban Area Plan for Pabna Municipality
A Study of Urban Area Plan for Pabna MunicipalityA Study of Urban Area Plan for Pabna Municipality
A Study of Urban Area Plan for Pabna Municipality
 
Bhubaneswar🌹Call Girls Bhubaneswar ❤Komal 9777949614 💟 Full Trusted CALL GIRL...
Bhubaneswar🌹Call Girls Bhubaneswar ❤Komal 9777949614 💟 Full Trusted CALL GIRL...Bhubaneswar🌹Call Girls Bhubaneswar ❤Komal 9777949614 💟 Full Trusted CALL GIRL...
Bhubaneswar🌹Call Girls Bhubaneswar ❤Komal 9777949614 💟 Full Trusted CALL GIRL...
 
Navigating Complexity: The Role of Trusted Partners and VIAS3D in Dassault Sy...
Navigating Complexity: The Role of Trusted Partners and VIAS3D in Dassault Sy...Navigating Complexity: The Role of Trusted Partners and VIAS3D in Dassault Sy...
Navigating Complexity: The Role of Trusted Partners and VIAS3D in Dassault Sy...
 
Double Revolving field theory-how the rotor develops torque
Double Revolving field theory-how the rotor develops torqueDouble Revolving field theory-how the rotor develops torque
Double Revolving field theory-how the rotor develops torque
 
2016EF22_0 solar project report rooftop projects
2016EF22_0 solar project report rooftop projects2016EF22_0 solar project report rooftop projects
2016EF22_0 solar project report rooftop projects
 
Thermal Engineering-R & A / C - unit - V
Thermal Engineering-R & A / C - unit - VThermal Engineering-R & A / C - unit - V
Thermal Engineering-R & A / C - unit - V
 
HOA1&2 - Module 3 - PREHISTORCI ARCHITECTURE OF KERALA.pptx
HOA1&2 - Module 3 - PREHISTORCI ARCHITECTURE OF KERALA.pptxHOA1&2 - Module 3 - PREHISTORCI ARCHITECTURE OF KERALA.pptx
HOA1&2 - Module 3 - PREHISTORCI ARCHITECTURE OF KERALA.pptx
 
scipt v1.pptxcxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx...
scipt v1.pptxcxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx...scipt v1.pptxcxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx...
scipt v1.pptxcxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx...
 
Hazard Identification (HAZID) vs. Hazard and Operability (HAZOP): A Comparati...
Hazard Identification (HAZID) vs. Hazard and Operability (HAZOP): A Comparati...Hazard Identification (HAZID) vs. Hazard and Operability (HAZOP): A Comparati...
Hazard Identification (HAZID) vs. Hazard and Operability (HAZOP): A Comparati...
 
Design For Accessibility: Getting it right from the start
Design For Accessibility: Getting it right from the startDesign For Accessibility: Getting it right from the start
Design For Accessibility: Getting it right from the start
 
notes on Evolution Of Analytic Scalability.ppt
notes on Evolution Of Analytic Scalability.pptnotes on Evolution Of Analytic Scalability.ppt
notes on Evolution Of Analytic Scalability.ppt
 
Block diagram reduction techniques in control systems.ppt
Block diagram reduction techniques in control systems.pptBlock diagram reduction techniques in control systems.ppt
Block diagram reduction techniques in control systems.ppt
 
Air Compressor reciprocating single stage
Air Compressor reciprocating single stageAir Compressor reciprocating single stage
Air Compressor reciprocating single stage
 
Employee leave management system project.
Employee leave management system project.Employee leave management system project.
Employee leave management system project.
 

Ijciet 10 01_040

  • 1. http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 420 editor@iaeme.com International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET) Volume 10, Issue 1, January 2019, pp.420–443, Article ID: IJCIET_10_01_040 Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=1 ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316 ©IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE IN EAST JAVA BASED ON DEA INDEX Abid Muhtarom Islamic University of Lamongan, Faculty of Economics, Indonesia; Airlangga University, Department of Economics, Indonesia Tri Haryanto, Nurul Istifadah Airlangga University,Department of Economics, Indonesia ABSTRACT The efficiency of food crop agriculture is a fairly common and used performance parameter, efficiency measurement is widely used to answer the challenges of calculating the size of agricultural crops. This research uses a method called Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to measure technical efficiency. DEA method from one company is a non-parametric analysis method which aims to measure the level of efficiency relative to the productivity unit that has the same goal. The productivity unit is here in the form of a decision-making unit (DMU) where the DMU in this study is the food crop agriculture sub-sector 29 districts in East Java. The results of this study can be studied as many as 93. Keywords: DEA, Land, Labor, and productivity. Cite this Article: Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah, Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), 10 (1), 2019, pp. 420–443. http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=1 1. INTRODUCTION East Java Province is one of the provinces in Indonesia that relies on the agricultural sector of food crops as a driving force for the economy. East Java Province is known as a province that has great attention to the progress of food crop agriculture . Large crop agricultural productivity can increase regional GDP in aggregate in Bhattarai & Narayanamoorthy, (2003) and Majid, (2004).The second largest East Java GRDP after the industrial sector is the agricultural sector, where the Food Crop sub-sector provides a large contribution compared to the agricultural and hunting services sub-sector, the Plantation sub-sector, the Livestock sub- sector, and the Holtukultur Crop sub-sector.
  • 2. Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 421 editor@iaeme.com Agricultural land is needed in increasing the productivity of agricultural crops according to Irz, Lin, Thirtle, & Wiggins, (2001). East Java Province has agricultural land which continues to decline throughout the year because it is caused by experts in the function of land to be residential and industrial. According to Bayyurt & Yılmaz, (2012) even though the government carried out agricultural land regulation had a negative impact or continued to decline. However, if the government does not provide a regulation to ban functional experts, it can be ascertained that the productivity of agricultural crops will decline according toKheir- El-Din & Heba El-Laithy, (2008). In addition to agricultural land, the productivity of food crops is urgently needed, and also requires labor to carry out their production according toTravers & Ma, (1994). Labor also has a good and bad impact on increasing productivity in the agricultural sector. Because the higher the number of workers with a little land area will have an impact on decreasing agricultural productivity in Kheir-El-Din & Heba El-Laithy,(2008). East Java Province must be aware of this phenomenon, because we know that more and more people cannot work in the industrial sector and their services will enter the agricultural sector. The agricultural sector is a sector that does not require high skills(Yutanto, Shonhadj, Ilham, & Ekaningtias, 2018). Efficiency of food crop agriculture is a performance parameter that is quite often and commonly used, efficiency measurement is widely used to answer the challenges of difficulties in calculating measures of food crop agriculture performance. Calculation of the level of land area, labor, irrigation and rainfall is usually used to show good performance results, but this calculation is sometimes not included in the criteria of good food crop agriculture that can answer the problems of food crop agriculture. Measurement of efficiency of food crop agriculture can be done using nonparametric methods, in this case using an approach to calculate the efficiency of food crop agriculture, namely Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to analyze the level of efficiency of food crop agriculture from Districts in East Java according toCooper, Seiford, & Zhu, (2011). 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE According toTravers & Ma, (1994) results of analysis of technological improvements, prices, fertilizer and irrigation can increase agricultural productivity food crops and reduce poverty .According to Irz et al., (2001)results of analysis of agricultural growth as well food crops can be done by adding agricultural land, along with supporting tools.Agricultural technology should be used to get more and more satisfying results. According to(Bayyurt & Yılmaz, 2012) the results of the analysis of increasing irrigation rates and literacy rates in rural areas are two factors, the most important of all is that they know, the knowledge of agriculture and growing food crops so that it can reduce poverty.According to Majid, (2004)the results of the analysis of factors in farmer income, food prices, GINI ratio, labor, total population and inflation can reduce poverty. According to Kheir-El-Din & Heba El-Laithy, (2008) TFP analysis results reduce poverty by 0.241 percent , higher productivity of agricultural food crops will result in lower poverty rates, -1,377 ,increase in yields do not benefit the poor, increase in land results in a decrease in poverty by 1.464, increase THIS one percent G index will increase poverty by 1.62 percent.According to Bayyurt & Yılmaz, (2012) the results of government regulation analysis havea positive effect on agricultural efficiency. Education has a negative influence on agricultural efficiency food crops . The result can be interpreted that the higher the level of education the more farmers leave the work of farmers.According toDhrifi, (2014) analysis results of poverty reduction per capital income of 0.25%, a decrease in household consumption expenditure by 0.21 points, which
  • 3. Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 422 editor@iaeme.com decreases poverty level,growth of foodcrop agriculture can reduce poverty by 32% , technology innovation reduces poverty by 18%. 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION This research uses a method namely Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to measure technical efficiency. DEA method is a non-parametric analysis method that aims to measure the level of technical efficiency relative to other production units that have the same objectives. The production unit is here in the form of a decision making unit (DMU) where the DMU in this study is a food crop agricultural sub-sector 29 districts in East Java. This study focuses for 8 years ie in 2010 until 2017. The input variables used in this research is the area of land and labor (labor), while Productivity become the output variable. The Linear Programming (LP) function that is carried out in this approach uses the assumption of output oriented , so the objective function that is applied is the maximizing function of output with the input level that isceteris paribus. DEA analysis of this one stage uses MaxDEA 7 Basic software . In this measurement of technical efficiency, it will use output oriented measurement with one measurement scale assumption, namely Variable Return to Scale (VRS) with a DEA one stage approach . A sum is needed to be able to produce technical efficiency values for each Regency in East Java based on VRS assumptions, but it is also intended to estimate the value of the efficiency scores of each Regency in East Java from year 20 10 to 2017 . 3.1. Dea Model The following is a model of technical efficiency analysis assuming VRS with the DEA one stage approach : VRS Model Measurement of Technical Efficiency Oriented to Output ( Output Oriented ) Max Ф, λФ, st-Фyi + Qλ ≥ 0 xi - Xλ ≥ 0 I1'λ = 1 λ ≥ 0 ………………… (3.1) Where : Ф = efficiency score; λ = Ix1 vector constant or obstacle vector; yi = output vector i; xi = input vector i; Q = Matrix ouput i keselu Ruhan; X = input matrix i overall The model above is a VRS model with an output-oriented approach where the variable ukkan shows the calculation of technical efficiency (Coelli, Prasada Rao, O’Donnell, & Battese, 2005)with a value of Ф between 1 to ∞ (infinity), and Ф - 1 representing proportional increase in output that can be achieved by DMU with a constant input quantity. λ is I x1 vector of constants and I1'λ = 1 is convexity constraint, with I 1 being I x1 vector of one. Convexity constraints show that variable return to scale (VRS) which ensures that companies are inefficient will only be compared with companies that have the same scale. There is a note that 1 / Ф indicates the value of technical efficiency which assumes values at interval levels 0 to 1.
  • 4. Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 423 editor@iaeme.com 4. RESULT AND ANALYSIS 4.1 Results of Estimates on the efficiency of food crop agriculture in East Java Province The results of the estimation of technical efficiency describing food crop agriculture using the DEA method one stage can be seen in graph I. The technical efficiency score ranges from 0 to 1. An assessment of score 1 shows that food crop agriculture reaches an efficient condition. While food crop agriculture in an ineffective condition has a technical efficiency score of less than 1. Graph 1. Productivity of food Based on Graph I, it can be seen that as many as 93.1 percent (29 districts) in East Java Province in the period 2010-2017 have an average score of efficiency of less than 0 , 69, while the rest have achieved an average technical efficiency of more than 0.31. So that it can be said that food crop agriculture in 2010-2017 estimates inefficiency by 31 percent and has the potential to increase output by 69 percent so that the conditions are efficient. Graph I above shows the DEA one stage technical efficiency score in 2010-2017. On the other hand, Sidoarjo Regency is the most inefficient DMU with the acquisition of an efficiency score of 0.20-0.25 in 2010-2017. But there is also one Kabupaten Gresik that also has an ineffective DMU from 29 Regencies in East Java with the acquisition of an efficiency score of 0.28-0.35 in 2010-2017. These two districts have a tendency to improve the efficiency of food crops throughout the year according to Hanaa Kheir-El-Din and Heba El-Laithy (2008) . This is due to the development of the center of the provincial capital of East Java to the area of Sidoarjo Regency and Gersik Regency, making it an expert in the function of agricultural land which used to be an agricultural area and a residential area. Sidoarjo regency has extensive agricultural land, but because small-scale ownership (subsitaries) by the community makes a choice to use agricultural land or sell at high prices to the owners of capital to be used as settlements or industries. If food crops are implemented, the landowners will also be burdened by high labor costs, rejecting (Irz et al., 2001; Travers & Ma, 1994). Third, Gresik Regency is an area with almost the majority of its area being industrial. Agricultural problems there are due to the large size of Litosol land where this type of soil is very difficult for agriculture. High labor costs compared to agricultural products make it an obstacle to agricultural productivity according to(Bayyurt & Yılmaz, 2012; Kheir- El-Din & Heba El-Laithy, 2008),rejected Dhrifi, (2014).
  • 5. Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 424 editor@iaeme.com The technical estimation of food crop agriculture in East Java can be seen in Figure 1. There are 8 efficient districts but in different years. First, Trenggalek District has an efficient area since 2010-2012 and 2016, where inefficiency occurred in 2013-2015 and 2017. The problem of food crop farming was broken down that year so that inefficiencies occurred were experts in the function of land and labor in the high agricultural sector, although this area contributed the largest regional income (Qi et al., 2018). Figure 1. Agriculture east java food crops efficiency Secondly, based on figure 1 efficiency occurred in 2010, 2012, 2014 and 2016, while in 2011, 2013 and 2015 there was inefficiency. The problem of food crop farming in Pacitan is the area of small agricultural land and the small number of workers in the agricultural sector, plus people who live a lot in subsitant agriculture for personal needs. Third, efficiency occurs in Malang Regency in 2015, while in 2010-2017 except 2015 agricultural inefficiencies occur. This problem occurs because the occurrence of expert land functions into settlements is also due to the large workforce. Fourth, Magetan Regency in 2010 was an agricultural area, but because experts in land functions were large enough to influence the productivity of agricultural crops since 2011-2017 and mapping the lack of regional governance that had an impact on agricultural areas where fertile land became settlements and tourism. Fifth, Lumajang Regency in 2010 was an area similar to magetan but different types of soil and soil fertility. Sixth, Regency Jember in 2010 was East Java's rice barn, but the food crop sector, but the existence of development made a good area for agriculture to turn into settlements and industries, so that 2010-2017 continued to decline in productivity. Seventh, Blitar Regency in 2010 happened agricultural efficiency the same problem with Magetan Regency. Eighth, Banyuwangi Regency in 2010,2013 and 2015 is one of the East Java Province rice barns because in that year agricultural productivity increased with government regulations that prohibited the construction of the (Agovino, Cerciello, & Gatto, 2018; Kaim, Cord, & Volk, 2018).
  • 6. Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 425 editor@iaeme.com 5. CONCLUSION This is due firstly, because of the development of the center of the provincial capital of East Java to the area of Sidoarjo Regency and Gersik Regency, it has become an expert in the function of agricultural land which used to be an agricultural area and a residential area(Ilham, 2018). Second, Sidoarjo Regency has extensive agricultural land, but because small-scale ownership (subsiten) by the community makes a choice to use agricultural land or sell at high prices to the owners of capital to be used as settlements or industries. If food crops are implemented, the landowners will also be burdened by high labor costs, rejecting Irz et al., (2001); Travers & Ma, (1994). Third, Gresik Regency is an area with almost the majority of its area beingindustrial. Agricultural problems there are due to the large size of Litosol land where this type of soil is very difficult for agriculture. High labor costs compared to agricultural products make it an obstacle to agricultural productivity according to (Bayyurt & Yılmaz, 2012; Dhrifi, 2014; Kheir-El-Din & Heba El-Laithy, 2008). ACKNOWLEDGE Thank you to both parents and extended family, colleagues and siblings, Lamongan Islamic University and Trunojoyo Madura University, Airlangga University Surabaya Partner and staff. The Chair of the Doctoral Program in Economics, the Promoter who always supports and assists in the joys and sorrows. BUDI-DN scholarships that provide financial assistance REFERENCES [1] Agovino, M., Cerciello, M., & Gatto, A. (2018). Policy efficiency in the field of food sustainability. The adjusted food agriculture and nutrition index. Journal of Environmental Management, 218, 220–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.04.058 [2] Bayyurt, N., & Yılmaz, S. (2012). The Impacts of Governance and Education on Agricultural Efficiency: An International Analysis. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 1158–1165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.1097 [3] Bhattarai, M., & Narayanamoorthy, A. (2003). Impact of Irrigation on Agricultural Growth and Poverty Alleviation: Macro Level Analyses in India. Water Policy Research, 8. [4] Coelli, T. J., Prasada Rao, D. S., O’Donnell, C. J., & Battese, G. E. (2005). An introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis. An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1007/b136381 [5] Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Zhu, J. (2011). Data Envelopment Analysis: History, Models, and Interpretations. Handbook on Data Envelopment Analysis - International Series in Operations Research & Management Science (Vol. 164). Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011. [6] Dhrifi, A. (2014). Agricultural Productivity and Poverty Alleviation: What Role for Technological Innovation. Journal of Economic and Social Studies, 4(1), 131–151. https://doi.org/10.14706/JECOSS11418 [7] Ilham, R. (2018). Improve Quality Of E-Loyalty In Online Food Delivery Services : A CASE OF INDONESIA. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 96(15), 4760–4769. [8] Irz, X., Lin, L., Thirtle, C., & Wiggins, S. (2001). Agricultural Productivity Growth and Poverty Alleviation Theoretical expectations of the effects of agricultural growth on poverty. Development Policy Review, 19(4), 449–466.
  • 7. Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 426 editor@iaeme.com [9] Kaim, A., Cord, A. F., & Volk, M. (2018). A review of multi-criteria optimization techniques for agricultural land use allocation. Environmental Modelling and Software, 105(April), 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.03.031 [10] Kheir-El-Din, H., & Heba El-Laithy, H. (2008). Agricultural productivity growth employment and poverty in Egypt. Working Paper Series, 129(129), 34. [11] Majid, N. (2004). Reaching Millennium Goals: How Well Does Agricultural Productivity Growth Reduce Poverty? Employment Strategy Papers, 38. [12] Qi, X., Fu, Y., Wang, R. Y., Ng, C. N., Dang, H., & He, Y. (2018). Improving the sustainability of agricultural land use: An integrated framework for the conflict between food security and environmental deterioration. Applied Geography, 90(November 2017), 214–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2017.12.009 [13] Travers, L., & Ma, J. (1994). Agricultural productivity and rural poverty in China. China Economic Review, 5(1), 141–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/1043-951X(94)90019-1 [14] Yutanto, H., Shonhadj, N., Ilham, R., & Ekaningtias, D. (2018). Development Of Parking Accounting Information Systems Based. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 9(8), 1013–1022. Data source: [15] https://jatim.bps.go.id/subject/162/produk-domestik-regional-bruto--kabupaten-kota- .html#subjekViewTab3 [16] http://prasarana.pertanian.go.id/lahanmy/ [17] http://prasarana.pertanian.go.id/tenagakerjamy/?page=home Table I Review of Previous Research NO Researcher Country Method used Analysis Results 1 Lee Travers and Jun Ma (1994) China -DEA, Dependent variable (Y): Food cropproductivity and poverty Independent variable (X): technology, labor, fertilizer and irrigation -R 2 of 0.833 - food crop agricultural products (+) -poverty (-) -technology (-) workforce (+) -fertilizer (+) - irrigation (-) 2 Xavier Irz, Lin Lin, Colin Thirtle and Steve Wiggins (2001) South Africa -DEA -Production: the number of poor people, the level of poverty, labor and land -Poverty: value added / labor and value added / land -Proconductivity(+): the number of poor (-), poverty (-), labor (+) and land (+) -Poverty (-): value added / labor (-) and value added / land (-), R 2 = 0.088 3 Madhusudan Bhattarai and A. Narayanamoorthy, ( 200 3 ) India -DEA -TFP -Variable variable (Y): Agricultural cropproductivity a nd poverty -Independent variable (X): Irrigation, selling price, land area and fertilizer -costanta (+) -R 2 = 0.53 - food crop agricultural products (+) -poverty (-) - irrigation (-) -selling price (-) -fertilizer (+) - Extensive land area (+) 4 Majid, Nomaan (2004) Sub- Saharan Africa -DEA -TFP Dependent variable (Y): Food cropproductivity and poverty Independent variable - R 2 = 0.33 -costanta (+) - food crop agricultural products (+) -poverty (-) - farmer's income (+)
  • 8. Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 427 editor@iaeme.com NO Researcher Country Method used Analysis Results (X): farmer income, food price, GINI ratio, labor, total population, irrigation, technology, fertilizer,government policyand inflation - food prices (-) -GINI ratio (-) -labor (-) -total population (-) - technology (+) - Irrigation (+) -fertilizer (-) -government policies (+) -inflation(-) 5 Hanaa Kheir-El-Din and Heba El-Laithy (2008) Egypt -DEA -TFP Dependent variable (Y): Productivity, poverty and technical efficiency. Independent variable (X): Land, GINI labor, and capital (capital input and livestock) Study: all of Egypt Productivity (-), poverty (-) and technical efficiency (-). Land (-), Labor (-), GINI (+) and capital (capital input and livestock) (-) 6 Nizamettin Bayyurta and Senem Yilmaz (2012) 64 world bank countries -DEA-CRS -OLS fixed effect dependent variable (Y) = government regulation and education Independent variable (X): Land area, fertility / fertilizer, tractor, labor. - R-sq: within = 0.0133 - government regulation (+) -education(-) -Surface area (-) - fertility / fertilizer (+) - tractor (-) -labor(-). 7 Abdelhafidh Dhrifi (2013) Sub Saharan Afrika32 Countries - Simultaneous Equation Model, SSA, Data Panel -Poverty: agricultural cropproduction , capital per capita, technological innovation, farmer income, farmer population, and infrastructure -Agricultural growth: agricultural production, technological innovation, inflation, export-import trade, education, government investment. -Agricultural production: economic growth, technological innovation, irrigation and agricultural labor. -Poverty (+): the productivity offood crops (+), GDP perkapital (+), Innovations in technology (+), farmers' income (+), the population of farmers (+), and infrastructure (+), R 2 = 0.431, constants 0.213 -Growth in agriculture (+):agriculturalproductivity (+), technological innovation (+), inflation (-), import-export trade (+), education (+), government investment (+), R 2= 0.383, -0.041 constants -agricultural productivity(+): economic growth (+), technological innovation (-), irrigation (+) and farm labor (+), R2 = 0.294, 0.022 constants.
  • 9. Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 428 editor@iaeme.com
  • 10. Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 429 editor@iaeme.com Tabel II DEA Results Envelopment Model (score,Benchmark) NO DMU Score Benchmark (Lambda) Proportion ate Movement (land) Slack Movemen t (land) Projecti on (land) Propo rtiona te Move ment (labor ) Slack Movement (labor) Projection (labor) Proportio nate Movemen t (producti vity) Slack Movement (productivity) Projection (productivity) 1 SIDOARJO_2011 0,201571 MALANG_2015( 0,404989); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,595011) 0 0 22692 0 -421678,632 977849,368 3160,117 99 0 3957,91799 2 SIDOARJO_2010 0,204003 MALANG_2015( 0,405323); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,594677) 0 0 22701 0 -394192,224 978277,776 3151,911 39 0 3959,70139 3 SIDOARJO_2012 0,210651 MALANG_2015( 0,360667); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,639333) 0 0 21498 0 -505991,167 921013,833 2937,421 26 0 3721,32126 4 SIDOARJO_2013 0,213571 MALANG_2015( 0,345521); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,654479) 0 0 21090 0 -551714,355 901592,645 2862,974 13 0 3640,47413 5 SIDOARJO_2017 0,220411 MALANG_2015( 0,321589); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,678411) 0 0 20445,28 571 0 -582846,082 870903,633 2738,479 53 0 3512,72095 6 SIDOARJO_2014 0,22089 MALANG_2015( 0,311816); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,688184) 0 0 20182 0 -623065,018 858370,982 2696,149 65 0 3460,54965 7 SIDOARJO_2016 0,250839 MALANG_2015( 0,209919); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,790081) 0 0 17437 0 -806747,626 727706,374 2185,014 94 0 2916,61494 8 SIDOARJO_2015 0,258042 MALANG_2015( 0,212888); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,787112) 0 0 17517 0 -776533,55 731514,45 2175,767 32 0 2932,46732 9 GRESIK_2016 0,28825 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,060424); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,772879); MALANG_2015( 0,166697) 0 0 36541 0 0 890124 4221,532 73 0 5931,20273 10 GRESIK_2015 0,317403 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,063682); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,782051); MALANG_2015( 0,154267) 0 0 36558 0 0 878367 4040,665 81 0 5919,54581 11 GRESIK_2014 0,320888 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,082423); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,781876); MALANG_2015( 0,135701) 0 0 36875 0 0 866295 4033,351 5 0 5939,1515 12 GRESIK_2017 0,328159 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,084416); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,786941); MALANG_2015( 0,128644) 0 0 36887,66 667 0 0 859676,167 3985,973 71 0 5932,91538 13 GRESIK_2013 0,332775 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,087471); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,790376); MALANG_2015( 0,122154) 0 0 36925 0 0 854073 3956,941 19 0 5930,44119 14 GRESIK_2012 0,351362 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,101782); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,793882); MALANG_2015( 0,104336) 0 0 37152 0 0 841034 3852,553 84 0 5939,45384 15 GRESIK_2011 0,358203 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,110713); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,800580); MALANG_2015( 0,088707) 0 0 37275 0 0 828164 3810,797 19 0 5937,69719 16 BANGKALAN_201 6 0,359842 BLITAR_2010(0, 058751); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,665604); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,275645) 0 0 28089 0 0 629891 2851,272 24 0 4454,01224 17 GRESIK_2010 0,373751 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,118774); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,807835); MALANG_2015( 0,073391) 0 0 37381 0 0 815278 3716,240 27 0 5934,13027 18 BANGKALAN_201 5 0,39906 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,729429); PACITAN_2010( 0,053856); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,216715) 0 0 28480 0 0 622926 2693,133 63 0 4481,53363 19 BANGKALAN_201 4 0,424207 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,728268); PACITAN_2010( 0,122598); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,149134) 0 0 28540 0 0 615818 2567,540 38 0 4459,14038 20 BANGKALAN_201 7 0,427032 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,736566); PACITAN_2010( 0 0 28855,71 429 0 0 607746 2557,374 61 0 4463,38175
  • 11. Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 430 editor@iaeme.com NO DMU Score Benchmark (Lambda) Proportion ate Movement (land) Slack Movemen t (land) Projecti on (land) Propo rtiona te Move ment (labor ) Slack Movement (labor) Projection (labor) Proportio nate Movemen t (producti vity) Slack Movement (productivity) Projection (productivity) 0,223165); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,040268) 21 BANGKALAN_201 3 0,432337 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,741975); PACITAN_2010( 0,227909); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,030116) 0 0 28985 0 0 608533 2544,351 96 0 4482,15196 22 SITUBONDO_2016 0,437081 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,244848); MAGETAN_2010 (0,755152) 0 - 4183,7998 2 25963,20 018 0 0 481853 1947,455 2 0 3459,5652 23 BANGKALAN_201 2 0,443012 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,714864); MAGETAN_2010 (0,069316); PACITAN_2010( 0,215819) 0 0 29141 0 0 600337 2481,111 38 0 4454,51138 24 BANGKALAN_201 1 0,46083 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,671773); MAGETAN_2010 (0,184059); PACITAN_2010( 0,144168) 0 0 29375 0 0 592322 2387,961 1 0 4428,9611 25 PONOROGO_2016 0,465615 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,648731); MAGETAN_2010 (0,351269) 0 - 3917,6761 8 30572,32 383 0 0 593848 2431,090 83 0 4549,32083 26 LAMONGAN_2016 0,466212 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,379738); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,620262) 0 - 36097,831 9 45043,16 806 0 0 827036 3549,456 17 0 6649,56617 27 PONOROGO_2015 0,474164 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,642734); MAGETAN_2010 (0,357266) 0 - 4085,1164 9 30503,88 351 0 0 592185 2383,689 19 0 4533,13919 28 LAMONGAN_2015 0,477055 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,375104); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,624896) 0 - 36806,504 9 44915,49 514 0 0 825379 3470,002 41 0 6635,50241 29 BANGKALAN_201 0 0,480786 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,634853); MAGETAN_2010 (0,263071); PACITAN_2010( 0,102077) 0 0 29380 0 0 584395 2275,523 16 0 4382,63316 30 SITUBONDO_2015 0,480934 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,232886); MAGETAN_2010 (0,767114) 0 - 4431,3100 5 25826,68 996 0 0 478536 1778,989 48 0 3427,28948 31 LAMONGAN_2013 0,517185 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,361862); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,638138) 0 - 37686,339 7 44550,66 032 0 0 820644 3184,314 17 0 6595,31417 32 LAMONGAN_2017 0,527432 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,358394); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,641606) 0 - 37752,311 1 44455,11 752 0 0 819404 3111,762 54 0 6584,78969 33 LAMONGAN_2012 0,529607 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,351582); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,648418) 0 - 38628,577 9 44267,42 214 0 0 816968 3087,714 17 0 6564,11417 34 TUBAN_2016 0,529828 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,346822); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,653178) 0 - 10121,718 1 44136,28 194 0 0 815266 3079,468 47 0 6549,66847 35 JOMBANG_2016 0,539477 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,342112); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,633209); MALANG_2015( 0,024679) 0 0 41873 0 0 852516 2970,477 88 0 6450,22788 36 JOMBANG_2014 0,542393 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,003111); BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,374823); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,622066) 0 0 42544 0 0 840668 2977,439 02 0 6506,53902 37 TUBAN_2015 0,542684 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,332673); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,667327) 0 - 10895,517 3 43746,48 271 0 0 810207 2975,630 29 0 6506,73029 38 JOMBANG_2015 0,543054 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,348624); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,634634); MALANG_2015( 0,016742) 0 0 41977 0 0 846762 2949,408 47 0 6454,60847 39 BOJONEGORO_201 6 0,543522 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,487110); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,512890) 0 - 29377,626 4 48001,37 357 0 0 865429 3184,126 18 0 6975,42618 40 JOMBANG_2013 0,545882 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,045427); BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,325106); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,629466) 0 0 42665 0 0 836128 2952,823 69 0 6502,32369 41 LAMONGAN_2011 0,546479 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,341058); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,658942) 0 - 38808,519 4 43977,48 056 0 0 813205 2962,475 77 0 6532,17577
  • 12. Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 431 editor@iaeme.com NO DMU Score Benchmark (Lambda) Proportion ate Movement (land) Slack Movemen t (land) Projecti on (land) Propo rtiona te Move ment (labor ) Slack Movement (labor) Projection (labor) Proportio nate Movemen t (producti vity) Slack Movement (productivity) Projection (productivity) 42 SITUBONDO_2014 0,552446 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,220145); MAGETAN_2010 (0,779855) 0 - 5687,7097 25681,29 031 0 0 475003 1518,511 99 0 3392,91199 43 JOMBANG_2017 0,553479 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,056735); BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,307835); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,635430) 0 0 42613,57 143 0 0 833337,857 2898,175 43 0 6490,564 44 BOJONEGORO_201 5 0,553782 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,476301); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,523699) 0 - 29677,427 2 47703,57 281 0 0 861564 3097,922 05 0 6942,62205 45 PONOROGO_2017 0,554678 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,622860); MAGETAN_2010 (0,377140) 0 - 4408,7832 1 30277,07 394 0 0 586673,857 1994,825 02 0 4479,51359 46 LAMONGAN_2010 0,555375 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,330313); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,669687) 0 - 39144,548 43681,45 197 0 0 809363 2889,866 85 0 6499,56685 47 TUBAN_2014 0,557353 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,317216); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,682784) 0 - 11474,376 2 43320,62 379 0 0 804680 2859,419 96 0 6459,81996 48 JOMBANG_2012 0,562619 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,106916); BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,245544); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,647540) 0 0 42687 0 0 826635 2832,771 18 0 6476,67118 49 MOJOKERTO_2014 0,563083 BLITAR_2010(0, 943567); MALANG_2015( 0,019608); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,036824) 0 0 30489 0 0 748054 2195,435 35 0 5024,83535 50 MOJOKERTO_2013 0,563089 BLITAR_2010(0, 968468); MALANG_2015( 0,005883); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,025648) 0 0 30599 0 0 737431 2199,415 2 0 5034,0152 51 BOJONEGORO_201 4 0,564857 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,463881); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,536119) 0 - 30130,609 1 47361,39 089 0 0 857123 3004,629 13 0 6904,92913 52 MOJOKERTO_2012 0,565384 BLITAR_2010(0, 920390); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,058019); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,021591) 0 0 30837 0 0 729918 2198,354 76 0 5058,15476 53 JOMBANG_2011 0,56647 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,204247); BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,138504); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,657249) 0 0 43119 0 0 819086 2812,085 6 0 6486,4856 54 PONOROGO_2014 0,567273 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,635352); MAGETAN_2010 (0,364648) 0 - 4258,3602 1 30419,63 979 0 0 590138 1952,991 07 0 4513,22107 55 MOJOKERTO_2011 0,570558 BLITAR_2010(0, 746053); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,227490); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,026457) 0 0 31342 0 0 720510 2193,655 44 0 5108,15544 56 MOJOKERTO_2016 0,57098 BLITAR_2010(0, 836381); MALANG_2015( 0,055877); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,107741) 0 0 29401 0 0 764529 2086,563 06 0 4863,55306 57 NGAWI_2016 0,571747 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,571229); MAGETAN_2010 (0,428771) 0 - 17417,132 4 29687,86 759 0 0 572357 1858,704 91 0 4340,20491 58 MOJOKERTO_2017 0,571964 BLITAR_2010(0, 961115); MALANG_2015( 0,008168); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,030718) 0 0 30518,85 714 0 0 738299,714 2149,537 83 0 5021,86068 59 TUBAN_2017 0,574383 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,297928); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,702072) 0 - 11962,651 7 42789,20 547 0 0 797783 2724,497 49 0 6401,28177 60 MOJOKERTO_2015 0,575066 BLITAR_2010(0, 857307); MALANG_2015( 0,044995); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,097698) 0 0 29511 0 0 756438 2071,447 32 0 4874,74732 61 PONOROGO_2013 0,576134 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,625824); MAGETAN_2010 (0,374176) 0 -4378,091 30310,90 9 0 0 587496 1902,103 36 0 4487,51336 62 TUBAN_2013 0,576678 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,301141); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,698859) 0 - 11978,263 3 42877,73 666 0 0 798932 2713,933 89 0 6411,03389
  • 13. Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 432 editor@iaeme.com NO DMU Score Benchmark (Lambda) Proportion ate Movement (land) Slack Movemen t (land) Projecti on (land) Propo rtiona te Move ment (labor ) Slack Movement (labor) Projection (labor) Proportio nate Movemen t (producti vity) Slack Movement (productivity) Projection (productivity) 63 BOJONEGORO_201 3 0,577841 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,449311); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,550689) 0 - 30541,043 46959,95 702 0 0 851913 2896,309 34 0 6860,70934 64 SITUBONDO_2017 0,578803 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,203570); MAGETAN_2010 (0,796430) 0 - 5934,5711 1 25492,14 318 0 0 470407 1410,248 23 0 3348,19109 65 JOMBANG_2010 0,58032 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,287234); BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,044510); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,668256) 0 0 43430 0 0 811570 2722,704 94 0 6487,57494 66 PONOROGO_2012 0,581497 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,614840); MAGETAN_2010 (0,385160) 0 - 4590,4483 30185,55 17 0 0 584450 1865,634 58 0 4457,87458 67 BOJONEGORO_201 7 0,585981 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,373402); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,626598) 0 - 29174,122 3 44868,60 982 0 0 824770,5 2745,089 02 0 6630,33777 68 BOJONEGORO_201 2 0,586682 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,433946); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,566054) 0 - 30985,359 2 46536,64 076 0 0 846419 2816,379 09 0 6814,07909 69 SITUBONDO_2013 0,588155 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,202463); MAGETAN_2010 (0,797537) 0 - 5891,4913 2 25479,50 868 0 0 470100 1377,703 86 0 3345,20386 70 PONOROGO_2011 0,59212 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,602456); MAGETAN_2010 (0,397544) 0 - 4734,7736 3 30044,22 637 0 0 581016 1804,650 4 0 4424,4604 71 BOJONEGORO_201 1 0,592984 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,416976); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,583024) 0 - 31566,902 6 46069,09 743 0 0 840351 2752,477 03 0 6762,57703 72 TUBAN_2012 0,593139 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,281735); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,718265) 0 - 12554,917 8 42343,08 222 0 0 791993 2584,439 24 0 6352,13924 73 NGAWI_2015 0,596576 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,566408); MAGETAN_2010 (0,433592) 0 - 17573,156 3 29632,84 372 0 0 571020 1745,695 37 0 4327,19537 74 BONDOWOSO_201 6 0,597211 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,425009); MAGETAN_2010 (0,574991) 0 - 5523,7919 7 28019,20 803 0 0 531811 1589,276 29 0 3945,67629 75 LAMONGAN_2014 0,60127 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,369103); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,630897) 0 - 37093,855 6 44750,14 445 0 0 823233 2638,508 27 0 6617,28827 76 MOJOKERTO_2010 0,605036 BLITAR_2010(0, 621251); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,337820); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,040928) 0 0 31453 0 0 711218 2015,612 64 0 5103,28264 77 TUBAN_2011 0,605183 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,262567); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,737433) 0 - 13087,022 9 41814,97 708 0 0 785139 2484,966 01 0 6293,96601 78 BOJONEGORO_201 0 0,610654 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,400084); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,599916) 0 - 33079,288 5 45603,71 152 0 0 834311 2613,022 63 0 6711,31263 79 SUMENEP_2016 0,618947 BLITAR_2010(0, 362937); MALANG_2015( 0,163802); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,473261) 0 0 23187 0 0 770264 1475,478 3 0 3872,1083 80 TUBAN_2010 0,619344 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,243340); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,756660) 0 - 13626,746 1 41285,25 388 0 0 778264 2373,624 56 0 6235,61456 81 NGAWI_2014 0,619652 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,560154); MAGETAN_2010 (0,439846) 0 - 18045,518 6 29561,48 142 0 0 569286 1639,422 86 0 4310,32286 82 TULUNGAGUNG_2 016 0,62034 BLITAR_2010(0, 667319); MALANG_2015( 0,037545); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,295136) 0 0 25650 0 0 693650 1596,826 37 0 4205,93637 83 PONOROGO_2010 0,630246 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,590079); MAGETAN_2010 (0,409921) 0 - 4897,0166 5 29902,98 335 0 0 577584 1623,615 68 0 4391,06568 84 PASURUAN_2016 0,634418 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,154783); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,486502); MALANG_2015( 0,358715) 0 0 39319 0 0 1128999 2375,291 46 0 6497,28146 85 BONDOWOSO_201 5 0,634726 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,412326); MAGETAN_2010 (0,587674) 0 - 5779,5331 4 27874,46 686 0 0 528294 1428,754 49 0 3911,45449
  • 14. Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 433 editor@iaeme.com NO DMU Score Benchmark (Lambda) Proportion ate Movement (land) Slack Movemen t (land) Projecti on (land) Propo rtiona te Move ment (labor ) Slack Movement (labor) Projection (labor) Proportio nate Movemen t (producti vity) Slack Movement (productivity) Projection (productivity) 86 SITUBONDO_2012 0,637501 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,190620); MAGETAN_2010 (0,809380) 0 - 6886,6434 5 25344,35 656 0 0 466816 1201,049 24 0 3313,24924 87 PASURUAN_2015 0,639333 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,162203); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,491871); MALANG_2015( 0,345925) 0 0 39422 0 0 1118511 2342,941 4 0 6496,1414 88 KEDIRI_2016 0,642276 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,204498); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,525387); MALANG_2015( 0,270116) 0 0 39997 0 0 1055676 2319,794 78 0 6484,87478 89 PASURUAN_2014 0,642409 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,170228); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,497286); MALANG_2015( 0,332486) 0 0 39535 0 0 1107580 2322,748 68 0 6495,54868 90 NGAWI_2013 0,643671 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,546952); MAGETAN_2010 (0,453048) 0 - 18290,186 29410,81 397 0 0 565625 1523,199 88 0 4274,69988 91 BONDOWOSO_201 4 0,651993 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,398262); MAGETAN_2010 (0,601738) 0 - 6051,0365 8 27713,96 342 0 0 524394 1348,005 95 0 3873,50595 92 SITUBONDO_2011 0,653067 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,174973); MAGETAN_2010 (0,825027) 0 - 7135,2138 1 25165,78 62 0 0 462477 1134,829 06 0 3271,02906 93 NGAWI_2012 0,656869 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,535938); MAGETAN_2010 (0,464062) 0 - 18516,872 6 29285,12 743 0 0 562571 1456,583 26 0 4244,98326 94 PASURUAN_2017 0,658154 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,180929); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,502604); MALANG_2015( 0,316467) 0 0 39693,57 143 0 0 1095000,29 2221,269 39 0 6497,87367 95 KEDIRI_2015 0,659015 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,210976); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,527881); MALANG_2015( 0,261144) 0 0 40096 0 0 1048822 2212,130 03 0 6487,47003 96 PASURUAN_2013 0,659916 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,172909); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,506767); MALANG_2015( 0,320324) 0 0 39541 0 0 1095876 2204,692 88 0 6482,79288 97 PASURUAN_2012 0,671789 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,180761); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,513412); MALANG_2015( 0,305826) 0 0 39646 0 0 1083766 2126,808 22 0 6480,00822 98 BONDOWOSO_201 3 0,672101 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,383292); MAGETAN_2010 (0,616708) 0 - 6332,8698 5 27543,13 015 0 0 520243 1256,875 08 0 3833,11508 99 PASURUAN_2011 0,672327 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,211193); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,506303); MALANG_2015( 0,282503) 0 0 40189 0 0 1071327 2137,416 72 0 6523,01672 100 KEDIRI_2014 0,673757 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,212640); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,533941); MALANG_2015( 0,253418) 0 0 40099 0 0 1041372 2113,814 16 0 6479,26416 101 KEDIRI_2017 0,673794 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,246768); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,521609); MALANG_2015( 0,231623) 0 0 40726 0 0 1031998,86 2131,634 13 0 6534,63413 102 BONDOWOSO_201 7 0,675048 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,380925); MAGETAN_2010 (0,619075) 0 - 6344,3076 8 27516,12 089 0 0 519586,714 1243,502 02 0 3826,72916 103 KEDIRI_2013 0,680232 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,271835); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,504947); MALANG_2015( 0,223218) 0 0 41218 0 0 1033095 2106,549 64 0 6587,74964 104 NGANJUK_2013 0,681707 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,026238); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,973762) 0 - 6074,1108 3 35303,88 917 0 0 700635 1775,039 58 0 5576,73958 105 NGANJUK_2016 0,682974 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,060111); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,939889) 0 - 3807,8733 8 36237,12 662 0 0 712747 1800,56 0 5679,54
  • 15. Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 434 editor@iaeme.com NO DMU Score Benchmark (Lambda) Proportion ate Movement (land) Slack Movemen t (land) Projecti on (land) Propo rtiona te Move ment (labor ) Slack Movement (labor) Projection (labor) Proportio nate Movemen t (producti vity) Slack Movement (productivity) Projection (productivity) 106 KEDIRI_2012 0,683286 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,273716); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,512134); MALANG_2015( 0,214149) 0 0 41220 0 0 1024321 2083,323 84 0 6577,92384 107 NGAWI_2011 0,684893 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,525246); MAGETAN_2010 (0,474754) 0 - 19053,896 3 29163,10 367 0 0 559606 1328,532 63 0 4216,13263 108 TULUNGAGUNG_2 015 0,685051 BLITAR_2010(0, 676306); MALANG_2015( 0,032195); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,291499) 0 0 25679 0 0 689307 1325,029 42 0 4207,12942 109 TULUNGAGUNG_2 014 0,685319 BLITAR_2010(0, 690457); MALANG_2015( 0,025378); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,284165) 0 0 25768 0 0 684531 1327,195 05 0 4217,59505 110 SAMPANG_2016 0,685972 BLITAR_2010(0, 333264); MALANG_2015( 0,059851); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,606885) 0 0 19815 0 0 628652 1010,845 75 0 3218,96575 111 PASURUAN_2010 0,686807 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,214424); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,516090); MALANG_2015( 0,269487) 0 0 40203 0 0 1058943 2038,986 34 0 6510,32634 112 KEDIRI_2011 0,687485 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,275763); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,519753); MALANG_2015( 0,204484) 0 0 41223 0 0 1014986 2052,461 72 0 6567,56172 113 KEDIRI_2010 0,689922 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,277950); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,527219); MALANG_2015( 0,194831) 0 0 41229 0 0 1005720 2033,364 76 0 6557,59476 114 TULUNGAGUNG_2 013 0,691581 BLITAR_2010(0, 700777); MALANG_2015( 0,018406); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,280817) 0 0 25779 0 0 678482 1299,845 73 0 4214,54573 115 NGANJUK_2012 0,692323 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,011816); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,988184) 0 - 6574,4610 2 34906,53 899 0 0 695478 1702,369 62 0 5532,96962 116 SAMPANG_2015 0,693454 BLITAR_2010(0, 359627); MALANG_2015( 0,047308); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,593065) 0 0 19985 0 0 619954 992,9941 62 0 3239,29416 117 NGAWI_2017 0,693839 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,818969); MAGETAN_2010 (0,181031) 0 - 16232,783 3 32515,07 386 0 0 641054 1533,453 88 0 5008,65388 118 NGANJUK_2015 0,696319 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,050094); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,949906) 0 - 4194,8688 35961,13 12 0 0 709165 1715,537 83 0 5649,13783 119 NGANJUK_2017 0,697922 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,023711); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,976289) 0 - 5878,4568 8 35234,25 74 0 0 699731,286 1682,290 75 0 5569,06932 120 BONDOWOSO_201 2 0,700774 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,366476); MAGETAN_2010 (0,633524) 0 - 6678,7743 4 27351,22 566 0 0 515580 1133,392 24 0 3787,74224 121 NGANJUK_2011 0,706653 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,996040); MAGETAN_2010 (0,003960) 0 - 7323,1878 9 34535,81 211 0 0 690155 1609,426 03 0 5486,42603 122 NGAWI_2010 0,709762 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,514452); MAGETAN_2010 (0,485548) 0 - 19251,072 4 29039,92 757 0 0 556613 1215,229 56 0 4187,00956 123 NGANJUK_2014 0,711369 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,038829); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,961171) 0 - 4616,2288 1 35650,77 119 0 0 705137 1620,650 24 0 5614,95024 124 TULUNGAGUNG_2 017 0,715204 BLITAR_2010(0, 610926); MALANG_2015( 0,017357); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,371717) 0 0 24019,67 857 0 0 651960,75 1113,965 96 0 3911,45417 125 NGANJUK_2010 0,716052 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,976736); MAGETAN_2010 (0,023264) 0 - 8287,4891 4 34315,51 086 0 0 684802 1543,069 22 0 5434,33922 126 SITUBONDO_2010 0,717109 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,159058); MAGETAN_2010 (0,840942) 0 - 7325,8296 2 24984,17 039 0 0 458064 913,1988 21 0 3228,08882
  • 16. Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 435 editor@iaeme.com NO DMU Score Benchmark (Lambda) Proportion ate Movement (land) Slack Movemen t (land) Projecti on (land) Propo rtiona te Move ment (labor ) Slack Movement (labor) Projection (labor) Proportio nate Movemen t (producti vity) Slack Movement (productivity) Projection (productivity) 127 SAMPANG_2014 0,718519 BLITAR_2010(0, 381098); MALANG_2015( 0,035739); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,583163) 0 0 20087 0 0 611135 914,4269 66 0 3248,62697 128 BONDOWOSO_201 1 0,718633 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,349253); MAGETAN_2010 (0,650747) 0 - 6898,3293 2 27154,67 068 0 0 510804 1052,669 88 0 3741,26988 129 TULUNGAGUNG_2 012 0,729167 BLITAR_2010(0, 708890); MALANG_2015( 0,012678); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,278432) 0 0 25781 0 0 673410 1140,431 12 0 4210,83112 130 SAMPANG_2017 0,731096 BLITAR_2010(0, 402867); MALANG_2015( 0,023458); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,573675) 0 0 20175,57 143 0 0 601486,429 875,3231 03 0 3255,14739 131 SAMPANG_2013 0,732701 BLITAR_2010(0, 398975); MALANG_2015( 0,023993); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,577032) 0 0 20115 0 0 601082 867,4169 78 0 3245,11698 132 SAMPANG_2012 0,737474 BLITAR_2010(0, 421379); MALANG_2015( 0,012462); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,566159) 0 0 20236 0 0 592573 855,2418 14 0 3257,74181 133 MADIUN_2016 0,73754 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,176422); MAGETAN_2010 (0,823578) 0 - 5293,6696 1 25182,33 04 0 0 462879 859,5406 75 0 3274,94068 134 TULUNGAGUNG_2 011 0,748748 BLITAR_2010(0, 724865); MALANG_2015( 0,004482); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,270652) 0 0 25868 0 0 667377 1060,276 14 0 4219,97614 135 TULUNGAGUNG_2 010 0,754612 BLITAR_2010(0, 704549); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,022684); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,272768) 0 0 25873 0 0 661216 1033,756 13 0 4212,73613 136 BONDOWOSO_201 0 0,757591 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,331860); MAGETAN_2010 (0,668140) 0 - 7145,8185 7 26956,18 144 0 0 505981 895,5401 78 0 3694,34018 137 MADIUN_2015 0,758799 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,169329); MAGETAN_2010 (0,830671) 0 - 5485,6209 5 25101,37 905 0 0 460912 785,3009 87 0 3255,80099 138 SAMPANG_2011 0,760489 BLITAR_2010(0, 428745); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,019422); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,551833) 0 0 20485 0 0 583177 787,3890 59 0 3287,48906 139 MADIUN_2017 0,771211 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,259168); MAGETAN_2010 (0,740832) 0 - 5966,3423 6 26126,62 193 0 0 485823,911 800,3514 08 0 3498,20373 140 PAMEKASAN_2016 0,772928 MALANG_2015( 0,044434); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,955566) 0 0 12979 0 -76031,6625 515501,338 461,6912 0 2033,2412 141 MADIUN_2014 0,772997 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,161070); MAGETAN_2010 (0,838930) 0 - 5690,8652 8 25007,13 472 0 0 458622 734,0183 81 0 3233,51838 142 PROBOLINGGO_20 16 0,783125 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,001238); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,899489); MALANG_2015( 0,099273) 0 0 35018 0 0 795939 1228,144 91 0 5662,92491 143 MADIUN_2013 0,789254 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,151788); MAGETAN_2010 (0,848212) 0 - 5839,7975 4 24901,20 246 0 0 456048 676,1723 44 0 3208,47234 144 SAMPANG_2010 0,792026 BLITAR_2010(0, 314308); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,117047); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,568646) 0 0 20506 0 0 573832 680,0571 41 0 3269,90714 145 PAMEKASAN_2013 0,794465 MALANG_2015( 0,072980); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,927020) 0 0 13748 0 -17196,5317 552106,468 449,2221 79 0 2185,62218 146 PAMEKASAN_2015 0,795773 MALANG_2015( 0,055310); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,944690) 0 0 13272 0 -54853,5841 529448,416 427,1005 33 0 2091,30053 147 PAMEKASAN_2014 0,800701 MALANG_2015( 0,062140); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,937860) 0 0 13456 0 -38623,0092 538206,991 424,0610 01 0 2127,761
  • 17. Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 436 editor@iaeme.com NO DMU Score Benchmark (Lambda) Proportion ate Movement (land) Slack Movemen t (land) Projecti on (land) Propo rtiona te Move ment (labor ) Slack Movement (labor) Projection (labor) Proportio nate Movemen t (producti vity) Slack Movement (productivity) Projection (productivity) 148 PAMEKASAN_2017 0,800779 MALANG_2015( 0,070026); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,929974) 0 0 13668,42 857 0 -20358,2073 548318,793 432,2804 4 0 2169,85473 149 PAMEKASAN_2011 0,80685 BLITAR_2010(0, 025747); MALANG_2015( 0,067930); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,906323) 0 0 14108 0 0 552845 433,4121 31 0 2243,91213 150 PAMEKASAN_2012 0,808409 BLITAR_2010(0, 004696); MALANG_2015( 0,078902); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,916403) 0 0 13998 0 0 561016 427,7815 18 0 2232,78152 151 PROBOLINGGO_20 15 0,814367 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,003210); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,904631); MALANG_2015( 0,092160) 0 0 35030 0 0 789253 1050,041 68 0 5656,54168 152 MADIUN_2012 0,814448 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,140031); MAGETAN_2010 (0,859969) 0 - 6162,9619 5 24767,03 805 0 0 452788 589,4512 54 0 3176,75125 153 MADIUN_2011 0,824092 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,128008); MAGETAN_2010 (0,871992) 0 - 6372,1718 1 24629,82 819 0 0 449454 553,1101 16 0 3144,31012 154 PROBOLINGGO_20 13 0,831918 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,063323); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,882037); MALANG_2015( 0,054640) 0 0 36138 0 0 773657 967,3954 12 0 5755,49541 155 MADIUN_2010 0,835363 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,116118); MAGETAN_2010 (0,883882) 0 - 6702,8589 5 24494,14 105 0 0 446157 512,3890 02 0 3112,229 156 PAMEKASAN_2010 0,835865 BLITAR_2010(0, 038954); MALANG_2015( 0,058856); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,902190) 0 0 14118 0 0 544910 367,5320 59 0 2239,20206 157 PROBOLINGGO_20 14 0,839379 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,005614); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,909842); MALANG_2015( 0,084544) 0 0 35049 0 0 782211 907,5890 89 0 5650,48909 158 SUMENEP_2015 0,840561 BLITAR_2010(0, 380694); MALANG_2015( 0,156411); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,462895) 0 0 23330 0 0 765762 620,4472 8 0 3891,44728 159 PROBOLINGGO_20 17 0,841011 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,043084); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,894499); MALANG_2015( 0,062417) 0 0 35744,85 714 0 0 773812 908,5016 03 0 5714,2316 160 SUMENEP_2017 0,84641 BLITAR_2010(0, 437585); MALANG_2015( 0,135223); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,427192) 0 0 23855,28 571 0 0 754533,429 609,2463 28 0 3966,70919 161 PROBOLINGGO_20 12 0,855425 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,067817); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,885864); MALANG_2015( 0,046320) 0 0 36198 0 0 766702 831,8641 43 0 5753,86414 162 PROBOLINGGO_20 11 0,871475 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,078614); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,886880); MALANG_2015( 0,034507) 0 0 36376 0 0 758575 740,7305 75 0 5763,33058 163 SUMENEP_2014 0,872803 BLITAR_2010(0, 425997); MALANG_2015( 0,142720); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,431283) 0 0 23834 0 0 760900 504,7625 25 0 3968,36253 164 MAGETAN_2016 0,886072 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,066370); MAGETAN_2010 (0,790633); PACITAN_2010( 0,142997) 0 0 22478 0 0 424511 318,6507 96 0 2796,9508 165 SUMENEP_2012 0,886323 BLITAR_2010(0, 464175); MALANG_2015( 0,125476); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,410349) 0 0 24105 0 0 749485 455,0180 74 0 4002,71807 166 SUMENEP_2013 0,887744 BLITAR_2010(0, 446109); MALANG_2015( 0,133645); TRENGGALEK_ 0 0 23977 0 0 754898 447,5081 35 0 3986,50814
  • 18. Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 437 editor@iaeme.com NO DMU Score Benchmark (Lambda) Proportion ate Movement (land) Slack Movemen t (land) Projecti on (land) Propo rtiona te Move ment (labor ) Slack Movement (labor) Projection (labor) Proportio nate Movemen t (producti vity) Slack Movement (productivity) Projection (productivity) 2010(0,420246) 167 PROBOLINGGO_20 10 0,889917 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,081772); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,892751); MALANG_2015( 0,025477) 0 0 36405 0 0 750347 633,7454 1 0 5756,97541 168 SUMENEP_2011 0,891988 BLITAR_2010(0, 484073); MALANG_2015( 0,116331); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,399596) 0 0 24242 0 0 743334 434,1834 35 0 4019,78344 169 BLITAR_2016 0,89375 BLITAR_2010(0, 945656); MALANG_2015( 0,036675); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,017669) 0 0 30989 0 0 770524 544,3042 1 0 5122,85421 170 MAGETAN_2015 0,898076 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,059335); MAGETAN_2010 (0,816553); PACITAN_2010( 0,124112) 0 0 22589 0 0 423597 285,5785 31 0 2801,87853 171 JEMBER_2016 0,904621 JEMBER_2010(0, 896065); MALANG_2015( 0,103935) 0 0 76862 0 -64153,2623 1595490,74 933,5673 21 0 9787,99732 172 JEMBER_2011 0,905622 JEMBER_2010(0, 999953); MALANG_2015( 0,000047) 0 0 81284 0 -14887,3781 1578638,62 952,8108 4 0 10095,6808 173 BLITAR_2015 0,909708 BLITAR_2010(0, 952383); MALANG_2015( 0,032050); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,015567) 0 0 30994 0 0 766478 462,3367 21 0 5120,43672 174 JEMBER_2014 0,916111 JEMBER_2010(0, 931986); MALANG_2015( 0,068014) 0 0 78391 0 -46542,2376 1589663,76 830,0254 03 0 9894,3854 175 JEMBER_2015 0,916441 JEMBER_2010(0, 898438); MALANG_2015( 0,101562) 0 0 76963 0 -53246,1704 1595105,83 818,4649 19 0 9795,02492 176 JEMBER_2012 0,917525 JEMBER_2010(0, 952567); MALANG_2015( 0,047433) 0 0 79267 0 -22070,6486 1586325,35 821,0676 34 0 9955,33763 177 JEMBER_2013 0,918008 JEMBER_2010(0, 933537); MALANG_2015( 0,066463) 0 0 78457 0 -33394,7618 1589412,24 811,6376 95 0 9898,9777 178 SUMENEP_2010 0,918698 BLITAR_2010(0, 499107); MALANG_2015( 0,108178); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,392715) 0 0 24312 0 0 737091 327,3265 47 0 4026,03655 179 JEMBER_2017 0,925671 JEMBER_2010(0, 944649); MALANG_2015( 0,055351) 0 0 78930 0 -33470,637 1587609,65 738,2248 3 0 9931,88912 180 BLITAR_2014 0,930122 BLITAR_2010(0, 962691); MALANG_2015( 0,026274); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,011035) 0 0 31037 0 0 761960 358,0345 27 0 5123,73453 181 MAGETAN_2014 0,933804 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,053211); MAGETAN_2010 (0,830563); PACITAN_2010( 0,116225) 0 0 22599 0 0 422332 185,0412 63 0 2795,34126 182 MAGETAN_2013 0,934046 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,040630); MAGETAN_2010 (0,877164); PACITAN_2010( 0,082206) 0 0 22800 0 0 420711 184,9656 39 0 2804,46564 183 LUMAJANG_2015 0,938608 BLITAR_2010(0, 184789); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,800028); MALANG_2015( 0,015183) 0 0 33991 0 0 715961 334,5793 92 0 5449,87939 184 LUMAJANG_2016 0,93861 BLITAR_2010(0, 220990); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,761919); MALANG_2015( 0,017091) 0 0 33871 0 0 719682 333,8906 62 0 5438,88066 185 MAGETAN_2017 0,939044 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,038028); MAGETAN_2010 (0,879975); PACITAN_2010( 0,081997) 0 0 22772,42 857 0 0 420001 170,5360 77 0 2797,71036
  • 19. Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 438 editor@iaeme.com NO DMU Score Benchmark (Lambda) Proportion ate Movement (land) Slack Movemen t (land) Projecti on (land) Propo rtiona te Move ment (labor ) Slack Movement (labor) Projection (labor) Proportio nate Movemen t (producti vity) Slack Movement (productivity) Projection (productivity) 186 MAGETAN_2012 0,942177 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,030113); MAGETAN_2010 (0,902295); PACITAN_2010( 0,067593) 0 0 22828 0 0 418597 161,5907 49 0 2794,59075 187 BLITAR_2013 0,948622 BLITAR_2010(0, 970099); MALANG_2015( 0,021050); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,008851) 0 0 31039 0 0 757337 263,0771 36 0 5120,37714 188 BLITAR_2017 0,948883 BLITAR_2010(0, 971651); MALANG_2015( 0,019532); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,008817) 0 0 31028 0 0 755824,857 261,5881 22 0 5117,41098 189 LUMAJANG_2014 0,954935 BLITAR_2010(0, 066167); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,917223); MALANG_2015( 0,016610) 0 0 34416 0 0 711828 247,7900 7 0 5498,49007 190 TRENGGALEK_201 4 0,956329 TRENGGALEK_ 2012(0,736842); TRENGGALEK_ 2016(0,263158) 0 0 11755 0 -3090,52631 468003,474 73,9 0 1692,2 191 LUMAJANG_2013 0,960151 BLITAR_2010(0, 042691); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,943099); MALANG_2015( 0,014210) 0 0 34489 0 0 708194 219,3179 61 0 5503,71796 192 TRENGGALEK_201 7 0,960736 TRENGGALEK_ 2012(0,969925); TRENGGALEK_ 2016(0,030075) 0 0 11759,42 857 0 -2104,91729 465608,083 68,43571 4 0 1742,95143 193 MALANG_2011 0,963545 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,079859); JEMBER_2010(0, 086815); MALANG_2015( 0,833326) 0 0 43764 0 0 1674540 272,4530 32 0 7473,58303 194 MALANG_2010 0,964877 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,109914); JEMBER_2010(0, 077037); MALANG_2015( 0,813049) 0 0 43855 0 0 1656472 262,5656 36 0 7475,60564 195 LUMAJANG_2017 0,965226 BLITAR_2010(0, 079461); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,909595); MALANG_2015( 0,010944) 0 0 34345,57 143 0 0 706511,571 190,6991 18 0 5484,02769 196 TRENGGALEK_201 3 0,965666 TRENGGALEK_ 2012(0,894737); TRENGGALEK_ 2016(0,105263) 0 0 11758 0 -1611,21053 466380,789 59,28 0 1726,58 197 TRENGGALEK_201 5 0,969977 TRENGGALEK_ 2012(0,421053); TRENGGALEK_ 2016(0,578947) 0 0 11749 0 -2285,1579 471248,842 48,74 0 1623,44 198 LUMAJANG_2012 0,972417 BLITAR_2010(0, 035563); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,955827); MALANG_2015( 0,008610) 0 0 34491 0 0 701978 151,6314 01 0 5497,3314 199 BLITAR_2012 0,976501 BLITAR_2010(0, 980461); MALANG_2015( 0,013788); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,005751) 0 0 31043 0 0 750928 120,2194 11 0 5115,91941 200 MAGETAN_2011 0,979252 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,016537); MAGETAN_2010 (0,942619); PACITAN_2010( 0,040845) 0 0 22944 0 0 416301 57,92556 4 0 2791,82556 201 BANYUWANGI_20 17 0,981441 BANYUWANGI_ 2013(0,812049); BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,041531); JEMBER_2010(0, 146420) 0 0 62786,85 714 0 0 1148621,76 160,8141 4 0 8665,17761 202 BLITAR_2011 0,983734 BLITAR_2010(0, 990268); MALANG_2015( 0,006886); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,002846) 0 0 31046 0 0 744825 83,14484 7 0 5111,54485 203 PACITAN_2013 0,985807 PACITAN_2010( 0,100016); PACITAN_2012( 0,869970); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,030015) 0 0 12763 0 0 366258 21,66182 8 0 1526,26183 204 MALANG_2017 0,986226 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,043289); JEMBER_2010(0, 029821); MALANG_2015( 0 0 40720,85 714 0 0 1707699,57 100,0966 88 0 7267,08383
  • 20. Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 439 editor@iaeme.com NO DMU Score Benchmark (Lambda) Proportion ate Movement (land) Slack Movemen t (land) Projecti on (land) Propo rtiona te Move ment (labor ) Slack Movement (labor) Projection (labor) Proportio nate Movemen t (producti vity) Slack Movement (productivity) Projection (productivity) 0,926890) 205 PACITAN_2017 0,988093 PACITAN_2010( 0,177972); PACITAN_2012( 0,794474); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,027554) 0 0 12786,85 714 0 0 365647,143 18,18023 5 0 1526,86881 206 PACITAN_2015 0,988964 PACITAN_2012( 0,182732); PACITAN_2014( 0,791235); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,026033) 0 0 12650 0 0 369710 16,65958 5 0 1509,55959 207 BANYUWANGI_20 16 0,989691 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,988620); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,001678); MALANG_2015( 0,009703) 0 0 55398 0 0 1092594 84,02197 1 0 8150,52197 208 BANYUWANGI_20 12 0,990979 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,759120); BANYUWANGI_ 2013(0,219724); JEMBER_2010(0, 021156) 0 0 62029 0 0 1065617 77,07234 8 0 8543,27235 209 PACITAN_2011 0,991028 LUMAJANG_201 0(0,001156); PACITAN_2010( 0,978255); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,020589) 0 0 13039 0 0 361486 13,84235 4 0 1542,82235 210 LUMAJANG_2011 0,991335 BLITAR_2010(0, 006028); LUMAJANG_201 0(0,989069); MALANG_2015( 0,004903) 0 0 34580 0 0 696685 47,68433 6 0 5502,78434 211 BANYUWANGI_20 14 0,99251 BANYUWANGI_ 2013(0,777558); BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,215040); JEMBER_2010(0, 007402) 0 0 59070 0 0 1080701 62,82195 2 0 8387,52195 212 MALANG_2014 0,992807 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,018938); JEMBER_2010(0, 016408); MALANG_2015( 0,964654) 0 0 39739 0 0 1725799 51,80732 0 7202,25732 213 MALANG_2012 0,992825 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,070648); JEMBER_2010(0, 014654); MALANG_2015( 0,914698) 0 0 40537 0 0 1692269 52,01845 1 0 7250,36845 214 MALANG_2016 0,996415 MALANG_2015( 0,995880); TRENGGALEK_ 2010(0,004120) 0 0 38610 0 -19284,7055 1735561,29 25,49482 6 0 7112,14483 215 BANYUWANGI_20 11 0,996994 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(0,893213); BANYUWANGI_ 2013(0,095374); JEMBER_2010(0, 011413) 0 0 62130 0 0 1057294 25,66856 2 0 8540,36856 216 MALANG_2013 0,997395 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(0,046693); JEMBER_2010(0, 007307); MALANG_2015( 0,946001) 0 0 39820 0 0 1709126 18,76407 2 0 7203,91407 217 BANYUWANGI_20 10 1 BANYUWANGI_ 2010(1,000000) 0 0 62132 0 0 1048823 0 0 8531,98 218 BANYUWANGI_20 13 1 BANYUWANGI_ 2013(1,000000) 0 0 59819 0 0 1074243 0 0 8432,8 219 BANYUWANGI_20 15 1 BANYUWANGI_ 2015(1,000000) 0 0 55597 0 0 1086913 0 0 8165 220 BLITAR_2010 1 BLITAR_2010(1, 000000) 0 0 31048 0 0 738722 0 0 5107,01 221 JEMBER_2010 1 JEMBER_2010(1, 000000) 0 0 81286 0 0 1578631 0 0 10095,82 222 LUMAJANG_2010 1 LUMAJANG_201 0(1,000000) 0 0 34581 0 0 691253 0 0 5497,11 223 MAGETAN_2010 1 MAGETAN_2010 (1,000000) 0 0 23169 0 0 413958 0 0 2798,92 224 MALANG_2015 1 MALANG_2015( 1,000000) 0 0 38721 0 0 1740845 0 0 7134,14 225 PACITAN_2010 1 PACITAN_2010( 1,000000) 0 0 13040 0 0 359054 0 0 1532,82 226 PACITAN_2012 1 PACITAN_2012( 1,000000) 0 0 12765 0 0 363903 0 0 1516,2 227 PACITAN_2014 1 PACITAN_2014( 1,000000) 0 0 12652 0 0 368129 0 0 1498,6 228 PACITAN_2016 1 PACITAN_2016( 1,000000) 0 0 12599 0 0 370990 0 0 1486,72 229 TRENGGALEK_201 0 1 TRENGGALEK_ 2010(1,000000) 0 0 11782 0 0 458523 0 0 1796,05
  • 21. Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 440 editor@iaeme.com NO DMU Score Benchmark (Lambda) Proportion ate Movement (land) Slack Movemen t (land) Projecti on (land) Propo rtiona te Move ment (labor ) Slack Movement (labor) Projection (labor) Proportio nate Movemen t (producti vity) Slack Movement (productivity) Projection (productivity) 230 TRENGGALEK_201 1 1 TRENGGALEK_ 2011(1,000000) 0 0 11771 0 0 461973 0 0 1784 231 TRENGGALEK_201 2 1 TRENGGALEK_ 2012(1,000000) 0 0 11760 0 0 465299 0 0 1749,5 232 TRENGGALEK_201 6 1 TRENGGALEK_ 2016(1,000000) 0 0 11741 0 0 475576 0 0 1531,76 Tabel III DEA Results Envelopment Model (weights, Dual Values) NO DMU Score Dual Price (land) Dual Price (labor) Dual Price (productivity) v* 1 SIDOARJO_2011 0,201571 -5,00654E-05 0 0,000252658 0,136084 2 SIDOARJO_2010 0,204003 -5,00428E-05 0 0,000252544 0,136023 3 SIDOARJO_2012 0,210651 -5,32485E-05 0 0,000268722 0,144736 4 SIDOARJO_2013 0,213571 -5,4431E-05 0 0,00027469 0,14795 5 SIDOARJO_2017 0,220411 -5,64106E-05 0 0,00028468 0,153331 6 SIDOARJO_2014 0,22089 -5,72611E-05 0 0,000288971 0,155643 7 SIDOARJO_2016 0,250839 -6,794E-05 0 0,000342863 0,184669 8 SIDOARJO_2015 0,258042 -6,75727E-05 0 0,00034101 0,183671 9 GRESIK_2016 0,28825 -1,77721E-05 -1,92862E-07 0,0001686 -0,178919 10 GRESIK_2015 0,317403 -1,78071E-05 -1,93242E-07 0,000168932 -0,179271 11 GRESIK_2014 0,320888 -1,77483E-05 -1,92604E-07 0,000168374 -0,17868 12 GRESIK_2017 0,328159 -1,7767E-05 -1,92807E-07 0,000168551 -0,178867 13 GRESIK_2013 0,332775 -1,77744E-05 -1,92887E-07 0,000168622 -0,178942 14 GRESIK_2012 0,351362 -1,77474E-05 -1,92594E-07 0,000168366 -0,178671 15 GRESIK_2011 0,358203 -1,77526E-05 -1,92651E-07 0,000168416 -0,178723 16 BANGKALAN_2016 0,359842 -3,14142E-05 -4,93005E-07 0,000224517 0,192933 17 GRESIK_2010 0,373751 -1,77633E-05 -1,92767E-07 0,000168517 -0,178831 18 BANGKALAN_2015 0,39906 -2,67427E-05 -9,2872E-07 0,000223138 0,340155 19 BANGKALAN_2014 0,424207 -2,6877E-05 -9,33384E-07 0,000224259 0,341863 20 BANGKALAN_2017 0,427032 -2,68514E-05 -9,32497E-07 0,000224045 0,341538 21 BANGKALAN_2013 0,432337 -2,6739E-05 -9,28592E-07 0,000223107 0,340108 22 SITUBONDO_2016 0,437081 0 -2,81261E-06 0,000289054 0,355263 23 BANGKALAN_2012 0,443012 -2,08778E-05 -1,32517E-06 0,000224492 0,403949 24 BANGKALAN_2011 0,46083 -2,09983E-05 -1,33281E-06 0,000225787 0,40628 25 PONOROGO_2016 0,465615 0 -2,13887E-06 0,000219813 0,270162 26 LAMONGAN_2016 0,466212 0 -1,2764E-06 0,000150386 0,055626 27 PONOROGO_2015 0,474164 0 -2,1465E-06 0,000220598 0,271127 28 LAMONGAN_2015 0,477055 0 -1,2791E-06 0,000150705 0,055744 29 BANGKALAN_2010 0,480786 -2,12203E-05 -1,3469E-06 0,000228173 0,410574 30 SITUBONDO_2015 0,480934 0 -2,83909E-06 0,000291776 0,358608 31 LAMONGAN_2013 0,517185 0 -1,2869E-06 0,000151623 0,056084 32 LAMONGAN_2017 0,527432 0 -1,28895E-06 0,000151865 0,056173 33 LAMONGAN_2012 0,529607 0 -1,29301E-06 0,000152344 0,05635 34 TUBAN_2016 0,529828 0 -1,29587E-06 0,00015268 0,056475 35 JOMBANG_2016 0,539477 -1,6342E-05 -1,77343E-07 0,000155033 -0,164522 36 JOMBANG_2014 0,542393 -1,12027E-05 -4,41276E-07 0,000153692 -0,152424 37 TUBAN_2015 0,542684 0 -1,30442E-06 0,000153687 0,056847 38 JOMBANG_2015 0,543054 -1,63309E-05 -1,77223E-07 0,000154928 -0,164411 39 BOJONEGORO_2016 0,543522 0 -1,21677E-06 0,00014336 0,053028 40 JOMBANG_2013 0,545882 -1,121E-05 -4,41562E-07 0,000153791 -0,152523 41 LAMONGAN_2011 0,546479 0 -1,29934E-06 0,000153088 0,056626 42 SITUBONDO_2014 0,552446 0 -2,86786E-06 0,000294732 0,362242 43 JOMBANG_2017 0,553479 -1,12303E-05 -4,42362E-07 0,00015407 -0,152799 44 BOJONEGORO_2015 0,553782 0 -1,22252E-06 0,000144038 0,053278 45 PONOROGO_2017 0,554678 0 -2,1722E-06 0,000223239 0,274372 46 LAMONGAN_2010 0,555375 0 -1,30585E-06 0,000153856 0,05691 47 TUBAN_2014 0,557353 0 -1,31389E-06 0,000154803 0,05726 48 JOMBANG_2012 0,562619 -1,12544E-05 -4,43311E-07 0,0001544 -0,153127 49 MOJOKERTO_2014 0,563083 -3,18984E-05 -1,58329E-07 0,000199012 0,09099 50 MOJOKERTO_2013 0,563089 -3,18403E-05 -1,58041E-07 0,000198649 0,090825 51 BOJONEGORO_2014 0,564857 0 -1,22919E-06 0,000144824 0,053569 52 MOJOKERTO_2012 0,565384 -2,76621E-05 -4,34121E-07 0,000197701 0,169889 53 JOMBANG_2011 0,56647 -1,12374E-05 -4,4264E-07 0,000154167 -0,152895 54 PONOROGO_2014 0,567273 0 -2,15598E-06 0,000221571 0,272323 55 MOJOKERTO_2011 0,570558 -2,73914E-05 -4,29872E-07 0,000195765 0,168226 56 MOJOKERTO_2016 0,57098 -3,29562E-05 -1,6358E-07 0,000205611 0,094008 57 NGAWI_2016 0,571747 0 -2,24192E-06 0,000230404 0,283179 58 MOJOKERTO_2017 0,571964 -3,19173E-05 -1,58423E-07 0,000199129 0,091044 59 TUBAN_2017 0,574383 0 -1,3259E-06 0,000156219 0,057784
  • 22. Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 441 editor@iaeme.com NO DMU Score Dual Price (land) Dual Price (labor) Dual Price (productivity) v* 60 MOJOKERTO_2015 0,575066 -3,28806E-05 -1,63204E-07 0,000205139 0,093792 61 PONOROGO_2013 0,576134 0 -2,16833E-06 0,000222841 0,273883 62 TUBAN_2013 0,576678 0 -1,32389E-06 0,000155981 0,057696 63 BOJONEGORO_2013 0,577841 0 -1,23712E-06 0,000145758 0,053914 64 SITUBONDO_2017 0,578803 0 -2,90617E-06 0,000298669 0,36708 65 JOMBANG_2010 0,58032 -1,12355E-05 -4,42566E-07 0,000154141 -0,152869 66 PONOROGO_2012 0,581497 0 -2,18274E-06 0,000224322 0,275704 67 BOJONEGORO_2017 0,585981 0 -1,2801E-06 0,000150822 0,055787 68 BOJONEGORO_2012 0,586682 0 -1,24558E-06 0,000146755 0,054283 69 SITUBONDO_2013 0,588155 0 -2,90876E-06 0,000298935 0,367408 70 PONOROGO_2011 0,59212 0 -2,19923E-06 0,000226016 0,277786 71 BOJONEGORO_2011 0,592984 0 -1,25507E-06 0,000147873 0,054697 72 TUBAN_2012 0,593139 0 -1,33616E-06 0,000157427 0,058231 73 NGAWI_2015 0,596576 0 -2,24866E-06 0,000231097 0,28403 74 BONDOWOSO_2016 0,597211 0 -2,46609E-06 0,000253442 0,311494 75 LAMONGAN_2014 0,60127 0 -1,28262E-06 0,000151119 0,055897 76 MOJOKERTO_2010 0,605036 -2,74175E-05 -4,30282E-07 0,000195952 0,168387 77 TUBAN_2011 0,605183 0 -1,34851E-06 0,000158882 0,058769 78 BOJONEGORO_2010 0,610654 0 -1,26465E-06 0,000149002 0,055114 79 SUMENEP_2016 0,618947 -4,13946E-05 -2,05464E-07 0,000258257 0,118078 80 TUBAN_2010 0,619344 0 -1,36113E-06 0,000160369 0,059319 81 NGAWI_2014 0,619652 0 -2,25746E-06 0,000232001 0,285142 82 TULUNGAGUNG_2016 0,62034 -3,81091E-05 -1,89156E-07 0,000237759 0,108706 83 PONOROGO_2010 0,630246 0 -2,21595E-06 0,000227735 0,279899 84 PASURUAN_2016 0,634418 -1,62237E-05 -1,76059E-07 0,000153911 -0,163331 85 BONDOWOSO_2015 0,634726 0 -2,48767E-06 0,000255659 0,314219 86 SITUBONDO_2012 0,637501 0 -2,93681E-06 0,000301819 0,370952 87 PASURUAN_2015 0,639333 -1,62265E-05 -1,7609E-07 0,000153938 -0,163359 88 KEDIRI_2016 0,642276 -1,62547E-05 -1,76396E-07 0,000154205 -0,163643 89 PASURUAN_2014 0,642409 -1,6228E-05 -1,76106E-07 0,000153952 -0,163374 90 NGAWI_2013 0,643671 0 -2,27628E-06 0,000233935 0,287518 91 BONDOWOSO_2014 0,651993 0 -2,51204E-06 0,000258164 0,317298 92 SITUBONDO_2011 0,653067 0 -2,97472E-06 0,000305714 0,37574 93 NGAWI_2012 0,656869 0 -2,29221E-06 0,000235572 0,289531 94 PASURUAN_2017 0,658154 -1,62222E-05 -1,76043E-07 0,000153897 -0,163316 95 KEDIRI_2015 0,659015 -1,62482E-05 -1,76325E-07 0,000154143 -0,163578 96 PASURUAN_2013 0,659916 -1,62599E-05 -1,76453E-07 0,000154255 -0,163696 97 PASURUAN_2012 0,671789 -1,62669E-05 -1,76528E-07 0,000154321 -0,163766 98 BONDOWOSO_2013 0,672101 0 -2,53851E-06 0,000260884 0,320641 99 PASURUAN_2011 0,672327 -1,61597E-05 -1,75364E-07 0,000153303 -0,162686 100 KEDIRI_2014 0,673757 -1,62688E-05 -1,76549E-07 0,000154339 -0,163785 101 KEDIRI_2017 0,673794 -1,61309E-05 -1,75053E-07 0,000153031 -0,162397 102 BONDOWOSO_2017 0,675048 0 -2,54275E-06 0,00026132 0,321176 103 KEDIRI_2013 0,680232 -1,60009E-05 -1,73641E-07 0,000151797 -0,161088 104 NGANJUK_2013 0,681707 0 -1,52194E-06 0,000179316 0,066327 105 NGANJUK_2016 0,682974 0 -1,4944E-06 0,000176071 0,065127 106 KEDIRI_2012 0,683286 -1,60248E-05 -1,73901E-07 0,000152024 -0,161328 107 NGAWI_2011 0,684893 0 -2,3079E-06 0,000237184 0,291512 108 TULUNGAGUNG_2015 0,685051 -3,80983E-05 -1,89103E-07 0,000237692 0,108676 109 TULUNGAGUNG_2014 0,685319 -3,80038E-05 -1,88633E-07 0,000237102 0,108406 110 SAMPANG_2016 0,685972 -4,97938E-05 -2,47154E-07 0,000310659 0,142037 111 PASURUAN_2010 0,686807 -1,61912E-05 -1,75706E-07 0,000153602 -0,163003 112 KEDIRI_2011 0,687485 -1,60501E-05 -1,74175E-07 0,000152264 -0,161583 113 KEDIRI_2010 0,689922 -1,60745E-05 -1,7444E-07 0,000152495 -0,161828 114 TULUNGAGUNG_2013 0,691581 -3,80313E-05 -1,8877E-07 0,000237274 0,108484 115 NGANJUK_2012 0,692323 0 -1,53398E-06 0,000180735 0,066852 116 SAMPANG_2015 0,693454 -4,94813E-05 -2,45603E-07 0,000308709 0,141146 117 NGAWI_2017 0,693839 0 -1,94272E-06 0,000199654 0,245386 118 NGANJUK_2015 0,696319 0 -1,50244E-06 0,000177018 0,065477 119 NGANJUK_2017 0,697922 0 -1,52404E-06 0,000179563 0,066419 120 BONDOWOSO_2012 0,700774 0 -2,56892E-06 0,00026401 0,324482 121 NGANJUK_2011 0,706653 0 -1,77354E-06 0,000182268 0,224017 122 NGAWI_2010 0,709762 0 -2,32395E-06 0,000238834 0,29354 123 NGANJUK_2014 0,711369 0 -1,51159E-06 0,000178096 0,065876 124 TULUNGAGUNG_2017 0,715204 -4,09782E-05 -2,03397E-07 0,000255659 0,116891 125 NGANJUK_2010 0,716052 0 -1,79054E-06 0,000184015 0,226165 126 SITUBONDO_2010 0,717109 0 -3,01429E-06 0,000309781 0,380738 127 SAMPANG_2014 0,718519 -4,93391E-05 -2,44897E-07 0,000307822 0,14074 128 BONDOWOSO_2011 0,718633 0 -2,60083E-06 0,000267289 0,328513 129 TULUNGAGUNG_2012 0,729167 -3,80648E-05 -1,88936E-07 0,000237483 0,10858 130 SAMPANG_2017 0,731096 -4,92403E-05 -2,44406E-07 0,000307206 0,140458 131 SAMPANG_2013 0,732701 -4,93925E-05 -2,45162E-07 0,000308155 0,140892
  • 23. Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 442 editor@iaeme.com NO DMU Score Dual Price (land) Dual Price (labor) Dual Price (productivity) v* 132 SAMPANG_2012 0,737474 -4,92011E-05 -2,44212E-07 0,000306961 0,140346 133 MADIUN_2016 0,73754 0 -2,97117E-06 0,000305349 0,375291 134 TULUNGAGUNG_2011 0,748748 -3,79823E-05 -1,88527E-07 0,000236968 0,108345 135 TULUNGAGUNG_2010 0,754612 -3,32134E-05 -5,21241E-07 0,000237375 0,203983 136 BONDOWOSO_2010 0,757591 0 -2,63387E-06 0,000270684 0,332686 137 MADIUN_2015 0,758799 0 -2,98863E-06 0,000307144 0,377497 138 SAMPANG_2011 0,760489 -4,25611E-05 -6,67942E-07 0,000304184 0,261393 139 MADIUN_2017 0,771211 0 -2,78154E-06 0,000285861 0,351339 140 PAMEKASAN_2016 0,772928 -9,74576E-05 0 0,000491826 0,264902 141 MADIUN_2014 0,772997 0 -3,00923E-06 0,000309261 0,380098 142 PROBOLINGGO_2016 0,783125 -1,8614E-05 -2,01999E-07 0,000176587 -0,187395 143 MADIUN_2013 0,789254 0 -3,03272E-06 0,000311675 0,383065 144 SAMPANG_2010 0,792026 -4,279E-05 -6,71533E-07 0,000305819 0,262799 145 PAMEKASAN_2013 0,794465 -9,06628E-05 0 0,000457536 0,246433 146 PAMEKASAN_2015 0,795773 -9,47519E-05 0 0,000478171 0,257547 147 PAMEKASAN_2014 0,800701 -9,31283E-05 0 0,000469978 0,253134 148 PAMEKASAN_2017 0,800779 -9,13217E-05 0 0,00046086 0,248223 149 PAMEKASAN_2011 0,80685 -7,14308E-05 -3,5455E-07 0,00044565 0,203757 150 PAMEKASAN_2012 0,808409 -7,17869E-05 -3,56317E-07 0,000447872 0,204772 151 PROBOLINGGO_2015 0,814367 -1,8635E-05 -2,02227E-07 0,000176787 -0,187607 152 MADIUN_2012 0,814448 0 -3,063E-06 0,000314787 0,386891 153 MADIUN_2011 0,824092 0 -3,0946E-06 0,000318035 0,390882 154 PROBOLINGGO_2013 0,831918 -1,83146E-05 -1,9875E-07 0,000173747 -0,184381 155 MADIUN_2010 0,835363 0 -3,1265E-06 0,000321313 0,394912 156 PAMEKASAN_2010 0,835865 -7,1581E-05 -3,55296E-07 0,000446588 0,204185 157 PROBOLINGGO_2014 0,839379 -1,8655E-05 -2,02444E-07 0,000176976 -0,187808 158 SUMENEP_2015 0,840561 -4,11889E-05 -2,04443E-07 0,000256974 0,117492 159 PROBOLINGGO_2017 0,841011 -1,84469E-05 -2,00185E-07 0,000175002 -0,185713 160 SUMENEP_2017 0,84641 -4,04074E-05 -2,00564E-07 0,000252098 0,115262 161 PROBOLINGGO_2012 0,855425 -1,83198E-05 -1,98806E-07 0,000173796 -0,184434 162 PROBOLINGGO_2011 0,871475 -1,82897E-05 -1,9848E-07 0,000173511 -0,184131 163 SUMENEP_2014 0,872803 -4,03906E-05 -2,0048E-07 0,000251993 0,115214 164 MAGETAN_2016 0,886072 -3,32507E-05 -2,11051E-06 0,000357532 0,643342 165 SUMENEP_2012 0,886323 -4,00439E-05 -1,9876E-07 0,00024983 0,114225 166 SUMENEP_2013 0,887744 -4,02067E-05 -1,99568E-07 0,000250846 0,11469 167 PROBOLINGGO_2010 0,889917 -1,83099E-05 -1,98699E-07 0,000173702 -0,184334 168 SUMENEP_2011 0,891988 -3,98739E-05 -1,97916E-07 0,00024877 0,11374 169 BLITAR_2016 0,89375 -3,12881E-05 -1,553E-07 0,000195204 0,089249 170 MAGETAN_2015 0,898076 -3,31922E-05 -2,1068E-06 0,000356903 0,642211 171 JEMBER_2016 0,904621 -7,10872E-06 0 0,000102166 -0,453609 172 JEMBER_2011 0,905622 -6,89207E-06 0 9,90523E-05 -0,439785 173 BLITAR_2015 0,909708 -3,13029E-05 -1,55373E-07 0,000195296 0,089292 174 JEMBER_2014 0,916111 -7,03229E-06 0 0,000101067 -0,448732 175 JEMBER_2015 0,916441 -7,10362E-06 0 0,000102093 -0,453284 176 JEMBER_2012 0,917525 -6,98923E-06 0 0,000100449 -0,445984 177 JEMBER_2013 0,918008 -7,02903E-06 0 0,000101021 -0,448524 178 SUMENEP_2010 0,918698 -3,9812E-05 -1,97608E-07 0,000248383 0,113564 179 JEMBER_2017 0,925671 -7,00573E-06 0 0,000100686 -0,447037 180 BLITAR_2014 0,930122 -3,12827E-05 -1,55273E-07 0,00019517 0,089234 181 MAGETAN_2014 0,933804 -3,32698E-05 -2,11172E-06 0,000357738 0,643713 182 MAGETAN_2013 0,934046 -3,31616E-05 -2,10485E-06 0,000356574 0,641618 183 LUMAJANG_2015 0,938608 -2,28922E-05 -1,95891E-07 0,00018349 -0,08162 184 LUMAJANG_2016 0,93861 -2,29385E-05 -1,96287E-07 0,000183861 -0,081785 185 MAGETAN_2017 0,939044 -3,32417E-05 -2,10993E-06 0,000357435 0,643168 186 MAGETAN_2012 0,942177 -3,32788E-05 -2,11229E-06 0,000357834 0,643886 187 BLITAR_2013 0,948622 -3,13033E-05 -1,55375E-07 0,000195298 0,089293 188 BLITAR_2017 0,948883 -3,13214E-05 -1,55465E-07 0,000195411 0,089344 189 LUMAJANG_2014 0,954935 -2,26899E-05 -1,94159E-07 0,000181868 -0,080898 190 TRENGGALEK_2014 0,956329 -0,006772249 0 0,000590947 78,607789 191 LUMAJANG_2013 0,960151 -2,26683E-05 -1,93974E-07 0,000181695 -0,080821 192 TRENGGALEK_2017 0,960736 -0,006575054 0 0,00057374 76,31888 193 MALANG_2011 0,963545 -9,43415E-06 -3,25367E-08 0,000133805 -0,53264 194 MALANG_2010 0,964877 -9,43159E-06 -3,25279E-08 0,000133768 -0,532496 195 LUMAJANG_2017 0,965226 -2,27497E-05 -1,94671E-07 0,000182348 -0,081111 196 TRENGGALEK_2013 0,965666 -0,006637399 0 0,00057918 77,042535 197 TRENGGALEK_2015 0,969977 -0,007059084 0 0,000615976 81,937183 198 LUMAJANG_2012 0,972417 -2,26946E-05 -1,942E-07 0,000181906 -0,080915 199 BLITAR_2012 0,976501 -3,13305E-05 -1,5551E-07 0,000195468 0,08937 200 MAGETAN_2011 0,979252 -3,33117E-05 -2,11438E-06 0,000358189 0,644523 201 BANYUWANGI_2017 0,981441 -7,50356E-06 -6,11454E-08 0,000115404 -0,458642 202 BLITAR_2011 0,983734 -3,13573E-05 -1,55644E-07 0,000195636 0,089447 203 PACITAN_2013 0,985807 -9,03102E-05 -2,87605E-06 0,000655196 1,206003
  • 24. Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 443 editor@iaeme.com NO DMU Score Dual Price (land) Dual Price (labor) Dual Price (productivity) v* 204 MALANG_2017 0,986226 -9,70222E-06 -3,34613E-08 0,000137607 -0,547775 205 PACITAN_2017 0,988093 -9,02743E-05 -2,8749E-06 0,000654935 1,205523 206 PACITAN_2015 0,988964 -0,000288566 -4,95715E-06 0,000662445 4,483065 207 BANYUWANGI_2016 0,989691 -1,29329E-05 -1,40347E-07 0,000122692 -0,130201 208 BANYUWANGI_2012 0,990979 -6,30933E-06 -1,17402E-07 0,000117051 -0,483533 209 PACITAN_2011 0,991028 -7,76811E-05 -2,69771E-06 0,000648163 0,988069 210 LUMAJANG_2011 0,991335 -2,26722E-05 -1,94007E-07 0,000181726 -0,080835 211 BANYUWANGI_2014 0,99251 -7,75195E-06 -6,31695E-08 0,000119225 -0,473825 212 MALANG_2014 0,992807 -9,78955E-06 -3,37625E-08 0,000138845 -0,552706 213 MALANG_2012 0,992825 -9,72459E-06 -3,35384E-08 0,000137924 -0,549038 214 MALANG_2016 0,996415 -2,78615E-05 0 0,000140605 0,075731 215 BANYUWANGI_2011 0,996994 -6,31148E-06 -1,17442E-07 0,000117091 -0,483698 216 MALANG_2013 0,997395 -9,7873E-06 -3,37547E-08 0,000138813 -0,552579 217 BANYUWANGI_2010 1 -8,54328E-06 -3,3652E-07 0,000117206 -0,116239 218 BANYUWANGI_2013 1 -8,43717E-06 -3,05034E-07 0,000118585 -0,167617 219 BANYUWANGI_2015 1 -1,291E-05 -1,40099E-07 0,000122474 -0,12997 220 BLITAR_2010 1 -2,44292E-05 -2,09042E-07 0,000195809 -0,087099 221 JEMBER_2010 1 -6,98377E-06 -2,40858E-08 9,90509E-05 -0,394295 222 LUMAJANG_2010 1 -1,91755E-05 -2,08092E-07 0,000181914 -0,193048 223 MAGETAN_2010 1 -3,32273E-05 -2,10902E-06 0,000357281 0,64289 224 MALANG_2015 1 -1,47754E-05 -1,60342E-07 0,000140171 -0,14875 225 PACITAN_2010 1 -7,8188E-05 -2,71532E-06 0,000652392 0,994516 226 PACITAN_2012 1 -9,09095E-05 -2,89513E-06 0,000659544 1,214006 227 PACITAN_2014 1 -0,000290676 -4,9934E-06 0,00066729 4,515851 228 PACITAN_2016 1 -0,000562478 -7,62692E-06 0,000672622 8,916174 229 TRENGGALEK_2010 1 -8,92427E-05 -4,4296E-07 0,000556777 0,254565 230 TRENGGALEK_2011 1 -0,000614044 0 0,000560538 6,227912 231 TRENGGALEK_2012 1 -0,00179272 0 0,000571592 20,082387 232 TRENGGALEK_2016 1 -0,00748159 0 0,000652844 86,841346