an .vfifimwg i- it? . AH. .|.I L.. “Us": ‘ 51-77 iii“ , ‘2' 193's“: u-{r ‘ ' . 7" .‘ f . v-’ {I}, n 0 ‘ .‘PM o . . tn . Mung. » u 2. ' I Ii 1. . . him? it... 1. a. . . .. A awn . . Nat-«$.31? . . . . . x. KL . 1‘ 4 , . . 5.... w .J. . .. .. . n. l «1.23..-. . , .. in! “3.7 -J....¢..Hb.uy.wml.nd«rfi 't t" ‘l v ill ‘nallmhw'rfl.o..~}.nt....vun....‘L.¢oi.u 2...: . . . .1}!!! . .‘fl.v1lo..v.‘. ...... \z‘v-INOA . lest: 3W. «H.993 buru.xh..rqb.nl.lb. . :gY‘ I..I......1 . '4‘ l1\.£uhtdo|ont duvdvré Fri}... 21 l... b . . lulu”... "I ixfiol‘V'I-l. 2d? .. 4.10.. . I'll “ - ‘4'7‘11.’ -i “ln. ; . HASH“. . t. . ta” titrzhuu‘. ”Mir.“ .l . _ ‘l t . nwvfln‘ .. ‘5‘ I 'A‘-“DO' Hint]... léukk.guogflvu a L 1 9g”. . .uvL .KHMJWIY. Lu...::!. EL.» Fur... )1 Huxfltlvqw .. n .cflfl.fl1fll. . { 43¢?! .“IXI‘KI 11!! . Inluooi. _. ”in gram . . <. .. 11".”, .Lurnu...‘ o “'2 < . u A .1 . .w ..u H» ...n.‘~l 51.1... \a..uvh111.L . .. ,4 5...”. .4. . (vu‘rll‘I15f1 . 1.. .3. 1o..|.l ., plowia. 2.9:) 9.4. 4 ‘ 3:. hfil. .12....11‘ . . .vl. u M‘: ' . 's ,‘. 2‘ V. ‘4 .’ u " ,.--u Lu: ‘ twin: windwflxrlizl . 1.: 241‘: ‘ I1." ‘ . v n V‘ n wit)! 7“ i‘ . t 2“h~l‘.4' : ”hep 7, 4° 4‘11 (7,70 . fi?‘ as 5:37 '7‘ us 1 n 1-7? C‘ I .‘39 . .r 1» 29 . d? a I» FACTORS INFLUENCING THE EXTENT TO WHICH FARMERS PRACTICE NEW FARM INPUTS: A STUDY FOCUSING ON SMALL FARMERS IN RURAL SUBANG, WEST JAVA BY Lukito Sukahar A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Resource Development 1982 ABSTRACT FACTORS INFLUENCING THE EXTENT TO WHICH FARMERS PRACTICE NEW FARM INPUTS: A STUDY FOCUSING ON SMALL FARMERS IN RURAL SUBANG, WEST JAVA BY Lukito Sukahar In principle, food self-sufficiency is still a national goal of the Indonesian country. Major rice programs were launched to increase food self-sufficiency and to increase farmers' welfare. This study, which focuses on small rice farmers in rural Subang, West Java, was conducted with the purpose of better understanding the factors that are asso- ciated with the extent to which small farmers practice new farm inputs, i.e., high yielding rice varieties, fertilizers and pesticides. Study data were collected during 1981 through a multi- stage cluster sample--180 small farmer respondents were selected who operate on farm lands of .7 hectare or less in six sample villages of northern Subang. Each farmer respon- dent was interviewed and asked questions that dealt with his: (1) farm setting; (2) social context; (3) economic context; (4) communication context; and (5) extent to which he uses inputs designed to increase rice production (e.g. fertilizer, pesticides). Attention was focused on eleven independent variables: farm size, degree of commercialization, level of education, extent of social participation, socio-economic status, economic activities, off-farm employment, extent of con- tact with change agents, extra-family contact, use of mass media, and ease of obtaining new farm inputs. Several major hypotheses were tested in this study. The sub-hypotheses of Hypotheses I - IV focus on the rela- tionships between each.of these independent variables and the dependent variable of the study. For eXample, sub- hypothesis Ial predicted that the larger the size of the farm, the greater the degree to which farmers adopt new farm inputs. Hypothesis V predicted that the farmer's economic context and communication context represent the most important blocks of indicators associated with the degree to which farmers practice new farm inputs. Hypo- thesis VI predicted that commercialization, economic activities, extent of contact with change agents, and ease of obtaining farm inputs are the most important indicators associated with the degree to which-farmers practice new farm inputs. Pearson correlation analysis was employed to test the sub—hypotheses of Hypotheses I - IV; multiple- partial correlation analysis was used to test Hypothesis V; and multiple regression analysis (using stepwise inclusion) was employed to test Hypothesis VI. The results of data analysis indicate that most of the findings did not support the expectations as stated in the study hypotheses.' only the degree of commercialization and economic activities variables, respectively, were found to have a positive and statistically significant relationship with the dependent variable at the .05 level. The size of farm, social participation, socio-economic status and extra- : family contact variables have a moderate, but inverse, re— lationship with the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. The results of multiple-partial correlation analysis suggest that the blocks of indicators associated with farm setting are the most important blocks of indica- tors in terms of explaining variance in the dependent variable. The results of multiple regression analysis suggest that only the degree of commercialization and economic activities variables significantly contribute to explaining variation in the dependent variable. Based on the study findings, various national policy, agricultural extension, and research recommendations were made. For example, it is suggested that the Indonesian government rethink the policy goal of achieving internal rice self—sufficiency. Another recommendation pertains to the need for more direct contact between agricultural extension agents and small farmers. r ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to express his sincere appreciation to Dr. Milton H. Steinmueller for his advice, guidance, support and encouragement without which my education would not have been possible. Sincere appreciation is particu- larly expressed to my dissertation director, Dr. Frank A. Fear, for his constant guidance, support and encouragement during this dissertation preparation. Without his con- stant help, this dissertation would probably never have been completed. Appreciation is also expressed to Dr. Denton Morrison (Sociology) and Dr. Joseph Levine (Education) for serving on the committee as minor area professors. Thanks goes to Mike Lambur for his assistance as my computer consultant. Special thanks are extended to Sue Cutler for her patient and thorough help in typing this dissertation. In addition, the writer is indebted to all those institutions, particularly the Padjadjaran university at Bandung, Indonesia, and the MUCIA-AID--Indonesia's Higher Agricultural Project, which provided me with the opportunity to pursue the Master's and doctoral degrees. The writer wishes to acknowledge the Ford Foundation ii iii mission to Indonesia for providing travel and data collec- tion funds. Special thanks goes to Ir. Abdul Choliq for his assis- tance in field work preparation. Thanks also goes to the Bupati of Subang who graciously welcomed the field work in his region. Last, but certainly not least, the writer thanks his wife Dien, his children Edi, Peni, Tri, Desi, Fajar and Youngki, without whose constant support and encouragement this work would probably never have been completed. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION The Issue of Food Production The Consequences of Increasing Crop Production: Implications for Agricultural Policy Food Self-Sufficiency as a Policy Goal: The Case of Indonesia The Impact of Rice Intensification Programs on Indonesia's Small Farmers Study Problem and Approach to the Problem Overview of Study CHAPTER 2. A DESCRIPTION OF INDONESIA'S SITUATION: FOCUS ON THE IMPORTANCE OF RICE IN AGRICULTURAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Location Terrain Climate Population History Early history Dutch colonization Movement toward independence iv 11 13 13 15 16 16 18 18 20 21 Government Form of government Levels of government Government planning The Role of Agriculture in the National Economy The Importance of Rice in the Agricultural Sector Components of the rice production system in Indonesia Indonesia's rice intensification programs Overview of rice intensification periods Programs of the early period (1952— -66) Newer programs (1966 to date) Observations about Indonesia's Rice Intensi- fication Efforts CHAPTER 3. THE ADOPTION OF NEW AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY BY SMALL FARMERS: AN OVERVIEW The Small Farmer as Subsistence Farmer Enhancing the Development of the Small Farmer: Strategies Enhancing Small Farmer Development: Results of Strategies The Diffusion of New Agricultural Technology to Small Farmers in Java A Theory of Adoption Behavior Types of adoption behavior Inpediments to adoption 22 22 23 24 26 27 28 28 29 29 31 ’ 35 36 36 37 39 42 43 43 45 Factors Influencing Adoption CHAPTER 4. METHODOLOGY Introduction Operationalization of the Theory The independent variables: factors influencing small farmer decision making Farm setting Social context Economic context Communication context Indicators of the independent variable Farm setting Social context Economic context Communication context The dependent variable: the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs Study Hypotheses Data Collection Method The study site Site selection criteria An overview of West Java's agri- culture The regency of Subang: its rural area Sample design Description of the sample villages 46 51 51 52 53 53 54 55 55 56 57 57 58 58 60 67 67 67 68 69 72 73 vii The data collection instrument The data collection process Data Analysis Approach Pearson correlation to test Hypotheses I - IV Multiple-partial correlation to test Hypothesis V Multiple regression to test Hypothesis VI CHAPTER 5. SUBANG'S SMALL FARMERS AND FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH THE EXTENT TO WHICH FARMERS PRACTICE NEW FARM INPUTS A Description of Small Farmers in the Sample Villages of Subang Small farm setting in Subang villages Farm land Farm production Commercialization level of the farm firm Subang's small farmers and their social and economic context Respondents' level of education Family size Small farmers' social participation Small farmers' houses and other major material possessions Respondents' family income Respondents' level of new farm inputs investment Respondents' credit performance 77 81 82 83 84 85 87 87 87 87 88 89 90 90 90 91 92 93 95 97 viii Communication aspects and the degree to which farmers practice new farm inputs Respondents' frequency of contact with development agencies Respondents' frequency of neighbor and demonstration plot visits Respondents' reliance on mass media The extent to which respondents practice new farm inputs Factors Associated with Small Farmers' Level of New Rice Technology CHAPTER 6. Farm setting related to the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs Farmers' social context related to the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs Farmers' economic context related to the extent to which farmers' practice new farm inputs Communication aspects related to the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs Subsets of independent variables re- lated to the extent to which farmers' practice new farm inputs —-A multiple- partial correlation analysis The most important predictor variables associated with the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs -- The stepwise inclusion procedure. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMEN- DATIONS Summary Conclusions 99 99 100 101 102 104 105 107 108 110 112 118 123— 123 129 ix Recommendations Policy implications Extension Further research Closing Observations Limitations of study Final comments on factors influencing the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs in Indonesia APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW SCHEDULE APPENDIX B: PROCEDURES FOR THE COMPUTATIONS OF MULTIPLE-PARTIAL R2 AND F RATIO FOR THE FOUR REGRESSIONS REFERENCES 133 133 135 136 136 136 137 139 149 153 Table 2-1 5-11 5-12 LIST OF TABLES Population Statistics for Indonesia by Pro- vince and Major Islands: Population in 1971, 1980, and Average Growth per Year (l97l—80). Agricultural Population in Indonesia. Respondents' Farm Size and Land Status. The Percentage of Respondents' Rice Product Sold to Market in 1980. Respondents' Formal Education. Respondents' Major Materials Possession. Respondents' 1980 Income: (1) Farm Income; (2) Off-farm Income; and (3) Family Income. Analysis of Respondents' Off-farm Jobs: (1) Kind of Job; (2) Length of Time; and (3) Percentage Contribution to Farm Income. Respondents' 1980 New Farm Inputs Investment and the Percentage of this Investment to Farm Income. Respondents' 1980 Production Loans: (1) Loans through Rice Program; (2) Loans outside the Rice Program; and (3) Total Loans. Respondents' Frequency of Contact with Development Agents in 1980. Respondents' Frequency of Visits to Neighbor Farms and Demonstration Plots. Respondents' Reliance on Mass Media. The Extent to which Respondents Practice Fertilizer, HYV Seed and Pesticide Page 17 26 88 90 91 93 94 96 97 98 99 101 101 103 Table 5-13 Figure 2-1 Product Moment Correlation among Measures of Farm Setting and the Extent to which Farmers Practice New Inputs Product Moment Correlation among Measures of Farmers' Social Context and the Dependent Variable Product Moment Correlation among Measures of Farmers' Economic Context and the Extent to which Farmers Practice New Inputs Product Moment Correlation among Measures of Communication and the Extent to which Farmers Practice New Inputs Summary Table for the First Regression Comparison of Multiple-Partial R and Multiple-Partial R3 for the Four Regressions Summary Table of Selected Statistics from Multiple Regression Analysis using Stepwise Procedure The Regression Coefficients and Standard Errors in Stepwise Regression Map of the Republic of Indonesia Page 105 107 108 111 116 117 120 121 14 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The Issue of Food Production. Achieving an acceptable balance between food and peOple may be regarded as one of the most difficult problems fac- ing mankind. Borgstrom (1967) has pessimistically pointed out that mankind has largely failed in its effort to ade- quately feed the billions of people now living on earth; at least one billion people are regarded as being under- nourished. If the minimum nutritional requirements of the world's population were to be met, Borgstrom points out, food production would have to be doubled. In the mid-1960's, optimism surrounding the food production situation in developing countries was generated because of the so-called "Green Revolution." The "Green Revolution" is defined by Stevens (1977) as the period in which modern science and technology began to have major impact on agriculture. The "revolution" resulted in large and continuing increases in land and labor productivity. For example, new seed varieties, which could increase crop production, were introduced. These agricultural break- throughs caused observers, such as Lester Brown (1970), to conclude: The food-production breakthrough demonstrates that man is capable of responding to crises, a fact that many of us, beset with the numer- ous complex and seemingly insolvable problem of today, were beginning to doubt. The Consequences of Increasing Food Production: Implications for Agricultural Policy. As stated earlier, the application of science and technology to traditional agriculture held promise for producing dramatic increases in crop production. However, technological change neither begins nor ends with the in- troduction of new varieties alone. The new technology involves other factors-—factors such as requirements for fertilizer, water, and pesticides. According to Wharton (1969), the very success of the new technology has concomi- tantly produced a number of new problems. For example, the "miracle rice," IR-8, was produced at the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in the Philippines through the process of crossbreeding a tall, vigorous rice variety from Indonesia, called Peta, with a dwarf rice from Taiwan, called Deo-geo-woo-gen (Brown, 1970). When properly mana- ged, IR-8 could double the yield of most local rices in Asia. IR-8, and increasingly pOpular new strains of other IR's, have proved quite responsive to fertilizers in a wide range of growing conditions in several countries and with- out lodging. However, these new seeds require a consider- able amount of irrigation. Thus, irrigation now becomes, more than ever before, a critical component of agricultural development. As might have been expected, the consequences asso- ciated with new agricultural technologies have promoted an evolution in agricultural development thought and policy in the decade since the innovation of the "Green Revolu- tion." During the 1960's, development thought in vogue emphasized that: l) the growth of agricultural output and productivity could become a major source of growth in the total economy; 2) technology represented the major con- straint on agricultural productivity growth; and 3) invest- ment in agricultural research could become the "high-pay off" source of agricultural growth. This perspective was reinforced and confirmed by the deve10pment and dissemina- tion of the new, fertilizer-responsive varieties of wheat and rice. The food crisis of 1972-73, however, put an end to such an unwarranted confidence in the "Green Revolution" as an easy answer to the complex food problem facing the overpopulated countries. Related to this situation, Wong (1979) argues that the "Green Revolution" actually repre- sents a gradual process of developing and diffusing high- yielding varieties; the technological advances in rice, for example, should not be construed as a once-and-for-all change, but should be viewed as evolutionary in nature (Barker, 1971). The early months of 1973 witnessed a dramatic upsurge in interest in the world food situation--largely in response to global scarcity and rising food prices. Prices for some of the principal food commodities--wheat, rice, feed—grains, and soybeans--soared to historic highs in international markets. According to Brown (1977), several factors that contributed to the food scarcities of 1973 were the poor rice harvest in Asia and the shortfall in the Soviet wheat crop. But Brown (1977) has also stated that we should not be permitted to obscure other, more fundamental, long-term trends and forces that are altering the nature and dimen- sions of the world food problem. During the 1970's, rapid global population growth continued to generate demand for more food, but, in addition, rising affluence emerged as a major new claimant of world food resources. Hence, self- sufficiency in food staples is still a national goal of most major rice-producing countries of south and southeast Asia. It was thought that the introduction of modern rice varieties (MV) or high yielding varieties (HYV) might make it possible to achieve the goal of self-sufficiency. How- ever, importation levels in these countries generally have not declined. Food Self-Sufficiency as a Policy Goal: The Case of Indonesia. Indonesia is one country that is faced with the pro- blem of food insufficiency, particularly in rice. Upon achieving its independence after World War II, Indonesia adopted self-sufficiency of food staples, particularly of rice, as a national policy goal. The continuous population growth in Indonesia, together with its still low productivity of agriculture, has resulted in the lack of national self-sufficiency in food production. There is increasing awareness that one of Indonesia's critical problems is to keep food production growth ahead of population growth and demand growth. In addition, in countries like Indonesia, where national economies had been based on the export of trOpical cash crOps during the colonial period, the policy of self-sufficiency repre- sents a nationalistic desire to minimize foreign power leverages. By the mid-1960's, the Indonesian government was determined to reduce rice imports. Thus, the policy goal of food self-sufficiency was sought through the design and implementation of national rice intensification programs. Major rice programs--"Demas," "Bimas," Inmas," "Bimas Gotong-Royong" and "Bimas Yang Disempurnakan"--were launched, especially in Java (Indonesia's "rice bowl") to increase food self-sufficiency and, at the same time, to increase the farmers' welfare. In general, these rice intensification programs have consisted of three major activities: 1) agricultural ex- tension; 2) distribution of farm supplies (e.g., seed, fertilizer, and pesticides); and 3) provision of credits. Furthermore, the government has made considerable invest- ments in the extension of irrigation facilities and fertilizer use. To accelerate the achievement of the food self-sufficiency goal, the government has established poli- cies directed toward the support of stabilizing product prices and subsidizing inputs, thus stimulating farm pro- ducers to increase food output. The government has also operated a price-policy program for rice that is designed to support a floor price for producers and maintain a ceiling price for consumers. Another policy instrument used by the government to encourage rice self-sufficiency has been the subsidy on inputs for rice production, espe- cially fertilizer. The Indonesian government has supported fertilizer use among rice producers by subsidizing half the going market price. For the country as a whole, there have been signifi- cant increases (i.e., 44 percent) in rice productivity over ten years--resulting in part from the adoption of modern technology (Wong, 1979). For example, Beckman (1981) reported rice production soared to 20 million tons in l980--more than one million tons above the government's estimate. The Impact of Rice Intensification Programs on Indonesia's Small Farmers. A major question can be posed: Does the increased rice productivity, through such extremely high cost, trans- late into equitable social and economic benefits for the rural population? There is some doubt as to whether the rice intensification programs in Java have reduced poverty, unemployment, and lowered inequality. From the experiences in other developing countries, it can be shown that when production is increased through new technology, the income of the "well to do" are increased the most (Mellor, 1975). Thus, there is a potential for a severe disequilibrium in economic benefits. This problem seems especially relevant in rural Java because of the large number of small farmers. Indonesia's Agricultural Census reports that the average farm size in Java was 0.71 hectare. Small farmers consti- tute 4.1 of Java's 7.9 million farmers. Of these small farmers, 2.1 million farm less than 0.1 hectares (Sajogyo, 1973). The concern for equitable distribution of the benefits of rice intensification is not unique to the Indonesian case. For example, in the early 1970's, development thought had shifted to a new concern about institutional performance. One big question was: How can the institu- tions that serve rural areas he modernized so that the potential productivity of the new green revolution techno- logy can be realized? (Ruttan, 1978). More recently, attention has also focused on the rural poor, including the landless and small farmers. However, the focus is now one of "equity," largely because it is becoming increasingly apparent that the advances in agri-, cultural technology often result in disparities between large and small farmers. The remarks made in 1972 by Robert S. McNamara, then president of the World Bank, illustrate the heightened concern for small farmers: Without rapid progress in small holder agri- culture throughout the developing world, there is little hope either of achieving long-term stable economic growth or of significantly reducing the levels of absolute poverty. The fact is that very little has been done over the past two decades specifically designed to increase the productivity of subsistence agriculture. In Indonesia, it has been found that small farmers share two interrelated characteristics: 1) The income from a farm size of 0.5 hectare or less is not sufficient to support household needs. (Therefore, many small farmers often live at the subsistence level.); and 2) many small farmers have to engage in off-farm jobs. .But can the rice productivity on small farms be in- , creased simply through the adoption of new technology by small farmers? It has been very difficult to persuade small farmers to adopt recommended new technologies. The reluctance seems to be related to several main reasons: 1) the new technologies require substantial capital for cash inputs; and 2) there is always some risk' and uncer- tainty in the use of new practices. There is also evidence to support the contention that not all of Java's farmers have gained benefits from parti- cipation in the rice intensification programs. Some re- ports have shown that the new technology of farm practices are still beyond the reach of many small farmers. Records from the government's "PeOple Bank" (Hansen, 1974) indicate that the average landholding for participants in the rice programs is about 0.75 hectare, a figure that is well above the average farm size of Java. Study Problem and Approach to the Problem. Despite an aggregate increase in rice production through successive rice intensification programs, Indonesia remains one of the world's largest importers of rice. In addition, there is some evidence to suggest that all far- mers do not equitably benefit from increased- production. A government sponsored "Expert Team" has found that, since 1975, stagnation has been experienced in the expan— sion rate of the land used as part of the rice intensifi— cation programs. It may be expected that one of the main reasons for this "leveling-off" trend comes from Java's small farmers, many of whom do not engage in new agricul- tural practices as fully as recommended. The extent to which the improved rice technology can increase rice productivity is determined by the quality and quantity of various resources, including human resources, and the extent to which these can be upgraded and reorgan- ized by improving the distribution system for the required inputs. According to Stevens (1977), many questions can be raised regarding the limitations associated with the techniCal, social, and economic situations faced by small farmers: Is the agricultural technology that is needed to increase production in a particular loca- tion actually available for small farmers? 10 If it is available, is it in sufficient quanfitities, in the form of fertilizer, new seeds, and pesticides? Has the available new technology been demon- strated on typical small farms so that far- mers know the details and other possible problems related to practicing the new technology? Are there community and social problems related to agricultural practices? In addition to these questions, Java's small farmers have been faced with a dilemma: to participate in the rice programs and apply the recommended agricultural tech- nology fully or to work off-farm, if the opportunity is available. To answer those questions, and to better understand the small farmer's problems related to the new agricultu- ral technology, it is useful to identify factors that may be associated with the farmer's decision to participate fully or not fully in the rice intensification programs. Hypothetically, a number of factors, such as the social context, the economic context, and the extent and type of communication with off-farm actors, can influence the ex- tent to which small farmers practice new agricultural technology. Accordingly, this study focuses attention on the degree and extent to which these factors impact the agri- cultural-related decisions made by Java's small farmers. 11 Overview of the Study. An introductory discussion on the background of the problem and the study problem were presented in this chap- ter. The following chapter will provide additional back- ground information by presenting an overview of Indonesia's situation (primarily intended for those who have little or no prior acquaintance with this country). At the end of Chapter 2 the discussion will focus on the importance of rice in agricultural and economic develOpment of Indonesia. A review of related literature and research to this study will be presented in Chapter 3. This chapter pro- vides an overview on the adoption of new agricultural technology--particu1arly new rice technology--by small farmers. The study methodology is presented in Chapter 4. This chapter provides the procedures or approach employed in this study and includes a discussion of: the Operationali- zation of the theory, study hypotheses, the data collection methods, and the data analysis approach. Study findings are presented in Chapter 5. The first section of Chapter 5 deals with a general description-- based on the results of the items in the survey questionnaire. In the second section of this chapter, the results of test— ing the study hypotheses will be discussed. The final chapter is devoted to a summary, conclusions, and recommendation. In Chapter 6, an attempt is made to 12 identify the key findings of the study, draw conclusions and explain the key findings, and relate the study findings to policy, extension and further research recommendations. CHAPTER 2 A DESCRIPTION OF INDONESIA'S SITUATION: FOCUS ON THE IMPORTANCE OF RICE IN AGRICULTURAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT The purpose of Chapter 2 is to provide an overview of Indonesia's situation. This will provide additional back- ground to the problem presented in Chapter 1. The early parts of this chapter are intendedtx>intro~ duce the Republic of Indonesia to those who have no prior acquaintance with this island nation. These parts will present the locality, the physical setting, history, and the government of the country. The remaining parts of the chapter will focus on the role of agriculture in the na- tional economy, the importance of rice in the agricultural sector, and the government policy on agricultural develop- ment through the rice intensification programs. Location. Where the Indian (or Indonesian) Ocean merges with the tropical Pacific, some 3,000 inhabited islands are strung out in a broad belt across the equator. Most of these islands, along with perhaps 7,000 tiny islets and the near— by waters, make up the Republic of Indonesia (Neill, 1973). 13 .mhma. Hafloz “mousom 14 HNQUQHU “4] :5... can <~wmzo a Z _ ..5 24.5%:— HF a Q 0 a S r .WuVJHafi: H. we . Mew“ . 1.1%,me «anacovcH no oaansnom on» no an: 34. L ILL a .HIN opsmfim 15 This country is located between the mainland of Southeast Asia and Australia (see Figure 2-1). Five of the main is- lands, i.e., Kalimantan, Sumatra, Irian Jaya (West New Guinea), Sulawesi and Java, contribute 92 percent of the total land area. Terrain. Indonesia, with its islands and seas together, is almost as large as the United States; but much of its terri— tory is water. Its actual land area, about 735,865 square miles, is a little less than half the land area of Europe and less than a quarter that of the United States. In general, rugged areas exceeding 2,000 feet in height might conveniently be described as mountains, those between 500 and 2,000 feet as hills, and flatter areas below 500 feet as plains (Neill, 1973). By this definition, most of the country consists of plains. Extensive plains exist in eastern Sumatra, southern Kalimantan and southern Irian Jaya, with those of Sumatra and Kalimantan being low and swampy in many places. The mountainous portions of Indo- nesia include western Sumatra, east-central Irian Jaya, most of inland Java, a large part of inland Kalimantan, and practically Sulawesi. The rest of Indonesia is hilly for the most part. Besides these three terrains, the country has many scattered and small plateaus: areas above 500 feet in height, steep-sided, but comparatively flat on top. Excluding Irian Jaya, the highest elevations of Indonesia are provided by volcanos. In the stretch of 16 islands from Sumatra and Java eastward through the Bali— Wetar chain, and thence northward through Sulawesi and the Mollacas (Maluku), more than 400 volcanos exist. About 77 of them are regarded as still active. On Sumatra, Mount Kerinci is 12,484 feet high. On Lombok Island, just east of Bali, Rinjani is almost as high, at 12,224 feet. Semeru, in eastern Java, reaches 12,060 feet. Irian Jaya is nonvolcanic even though mountainous. The highest moun- tain, Puncak Jaya, on Irian Jaya, rises to 16,500 feet high. Climate. There are only two seasons: the dry season between April and October, and wet or rainy season between Novem- ber and March. Rainfall is most prevalent during December and January. It varies from island to island with an ave- rage precipitation of 3,300 mm in Kalimantan and 2,000 mm in the eastern part of Nusa Tbnggara. Indonesia straddles the equator, so the country has generally a hot, tropical climate with little difference in temperature the year round. In Bandung, for example, the mean minimum temperature was 18.6°C in February, 1978; the mean maximum temperature was 28.8°C in May, 1978 (Indonesia's Statistic Bureau, 1979/80). Population. Indonesia has the fifth largest population in the world. Only China, India, the SovietUhion and the United States possess larger populations. According to the 1971 17 Table 2—1. Population Statistics for Indonesia by Province and Major Islands: Population in 1971, 1980, and Average Growth Per Year (1971-80). Population In: Population 1971 1980 Growth Per Year 1971-80 (%) Aceh 2,008,918 2,607,737 2.94 North Sumatra 6,622,693 8,357,018 2.62 West Sumatra 2,793,196 3,401,564 2.21 Riau 1,641,591 2,163,088 3.11 Jambi 1,006,084 1,439,787 4.06 South Sumatra 3,443,749 4,621,155 3.32 Bengkulu 519,366 767,672 4.44 Lampung 2,777,085 4,622,247 5.82 Sumatra 20,812,682 27,980,268 3.34 Jakarta 4,576,009 6,506,470 3.99 West Java 21,632,684 27,490,210 2.70 Central Java 21,877,081 25,365,053 1.66 Yogyakarta 2,489,998 2,745,470 1.09 East Java 25,526,714 29,175,269 1.50 Java 76,102,486 91,282,462 2.04 Bali 2,120,338 2,469,853 1.71 West Nusa Tenggara 2,202,333 2,724,065 2.39 East Nusa Tenggara 2,294,945 2,721,909 1.91 East Timor - 552,954 — Nusa Tenggara 6,617,616 8,468,781 2.00 West Kalimantan 2,019,936 2,482,809 2.32 Central Kalimantan 699,589 949,819 3.46 South Kalimantan 1,699,105 2,069,423 2.21 East Kalimantan 733,536 1,218,785 5.80 Kalimantan 5,152,166 6,720,836 3.00 North Sulawesi 1,718,155 2,091,279 2.21 Central Sulawesi 931,662 1,289,226 3.90 South Sulawesi 5,189,227 6,053,633 1.73 Southeast Sulawesi 714,120 943,386 3.14 Sulawesi 8,535,164 10,377,524 2.20 Maluku 1,088,945 1,407,016 2.90 Irian Jaya 923,440 1,146,178 2.43 Maluku & Iran Jaya 2,012,385 2,553,194 2.68 Indonesia 119,232,499 147,383,075 2.34 Source: "Biro Pusat Statistik" (Center Bureau of Statis- tics), 1981. 18 census, the population of Indonesia was 119 million inhabi- tants; 78.2 million live in the islandsof Java, Madura, and Bali. The population density is 560 persons per square kilometer for the country-—one of the highest in southeast Asia. The islands of Kalimantan, Sulawesi and Sumatra have densities of 9,37 and.39 persons per square kilometers, respectively. Preliminary results from the 1980 census reveal a national population of more than 147 million people. The annual population growth rate is 2.34%. As shown in Table 2-1, the population growth rate in Java is still high despite ten years of intensive family planning efforts. Java's population growth is often noted as one of the country's major problems. Estimates of pro- jected population growth indicate that, by the year 2000, from 110 to 120 million people will inhabit Java (Hansen, 1974). History. Indonesia's history can be divided into the following periods: early history, the period of Dutch colonization, and the period after movement toward independence. Early History Scholars appear to generally agree that ethnically and culturally the Indonesians are composed of two strains (Sievers, 1974). The Neolithic, Austronesian-speaking Proto-Malays drifted into this area from the Asian mainland 19 over the period between 2500 to 1000 B.C. One or two centuries before the Christian era, the Proto-Malays were joined by more purely Mongoloid peOple that may be called, Deutro-Malays. In general, the two strains merged, and this synthesis has produced the distinctivelyMalay ethnic type and cultural pattern (of whom the Indonesians are the major part), which is characterized by tribal-village life, with its "adat" (traditional custom), including wet-rice agriculture with irrigation. During this period, Indian cultural influence was dominant. Early Indonesian contact with India had con- sisted largely of travel by merchants of both regions. Because of this contact, Hindu-Buddhist culture began a rapid penetration of Indonesia. The great Shriwjaya em- pire with its capital in Southern Sumatra, was a reknowned center of Buddhist learning. In about A.D. 800, the Saelendra dynasty built the great Buddhist temple, Boro- budur, in Central Java. In the 1200's, Hinduism was as- cendant in the powerful, Java-based, Majapahit empire. From the 1100's, Arab traders spread the Islamic religion. Like Buddhism and Hinduism, Islam was first adopted by the kings and nobles of the local dynasties and by the merchant princes, who were a powerful force in these communities. The kingdom of Majapahit, its power already weakened, was conquered in 1478 by a coalition of the Moslem states that had been established on the north coast of Java. By 20 the dawn of the sixteenth century, a majority of the Indonesian people were Moslems. Western dominance began in 1511 when the Portuguese landed at Malacca, on the Malayan peninsula, in search of spices. Traces of the Portuguese influence can still be found in the many Indonesian words derived from Portuguese and in some of the music of the eastern part of the archi- pelago. Dutch Colonization A new and more vigorous group of European traders dropped anchor off the west of Sumatra, in 1596. The Dutch were previously interested in quick and substantial profits. Within five years, the Dutch merchants had formed no fewer than ten companies to carry on trade with the islands. The Indonesian rulers welcomed the Opportunity to use the Dutch to drive out not only the Portuguese, but also the consi- derably smaller British and French trading groups. In 1602, the existing trading firms were amalgamated into a single unit, the Dutch East India Company. By the 1630's, this Dutch company had effectively driven out rival European traders from the archipelago. In Java, the net effect of the Company's policy was negative. The Dutch regulated the production of various crops and imposed a system of forced cultivation of certain crops and the delivery of the stipulated quotas to the Company. Thus, although agricultural production, in gener- al, increased considerably under the Company's regime--and 21 despite the fact that the Dutch introduced the cultivation of new crops, principally coffee—-the position of the indi- vidual Javanese farmers deteriorated (Mintz, 1961). Java- nese merchants also were soon forced out of business. The Dutch preferred to use Chinese as their middlemen. The Company leased large tracts of land to the Chinese, and also granted them certain monopolies, among them the right to collect tolls and taxes. The Chinese soon came to con- trol the internal commerce of the island; their number in- creased and the Javanese merchant class gradually disap- peared. Although coffee, sugar, indigo and tea from Java, and spices from the Moluccas (Maluku), were bringing the Dutch enormous profits, the Dutch East India Company was disas- trously in debt by the end of the eighteenflmcentury. The Company collapsed in 1798 and the areas it had controlled were taken over by the Netherlands government. In 1811, following Napoleon's conquest of the Nether- lands and his subsequent attempt to establish French rule in Java, the British seized the Indonesia archipelago. The Dutch came back to Java in 1816, after the close of the Napoleonic Wars. Once again they found themselves back in the familiar situation: running a highly profitable colo- nial enterprise. Movement Toward Independence Discontent at the way things were going was protested by the local people in the form of local wars and other 22 anti-government actions from time to time. These struggles against the colonial power gradually produced a feeling of nationalism among Indonesians, which lead to movements to- ward independence from the Dutch colonial string. During World War II, the Japanese occupied the islands for more than three years. The sufferings during Japanese occupa- tion had accelerated the desire for independence. With Japan's defeat, two Indonesian leaders, Sukarno and Hatta, declared the independence of the Republic of Indonesia, on August 17, 1945. For the next four years, Indonesia strug- gled to keep the Dutch from resuming colonial rule. The U.N. succeeded in getting both sides to end the conflict. In December 1949, the Netherlands formally recognized Indonesia's independence. However, conflict against the Netherlands still existed and increased as Indonesia sought control of its territory that still was controlled by the Netherlands--West New Guinea (Irian Jaya). In 1960 diplomatic relations with the Netherlands were severed and Indonesian troops began infiltration of Irian Jaya. The Netherlands subsequently turned the region over to the United Nations in 1962. The U.N. placed the terri- tory under Indonesia's jurisdiction in May 1963. Government. Form of Government At the present time, Indonesia is a unitary republic with a president as the national head of the central 23 government; just after the Agreement with the Dutch the country was a Federation of several regional states. In accordance with the Agreement, on December 27, 1949, the "Republik Indonesia Serikat" (Republic of the United States of Indonesia") became a sovereign and independent state-- under a new constitution and under Sukarno as president and Hatta as prime minister. However, by the end of March,1950, twelve of the sixteen states voluntarily sub- merged their identity, through unitary movement, in the first Republic (which was proclaimed by Sukarno-Hatta on August 17, 1945). In May 1950, it was decided by all concerned to esta- blish a new unitary state, terminating the Federation. The new Republic chose Sukarno for president and Hatta for vice-president. After the failure of an attempted communist coup on October 1, 1965, a power struggle erupted. Gen. Suharto emerged as the strong man of a new regime. On February 23, 1967, he was nominated as acting president. On March 12, 1968, he was appointed full president by the "Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat" (MPR, People Consultative Assembly-- the highest authority of the state, the embodiment of the sovereign people). Suharto was reelected to a third five- year term as president in 1977. Levels of Government The central government, located in Jakarta, controls and coordinates the lower levels of government. The lower levels consist of: provinces ("propinsi"), regencies 24 ("kabupaten"), sub-districts ("kecamatan"), and villages ("desa"). The country consists of 27 provinces that cover major islands and regions: Sumatra, Kalimantan (Borneo), Sulawesi (Celebes), Java, Irian Jaya (West New Guinea), Nusa Tenggara and Maluku (Moluccas). The central govern- ment gives "first order" autonomy to provincial governors and "second order" autonomy to the regencies or "kabupaten" and to town municipalities. Each level has its legislative council, personnel, and budget. The village, particularly in Java, is seen as the "third order" autonomy level of government, but usually functions without any legislative body. Government Planning General Suharto became full president in March}l968. In June, 1968, he named his first cabinet the "Development Cabinet." He gave this name special meaning by appointing members of his brain trust to it. For the first time, the generals were outnumbered by civilians--about half of whom were technocrats (Sievers, 1974). The first Five-year Development Plan, "REPELITAI," was inaugurated at the beginning of fiscal year 1969/70, that is, April 1, 1969. It is the National Development Planning Board, BAPPENAS ("Badan Perancang Pembangunan Nasional"), which develops the five-year plans, makes annual adjustments in the plans, and generally supervises the development program. Each province government has a Regional Development Board. This board is responsible for the planning 25 coordination among department offices at the province level to meet the central government policy guidelines for deve- lopment program. The regency government has a Regency Development Board. The purpose of this board is to decide the priority of development projects for a particular regency. The regency or "kabupaten" is usually known as the county level with population of one or more hundred thou- sands. Other similar levels are changwat in Thailand, counties in China, Korea and Taiwan (Uphoff and Esman, 1975). In the sub-district level, the head man CCamat") has the responsibility of reporting to the higher level of government. The "Camat" has the responsibility for coordi- nating the technicians, who are stationed in the sub- district area. According to Uphoff and Esman (1975), the sub-district is equivalent to the 0.8. township level with a population generally in the range of 20,000 to 50,000. Similar to sub-districts are amphoe in Thailand, blocks in India, divisions in Sri Langka, mukim in Malaysia, mura in Japan, and unions in Bangladesh and Pakistan. The "desa" or village is the bottom administrative unit of the government, although generally it consists of several sub-villages or "kampung," i.e., a cluster of family houses. As a comparison, Indonesia's village is the same level as barrio in the Philippines, brigade and production-team in China, hamlet in Japan and Korea, 26 kampong in Malaysia, local community in Yugoslavia, and panchayat in India (Uphoff and Esman, 1975). The Role of Agriculture in the National Economy. Agriculture plays an important role in the Indonesian economy. More than 60 percent of the economically active population of the country is in agriculture, as can be seen in Table 2-2. Table 2-2: Agricultural Population in Indonesia. Total Economically Active Population Percentage Year Active Population in Agriculture in Agriculture (million) (million) 1960 32.9 24.6 74.5 1970 42.2 27.9 66.3 1978 50.3 30.4 60.4 Source: FAO (1978). Approximately 80 percent of the agricultural population is concentrated in Java. Prior to 1968, agriculture's contribution to the gross domestic product (GDP) fluctuated between 51.3 to 53.9 per- cent (USDA, 1977). In 1976, the agricultural sector repre- sented 40 percent of the GDP. Since 1974, the percentage has decreased as a result of the relatively increasing con- tributions made by other sectors, particularly oil. How- ever, the absolute value of the agricultural sector has increased. It is estimated that, as a portion GDP, agri- culture remains at about 35 percent. Major agricultural 27 products are rice, rubber, cassava, corn, palm oil, and tobacco. Agricultural exports’in 1979/80 reached $4,628 million as compared to $2,744 million in 1977. In both cases, the agricultural exports represented roughly about one quarter of total exports. To some extent, the high proportion of the agricultural export value is a result of increasing prices for agricultural products on the international market. Coffee is Indonesia's largest food-product earner. Exports of lumber, rubber, palm oil, along with coffee, represented 85 percent of the agricultural export value in 1979/80. The Importance of Rice in the Agricultural Sector. One of Indonesia's major problems is the insufficiency in food production, particularly of rice. Actually, rice production in the last decade has expanded rapidly, but still not rapidly enough to keep up with the demand. The increase of rice consumption per capita of almost two percent annually, coupled with population growth of more than two percent, should continue to aggravate the problem of food supply. The growing deficit of rice is evidenced by rapidly increasing rice imports--from an average of only half a million tons in 1968 to almost 28 2 million tons in 1977. With high productions of rice in 1979 and 1980, rice imports were still high--approximately 1.9 million tons and 1.3 million tons, respectively ("Tempo," Nov. 1981). Components of the Rice Production System in Indonesia Indonesia's agricultural production is basically com- posed of two components: the plantation sector, which pro- duces cash crOps mainly for exports, and the subsistence sector of small holders (peasants), who produce rice and other secondary food crops. While the cash crops have long been a prime factor in the growth of the economy, the importance of the subsistence sector is even more far- reaching; it directly concerns the livelihood of about 70 percent of the rural population (Wong, 1979). Within the subsistence sector, rice is the most important crop for the peasants in the country, as it provides not only the bulk of their incomes, but also a major source of their daily caloric intake. It is not surprising, therefore, that the government has given high priority to rice pro- duction in economic development plans. Indonesia's Rice Intensification Programs The government has focused production efforts through several rice intensification programs. "Intensification" generally means the use of a recommended package of inputs involving new high-yielding variety seed, fertilizer, pes- ticides, irrigation, and improved cultural practices. 29 Upon achieving its independence, the government of Indonesia immediately set about preparing plans for in- creasing the domestic production of rice. In discussing Indonesia's economic developments, it is relevant to refer to 1960-65 as the "Sukarno period" and 1966 to present as the "Suharto" or "new order" regime. In general, the Sukarno period was a time of slow economic growth and high inflation rates. Conversely, the Suharto government brought stability to the country by reducing inflation and accelerating economic growth. Overview of rice intensification period Historically, the Indonesia's rice programs can also be differentiated into two periods: those carried out prior to 1966 and those carried out after 1966. Four of the early programs were: (1) The first sustained program to increase rice production, which was initiated in 1952; (2) "PadiCentra" (Paddy Center) program that was initiated in 1959; (3) "Demas" (Mass demonstration) that was carried out in 1964-65. The second period's rice program are: (l) "Bimas" (Mass guidance) that was initiated in 1965-66; (2) "Inmas" (Mass intensification) that was initiated in 1967-68; (3) "Bimas Gotong-Royong" (Cooperative Bimas) conducted in 1969-70; and (4) Improved Bimas that was ini- tiated in 1970-71 and continues to the present time. Programs of the early periods (1952-66). The rice program initiated in 1952 was inaugurated with the purpose of achieving rice self-sufficiency by 1956. The basic 30 thrust of this campaign involved the increased distibution of fertilizer, the dissemination of improved seeds, and restoration of irrigation facilities; whereas in the outer islands efforts had been conducted through an expansion of new agricultural land areas. The results of this program appear to have been considerable; rice production rose by a margin of 30 percent between 1950 to 1954. However, the momentum achieved in this program came to a sudden halt in 1955 when major floods destroyed a significant portion of the rice crop. The plan was then abandoned. In 1959, a national policy for reaching self-sufficiency in rice within a period of three years was established in the "Paddy Center" program. The target was to establish 250 paddy centers to cover 1.5 million hectares by 1961-62. A special authority, the "Pertani," was created to imple- ment an integrated program to deliver a better technology package to rice farmers. The package included intensive extension sources and credit in kind (fertilizer, local improved seeds, pesticides) and in cash, to be repaid in rice procurement for a national rice stock. According to Sajogyo (1973), the program had pushed a chemical ferti- lizer "revolution" in Indonesia's rice fields. In a short time, the annual imports of fertilizer had reached two to three times the pre-war volume. Despite the result of increased fertilizer consumption, the lack of trained ex- tension agents and the weakness of the administrative performance of the "Pertani," made the program unsuccessful. 31 The hoped for surplus of 390,000 metric tons in 1962 turned out to be a record deficit of one million tons (Palmer, 1978). Another failure of the program was the low repay- ment rates. In the wet season of 1959-60, the repayment rate in West Java was the lowest at 56 percent (Birowo, 1975). During the 1964-65 wet season, a "Mass demonstration" program was conducted. The program encouraged farmers to practice "panca usaha" ("five principles" of rice intensi- fication): 1) use of high-yielding seed; 2) use of ferti- lizer; 3) use of pesticides; 4) better irrigation; and 5) improved cultural practices. Four hundred forty stu- dents from nine Colleges of Agriculture of all parts of the country were sent to 220 villages in an area of almost 10,000 hectares. The tasks of the students were to under- take intensive extension work and work together with far- mers in practicing rice intensification efforts. This program was successful in terms of the national effort to increase production. However, with the growing of the size of rice areas faced by each student, problem inputs delays becoming serious, and this program was terminated. Newer program (1966 to date). The second "wave" of rice programs was the "Bimas" rice intensification pro- gram that was initiated during the wet season of 1965-66. Bimas is an acronym for "BImbingan MASaal," which means mass guidance. It involved the mass guidance, or educa- tion, of farmers in using their resources for production, 32 i.e., to use more and proper fertilizer, better rice varieties, and pesticides, besides improving their cultu- ral practices and irrigation facilities. The Bimas program was rapidly expanded and it has been modified substantially. Program areas were selected on the basis of: l) the availability of irrigation; and 2) the adequacy of road network. These areas were heavily con- centrated in Java. The predominant feature of this Bimas program was its group-credit approach. Farmers received credit accommo- dations through their village cooPeratives. These coop- eratives were loosely registered organizations as they served as channels for loans, but they do not meet coop- erative standards of education and financial management. "Bank Rakyat Indonesia" (Indonesia's People Bank") was the major source of loans. Other sources were "BULOG" (Food Logistic Board) and "Pertani." Bimas loans consist- ed of farm supplies and cost of living allowance; the size of loan packages varied from time to time. In mid-1967, some alterations were made to these rice programs. The programs were divided into "Inmas" and "Bimas." "Inmas"(mass intensification) embraced farmers who were self-financing and voluntary participants. It was assumed that farmers, who had been assisted under the Bimas program, would have increased their production and income substantially. Further, it was assumed that they no longer needed credit and would only need technical 33 advice. In fact, there was no evidence that the extension service had been intensified under the Inmas program. During the wet season of 1968-69, "Bimas GotongRoyong" was introduced. "Gotong Royong" means cooperation; the cooperation was arranged among Indonesian government, far- mers, and foreign companies. The government entered into a contract with seven foreign companies, mostly manufac- turers, for the supply of fertilizer, pesticides, and some equipment on a one-year deferred payment basis. It was designed to have a dramatic impact on rice production. For West Java, this program covered 343 thousand hectares in 1969 and 318 thousand hectares in 1970. The size of loan packages under this program were larger than under the earlier programs. Farmers were advanced supplies of fertilizers and pesticides through the village head and were committed to pay for these inputs by delivering one- sixth of their crop to the government. By the second year of implementation (1970), the terms of repayment were changed to a fixed value; repayment was to be made in cash or in kind. Those foreign companies were to be paid a fixed price for every hectare that was supplied with production inputs. Despite some benefits of the mandatory introduction of new inputs to the farmers through the Bimas Gotong Royong program, repayment rates were very low--even lower than in Paddy Center program in 1959-62. Thus, in light of the high cost of the program, low repayment rates, wastage of 34 farm supplies, and alternative investment opportunities, this Bimas program was not considered successful. This program lasted only two years before it was terminated. A new Bimas program was then developed during the wet season of 1970-71. It was named the "Improved National Bimas" program. The funds for the new program were put in the national development budget. The "Bank Rakyat Indone- sia" was the single institution called on to take care of the credit services. Under this program, farmers received loans individually--not as collective credit--from the "village unit," which was organized by Bank Rakyat Indo- nesia. In structure, the "village unit" consisted of a representative of the government bank with two assistants recruited from local villages--an extension workers, and a fertilizer retailer. A "village unit" usually covered an area of 600 to 1,000 hectares of rice fields (called "Wilud, Wilayah unit desa) and a population of 1,800 to 3,000 farmers living in about five adjoining villages (Bi- rowo, 1975). Supplies of fertilizer and pesticides go through the usual marketing channels instead of direct government's distribution ones. Farmers are given more freedom to choose the combination of inputs they need. A "Wilud" is also provided by a village unit admi- nistrative (BUUD, "Badan Usaha Unit Desa") whose officials are appointed from local villages. It is hoped that, in the future, when local administrative resources were strong 35 enough, the BUUD would turn into Village Unit C00perative (KUD, "KOperasi Unit Desa"). It is also hoped that this KUD would form the basis of a new village development unit. Since 1973, BUUD's and KUD's have been grown in many areas. They serve both the Bimas and Inmas programs. Observations About Indonesia's Rice Intensification Efforts. I From studying Indonesia's rice intensificaton programs,| it can be generalized that basically those programs consist of four major activities. The activities differ in the manner in which they are carried out. They involve: l) agricultural extension to encourage farmers to adopt new agricultural inputs; 2) steps to properly distribute 2aupplies of new inputs; 3) provision of credit to enable farmers to secure farm supplies and pay for them after harvest; and 4) improvement or irrigation facilities. Two other measures on price policy are conducted by the government in connection with the rice programs to accelerate the achievement of the programs. They are: l) the fertilizer price subsidy to encourage greater use of fertilizer by farmers; and 2) the rice price stabili- zation to encourage farmers to adopt improved technology and to increase their production so that consumers can benefit by reduced prices. f ‘R 3 THE ADOPTIO’ 7 ‘AL TECHNOLOGY BY F p ,1 ‘VIEW The Smal\l mer. Rural poverty of filicts most developing countries. Th ,onsists of landless laborers, the unemployed, an stence farmers (Berry and Cline, 1979).. Subsistence rmers may be defined as farmers who use most of what they grow to meet the needs of their families (Wharton, 1970). A subsistence farmer generally operates a small farm; he almost always works close to the edge of poverty. Many small farmers cannot support their families from the income generated by their tiny holdings. Thus, many small farmers are forced to seek employment as agricultural labors. In the developing countries, agricultural per capita income is typically below the national average. Even worse, the distribution of income within the agricultural sector is highly skewed. In Mexico, for example, more than 40 percent of the agricultural population in 1962 belonged to the lowest income group. Yet, persons in this group received only 15 percent of the income generated in agriculture._ By contrast, the highest income group, which 36 37 constitutes 1.4 percent of the agricultural population, received 14 percent of the income. Therefore, the per capita income of the highest income group was nearly one hundred times higher than that of the lowest group (Biggs, 1974). Enhancing the Development of the Small Farmer: Strategies. Since an estimated 40 percent of the land under culti- vation in the developing countries is subsistence, rather than commercially farmed (Wharton, 1970), an increase in the output of subsistence farms would have an important affect on the overall agriculture yield. Recently, policy makers have turned, in earnest, to the present and poten- tial small farm sector in the search for a feasible means of achieving the objectives of increasing agricultural production, growth of income, and enhancing rural equity. In the last decades, many countries have embarked upon a variety of projects that are aimed at increasing food pro- duction as a means to enhance the standard of living of rural people (Crouch and Chamala, 1981). Through those projects, technological change has been either guided, managed, or induced in different parts of the world. However, there is a greater need to define or redefine development and to understand the process and dynamic fac— tors that are related to technological change and rural development. In this connection, Seers (1981) in his at- tempt to define development, points out that a "plan that 38 includes no targets for reducing poverty, unemployment, and inequality can hardly be considered a "development plan." The questions to ask about a country's development, according to Seers (1981), are therefore: What has been happening to poverty? What has been happening to unem- ployment? What has been happening to inequality? If all three of these have declined,then--beyond doubt—-there has been a period of development for the country concerned. According to Berry and Cline (1979), two general poli- cies warrant particular, considerations: (1) land reform, i.e., redistributing land from existing large farms into new small-scale family farms; and (2) the channeling of improved inputs and credits to existing small-farm sector. For Java, where land redistribution is not a feasible option, only the latter policy is relevant. Mosher (1966) has presented a classification system for small farmer development strategies. Essentially, there are three types of programs: (1) the integrated ap- proach; (2) the non-integrated approach; and (3) the filter- down approach. The integrated approach calls for the simul- taneous provision of a number of sources or activities for small farmers located in a specific geographic region. The non-integrated approach stresses the delivery of a small number of sources or activities (e.g. credit programs and cooperatives). The filter-down approach includes a national development policy that is aimed at overall agri- cultural development, such as: price support, extension efforts, trade policy, and research. 39 Enhancing Small Farmer Development: Results of Strategies. Deficiences are associated with these approaches in terms of their ffect on small farmers. For example, filter- down programs typically benefit large commercial farmers who have access to information and/or already actively par- ticipate in the exchange economy. The rice intensification programs in Java may be cate- gorized as an example of the integrated approach. Through these programs, new agricultural technology (i.e., "Green Revolution" technology), is introduced to farmer partici- pants. However, the reality (at least from the experiences in the developing world) is that the new technology is still beyond the reach of many small farmers. Some ana- lysts also feel that the impact of the "Green Revolution" has been minimized because of: 1) soil erosion; 2) the costs of the adoption package (improved seed varieties often demand irrigation and intensive application of fer- tilizers and pesticides): 3) the cost of storage, distri- bution, and marketing; and 4) the lack of awareness of the technology by some low-income farmers (Wharton, 1969). According to Havens (1975), the "Green Revolution" techno— logy was often available only to the large landowner. This situation could lead to further concentration of agricul- tural incomes. In essence, those who may not benefit fully from the fruits of the "Green Revolution" may be small farmers, sharecroppers, renters, and agricultural laborers. 40 Lele and Mellor (1972) have noted that larger farmers are in a position to afford these innovations. They also wield more political power over the development agencies that provide access to credit and crucial supplies, such as: fertilizers, seeds, and pesticides. Thus, the introduc- tion of new technology seems generally to fall under the predominant control of those who own most of the land and capital. Consequently, while new technology may increase production and incomes, these benefits may not automati- cally "trickle down" to the rural majority. The problem of inequality is further compounded by the use of a "progressive farmer" strategy by national govern— ments to diffuse new innovations. The reasons why most rural development agencies in deve10ping nations follow the "progressive farmer" strategy have been delineated by Roling (1970): 1. Progressive farmers have large-size farms; the extension worker's direct effect on total agricultural production is greater if he works with more progressive farmers; 2. Progressive farmers are those who can be expected to form the future core of com- mercial farmers who will provide the nation with food and export earnings; 3. Progressive farmers have a high sense of efficacy; thus, they are eager for infor- mation; 4. Progressive farmers demand assistance; they have the economic means to try out new ideas; 5. Progressive farmers are usually homo- phillous with the agricultural extension workers; 41 6. Progressive farmers provide an intellectual challenge to the local extension service official—-they keep him "on his toes" with their questions and problems; 7. Extension workers learn from progressive farmers what to tell others. An example of the "progressive farmer" approach is described in a report authored by the Republic of Indonesia (1973). After having said that "ideal domonstrator farmers should be progressive, influential, sufficiently educated, representative, and of sufficient economic means," the authors continue: ...it will not be easy to find the ideal demon— strator farmer, ...but it must be considered quite possible to find always a farmer who is willing to follow advice and to play a leading part in farmers' meeting without insisting on being paid for that. However, diffusion processes are "imperfect equalizers," in fact, because of the following reasons: 1. Innovations do not typically arrive in rural communities one by one; instead, innovations come in rapid succession. While some mem- bers of the system are still adopting an earlier innovation, other individuals are already reaping benefits from those more recently introduced. 2. Innovations take time to diffuse. So, those who plant it earlier receive an extra income over additional years that puts them ahead of others. The later adopters may find it impossible to "catch up." 3. Farmers with a small resource base run a proportionately greater risk in venturing into new endeavors. Conversely, those with larger farms benefit proportionately more, given the same yield increase per hectare. 4. Progressive farmers tend to become a fixed clientele over time. Consequently, new 42 information is always channelled to the same farmers--further strengthening their advan- tages through early adoption of innovation. The Diffusion of New Agricultural Technology to Small Farmers in Java. This process of diffusing new technology from the pro- gressive farmers ("upper stratum") to the peasants ("lower stratum") also occurs in rural Java. For example, Soewardi (1972) has studied the Javanese farmer's response to the modernization process. He has viewed Java's "Green Revo- lution" from a sociological viewpoint with the area's history serving as an important frame of reference. The focus of interest of his study is the "cure" of Javanese village society after one-and-a-half centuries of an insti- tutional non-linkage problem with its far-reaching conse- quences. Soewardi found that the rural population was generally responsive to the adoption of new technology. This conclusion means that both the upper and lower strata of the village population appeared to participate in the new farm practice opportunities that were available to them. The findings of the study also revealed that it is the upper stratum that is in the position to pioneer the new technology. This upper stratum is usually in dir- ect contact with the extension workers so that those people are the first to be persuaded by the extension workers to attend agricultural courses and practice the new practices. Through these people, somewhat indirectly, the new techno- logy has been diffused to the lower stratum over a span 43 of approximately ten years. The diffusion to the lower stratum happens--not because the upper stratum has exten- ded its knowledge--but because of contacts with the "mar- ginal" upper stratum,who are visually not distinguishable from the lower stratum, and who maintain daily contact with the lower stratum people. However, an important change has transpired since Soewardi's 1972 study: a "leveling off" of the land area of intensification and of the increasing rate of rice yield has occurred. This suggests that many farmers, who had previously participated in the programs, have decided to decrease or withdraw their participation in the rice in- tensification program. A Theory of Adoption Behavior. What type or kind of adoption behavior appears to be most applicable to Javanese small farmers? Types of Adoption Behavior. Innovations, such as new farm practices, can be adopted or rejected by individual members of a system or by the entire social system. Rogers andShoemaker (1971) have suggested four kinds of adoption behavior: (1) contin- gent; (2) collective; (3) authority; and (4) optional or individual. Contingent adoption is defined as a social system adoption in which individual members have the option to adOpt the innovation after a prior adoption decision by the system. An example of a contingent adOption is the adoption 44 by a teacher of audio—visual aids in teaching after the school authorities have purchased audio-visual equipment for use in the school. Collective adoption may be defined as a social system adoption in which the individual members are involved in decision-making process. The individual members are ob- liged to act jointly to adopt the innovation. An example of a collective adoption is a well for irrigation by a farmer's cooperative. The adoption decision is made jointly by the farmers. The use of the well for irrigation involves joint action by the farmers. Authority adoption is defined as a social system adop- tion in which the individual members are not involved in decision-making. The individual members must, individually or jointly, adopt or reject the innovation. An example of an authority adoption is the adoption of a new technologi- cal process by the management of a factory. The individual members are bound to use the new process. These three types of adoption behavior can be classi- fied as types of social system adoption; cases where the decision to adopt an innovation is made by a subsystem of the social system. This subsystem may consist of all the members of the social system or may consist of one or more members authorized to make decisions for the social system. Individual adoption is defined as the case where the individual makes a decision for himself and implements the decision to use the innovation. In this process, the 45 individual adopter is likely to be influenced by the other members of his social system. But the final responsibility for decision-making and acting is his own. The adoption of a new farm practice by a farmer is an example of individual adoption. Only individual adoption will be considered in this study. Impediments to Adoption Scientists and planners are aware of the need for deliberate efforts to persuade farmers to adopt new ideas and practices. However, there are a number of problems or obstacles to extending new production-technologies to a large number of farmers. Although it is recognized that these problems are quite complex and interrelated, Biggs (1974) has identified three broad categories of problems: (1) technical-production problems; (2) organizational and institutional problems; and (3) problems related to far- mer's decision-making. Lack of rainfall is an example of a technical- production problem. The new technologies, which employ heavy doses of fertilizer and require more plantings per unit of area, are particularly sensitive to rainfall. New technologies, which are often developed under field-tested, moisture-adequate conditions, often perform worse than the local technologies when subjected to rainfall deficiencies. An example of organizational/institutional problem is the process of obtaining credit. Many farmers often complain that bank credit is difficult to obtain through Java's rice 46 program. Particularly the small farmer who could not get credit did not have an Opportunity to practice new techno- logies at earlier time; whereas new technologies need additional cost to practice. The third problem will be elaborated on in the following sub-section. Factors influencing adoption From the experience of the Pueblo Project in Mexico, Biggs (1974) indicates that one of the most important fac- tors influencing the decision to participate or not in the problem is the degree of economic risk implied by the new technology. Even under the possibility of doubling family income, many small farmers may be deterred from partici- pation by their perception of the risk accompanying the technology. Another factor that has been found to influ- ence the decision to participate in the rice program is the availability of off-farm job opportunities. The other possible reason for dropping out of the program is the accumulation of debts from previous years. The major reason for loan defaults is low level of production, which may be due to many factors such as the participant's fail- ure to precisely follow farm practice recommendations. From the experiences in some villages of Java, farmers often buy the recommended quantities of fertilizers, but often do not apply the entire amount. These farmers see the fertilizer purchase as a form of savings--to be sold at a later time--when cash is needed. Other farmers sell part of the total fertilizer to a neighbor or family mem— ber who may not be able to obtain credit from the program. 47 In addition, there are a number of other possible reasons for farmers to behave at variance with farm prac— tice recommendations. Among these are: late receipt of fertilizer due to late loan applications (and the associated difficulty in bank processing); participants not being fully informed on the recommendations; and credit constraints in purchasing fertilizer. All of these factors may inhibit the use of optimal farm practices. Roy (1968) has concluded from his research in rural India that the following variables affect the far- mers' decision-making process: (1) socio-economic status; (2) size of farm; (3) the use that a farmer makes of com- munication in terms of his extension service contact and his reliance on mass media; and (4) the farmer's linkage with outside world in terms of his urban contact, politi- cal knowledge, and secular orientation. Rochin (1972) also found that both mass media and interpersonal communication channels have important roles to play in introducing dwarf wheat varieties to smallholders in Pakistan. Mass media channels are those means of trans- mitting messages that involveiamass medium such as radio, television, film, newspaper, fairs and the like which en- able a source to reach a large audience. (A source is an individual or an institution that originates a message.) Interpersonal channels are those that involve a face-to- face exchange between two or more individuals. Adoption research has shown that peOple become aware of new ideas 48 from the mass media, but they usually do not adopt these ideas themselves before they have been able to use personal sources of information; the massmedia does not bring about important changes in human behavior unless they arethm- biHEd with interpersonal communication (Rogers, 1962; Luthe, 1968). Vanden Ban (1981) argues that farmers are readily convinced by results and performances--not by claims and suggestions. These influences are likely to come from other farmers who have similar problems and are in the same situation. One of the methods that takes advantage of this premise is the result demonstration farm system that has been used in several countries as an extension technique. Demonstration (both method and result) were supposed to help facilitate communication among illiterates. In addition, the attributes of innovations, as per- ceived by receivers, can also influence the rate of adop- tion. The five attributes of innovation as observed by Rogers and Shoemaker (1971) are: (1) relative advantage, i.e., the degree to which an innovation is perceived as better than the idea it supersedes; (2) compatibility, i.e., the degree to which an innovation is perceived as consis- tent with existing values, past experience and needs of the receiver; (3) complexity, i.e., the degree to which an innovation is perceived as relatively difficult to understand and use; (4) triability, i.e., the degree to which an innovation could be tried on a limited basis; and (5) observability, i.e., the degree to which the re- sults of innovation are visible or could be felt by others. 49 Scholars and researchers of the adoption process have recognized that an individual's decision about adopting or rejecting an innovation is not usually an instantaneous act. Rather, it is a process that occurs over a period of time and consists of a series of actions and decision. According to Singh(1965), who has studied the Indian situa- tion, this process has been depicted in terms of seven stages. These stages are: 1. Need: this is a stage of discontent when an individual wishes to change his existing practices. 2. Awareness: the individual just comes to know about an innovation without knowing the details of it. 3. Interest: he makes an attempt to know more about the innovation. 4. Deliberation: this is a stage of deliber- ating on "to try or not to try"--(mental evaluation). 5. Trial: an individual uses an innovation in part or sometimes on the full scale. 6. Evaluation: the individual evaluates the performance of the innovation. 7. Adoption: it is a decision to use the practices on a continued basis. Hodgon and Singh (1966), compare the 0.8. and Indian situation related to these stages. In the U.S., adoption implies that a farmer is convinced of the profitability of a single practice and wants to continue using it. In Indian villages, adoption means simultaneous use of seve- ral practices and procedures. AdOption appears to be more a result of linking of.cash credit with production 50 supplies than of farmers conviction about the profitability of recommended practices. In India farmer's need for credit may cause him to adopt the practices (adoption stage) and then evaluate the result later. Moreover, the adoption stage may conceivably continue because of a farmer's con- tinuing need for cheap credit rather than of conviction based on trial. In general, from those factors that have possible re- lationship with the decision-making to practice new farm inputs, the following general factors can be identified: the farm setting, the farmer's social context, the econo- mic context, and the aspects of the communication process. Each of these factors will be further discussed--from both a theoretical and measurement perspective--in the next chapter. CHAPTER 4 METHODOLOGY Introduction. The purpose of this study is to identify those factors that influence the extent to which small farmers practice new rice technology in West Java. It is hoped that future agricultural programs may be improved by isolating the reasons why small farmers do not adopt new farm practices as recommended. Study data were collected from a sample of respondents that was selected among the small farmers in six villages of rural Subang, West Java. Subang was selected as the study site because it is one of the most important rice production regencies of West Java. It is also one of the "poor areas" in the province. The design chosen in this study is a cross-sectional survey, i.e., data were collected at one time. Study data were collected through face-to-face personal interviews with respondents from August 2, 1981 to September 30, 1981 by a team of enumerators consisting of the writer and two graduate students at Padjadjaran University, Bandung. The purpose of this chapter is to provide details on the study method. The chapter includes sections on: 51 32 Operationalization of the Theory, Study Hypotheses, Data Collection Method, and Data Analysis Approach. Operationalization of the Theory. The study of the adoption of agricultural technology in rural areas had received great attention from social scientists. Basically, the difference among these research- ers is which explanatory variables account most for the adoption of new agricultural technology. The researchers consider different categories of independent variables. Conversely, there is a common feature in these studies: the emphasis on adoption as the main dependent variable of interest. Although most of these studies do not apply directly to Java, the studies provide guidelines for iden- tifying the theoretical concepts and indicators used in this study. The studies of the adoption of new agricultural tech- nology and its related literature show, as presented in Chapter 3, that many factors influence farmers' decision to adopt new technology as fully as recommended. Within the total decision-making process of Java's small farmers, this study will focus on the following general factors as the independent variables: Farm Setting; Social Context; Economic Context; and Communication Context. 53 The dependent variable in this study is the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. For the purpose of opera- tionalizing the theoretical concepts, this study specifies empirical observations that may be taken as indicators or operational measures of the attributes contained within a given concept. The independent variables: Factors influencing small farmer decision making. As previously mentioned, four general factors are hypo- thesized to affect the extent to which small farmers prac- tice new farm technology: farm setting, social context, economic context, and communication context. Farm setting. The farm setting in which farmers' de- cisions are made is one of the important causes or predic- tors of the small farmers decision to practice new technology. It is the larger farmer with larger farm and wealthier cul- tivator who is apt to adopt more new practices. Many inno— vations, such as practicing new farm inputs, require substantial capital outlay and involve substantial risk of crop failure that are beyond the investment and risk- taking of a smaller cultivator. In order to describe the farm setting, we intend to specify the nature of the farm firm through obtaining information on: farm size in hectares, farm business size in terms of degree of commercialization land fragmentation, farm status, and crop diversification. Social context. The second cause, or predictor, of the dependent variable of this study is the farmer's social 54 context-~the context in which he makes decisions. In general, the better educated, higher social status farmer (if he is linked with social systems beyond the immediate family) should be in the best position to know about, and to accept, new farm practices. Local development agencies are aware of the potential of this type of farmer and they tend to work more closely with the higher social status farmer--who is generally a progressive cultivator. In connection with the farmer's social context, this study sets out to describe the individual small farmer in a gross sense: formal education, size of family, his degree of involvement in formal and informal groups or organiza- tion, and his position in the village social structure in terms of his leadership in the local community. Economic context. The third general factor used to explain small farmer decision-making is the economic con- text in which decisions are made. Since new farm prac- tices, such as the use of new inputs, require capital investment, it is the wealthier farmer——with higher economic status--who is apt to adopt more practices and to adopt sooner. Availability of capital permits adoption, which leads to higher profits, which permits more adoption, and so forth. In order to describe this economic context variable, the study is interested in the context of econo- mic relationships in which decisions are made: his socio- economic status, his economic activities, and off-farm employment. 55 Communication context. The fourth independent variable used to predict the dependent variable in this study is the communication context. There are differences among indivi- dual small farmers in access and exposure to communication about new technology. Communication is the transmission of a message from one person or institution to another. If the farmer is to utilize a new technology, he must come to know something about it. In this study, we are interested in information on his degree of reliance on mass media (such as radio, TV and printed communication channels), as well as the extent of contact with various types of change agents. Furthermore, we are interested in information on the extent to which the farmer is in- volved in, and dependent upon, the local community in terms of: extra-family contact with his neighbors and in demonstration plots located on the neighbors' farms. Indicators of the independent variable. Having considered these four general factors as the independent variables, i.e., farm setting, social context, economic context, and communication context, indicators of these variables were devised to project that meaning into concrete realm. According to Warren et a1. (1977), an indicator is an estimate—-an attempt to capture or measure the quality and/or quantity of a property or concept. In this study, two or more specific indicators will be iden- tified as Operational measures for each of the independent variables. These indicators were devised with the 56 confidence that they fulfill at least two criteria as adequacy indicators--high enough reliability and validity. Each indicator has an adequate accuracy or precision of a measuring instrument and it measures with an adequate de- gree what it purports to measure. Farm setting. The farm setting, which shows the nature of the farm firm of the individual farmer, will be measured by: (l) farm size; (2) farm status; (3) land fragmentation; (4) crop diversification; (5) crop intensity; and (6) com- mercialization. Specific measures of the indicators of the farm setting are: Farm size -- Measured in hectares of land oper- ated by the respondent. Farm status -- Classified as: owner operator, renter, and sharecropper. Land fragmentation -- Measured by the number of non-contiguous plots of farm a farmer operates. Crop diversification -- Measured by the number of crops a farmer cultivates on his farm. Crop intensity -- Measured by how many times a farmer plants a crop or various crops during one year. Commercialization -- Measured by the percentage of farmer's agricultural product that is Sold to market. In this study, it was found that all of the farmers grew rice twice-a-year and nearly all farmers grew only rice. Similarly, nearly all of the farmers had only one plot of land and they were owner operators on that land. Therefore, further analysis in this study will deal with 57 two indicators of farm setting: (1) farm size; and (2) commercialization. Social context. The social context of a farmer in which he makes decisions will be measured by: (1) his formal education; (2) size of his family; and (3) social participation. Specific measures of the indicators of the social context variable are: Education of the farmer -- Measured by the number of years of formal schooling; Social participation: (1) Membership in local organizations -- Indi- cated by the kinds and number of organiza- tions to which the farmer belongs. (2) Role or leadership in local community -- Measured by asking about farmer's position in the local community. Economic context. The economic context of an indivi- dual farmer will be measured by his: (1) socio-economic status; (2) economic activities; and (3) off-farm employ- ment. Specific measures of the indicators of the economic context variable are: Socio-economic status index -- Indicated by the amount of farm taxes; the value of material / possessions (radio, TV, tape recorder, sewing machine, motorcycle, and bicycle); farmer's house (its size, design, and material of . the house). ~r-\l/ Economic activites: (1) Level of farmer's farm income used for purchasing new inputs. (2) Credit performance -- Measured by the amount of production-loan a farmer gets from credit institutions or individuals. 58 Off-farm employment -- Measured by the earnings from off-farm jobs as compared to farm earnings. Communication context. The communication context, in this study, will be measured by the extent of the farmer's: (1) contact with development change agents; (2) extra-family contact; (3) reliance on mass media; and (4) the extent of access to farm inputs. Specific measures of the indicators of the communication context variable are: Extent of contact with develOpment/change agencies -- Measured by the frequency of meetings, in the last year, with development/change agents, such as with the extension agent, the "village unit cooperative" people, and the credit in- stitution/"Village People Bank“ people. Extent of extra-family contact -- Measured by the frequency, in the last year, or visits to the better neighbor farms, demonstration plots, and meetings with other progressive farmers. Degree of reliance on mass media -- Measured by the frequency (hours per week) of the use of mass media sources of information (radio, TV, and printed materials: newspaper, pam- phlet, etc.). Access to new farm inputs -- Measured by how easy it is for the small farmer to obtain new farm inputs (e.g., fertilizer, pesticides) and the quality of the transportation system between the "input-kiosk" and the farm. The dependent variable: The extent to which farmer practices new farm inputs The dependent variable in this study is the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. The variable will be measured by the degree to which: (1) new farm inputs were used; and (2) farm inputs were used as recommended. Measures of the indicators of the 59 dependent variable are: The degree to which new farm inputs were used The (l) -- Measured by the kind/variety and dosage of each input (fertilizer, rice seed variety, and pesticides) used. extent to which farm inputs were used as recommended -- Measured by the extent of each input used compared with recommended dosage* **): Extent of fertilizer use: N-fertilizer P O -fertilizer Total (TgPS (urea) =Triple Super kg/Ha Phosphate) kg/Ha. kg/Ha Great extent: > 225 >90 >315 Moderate: 190 - 225 70 - 90 260 - 315 Little: 100 - 190 40 - 70 140 - 260 Very little: < 100 .. 4 40 < 140 No use: --- --- --- Extent of HYV use: Rice seed variety Weight (kh/Ha) Great extent: National HYV 20 - 25 Moderate: National HYV, or <_20 Local HYV 20 - 25 Little: Local HYV <;20 No HYV use: Local traditional variety Extent of pesticide use: Great extent: > 3 liter per Ha. Moderate: 2 - 3 liter per Ha. Little: 1 - 2 liter per Ha. Verylittle: < 1 liter per Ha. 60 *) The recommended dosage of each input according to the government's rice intensification program is: Urea fertilizer: 200 kg/Ha TSP fertilizer: 80 - 100 kg/Ha HYV seed: 20 - 25 kg/Ha Pesticide: 2 liter/Ha. **) In the statistical analysis, the score of fertili- zer use and pesticide use was weighted two times that of the score of HYV use. Study Hypotheses. (M . . e, * 3 Having identified the variables and their indicators, M~' the following hypotheses and sub-hypotheses were constructed to look at important theoretical relationships between one or more independent variables and the dependent variable. Hypothesis I: The extent to which the farmer practices new inputs is positively influenced by the farm setting. This hypothesis suggests that there is a relationship between farm setting and the farmer's decision to practice new technology. The farm setting of a farmer, which con- sists of several items forming the nature of a farm finm [as shown by Roy's (1968) study in rural India] positively affects the farmer's decision to adopt new practices. Sub-hypothesis I-l:' The larger the size of the farm, the greater the degree to which farmers adopt new farm practices. This hypothesis assumes that farm size positively affects the extent to which farmers practice new tech- nology. As reported from many studies, farm size has con- sistently been shown to be related to adOpt behavior. 61 The larger cultivator is more apt to adopt new practices and, for any given practice, practice it sooner. Sub-hypothesis I-2: The greater the percentage of farm product that is sold to market, the greater the degree to which farmers practice new farm inputs. This hypothesis predicts that the amount of product sold to market from a farm firm positively relates to the extent of practicing new inputs. Reasons for this rela— tionship seem clear that the more market oriented a farm firm is, the more that incentives exist to increase pro- duction and, consequently, the more new inputs will be used in the farm. Hypothesis II: The extent to which the farmer practices new inputs is positively influenced by his social setting. This hypothesis assumes that there is a positive re- lationship between the farmer's social context, such as his education and social participation, and the extent to which the farmer practices new inputs. In general, better educated farmers with higher social participation in the local community are more likely to come in contact with sources of information, to know about, and to accept, new technology in agriculture. . Sub-hypothesis II-l:. The higher the farmer's education, the greater the degree to which the far- mer practices new farm inputs. I ' ’I .IlglII‘IQ‘I‘I-‘I’Jl. ‘ I‘u.f£.tl (It Iv'artllyt It? uckf 4 1‘&[.OE»‘A‘ED).I. .6; .4 I II. ‘. n 11"j'llr \I «In... E‘j’EE. .I v 9).... f {'4‘ ‘75, (1|! . .leq‘IEl-‘I: 62 This hypothesis stresses that the farmer's education is significantly associated with the extent to which new inputs are practiced. From many studies, it has been con- cluded that better educated farmers are more prone to ac- cept innovations in agriculture. Sub-hypothesis II-2: The greater the extent of social participation, the greater the degree to which farmers practice new farm inputs. This hypothesis expects that farmer's social partici- pation, measured by his membership in local organizations and leadership in local community, will relate positively with the extent to practice new farm inputs. This rela- tionship has been demonstrated by several studies (e.g. a study conducted by Fliegel, et al. (1967) on Agriculture Innovations in Indian Villages). Greater social partici- pation typically means that there is a higher integration of social activites and leadership pattern in the village. This phenomenon may then lead to higher adoption of agri- cultural innovations. Hypothesis III: The extent to which the farmer practices new inputs is positively influenced by his economic Context. This hypothesis explores the relationship between farmer's economic context and the extent to which he prac- tices new farm inputs. It demonstrates that the farmer, who is better off economically, is also higher in the extent to which he adopts new farm practices. 63 Submhypothesis 111-1: The higher the farmer's socio- economic status, the greater the extent to which he practices new farm inputs. This hypothesis assumes that there is significant relationship between farmers' socio-economic status and the extent to which they practice new farm inputs. Many studies of individual differences in adoption behavior show that higher socio-economic farmers are: (l) quicker to adopt modern practices; and (2) adopt more of such practices. This may stem, to some extent, from the fact that change agents work more closely with higher socio- economic status farmers. Sub-hypothesis III-2: The more a farmer is engaged in economic activites, the greater the extent to which he practices new farm inputs. This hypothesis predicts that a positive relationship exists between farmer's economic activities, as measured by his level of investment on new inputs and credit per- formance, and the extent to which he adopts new practices. The higher the percentage of farmer's income used for new inputs investment, the more likely that he wants to take a risk by practicing new inputs; and the more that a far- mer obtains production-loans reflects the availability of the means to adopt new practices. Sub-hypothesis III-3: The more a farmer is engaged in off-farm employment, the higher the degree to which he will utilize new farm practices. 64 In constructing this hypothesis, we expect that off- farm employment will contribute to a higher level of new farm practices. This assertion is made on the grounds that off-farm employment can provide an additional source of income for investing in the farm. Hypothesis IV: Given that new farm practices stem from the larger society, communication aspects (indicated by contact with change agencies, extra-family contact, reliance on mass media, and access to farm inputs) will positively influence the extent to which the farmer practices new farm inputs. Sub-hypothesis IV-l: The more a farmer has contact with change agencies, the more likely he is to practice new farm inputs. This hypothesis predicts that the more a farmer con- tacts with change agencies--the sources of information-- the more exposed he will be to information and, subsequently, will be more likely to accept new farm practices. Through this hypothesis, we are interested in looking at whether the local small farmers could easily make contact with the village change agents or whether these agents use the stra- tegy to contact only the progressive farmers. Sub-hypothesis IV-2: The greater the degree of extra-family contact, the greater the degree to which farmers practice new farm inputs. 65 Extra family contact with friends, neighbors, rela- tives or other cultivators provides an informal, inter- personal channel of communication. Some studies conclude that this kind of interpersonal communication channel plays an important role in introducing new farm inputs. Sub-hypothesis IV-3: The greater the use of mass media, the greater the degree to which farmers practice new farm inputs. In general, we expect that farmers, who are exposed to information from the larger society through the mass :media, are more likely to accept new practices. Users of the mass media generally come from the farmers who have more wealth, education, knowledge and experience. This hypothesis is interested in understanding the performance of mass media channels and their function at the local level in the process of the introducing of new farm inputs. Sub-hypothesis IV-4: The easier it is to obtain farm inputs, the greater the degree to which farmers practice new farm inputs. This hypothesis assumes that farmers' access to new farm inputs relates positively to the extent that farmers will practice these inputs. The difficulty in getting these farm inputs is one possible reason why farmers prac— tice farm inputs at variance with those recommended by the agricultural extension agents. For the purpose of adoption of new farm inputs as recommended, these inputs should be provided at the right local place and the right 66 time so that farmers can easily get these inputs whenever needed. Hypothesis V: The farmer's economic context and commu- nication aspects variables are the most important factors associated with the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. This hypothesis indicates the expectation that two blocks of empirical variables or indicators, i.e., farmer's economic context and communication, have the most signifi- cant influence on the extent of new inputs practiced by the small farmer. Practicing new farm inputs, such as ferti- lizer, new seed and pesticides, means an additional capi- tal outlay to the farmers. Particularly for the smaller farmers, it is a risk to practice these new inputs. Thus, farmers need information and assurance--through interper- sonal and/or mass media communication channels--that they will benefit from practicing new farm inputs. Hypothesis VI: Commercialization, economic activites (level of farm inputs investment and credit performance), extent of contact with change agencies, and access to farm inputs are the important variables asso- ciated with the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. The higher commercialization of a farm firm tends to promote a more market-oriented farmer, which causes the 67 farmer to take the risk of using new inputs. Similarly, the high farmer's economic activites will picture more capital availability which, in turn, will increase his ability to invest in the additional cost of farm inputs. The more frequent a farmer has contact with change agents, the more he gets information on the benefits of practicing new inputs and, consequently, the more likely he will be confident in using these inputs. Farmers with adequate capital and more confidence in the benefits of new inputs will immediately practice these inputs when the procedure of getting them is adequate or easy. Accordingly, this hypothesis predicts that some empirical variables or indi- cators, such as commercializaton, economic activites, ex- tent of contact with change agents and access to farm inputs, have the most important influence on the degree to which a farmer practices new farm inputs. Data Collection Method. This section presents details on: theistudymsite; sample design; the data collection instrument; and the F- _—.-—'--— data collection process. The study site This study was carried out in six villages in the irrigation areas of the regency of Subang. Site selection criteria. The study site was selected on the grounds that the regency of Subang is one of the important rice production areas among the regencies of 68 West Java. In addition, the regency belongs to one of the "poor areas" of West Java. Many small farmers operate tiny ricefields and struggle for their livelihood. An overview of West Java's agriculture. Subang regen- cy is one of twenty regencies in the province of West Java. This province is one of the important provinces among the 27 provinces in Indonesia. West Java covers a land area of 46,300 square kilo- meters, about one third of the island of Java, and only 2.4 per cent of the whole land of the country. How- ever, this province has a population of more than 27 million people (in l980)about 19 percent of the total population of the country. The role of West Java's agri- culture is very important for the country. About 23 per- cent of Indonesia's rice production is produced in West Java. Its 1979 rice yield of 32.5 quintal per hectare was higher than that of the national average rice yield of 29.8 quintal per hectare. Similar to the agricultural production composition of the country, West Java's agricultural production basi- cally made up of two components: the plantation sector and the small farms or peasant sector. The plantation sector of West Java produces mainly tea, rubber, and cin- chona as export commodities, and cane sugar for domestic market. Whereas the peasant sector produces mostly rice, and secondary food crops, such as cassava, pea nut, corn, sweet potato and soybean. Most of the farmers in Banten 69 (Western part) and Northern West Java areas, to which the regency of Subang belongs, farm most1y_rice during the whole year; those areas are known as monocultural areas. On the other hand, the Central and Eastern West Java is known as poly-cultural areas. Many farmers in this agri- cultural area farm other crops after rice or between two rice cultivations. In general, it is considered that the farmers in this area are more market oriented, are more economically minded in using their resources, and, thus, are more progressive as compared with those farmers in the other areas of West Java. The regency of Subang: its rural areas. The regency of Subang consists of 11 sub-districts ("kecamatan") and 160 villages ("desa") with a land area of 2,052 square kilometers. In 1975, the population of Subang was 928,802 inhabitants with a density of 551 people per square kilo- meters. In general, Subang belongs to the "poor area," whereas six of its sub-districts belong to "very poor areas"*); this condition is a typical characteristic of mono-cultural rice areas. *) The Indonesia's Directorate of Land Use conducted a study, in 1978, on "Location of Poor Areas in the pro— vince of West Java." A "poor line" was set based on the minimum need per capita on nine basic commodities consumed for living (i.e., rice, dried fish, sugar, food oil, salt, kerosene, soap, rough textile, and batik). "Very poor area" referred to an area where the income per capita is below 75 percent of the "poor line." "Poor area" referred to an area where the income per capita of the population in that area is between 75 per- cent and 125 percent of the "poor line." 70 The regency may be diVided into: a coastal area in the north; a lowland plain in the middle; and upland plain in the south. In general, in the upland area farmers plant pere- nial crops, such as tea, fruits, and woods. In the lowland plain, farmers cultivate mostly rice, together with a num- ber of secondary food crops, such as peanuts, beans and vegetables. In the coastal area, almost all farmers plant rice (monoculture); only a few farmers rear fish in their ponds. Most of the ricefields in the northern, or coastal parts of Subang get irrigation provided by the "Jatiluhur Irrigation Dam Project," which is located in the adjacent regency of Purwakarta. All of the six sample villages selected as the site of this study are located in this irrigation area. Most of the Subang inhabitants live in the rural area; 71.9 percent of the families live as farmers. A typical village in rural Subang is a cluster of houses surrounded by ricefield ("sawah") or dry fields ("tegalan") and occasionally by hedges or bamboo groves. The head of the village, called "Kepala desa" or "lurah," is generally elected by the villagers. Village officials generally consist of: one or two clerks, village police, "penghulu" (the person who handles the religious matters). and "ulu-ulu" (the person who handles the irrigation sys- tem.in the village level). Usually a "desa" hall, called "balai desa," is found near the house of the village head. 71 Other public buildings in Subang villages might include a mosque, a community health center hall ("Puskesmas") and 2 or 4 elementary schools. Village markets vary consider- ably in size and appearance. It may be just an open space at the junction of main roads of the village or it may be a building with tiled roof and a number of stalls. These markets usually open only once a week; two or three adja- cent village markets have a different "market day." As in other parts of Java, most Subang farmers op- erate tiny farms. In the village of Rancasari, for example, more than 50 percent of the farmers operate under one hec- tare of land. The majority of Subang's farmers are owner- operators--about 70 percent of them own all of their farm- land; and 5 percent do not own any of the land that they cultivated. The land owners in the village have an obli— gation to contribute a portion of their rice product for the salary of the village officials. This kind of con- tribution, called "pancen," is distributed to the officials according to their rank (Palmer, 1978). Increasing crop intensity and rice intensification methods are the two important ways to compensate for the problem of small farm size. Rehabilitation of the irri- gation and the construction of new irrigation facilities in Subang will increase the cropping intensity. In this way, ricefields can be planted two times a year and pro- vide the Opportunity to practice rice intensification method. 72 Sample design. A sample of small farmers for this.Study was selected through a multistage cluster sampling design. According to Babbie (1973), cluster sampling may be used when it is either impossible or impractical to compile an exhaustive list of the elements comprising the target population. Multistage cluster sampling involves the repetition of two basic steps: listing and sampling. In the first stage, three sub-districts (i.e., Binong, Pamanukan and Ciasem) were selected on purpose, based on the homogeneity of the area irrigation distribution from "Jatiluhur Dam Project." In the second stage, two villages or clusters were randomly chosen from a frame of all villages in each chosen sub- district. In the third stage, 30 respondents were randomly selected from a list of all small farmers in each chosen village. A problem was encountered in making a decision on the correct sample size. It is understood that the larger the sample, the more precise will be the estimate of the characteristic in the population. This is especially true in the lowest ranges of sample size, i.e., below 100 (Neale and Riebert, 1973). In practice, however, especially in the developing countries, it is rarely possible to follow textbook procedures for determining sample size without making a heavy expenditure of time and finance (Spencer, 1976). Soewardi (1972) argues that a sample size of 25 for each village is reasonable under Java's conditions. 73 According to Babbie (1973), the general guideline for cluster design is to maximize the number of clusters while, at the same time, decreasing the number of elements within each cluster. Based on the above arguments, taken together with the time and budget constraints associated with this study, a sample of 180 farmers was selected--30 small far- mers from each sample village. Description of the sample villages. The six sample villages belong to three sub-districts (Binong, Pamanukan and Ciasem) in the lowland plain of northern Subang. Gen- erally, the cr0pping pattern in these sample villages is similar: rice is typically the sole crop cultivated by farmers in the wet land. Water is supplied by "Jatiluhur Irrigation Project." Soil in the sub-district of Binong is generally more fertile than in the other two sub— districts. Farmers in Binong are considered more progres- sive; several cultivate other crops between two rice cultivation periods. The sub-district of Ciasem and Pama- nukan are considered as "very poor areas," whereas Binong sub-district belongs to "poor area." A short description of each of the sample villages will now be presented. Mulyasari village. This sample village is one among the ten villages of Binong sub-district. In general, Mulyasari is a relatively developed village within a "poor area." It is located on the side of the mainroad that connects the city of Subang to other big cities of ‘West Java, such as Cirebon and Jakarta. The distance of 74 the village to the city of Subang is approximately 27 kilometers, and to Binong (the sub—district town) is only 6 kilometers. The village covers a land area of 647.2 hectares. In 1980, the population of this village was 5,468 inhabitants with a high density of 845 peOple per square kilometer. The density is higher than that of the Subang regency of 551 people per square kilometer (in 1975). The village has a farm area of,586.24 hectares with an average farm size of 0.64 hectare. It has been reported that all of the farmers in this village practice the rice intensification method; the average yield was five ton of rice per hectare. The material possessions registered by the villagers include: 385 radios, 33 tape recorders, 24 TV's, 40 motor- cycles, two trucks and 69 bicycles. Tambakdahan village. This village also belongs to the sub-district of Binong. In general, this sample village has similar conditions and the same level of development as the Mulyasari village. It is located on the side of the main road and has good road and transportation facilities to the city of Subang and to the other places outside the village. The village covers 656.12 hectares including 587.75 hectares of ricefields or wetlands. The 1980 population was 5,582 inhabitants with a high density of 850 people per square kilometer and an average family size of 3.8. 75 The kinds and numbers of things registered by the villagers are: 247 radios, 58 TV's, 32 motorcycles, three trucks and eight minibus/taxis. Rancasari village. Administratively, this sample village belongs to the sub-district of Pamanukan. There are 12 other villages in this sub-district. Rancasari village is located about seven kilometers to the west of the main road to Subang-Pamanukan. The distance from the village to the city of Subang is 37 kilometers and ten kilometers to Pamanukan. The area of the village is 546.32 hectares including 471.48 hectares of ricefield. It has been reported that all of the farmers participated in the rice intensification method using new farm inputs. The 1980 population of the village was 4,985 inhabitants with a density of 912 people per square kilometer. Several farmer organizations were introduced by the government in the rural area of Subang, such as: Farmer Contact Group, Village Irrigation Society, Youth Farmer Discussion Group, Group of Discussion on Village Radio Program, and the Vil- lage Unit Coops. The possessions registered in the village include: 175 radios, 65 TV's, four trucks, seven minibus/ taxis, two sedan cars, 51 motorcycles, 39 "becaks" (rick- shaws), and 571 bicycles. Rancahilir village. This village also belongs to the sub-district of Pamanukan. In general, the rural condition of this village is not quite different with that of Rancasari: Rancahilir is located six kilometers to the east of the 76 Subang-Pamanukan main road. The distance from the village to the city of Subang is about 40 kilometers and to Pamanu- kan is eight kilometers. With a land area of 600 hectare, and total population of 7,642 inhabitants (in 1980), the village has a very dense pOpulation of 1,252 peOple per square kilometer. The total area of ricefield in this village is only 378.20 hec- tare; more than half of the farmers farm less than 0.5 hectare of land. However, it has been reported that more than 90 percent of the ricefield in Rancahilir was culti- vated using the rice intensification method, with an average yield of 4.5 ton per hectare. Blanakan village. This sample village is one of the ten villages of the sub-district Ciasem. A central govern— ment's "Rice Seed Development Project," called "Sang Hyang Sri," is located in Ciasem to develop and distribute high yielding varieties of rice. Blanakan village is located in the coastal plain of Java's Ocean--about eight kilometers to the north of Cirebon-Jakarta highway. The village road condition to Blanakan is rather poor, particularly in the rainy season. This village has an area of 987.92 hectares including 510 hectares of ricefield, 96 hectare of dry land, and 54 hec- tares of ponds; the rest of the area is mostly covered by briny forest. It was reported that the average rice yield was four ton per hectare, in 1980. Sukahaji village. This village also belongs to the sub-district of Ciasem. Sukahaji is located about ten 77 kilometers to the south of Cirebai-Jakarta highway--a distance of approximately 67 kilometers from the city of Subang. The village has a land area of 825.98 hectare in- cluding 720.92 hectare of wet land or ricefield with an average from size of 0.6 ha. It has been reported that the average rice yield during the last five years was four ton per hectare. With a total pOpulation of 5,961 inhabi- tants, in 1980, the pOpulation density of this village was relatively moderate: 679 people per square kilometer. The condition of rural roads is generally adequate, but becomes poor in the rainy season. The most important transportation modes are bicycle and motorcycle; "becaks" (rickshaws) are mostly used during the dry season. The number of each transportation mode in the village is: two minibus/taxis, 39 motorcycles, 1,093 bicycles and 28 "becak." Other villagers' possessions that were registered in the village were: 490 radios and 20 TV's. The data collection instrument. I An interview schedule was used to collect data from the selected farmers. A structured interview was used; a similar stimulus was given to all responents. Most of the questions in the schedule were close-ended questions. The interview schedule was organized into five sections: (1) farm setting; (2) social context; (3) economic context; (4) communication context; and (5) extent to which the far- mer practiced new farm inputs. Farm settigg. In this section, several questions on the farm setting were asked; such as : 78 l. The size of the ricefield operated by the respondent: (answered in hectare); ,, 2. The respondent's status to his land: which was answered by selecting among a list of responses: (1) owner-operator; (2) renter; (3) sharecropper; and (4) others: ......; 3. Respondent's land fragmentation: which was measured by the number of his non-contiguous plots, and the distance (in meter) between each plot and his house; 4. The respondent's farm intensity: which was measured by how many times the farmer planted rice in a year, and what other creps that were cultivated; 5. The rice yield andyproduction of respondent's farm: which were measured in kilogram per hectare; 6. The degree of respondent's commercialization: which was measured by the amount of rice sold to the market (in quintal and percentage). Social context. In this section, several questions concerning the social context of the respondent were asked: 1. Respondent's education: which was measured by the number of years he attended formal school, and whether he got a formal diploma or not. L 2. Respondent's family size: the number of family members. 79 3. Respondent's socialeparticipation in his local community: which was measured by the number of organizations to which the farmer belongs. 4. Respondent'segeneral social standing in the local community: which was measured by the number of leadership positions held by the farmer in local organizations and/or his role as: (1) religious leader/"kyai," "haji," "ustad"; and (2) teacher (as indicators of the respondents' level of social status). Economic context. In this section, questions con- cerning the economic context of the respondent were asked: 1. The respondent's socio-economic standing: which was gauged by his house (possession, material and design of his house), other ma- terial possessions (Tv,radio, tape recorder, sewing machine, motorcycle, bicycle), the amount of taxes paid (in rupiah per year), and his income per year (in rupiah). 2. The respondent's level of farm input invest- ment: which was measured by the amount of "rupiah" for the purchase of each input (fertilizer, HYV, and pesticides) and the total of inputs, and also measured this total by percentage to the total farm income. 3. The amount of respondent's loans: which was measured by rupiah per year. 80 Respondent's off-farm employment: which was measured by the number of hours-per-week spent in off-farm employment and the percentage of earnings from off-farm jobs as compared to farm earnings. Communication context. In this section, questions concerning communication context by which the respondent comes to learn about new practices were asked: 1. The extent of respondent's contact with the local formal change agents: which was measured by the total number of times per year (last year) that: (1) the change agents visited the respondent); (2) the respondent visited the change agents; and (3) the respondent attended village meetings. The extent of respondent's extra-family contact: which was measured by the total number of times per year (last year) that the respondent: (l) visited neighbors or progressive farmers; and (2) visited demonstration plots. The degree of respondent's reliance on mass media: which was measured by the total number of hours per week that the respondent spent: (1) listen- ing to the radio; (2) watching "agricultural extension" programs on TV; and (3) reading printed materials on agricultural improvement. 'The respondent's access to new farm inputs jfertilizer, HYV, and pesticides): which 81 was measured by the degree of access (very easy; easy; difficult; very difficult) to various farm inputs. Extent to which the farmer practices new farm inputs. In this section, questions concerning the extent to which the farmers practiced new inputs (the dependent variable) were asked: 1. The degree to which new farm inputs were used py the respondent: which was measured by: (l) the kilogram per hectare of fertilizers used; (2) the variety of rice seed used and kilogram per hectare of that seed; (3) the kind of pesticide used and liter per hectare of that pesticide. The extent of which new farm inputs used as compared with the amount recommended: which was measured by selecting one of the following response options: (1) Great extent; (2) mo- derate; (3) little; (4) very little; and (5) no use. The complete interview schedule is reprinted in ‘ Appendix A. . The data collection process. Study data were collected through face-to-face inter- views with the respondents from August 2, 1981 to September 30, 1981. These data were collected by a team of inter- viewers, or enumerators, that consisted of this writer and 82 two graduate students of Padjadjaran University at Bandung. Each interviewer collected the data from respondents living in two villages of the same sub-district. The recruitment of the two interviewers to help in the field was of paramount importance. They were selected based on the following criteria: (1) they had previous knowledge of agriculture and rural study; (2) they spoke Sundanese, the language of respondents; (3) this Opportunity represented practical training for them (important because they will continue to conduct further study for their thesis); and (4) they were hard working students and had an appropriate attitude for working in rural areas. The two students enumerators were trained intensively for about one week before they went to the field. The training emphasized: (1) an understanding of the study objectives; (2) the problems of the rural areas; (3) the usefulness of the data to be collected; and (4) techniques of interviewing. In the training period, every question in the schedule was discussed and explained. Interviewing was done by visiting respondents' houses and took a maximum of two hours. When the questionnaire could not be completed in a session, another session on a different day was held. Every weekend during the data collection period, the three enumerators met together to discuss the problems related to the data collection process. Data Analysis Approach. Basically, data analysis deals with the analysis of 83 relationships among variables; in this study, the focus is on the relationship between the independent variables and the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs (as stated in study hypotheses). Weisberg and Bowen (1977) call attention to the increa-‘ singly major role of interval statistics in social science research. Many social scientists, whose data are not inter- val level, nevertheless, find interval statistics usefulT—\ Interval level techniques are much more powerful than ordinal- level and nominal-level techniques. These techniques permit us not only to measure how strongly related a pair of variables are, but also—-by means of such techniques--we can measure the affect that a change in the independent variable has on the dependent variable. One of the most common applications of interval statistics to what are usually ordinal or nominal data is in the field of survey research (Weisberg and Bowen,1977). This study also used interval-level techniques for analyzing data to test the study hypotheses. Pearson correlation to test Hypotheses I-IV. Pearson correlation is employed in this study because it serves the purpose of measuring the strength of the linear relationship (shown by Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficient, r) between two variables as stated in those sub-hypotheses associatediwith Hypotheses I-IV. r2 is a more easily interpreted measure of association when our concern is strength of the relationship-(Nie, et al., 1975). 84 It can be interpreted as the proportion of variance in one of the variables explained by the other variables. Pearson correlation analysis provides a single summary statistic, the correlation coefficient, describing the rela-- tionship between two variables (e.g. the relationship bet- ween farm size and the degree to which farmers adopt new farm practices). Multiple partial correlation to test hypothesis V. According to Blalock (1970), and also Loether and McTavish (1974), multiple-partial correlation analysis may be defined as the multiple correlation between a block of predictors and a dependent variable after other independent variables have been statistically controlled. Warren, et a1. (1980) argue the fundamental characteristics of multi- pleepartial correlation relates to the size of explained variance in multiple regression analysis. Unlike multiple correlation, multiple partial correlation involves the partitioning of explained variance. The square of multiple correlation coefficient (R?) represents the proportion of variance simultaneously explained in a dependent variable by two or more independent variables. The square of the multiple-partial correlation coefficient (MPC-square), on the other hand, pertains to the prOportion of the remain- ing variance explained by a block after still other pre- dictors have explained as much variance as possible in the dependent variable. In this study. the focus is on economic context and communication aspects associated with the dependent variable 85 (the extent to which farmers practice new inputs), after other independent variables of farm setting and social con- text have been controlled. Multiple regression to test Hypothesis VI. Multiple regression is employed because it serves the purpose of measuring the strength of the relationship bet- ween a dependent variable and a set of independent variables as stated in hypothesis VI. Kim and Kohout (1975) define multiple regression analysis as a general statistical tech- nique through which one can analyze the relationship between a dependent variable, or criterion variable, and a set of independent or predictor variables. We have hypothesized that a set of independent vari- ables--commercialization, economic activities, extent of contact with change agencies, and access to farm inputs-- have significant relationship with the extent to which farmers practice new inputs. The approach that will be used in this study is through the forward (stepwise) in- clusion procedure. This procedure is used when we wish to isolate a subset Of available predictor variables that will yield an optimal prediction equation with as few terms as possible. The order of inclusion is determined by the respective contribution of each variable to explain- ed variance. The variable that explains the greatest amount Of variance unexplained by_the variables already in the equation enters the equation at each step. Thus, the independent variable which is chosen for entry is the one 86 which has the largest squared partial correlation with the dependent variable. Through multiple regression analysis using forward (stepwise) inclusion procedure, it will be shown whether the set of independent variables stated in hypothesis VI (commercialization, economic activities, ex- tent of contact with change agencies and access to farm inputs) are the "best 4" predictor variables Of the de- pendent variable. CHAPTER 5 SUBANG'S SMALL FARMERS AND FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH THE EXTENT TO WHICH FARMERS PRACTICE NEW FARM INPUTS In this chapter, study findings are discussed. Chapter 5 consists of two major sections. The first section deals with a description of the items in the survey questionnaire. In the second section, the previously stated hypotheses are tested. A Description of Small Farmers in the Sample Villages of Subang. In this section, a general description of small farmers, based on data from the sample villages, will be discussed. This section consists Of‘three subsections: (1) the small farm setting; (2) small farmers and their social and econo- mic context; and (3) communication aspects and the degree to which the respondents practice new rice technology. y/Small farm setting in Subang villages The small farm setting in the sample villages will be described in three ways: (1) the farm land; (2) the crop production of the farm land; and (3) the commercialization level of the farm firms. Farm land, As stated earlier, the respondents in this StUdY were selected from among the small farmers who 87 88 operated farm land of .7 hectare or less. Table 5-1 displays the frequency distributions for the respondents' farm size and land status. Data presented in this table indicate that the mean size of land Operated by small farmer respon- dents is .45 hectare with a standard deviation of .172. Table 5-1. Respondents' farm size and land status. Size of land Respondents Land status Respondents (hectare) N % N % .10 - .20 21 11.7 Owner Operator 137 76.1 .21 - .30 26 14.4 Renter 3 1.7 .31 - .40 30 16.7 Sharecropper 38 21.1 .41 - .50 50 27.8 Renter and .51 - .60 17 9.4 sharecropper 2 1.1 .61 - .70 36 20.0 180 100 % 180 100 % Mean: .449 Standard deviation: .172 More than 76 percent of the respondents operated their own land, whereas 21.7 percent operated land as sharecroppers. Only about 2 percent rent their farm. Since the size of the farm is very small, the lands cultivated by the far- mers are generally not fragmented. Almost 90 percent of respondents cultivated one plot of land; only one respon- dent operated on three separate plots of land. Farm production. All of the respondents in the sample villages planted rice two times a year. More than 83 per- cent Of the respondents did not cultivate other crops after the rice cultivation or between two rice cultivations; 89. and only 17 percent of them planted other crops after rice, such as red beans, mungbeans, cassava, and other vegetable crops. The average rice yields of respondents' farms of 24.94 qt/ha and 40.66 qt/ha in the dry and wet season, respectively, were lower than the yield of the Subang farms included in the rice programs. It was reported that the rice yield of farms included in the "Bimas" program was 62.30 qt/ha, as compared to 55.58 qt/ha, in 1976 for the farms included in the "Inmas" program (Agricultural Extension Service of the Regency of Subang, 1977). The average yield in both 1980 seasons, 32.80 qt/ha, was also lower than the yield of 33.45 qt/ha for West Java in 1979 (Indonesia's Central Bur- eau of Statistics, 1980). Commercialization level of the farm firm. Although small farmers in the sample villages of Subang Operated small farmlands with low yield and produced small amounts of rice, the respondents' farm firm generally showed an adequate degree of commercialization, i.e., some portion of their rice product was sold to market. Table 5-2 shows that, on the average, more than half of the respondents' rice product--43.5 percent in dry season and 60.9 percent in wet season of l980--was sold to market. The data show that 14.4 percent of the respondents in the dry season and 2.2 percent of the respondents in the wet season did not sell their rice product. 90 Table. 5-2. The percentage of respondents' rice product sold to market in 1980. Percentage of ' Product produced in:‘ rice product . sold to market ‘ Dry season Wet season The whole year (%) - .31. .jL_. _BL. _§__ _EL. __31 0 26.. 14.4 4 2.2 4 2.2 5 - 25 , 17 9.5 14 7.8 20 11.1 25.1 - 50 68 37.8 36 20.0 43 23.9 50.1 - 75 49 27.2 71 39.4 84 46.7 More than 75 20 11.1 55. 30.6 29 16.1 180 100 % 180 100% 180 100% Mean: .43.5 60.9 55.6 Median: ‘7 .. 43.0 66.8 59.4 Standard dev.: 25.7 , 22.9 . 20.4 This situation suggests that the Indonesian government was successful in its efforts to stabilize the price of rice. Small farmers tend not to store their rice production for their own consumption during the whole year. Subang's small farmers and their social and economic context. Based on the frequency distribution analysis of data, small farmers in the sample villages can be described from several points.of view: (1) level of education; (2) social participation; (3) socio-economic context; (4) income; (5) investment of new farm.inputs; and (6) credit performance. Respondents' level of education. Study findings show that respondents, as the head of families, had generally low levels of education. Figures in Table 553 indicate that al- most one-third of the respondents did not complete a single year of formal education; none of them had an opportunity to attend Middle School or a higher level of school. More than 91 Table 5-3. Respondents' formal educatirnl. Number of years of Reepondente formal education N % 0 (No formal education) 57 31.7 1 year 1 .6 2 - 3 years 71 39.5 4 — 5 years 17 9.5 6 years 34 18.9 More than 6 years 0 0 180 100 % 40 percent Of the remaining respondents had attended three years of formal education and less than one-fifth Of the respondents attended six years of formal school. Around 19 percent of the respondents had a primary school diploma. Reports from the four sample villages (Mulyasari, Rancasari, Rancahilir and Tambakdahan) indicate that, on the average, around 32 percent of the population of these villages gradu- ated the Primary School (6th grade), 5 percent passed Mid- dle School (9th grade) and around 1 percent passed High School. Family size. The average family size of the respon- dents was 4.4 with a mode of 4 persons. The average family size in the sample was lower than that of the regency of Subang--4.6 persons in 1976 (Subang Agricultural Extension Service Report, 1977). Small farmers' social participation. The study data indicate that small farmers in the sample villages had low levels of social participation. Although several farmer's 92 organizations were introduced by the government in rural Subang, small farmers did not activitely participate in these local organizations. Nearly seventy percent of the respondents answered that they belonged to only one local organization—-that organization being the "Village Irriga- tion Users Group." Only three respondents belonged to three rural organizations. In addition, more than 90 per- cent Of the respondents did not have any position of leader— ship in the local community. Small farmer's houses and other major material posses- eigne. The study data show that 94 percent of the respon- dents lived in their own houses, 2.2 percent lived in their parents' houses, and less than 2 percent rented their houses. In general, houses in rural Subang may be differentiated into three categories based on the quality of the material of the house, i.e., bamboo house, wood house, and brick house. More than 50 percent of respondents' houses were built from wood, 26 percent were bamboo huts, and only 18 percent were brick houses. None of the respondents owned a TV or a sewing machine. Table 5-4 shows that one-fourth of the respondents owned bicycles and only 5 respondents (1.7 percent) owned a motor- cycle. Other major material possessions owned by small farmers include: radio (owned by 21.7 percent of the res- pondents) and tape recorder (owned by only 5 percent of respondents). More than one-fourth of the respondents owned 93 Table 5-4. Respondents' major material possession. ‘ Material categories Respondente N % Nothing 37 20.5 Radio 39 21.7 Bike 45 25.0 Motorcycle 3 1.7 Tape recorder 5 2.8 Two materials 45 26.1 More than two 3 1.7 No answer 1 .6 180 100 % two kinds of materials (mostly consisting of bike and radio); only 3 persons owned more than two kinds Of those materials. Respondents' family income. Small farmers family income mostly came from farm revenue plus an additional revenue from outside farm jobs. Table 5-5 presents the respondents' gross family income. This table shows that the average res- pondent's farm income was Rp 289,100, the average off-farm income was Rp 59,780 and the average family income was Rp 347,500 (approximately $556; $1 = R9 625). Around 12 percent of the respondents had income of Rp 200,000 or less and only one respondent had an income of more thanlq>750,000 ($1,200). 94 oo.m~v ”0002 oo.cm umvoz oo.omm "OGOZ mEoocw aawfimm 0500c“ Esmwlumo so.sms "oosuts>oo .oomom ~o.~o "cosoms>oo..ocmum oo.o~s "oosums>oo .oomum om.oom "new: oo.om "out: os.oo~ "com: o oos oos o oos oos o oos oos o. s one coco one: o s oms can» ouoz s.s m ooo one» who: m.m o one u soo m o o oms : o.oos o.m o ooo u som o.o ms ooo - som e mm so oos u s.mo o.os om oom u soo e.- so oom : soo o om on me . s.om o.m~ mo ooo u som o.o~ oo ooo u som N so no moms not om e.o~ oo oom u son ~.o~ oo oom u som .maooos sumo s.o~ so oom . sos o.~s mm moms one oom o m o -moo oz. o o.m o sos can» mums o z o z o z .ooo.s om. .ooo.s om. .ooo.s om. oeoocs Show “OEOOGH one “sumo-ooo Am. “oEOOCs Show As. .mEoocfl msflsmw .m. "oEoocfl cams .mucmocommmm .mlm msnwa 95 Although the median of the off-farm income comprised only 20 percent Of the total farm income, as shown in Table 5-6, Off-farm employment opportunities represent a very important source of additional family income. Table 5-6 presents the respondents' Off-farm job situation in the sample villages. This table shows that only 5 percent of the respondents were not employed in Off-farm jobs. Around 40 percent Of the respondents worked in off-farm jobs for less than 15 hours per week. About the same percentage (44.5%) worked between 15 - 30 hours per week in off-farm jobs. And only 15 respondents (around 8 percent) worked for more than 30 hours per week outside their farms. Nearly 60 percent Of small farmers worked outside their farms as farm laborers. Other important off-farm jobs were: coolie (12.7 percent of respondents worked in this job) and small merchants (more than 7 percent of respondents worked in this job). Respondents' level of new farm inputs investment. Table 5-7 presents the respondents' level of farm investment for new inputs (fertilizer, HYV and pesticides) in 1980 and the percentage of this investment to farm income. This table shows that all of the respondents had invested in these new inputs, p23 in various amounts of capital outlay. The average amount of the respondents' new inputs investment was Rp 18,980; the average percentage of this investment was 7.7 percent Of respondents' farm income. Around 45 percent of the respondents had invested between Rp 10,000 - Rp 20,000 96 oo.m~ u.>mp .Ocmum hm.m u.>mp .Ocmum oo.o~ "cusooz ah.ms ”com: w oos oms o.m a “now soooo oz w oos ems s.s N "smsosmmo momsss> w oos oms m.m m umcficmwm .IIIII .III m.m ms “om nun» who: m.> os uucmnosofi ssoam s.m so “mo son» who: m.oo cm ”on I ms s.s m ”ummnosocmm m.h ms "mm I om «.mo on “ms I s s.s N “smucomumu o.om mm uom I mm o.m a “room s.sm mm ”388 s.mm sos "mm can» mums EHOMImmo oz. o m.mm oos “sosonms Eumm m z w z w 2 Amy mEoocw Show .xmo3\ssonv was» on EHOMIMMO non Show ooh show we mmmucoonmm Immo mo cumcmq Immo mo ocflm .wEoocs Show on coausnfiuucoo mmoucmoumm Am. cow “was“ no spasms Amy “Dom mo poem .sv “mach EsmmImmo .mpcoocommms mo mommaocd .mIm OHQMB 97 Table 5-7. Respondents' 1980 new farm inputs invest- ment and the percentage of this investment to farm income. Amount of new Percentage of new inputs investment Respondents inputs investment Respondents (in Rp 1,000) N % to farm income (%) N % 10 and less 26 14.4 5 and less 13 7.2 10.1 - 20 80 44.5 5.1 - 7.5 81 45.0 20.1 - 30 54 30.0 7.6 - 10 65 36.1 More than 30 20 11.1 More than 10 21 11.7 180 100 % 180 100 % Mean: 18.98 Mean: 7.7 Standard deviation: 8.75 Standard deviation: 2.4 on these new farm inputs or 5% - 7% of their farm income. Around 11 percent of the respondents spent more than Rp 30,000 for these new investments; nearly 12 percent of them spent more than 10 percent of their income for this investment. Respondents' credit performance. Together with the investment in new farm inputs, respondents' credit perfor- mance indicate the degree of farmers' economic activity in conducting their farm firms. Table 5-8 displays information on the respondents' production loans. In general, farmers got production loans for new farm inputs investment from the "Bimas" program in the form of a "package loan" and from other money lenders outside the government's rice programs. Table 5-8 shows that around 27 percent of the respon- dents did not obtain production loans through the rice program. Around 28 percent of these respondents did not borrow money from other lenders outside the program. About 98 moo.~s ”.eoo .oomum moo.o ”.>oo .oomuo omm.o ”oosums>oo .oomum mmm.o~ “coo: omo.sa ”cows mum.ms ”coo: w oos oms w oos oms w oos ems s.s m cm son» who: s.s N om coca who: m.~ m on can» who: m.om mm cm I H.o~ s.ss Hm cm I H.om ~.hs an on I H.om m.mm mm on I H.0H s.sm om om I s.os m.mo mm cm I s.os s.s m mums can as m.hm om mums can as «.5 ms moms can as o.os ms 0 m.mm Hm o m.hm mo 0 m z m z w z Aooo.s mmv Aooo.s mm. Ecsmoum Aooo.s mm. GOOH smuoa mosh opwmuoo Emsmoum Guam "coon .mGOOH Hmuou Amy paw «Emumoum moss may mpsmuso mcmoH Amy «Emumosm OOHH nooossu chOH As. "mOOOH cosuosoosm omms .mucmocommwm “mIm osnme 99 10 percent of the respondents used capital from their own sources and did not seek loans for production from either the rice program or from money lenders. Around 45 percent of the rice program participants got their loans from the program between Rp 10,000 - Rp 20,000, whereas nearly 60 percent of the respondents got loans from money lenders at an amount of less than Rp 20,000. Communication aspects and the degree to which farmers prac— tice new farm inputs. This section presents information on communication in terms of the communication between the respondent and the sources Of information about new farm technology and the degree to which respondents' practice new farm inputs. With regard to the communication aspects, we shall focus on: (1) respondents frequency of contact with development agencies; (2) the frequency of neighbor and demonstration plot visits; and (3) the respondents' reliance on mass media. Respondents frequency Of contact with development agencies. The contact between farmers, who need informa- tion, and the development or change agents (e.g. agricul- tural extension agents, Bank's officials) generally occurs through regularly scheduled village meetings. Table 5-9 shows that the traditional village meeting provides greater contact Opportunities for small farmers and development agents to meet each other. Only 4 respondents (2.2 percent) 100 Table 5-9. Respondents' frequency of contact with development agents in 1980. Nature of interaction: Frequency con- Agents visit Respondents Village tact categories respondents visit agents meeting (time/year) N % N % N % 0 48 26.7 74 41.1 4 2.2 l - 5 51 28.3 76 42.2 31 17.2 6 - 12 69 38.3 29 16.1 132 73.3 19 - 24 10 5.6 l .6 10 5.6 180 100 % 180 100 % 180 100 % Mean: 5.8 Mean: 2.7 Mean: 9.4 did not attend a village meeting during 1980; on the average, respondents attended 9 times village meetings in that year. On the other hand, more than 40 percent neyeg visited change or development agents and nearly 27 percent of them had neyeg been visited by the agents in 1980. The average num— ber of times that development agents had visited respondents was 6 times in 1980; whereas the "average" respondent had visited development agents 3 times in the same period. Respondents' fregpency of neighbor and demonstration plot visits. Table 5-10 displays the number Of respondents who visited neighbor farms and demonstration plots in 1980. This table shows that more than 40 percent of the respon- dents had never visited a demonstration plot during 1980: whereas the remaining 40 percent had made less than 3 times in that year. Table 5-10. Respondents' 101 frequency of visits to 'neighbor farms and demonstration plots. Frequency visit \ Frequency visit neighbor farm Respondents demonstration Respondents (times/year) N % pflot(times/year) N % 0 34 18.9 0 79 43.9 1 - 5 51 28.3 1 - 3 72 40.0 6 - 12 87 48.4 4 - 6 28 15.5 13 - 18 2 1.1 More than 6 1 .6 l9 - 24 6 3.3 - ——— -——- 180 100% 180 100 % ' Mean: 6.2 Mean: .l.6 Respondents' visits to a neighbor's farms--farm opera- ted by progressive farmers--were more frequent with an ave- rage of 6 times in 1980. However, nearly 19 percent of the respondents had never visited a neighbor's farm in that year. Respondents' reliance on mass media. In general, small farmers in rural Subang did not extensively use mass media channels of communication in getting information on new farm technology. Table 5—11 shows that more than 90 percent Table 5-11. Respondents' reliance on mass media. Frequency Type of media used: categories . . . . . (hour/week) Listening to Watching A. Reading printed Ag. Ext. Progr. Ext. Progr. material on on the radio on TV Ag. Improvement N % N % N __% 0 57 31.7 122 67.8 169 93.9 .5 - 2.0 63 35.0 45 25.0 3 1.7 2.0 - 4.0 56 31.1 13 7.2 3 1.7 Over 4.0 4 2.2 --—y —-- 5 2.7 180 100 % 180 100 % 180 100 % 102 of the respondents had never read printed materials that included information on new technology. Nearly 70 percent of the resondents had never watched agricultural extension program on TV. More than 30 percent of the small farmers interviewed in this study had never spent time listening to "village programs" on the radio. On the other hand, around 30 percent of the respondents answered that they had had an Opportunity to watch the agricultural program (for around 2 hours per week) on a TV owned by others. The extent to which respondents practice new farm inputs. Study data indicate that all of the respondents practiced new farm inputs on the farm (such as fertilizer, HYV seeds and pesticides) but in various dosages. Table 5—12 presents the frequency distributions of the extent to which farmers' practice fertilizer, pesticide, and HYV seed. As stated earlier, the extent of using each of these inputs was cate— gorized--based on the recommended dosage of each input set by the government's rice intensification program. The table shows that all of the respondents used seeds as recommended--they practiced HYV seed in the recommended dosage. More than half of the respondents used pesticides on their farm.at a "moderate" level--they practiced pesti- cides around the recommended dosage. More than 38 percent Of the respondents used pesticide below the recommended dosage and nearly 3 percent of them used pesticides at a "very little" level. Whereas the use of fertilizer was 103 Table 5—12. The extent to which respondents practice fertilizer, HYV seed and pesticide. Type of input: Degree of (*) practice Use of Use of HYV Use of fertilizer pesticide N % N % N % Great extent 5 2.8 160 88.9 11 6.1 Moderate 23 12.8 20 11.1 95 52.8 Little 141 78.3 --- --- 69 38.3 Very little 11 6.1 --- --- 5 2.8 180 100 % 180 100 % 180 100 % (*) Fertilizer (kg/ha) N-fert. TSP-fert. Total Great extent 225 90 315 Moderate 190 - 225 70 - 90 260 - 315 Little 100 - 190 40 - 70 140 - 260 Very little 100 40 140 HYV (kg/hal Pesticide "National" or "Local" (liter/ha) Great extent 20 - 25 --- 3 Moderate --- 20 - 25 2 - 3 Little --— 20 1 - 2 Very little --- --- l The recommended dosage by theygovernment: N-fertilizer (urea) TSP fertilizer HYV seed Pesticide 200 kg/ha 80 - 100 kg/ha 20 - 25 kg/ha 2 liter/ha 104 generally below that recommended, more than 80 percent of the respondents used fertilizer at lower dosages than that recommended. Nearly 13 percent of them used fertilizer at the amount around the recommended dosage; only 2.8 percent used higher than recommended dosage. Factors Associated with Small Farmers' Level of New Rice Technology. New rice technology began with the introduction of "miracle" or high yielding varieties (HYV) that promised to increase rice production. To achieve its optimum pro- ductivity, the HYV involved other additional production factor inputs, such as the additional use of fertilizer, use of pesticide, better water conditions, and better preparation of farmland tilling. In this study, we shall focus attention on the extent to which farmers' use fertilizer, HYV seed, and pesticides. This research concentrates on those inputs because: (1) it is difficult to measure the level of far- mers' land tilling; and (2).there is little variance in the use of irrigation in the sample villages. In this section, the results of data analysis concern- ing factors associated with the farmers' level of new rice technology--employing Pearson Correlation, Multiple-partial Correlation and Multiple Regression analyses--are presented. In employing these analyses, the package program SPSS (Sta- tistical Package for the Social Sciences) was used. As stated in the study hypotheses, generally the hypotheses I I ‘1!!!“ III-III II .iIEJIl-ll . I i .l f -..I..~!.. (III III! ii} 105 predicted that each of the four general variables-—farm setting, farmer's social context, farmer's economic context, and communication aspect--was related to the extent to which farmers practice those three new farm inputs. Accordingly, this section is separated into sub-sections following the differentiation of these general variables. Farm setting related to the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. Theoretically, farm setting affects the farmer's deci- sion to practice new farm inputs. Several studies indicate that farm size is significantly related to the adoption of new farm technology. Although the results of this study support this expectation, the two variables arewinvegsely relatedilas shown in Table 5-13). An interesting finding Table 5-13. Product moment correlation among measures of farm setting and the extent to which farmers practice new inputs. Extent to which Degree of farmers practice Size of farm commercial- new inputs ization Extent to which * ** farmers practice 1.00 -.14 .19 new inputs ** Size of farm 1.00 .29 Degree of com- mercialization 1.00 * Significant at .05 level **Significant at .01 level 106 is the negative relationship between the extent to which farmers practice new inputs and small farmer's farm size. Table 5-13 shows that the product moment correlation coef- ficient between these two variables is -.14. Although the coefficient is not high, this indicates that the smaller the farm size (for small farmers-~farmers with an average farmmm size of .45 hectare in this sample) the greater the use of new rice technology. In other words, the larger farm Opera- tor tends to use farm inputs in lower dosages, particularly in terms of fertilizer use. As stated earlier, more than 80 percent of the small farmers used fertilizer at the dosage lower than the recommended dosage. Thus, the result does not support the expectation as stated in Sub-hypothesis I-l. The correlation between the degree Of commercialization of the farm firm—-measured by the percentage of rice product that is sold to markete-and the extent to which farmers prac- tice new inputs is positive with a correlation coefficient of .19. This indicates that as the degree of commerciali- zation increases, the extent to which farmers practice new inputs tends to slightly increase. This result supports the expectation as hypothesized in Sub-hypothesis I-2. Table 5-13 also shows a moderate relationship between size Of farm and the degree of commercialization (r = .29). As the farm size increases, the degree Of commercialization of the farm firm tends to increase also. 107 Farmer's social context related to the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. It was hypothesized that the extent to which the farmer practices new inputs is influenced by his social context. We expect that the higher the farmer's education, the great- er the degree to which the farmer will practice new inputs. It is also predicted that farmer's social participation is positively related to the dependent variable. However, the study analysis results do not support those expectations. The results indicate that the extent to which farmers prac- tice new inputs, particularly fertilizer use, is not related to their social context. Table 5-14 shows that the farmer's level of education is very weakly and inversely related to the extent to which a farmer practices new inputs (r=-.01). Table 5-14. Product moment correlation among measures of farmer's social con- tact and the dependent variable. Extent to which Level of Extent of farmers practice education social new inputs participation Extent to which * farmers practice 1.00 -.01 -.14 new inputs ** Level of education 1.00 .28 Extent of social participation 1.00 * Significant at .05 level. **Significant at .01 level. 108 This indicates that a farmer's dosage of inputs is not greatly influenced by his level of education. The corre- lation coefficient between the extent of the farmer's social participation and the dependent variable is -.14, which indi- cates that these two variables are inversely related. Table 5-14 also shows a positive relationship between the farmer's level of education and the extent of his social participa- tion (r=.28). This finding supports the notion that as level of education increases so does the farmer's social participation. Farmer's economic context related to the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. It had been hypothesized that the extent to which far- mers practice new farm inputs is influenced by their econo- mic context. Farmers, who are better Off economically, practice new farm inputs at a greater level. The results presented in Table 5-15 do not support all of these Table 5-15. Product moment correlation among measures of farmers' economic context and the extent to which farmers practice new inputs. Variable number Variable l 2 3 4 l. Extent to which farm- * * ers practice new inputs 1 . 00 - . l2 . 14 . 06 2. Farmer's socio- ** ** economic status 1.00 .26 -.32 3. Farmer's economic ** activities 1.00 -.29 4. Off-farm earning 1.00 * Significant at the .05 level. **Significant at the .01 level. 109 expectations. As shown in the table, the farmers' socio- economic status--as measured by farmers' taxes, house status and major material possession--is inversely related to the ex- tent to which farmers' practice new inputs. The correlation coefficient is not high, (r=-.12), but it is statistically significant at the .05 level. This indicates that farmers with lower socio-economic status tend to practice more farm inputs per unit of farmland. On the other hand, the farmers' economic activities are positively related to the extent to which farmers practice new inputs. The Pearson correla- tion coefficient between these two inputs, r=.l4, is signi- ficant at the .05 level. This result supports the expectation of the significant relationship between the two variables, as predicted in Hypothesis III-2. The Off-farm job earning is also positively related to the extent to which farmers' practice new inputs, but the relationship is very weak (r=.06) and statistically insignificant (at the .05 level). This indicates that off-farm earning is generally used by the Subang small farmers for additional family living ex- penses, rather than for the purpose of farm investment. Table 5-15 also shows the intercorrelations among the measures of farmers' economic context. Farmers' socio- economic status is significantly and positively related to their economic activities (r=.26). Each of these two variables also has significant relationships with the Off- farm earning, but each is inversely related (r=-.32 and 110 r=-.29, respectively). This indicates that as the farmers' socio-economic status increases and the level of their economic activities increases, the percentage of off—farm earnings to their farm income tends to decrease. Communication aspects related to the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. As stated earlier, communication is the transmission of messages and information from one person or institution, as the sources of information, to other persons through channels Of communication. Channels of communication gene- rally can be differentiated on the basis of personal or face-to-face contact vs. the impersonal channels of the mass media. They can also be indirect, as when a farmer observes neighbor's farm. Since information on new farm practices stem from the sources outside the farm, it is expected that communication aspects--indicated by the fre- quent use of channels of communication and the ease of ob- taining farm inputs will influence the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. However, Table 5-16 shows that the study results do not support the expectation. The interesting results are the inverse relationships bet- ween extra-family contact and the extent to which farmers practice new inputs and between the ease of obtaining farm inputs and the-dependent variable (r=-.13 and r=-.l4, respectively). These findings suggest that as the frequency of extra-family contact increases, and the ease of Obtaining 111 Table 5-16. Product moment correlation among measures of communication and the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. Variable Variable number 1 2 3 4 5 l. Extent to which * * farmers practice 1.00 .06 -.13 -.01 -.14 new inpu s 2. Development agents ** contact 1.00 .003 -.06 -.17 3. Extra-family ** contact 1.00 .18 —.03 4. Use of mass media 1.00 -.04 5. Ease of Obtaining farm inputs 1.00 * Significant at .05 level **Significant at .01 level farm inputs increases, the willingness to "save" farm inputs (particularly fertilizer) also increases, thus resulting in the decreasing use of that input. The other two communica- tion variables, i.e., the development agents contact and the use of mass media, have a very low and insignificant relationship (at the .05 level) with the dependent variable. This indicates that small farmers in rural Subang do not ex- tensively rely on either the local development agents or on Inass media. From the previous frequency distribution analy- sis, it was also shown that the respondents did not exten- sively use channels of communication available in the local village. 112 Subsets of independent variables related to the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs--A multiple—partial correlation analysis. In the previous sub-sections, the results of computing Pearson correlation coefficients of pairs of variables, i.e., relationships between each of the independent variables and the dependent variable as stated in the sub-hypotheses of Hypotheses I - IV, were presented and discussed. These were zero order correlations--no controls for the influence of other variables were made. In this sub-section, the results of testing Hypothesis V using multiple-partial correlation analysis will be presented. Multiple-partial correlation is an elaboration of mul- tiple correlation between a set of independent variables and a dependent variable when other independent variables are statistically controlled (Blalock, 1972; Loether and MCTavish, 1974). As discussed in Chapter 4, the fundamental characteris- tic Of the multiple-partial correlation coefficient relates to the issue of explained variance in the dependent variable by independent variables as a result of multiple regression analysis. While the square of the multiple correlation re- presents the percent of explained variance by all independ- ent variables "taken together," the square of multiple-partial correlation focuses on the proportion of variance explained by a specific block of indicators after other independent 113 variables have explained all the variance they can. The key to the multiple-partial approach is that indicators of constructs can be grouped together in blocks, without in- corporation into a summary measure. As stated earlier, in this study we have classified the predictors of the extent to which farmers' practice new farm inputs according to four major variables: (1) farm setting; (2) social context; (3) economic context; and (4) communication context. Each of the four major variables has been measured by a variety of indicators: Major variable Indicator 1. Farm setting x1 - Size of farm x2 - Degree of commerciali- zation 2. Farmers' social context Level of education - Extent of social parti- cipation xx #00 l - Socio-economic status - Economic activities - Level off-farm earnings 3. Farmers' economic context 4. Communication context - Extent of agents con- tact - Extra-family contact 0' Use of mass media 1- Ease of Obtaining new farm inputs xxx x xxx f‘hHO m samcn Dependent variable — Extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. In this study, it is hypothesized that the farmer's economic context and communication context variables are the mostimportant predictors regarding the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. Related to this expectation, this study is interested in analyzing the affect of the level 114 of each of the major variables or blocks of indicators-- i.e., farm setting (indicated by x and X2), farmer's social 1 context (indicated by X3 and x4), farmer's economic context (indicated by X5 - X7) and communication context (indicated by K8 - Xll)--on the dependent variable, respectively, EEEEE the other indicators have explained all the variance in the dependent variable they can. For example, in analyzing the effect of farmer's economic context on the dependent variable, after the other indicators have explained all the variance in the dependent variable they can, we then concentrate on how much of the remaining variance in the dependent variable is explained by the block of indicators representing X5 - X7. The multiple-partial correlation coefficient and its square were derived from a computer regression program using a multistep or hierarchial format for inclusion of the inde- pendent variables. In terms Of the hierarchial format (using the economic contact example described above) the dependent variable was regressed on the block of the other independent variables (x1 - x4, X8 - X11) in step one of the procedure. Step two involved regressing the dependent variable on the entire compliment of indicators (Xl - x11). In other words, the remaining block of indicators (farmer's economic context [X5 - X71) was added in the equation in the second step of solution. Thus, the dependent variable was regressed on (X5 - X7) after the control block (X1 - x4, x8 - X11) had already been introduced into the equation. 115 For the purpose of comparison among the multiple-partial correlation, the following regressions were set up: 1. The dependent variable was regressed on EEEE Setting indicators (X1 and xi) after the in~ clusion of all other indicators (X3 - XII). The dependent variable was regressed on farmer's social context indicators (X3 and X4) after the inclusion of all other indicators (X1, X2, X5 - X11). The dependent variable was regressed on farmer's economic context indicators (X5 - X7) after the inclusion Of all other indicators (X1 - X4, X8 - X11). The dependent variable was regressed on commu- nication context indicators(x8 - X11) after the inclusion of all other indicators (X1 - X7). Table 5-18 presents the multiple-partial R, the multiple- partial R3, and the F values for the above four regressions. To illustrate the procedure of calculating the statistics presented in the above table, we will give an example of computing the multiple-partial R2 of the farm setting variables (x1 and X2) from the output for the first regres- sion. Table 5-17 presents the summary output of the first regression, i.e., the regression of the dependent 116 Table 5-17. Summary table for the first regression. Variable/ Step indicator Multiple R R2 1 Level of education .01638 .00027 Ease of Obtaining inputs .14316 .02049 Extra-family contact .19946 .03978 Off-farm earnings (.20345 .04139 Use of mass media .20416 .04168 Change agents contact .20955 .04391 Economic activities .26273 .06903 Social participation .29396 .08641 Socio-economic status .31218 .09746 2 Degree of commercialization .33749 .11390 Size of farm .41039 .16842 variable on farm setting indicators (x1 and x2) after the inclusion of all other indicators (x3 - X11). From this table, we could learn the proportion of the total variance in the dependent variables by all eleven predictors 2 o (Ry‘xlxz...xll), discover the prOportion of the total varia- tion that is accounted by the blocks of indicators of social context, economic context and communication context variables (R§.x ...xll), and then identify the prOportion of the un- 3x4 explained (remaining) variance that is eXplained by the ]. This 1 k f tt' ' l 3. b cc of arm se ing variab e [Ry(x1x2,x3x4...x11 amount of the remaining variance explained by K1 and x2. after the effect of X3 - x has been taken into account, 11 can be computed by the following formula (Warren,et al., 1980): R2. - R3. y x1x2...x11 y x3x4...x11 R3. = y (X1x2)0 X3X4...X11 l _ R2. y x3x4...x ll 117 .16842 - .90746 R2. . = = .07862 . Y (XlXZ) x3X4""‘11 1 - .09746 The other computations of multiple—partial R3 and the procedure for computating the F ratios, as presented in Table 5-18, are presented in the Appendix B . Table 5—18. Comparison of multiple-partial R and multiple-partial R2 for the four regressions. Variables/Block Multiple- Multiple- of indicators _ partial R partial R3 F Farm setting (Xland x2) .2804 .0786* 6.4474 Social context (X3and X4) .1315 .0173* 1.4176 Economic context (X5 - X7) .2302 .0530 2.9010 Communication context (X8 - X11) .1565 .0245 1.0038 * Significant at the .05 level. Table 5-18 shows that the multiple-partial R2 between the dependent variable and the block of indicators of £35m setting is the highest (R3=.0786) and is significant at the .05 level. This indicates that nearly eight percent of the variance in the dependent variable is explained by farm setting (measured by farm size and the degree of commerciali- zation) afteg the other independent variables have explained all that they can. The next highest multiple-partial R2 is between the dependent variable and farmer's economic context (R3=.0530). It is significant at the .05 level, thus indi- cating that farmer's economic context (measured by socio- economic status, economic activities and level of off-farm earnings) is significantly related with the dependent 118 variable after other independent variables have been statis- tically controlled. The other two R2 s--the multiple-partial R3 between the dependent variable and the social context and the multiple-partial R2 between the dependent variable and communication context--are low and insignificant at the .05 level with R3=.0199 and R3=.04158, respectively. This indi- cates that each of these two variables does not significantly contribute to the variance explained in the dependent variable after the other independent variables have explained as much variance as they can. Thus, the results of the four regression analyses do not support all of the expectations stated in Hypothesis V, viz., that farmer's economic context and communication con- text are the most important factors associated with the de- gree to which farmers practice new farm inputs. At least in terms of this data set, the farm setting and farmer's economic context seem to be the most important factors re- lated with the dependent variable. Conversely, the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs is not significantly determined by the subset or block of independent variables reflecting the communication context. The most important predictor variables associated with the extent to which farmers' practice new farm inputs--The stepwise inclusion procedure. In this study, we are also interested in the contribu- tion of specific independent variables to explaining variation 119 in the dependent variable. Hypothesis VI predicts that certain indicators will explain the most variance in the dependent variable. These indicators include: commerciali- zation, farmer's economic activities, contact with change agents and access to (or ease of obtaining) farm inputs. To test this hypothesis, linear multiple regression analysis using stepwise inclusion procedure was employed. In this procedure, a stepwise regression—-Of the dependent variable with the eleven independent variables or indicators stated earlier-~was called for without specifying any parameters (n, F, T) values. According to Kim and Kohout (1975), the variable that explains the greatest amount of variance un- explained by the variables already in the equation enters the equation at each step. The variable that explains the greatest amount of variance in the dependent variable will enter first, the variable that explains the greatest amount of variance in conjunction with the first will enter second, and so on. By using this method; nine independent variables re- mained in the equation. Two of the variables--socio-economic: status and use of mass media--were dropped out and, conse- quently, were not included in the equation. Table 5-19 presents a summary table of selected statistics from the multiple regression. This table shows the order of inclu- sion which is determined by the respective contribution of each variable to explained variance. From this table, we can see that the degree Of commercialization is the best 120 ooos.I mooo. owes. moso. mm. mmmo. cOsumosoo mo so>ms .m homo. mmoo. «mos. Nose. hm. meme. muomucoo museum omcmnu .m Nomo. omoo. moos. mmoo. om. ooeo.s moosoutm summnmmo .o moms.I omoo. moms. wmmm. ms. smom.s uomucou xssEmmImuuxm .o osos.- mooo. ooos. Noon. os. omno.s .musoes sumo mcscsouno mo mmmm .m moms.- ooso. ooos. smem. mo. ommo.m cosumososuumo smsoom .o wsos. oomo. msms. smom. soc. omwm.m mosus>suom OsEocoom .m mmms.I Nmmo. msbo. ohou. so. ommm.o Show mo onsw .N moms. mono. mono. moms. so. momm.m ecsumussmso IHOEEOO no common .s m omcmnu m OsmEsm «m «m msesuszz mocmosmscmsm m msnmsum> .osoomooue mmszmmum meson msmxsmsm ecsmmoumos msmsusofi scum mosumsumum oouoosom mo msnmu meEEom .msIm msnma 121 predictor variable and level of education is the worst among the nine variables in the equation. It should be noted that only the first four variables-~ie., degree of commer- cialization, size of farm, economic activities, and social participation--were included as variables that significantly contribute to explain variance (at the .05 level). In other words, these four predictor variables yield an opti- mal prediction equation. The regression coefficients and its standard errors of these four predictor variables are presented in Table 5-20. Since the independent variables in this study are measured on different units, the stan- dardized coefficients, Beta, are also presented in this table. Table 5-20. The regression coefficients and standard errors in stepwise-regression. Variable Regression Standard error Beta (standar- coefficient of regr. coeff. dized coeff.) Degree of com- mercialization .2436 .8234 .2217 Size of farm -4.0759 1.1091 -.3052 Economic acti- vities .5724 .1832 .2565 Social parti- cipation -.4058 .2094 -.1378 (Constant) 17.0122 122 The results of the analysis do not support all of the expectations as stated in Hypothesis VI. Only the degree of commercialization and economic activities variables appear as expected--they contribute significantly to explaining variation in the dependent variable. The other two variables--the extent of change agent contact and ease of obtaining farm inputs--are not included as important predictors. However, these results parallel and support the results of the Pearson correlation discussed earlier. CHAPTER 6 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This last chapter will attempt to identify the key findings of the study, draw important conclusions for the findings, and relate the findings to policy and research recommendations. Summary. In principle, food self-sufficiency is still a national goal of most developing countries. It was thought that the application of science and technology--through the practice of HYV seed and the use of more fertilizer and pesticides-- might produce a dramatic increase in food crop production and make it possible to achieve the goal of self-sufficiency. In the last several decades, many countries have em- barked upon a variety of projects that are aimed at increas- ing food production. Through these projects, technological change has been either guided or managed. Major rice programs were launched in Indonesia, espe- cially in Java, to increase food self-sufficiency and to increase the farmers' welfare. Because of the large number of small farmers in rural Java, an increase in the output 123 124 of small farmers would have had an important effect upon the overall agricultural yield. There is some evidence to suggest that small farmers do not benefit from these rice programs; many of them do not practice new farm inputs fully as recommended. This study was conducted with the purpose of better understanding those factors that may be associated with the extent to which small farmers practice new farm inputs. The Subang regency was selected as the study site because it is one of the most important rice production regencies of West Java. Study data were collected through a multistage cluster sampling from a sample of 180 small farmers—-farmer respondents who operate on farmland of .7 hectare or 1ess--in six sample villages. Data were collected through an interview schedule that was organized into five sections: (1) farm setting; (2) social context; (3) economic context: (4) communication aspects; and (5) the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. The first four sections included questions that constituted independent variables of this study; the fifth section focused on the dependent variable in this study. Among those indicators of the four general independent variables, attention was focused on eleven major indicators and they were included in the study hypotheses. In general the sub-hypotheses of Hypotheses I — IV focus on the 125 relationships between each of these independent variables and the dependent variable: 1. Sub-hypothesis I-l predicted that the larger the size of the farm, the greater the degree to which farmers adopt new farm practices; Sub-hypothesis I-2 predicted that the greater the percentage of farm product that is sold to market, the greater the degree to which farmers practice new farm inputs; Sub-hypothesis II-l predicted that the higher farmers' education, the greater the degree to which farmers practice new farm inputs; Sub-hypothesis II-2 predicted that the greater the extent of social participation, the greater the degree to which farmers practice new farm inputs; Sub-hypothesis III-1 predicted that the higher the farmers' socio-economic status, the greater the extent to which they practice new farm inputs; Sub-hypothesis III-2 predicted that the more farmers are engaged in economic activities, the greater the extent to which they practice new farm inputs; Sub-hypothesis III-3 predicted that the more farmers are engaged in off-farm employment, the higher the degree to which they will utilize new farm prac- tices; 126 8. Sub-hypothesis IV—l predicted that the more farmers have contact with change agents, the more likely they are to practice new farm inputs; 9. Sub-hypothesis IV-2 predicted that the greater the amount of extra-family contact, the greater the degree to which farmers practice new inputs; 10. Sub-hypothesis IV-3 predicted that the greater the use of mass media, the greater the degree to which farmers practice new inputs; and 11. Sub-hypothesis IV-4 predicted that the easier it is to obtain farm inputs, the greater the degree to which farmers practice new farm inputs. Hypothesis V predicted that the farmer's economic con- text and communication aspects are the most important blocks of indicators (or general independent variables) associated with the dependent variable. Hypothesis VI predicted that commercialization, economic activites, extent of contact with change agents, and access to farm inputs (or ease of obtaining farm inputs) are the most important indicators or independent variables related to the dependent variable. Pearson correlation was employed to test the sub- hypotheses of Hypotheses I - IV; multiple-partial correlation analysis was used to test Hypothesis V; multiple regression analysis, using stepwise inclusion, was employed to test Hypothesis VI. 127 The initial analysis of the study data (presented in Tables 5-1 through 5-12) focused on the frequency distribu— tion of the study variables. The major findings derived from this analysis included: 1. The average size of land operated by small farmers in the sample villages was .45 hectare. In general, there was no frag- mentation of farmland. The average yield of small farm of 32.8 qt./ha was lower than the yield of the farms in Subang participating in the rice programs and also lower than the average yield of West Java in 1979. Generally, the small farm firms in the sample villages of northern Subang have an adequate degree of commercialization—- more than 40 percent of rice production was sold to market in the dry season and more than 60 percent in the wet season. Most of the small farmers (more than 75 percent) were owner operators, more than 20 percent were sharecroppers, and only 2 percent of them rent their farm. The off-farm employment opportunity repre- sented a very important source of additional farmily income; almost all small farmers were employed in off-farm jobs. Most of them worked as farm laborers. In general, almost all small farmers get loans from the "Bimas" program and/or from other money lenders. In general, the small farmers in rural Subang did not extensively use channels of communication in getting information on new farm technology. Most of them had never read printed material and had never watched agricultural programs on TV. The traditional village meeting pro- vided greater contact opportunities for small farmers and the development agencies. 128 8. All of the small farmers in the sample vil- lages of Subang regency practiced fertilizer, HYV seed and pesticide in various dosages. All of the small farmers used HYV seed in the recommended dosage. More than half of them generally used pesticides around the recommended dosage; whereas most of them used fertilizer at an amount below the recommended dosage. The results of Pearson correlation analysis pre- sented in Table 5-13 through Table 5-16 indicate that most of the findings do not support the expectations as stated in the study hypotheses. Only the degree of commer- cialization and economic activities variables, respectively, I", (‘6 «J have a positive/and significant relationship (at the .05 level) with the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs. The size of farm, social participation, socio- economic status, and extra-family contact variables have a significiant, but inverse, relationship with the depen- dent variable. Other variables--such as education, off- farm earnings, change agents contact, use of mass media, and ease of obtaining farm inputs--have a weak and insig- nificant relationship with the extent to which small far- mers practice new farm inputs. The results of Multiple-partial correlation analysis, as presented in Table 5-18, also do not support all of the hypothetical expectations. The block of indicators asso- ciated with the farmers' economic context had a significant association with the dependent variable as hypothesized. 129 On the other hand, the block of indicators associated with the communication context was insignificant when related to the dependent variable. The block of indicators associated with farm setting also had a significant relationship with the dependent variable. It was also the best predictor variable (i.e., explaining the most of the remaining vari- ance in the dependent variable after the other independent variables had been explained as much variance as they could). The results of the Multiple regression analysis using stepwise inclusion procedure, which parallel the results of Pearson correlation, do not support all of the expec- tations stated in the study hypotheses. Only the degree of commercialization and economic activities variables contribute significantly in explaining variation in the dependent variable. The other two variables--size of farm and social participation--belonged to the best four pre— dictor variables that had significant relationship with the dependent variable. Yet, it was not expected that these variables would be included in the Optimal prediction equation. Conclusions. From the study findings stated earlier (and also from the key findings identified in this summary), we may con- clude that the small farmers in rural Subang have unique characteristics related to the extent to which they prac- tice new technology, such as the use of HYV seed, fertilizer 130 and pesticide. This study indicates that most of the findings do net support the expectations as stated in the study hypotheses. Some factors that theoretically will influence the practice of new agricultural technology, as found by some other studies on the adoption of agricultu- ral technology (in the 1960's), is not relevant to the small farmers in rural Subang. As stated in Chapter 1, some reports have shown that the new technology of new farm inputs practices are still beyond the reach of many small farmers; thus, not all of Java's farmers have gained benefits from participation in .the rice programs. According to Hansen (1974), the average landholding for participants in the rice program was about .75 hectare, a figure that is well above the average farm size of respondents of this study. However, this study finds that the new agricultural technology--in terms of the use of HYV, fertilizer, and pesticides--could be reached by Subang's small farmers. All of the small farmer respondents practice these new inputs in their farms, but in various dosages. Because the small farmers almost al- ways work in their tiny farms, close to the edge of poverty, they will use every opportunity available to support their family. This solution by small farmers, to overcome the difficulty in supporting their families, is related to their decision to invest in each of those three farm inputs. Among the three inputs, the cost of investment in HYV seed 131 is the lowest, so it should be concluded that all the small farmers could use HYV seed in the recommended dosage. How- ever, the cost of pesticide investment is higher than the cost of HYV, but lower than that of fertilizer. In addition with the experiences of the occurance of pests and diseases in Subang rural areas, more than half of the small farmers generally use pesticides around the recommended dosage. On the other hand, since the cost of fertilizer investment comprised the largest portion of the investment of the three farm inputs, it appears that the small farmers see the use of fertilizer as a form of savings. Small farmers might get loans from the program that egng facilitate using the recommended quantities, pgt they may not apply the entire amount. Or, because the present rice program is not packaged, small farmers might choose their own fertilizer dosage, which may be lower than the quantity recommended. Thus, the poor and small farmers in the rural Subang appear to use available Opportunities to support their families. Their decisions may explain many of the other findings in this study. Among the factors or indicators of the general inde- pendent variables, the degree Of commercialization and economic activities are positively weak and significantly re- lated to the dependent variable. The small farmers gen- erally have an adequate degree of commercialization. It appears that they have changed from the earlier tradition 132 to store and consume what they grow to meet the needs of their families. With the relatively stable price of rice, small farmers prefer to sell some portion of their product to market. And when they need rice for their family con- sumption, in the future, they will purchase this commodity from market. The more the degree of their commercializa- tion, the more they will get capital and the more that they will invest for new farm inputs. Similarly, the more the degree of farmers' economic activities-—as measured by the amount of their production loans and the level of their investment in the new farm inputs--the more that they will get capital and, subsequently, want to take the risk of practicing new inputs. On the other hand, the study findings indicate that the more land the farmers operate (within the limit of .7 hectare), the less is the amount of the farm inputs that they will use. It appears that the small farmers who oper- ate larger farms have a "better" economic sense to save fertilizer for "other uses." In rural Subang, other factors, such as education, off- farm earnings, ease of Obtaining farm inputs, use of mass media, and change agents contact, insignificantly influence the extent to which farmers practice new inputs. It appears that the very low education among the small farmers has no influence on the farmers' decision to practice new farm inputs. Although Off-farm earnings was an important source 133 of additional family income, it appears that small farmers do not use this additional income for additional investment on farm inputs. But they use it for their living consump- tion purposes. The study data also show that all small farmers in rual Subang have similar access to new farm inputs-~pro- vided through the rice programs or by private kiosk-—which means that they have similar ease in Obtaining new inputs, so that this factor does not influence the level of prac- ticing those inputs. The weak influences of change agent contact and the use of mass media on the extent to which farmers practice new inputs show that small farmers practice new inputs at the present level without getting much input frOm outside. On the average, the change or development agents (including the agricultural extension agents) visited a small farmer less than 6 times in 1980. This may indicate that local agricultural extension agents do not intensively work with the small farmers; they seem to use the "progressive farmers“ strategy in their extension work. Recommendations. This section will attempt to seek the possible impli- cations of the study findings in terms of government policy, extension work and needed research. Policy implications. By understanding the small farmer's situation and con- sidering the factors associated with the farmer's decision 134 to practice new farm.inputs, it is anticipated that a better development strategy will be planned for the goal of provi- ding more benefits to the small farmers. With an extremely high cost associated with the rice intensification program, particularly with regard to the government's subsidy on controlling fertilizer price, efforts should be directed more toward controlling and encouraging the small farmers to use additional fertilizer on their farms. They should be convinced that using more fertilizer might provide signifi- cantly higher returns. In addition, food self-sufficiency does not always mean self-sufficiency in terms of rice that has to be pro— duced in the country. In facing the food problem, it might be better economically for the Indonesian government to export more urea fertilizer and import rice--rather than steadfastly retaining the policy of achieving self-sufficiency in terms of rice. Currently, a small farmer receives re- latively less of the portion of this subsidy as compared to the large farmer. More attention should also be focused on "palawija" (second crop) crops--neglected in the last decade given the preoccupation with rice in northern Subang. Because Subang small farmers are generally good deci- sion makers (at least in their solution to support their family needs) and they already have an adequate degree of commercialization, the develOpment strategy should be focused also upon making economic changes through changes in local cropping patterns. This strategy direct particular 135 focus on the development of locally-tested new agricultural crops, besides rice, that are more productive and provide significantly higher returns for the investment. This strategy leads to policies for directing activities of national agricultural research to insure the availability of new agricultural patterns to local farmers. Extension. Local extension agents are very important for the success of the programs directed by the above strategies. This study finds that the communication aspects in rural Subang did not have a significant influence on small far- mers' decision to practice new farm inputs. The local extension agents did not frequently contact, and did not intensively work with, the small farmers. They should change their strategy from a "progressive farmers" approach to a "small farmers" approach. Traditional village meetings, which small farmers frequently attend, represent good op- portunities for extension agents to learn and discuss small farmers' problems. This study shows that many small farmers never visited local demonstration plots or demonstration farms. Because small farmers will be readily convinced by results and performances, not only by suggestions, demon- stration farms which illustrate both results and method should be extended to help facilitate communication among small farmers. 136 Further research. Few studies that specifically focus on the problems of small farmers have been conducted in Indonesia. This study may be seen as an effort to invite other researchers, particularly in Indonesia, to focus the attention of their studies on the increasing welfare of small farmers. And because this study was based on data collected at one time, replication studies need to be conducted. Researchers should also be aware of the fact that income from Subang's farms is limited by the small farm size--a situation that is not likely to change in the near future. Consequently, further studies are needed that focus attention on the potential local resources that can provide economic opportunities in the non-farm sector. Similarly, studies of rural commun— ity development, for example needs assessment studies of the rural people, should be undertaken. More studies that focus on the rural poor will provide findings that can be used as policy inputs. With adequate inputs based on those studies, planners can design better "development plans" that include targets for reducing poverty, unemployment, and inequality. Closing Observations. Limitations of the study. Relatively weak relationships between the independent and dependent variables were found in this study. why were these relationships weak? Several explanations seem plausible. 137 First, these findings may suggest that important predicator variables (e.g., the social psychological variable of the farmer's commitment to the land) were excluded from the theoretical framework. Second, the weak relationships may be due to imprecise measurement of the variables. Third, and perhaps the most noteworthy possibility, pertains to the use of a cross-sectional survey design to study an area of human behavior as complex as the ad0ption process. It is recommended that social science researchers truly con— sider the advantages associated with qualitative approaches to studying the adoption process. Final comments on factors influencing the extent to which farmers practice new farm inputs in Indonesia. After a span of almost two decades--through trials and errors of several successive rice programs--the present Indonesian rice program seems to be headed in the appro— priate direction in its effort to handle the problem of food insufficiency. In the last three years, Indonesia has achieved significant increases in rice production. As reported by Indonesia's Ministry of Agriculture, the rice production in 1981 was at a record high--more than 22 million tons. In addition, this figure was more than two million tons above the government's estimate. As the result of increasing production, the govern- ment's rice importations have decreased. In 1979, Indonesia imported rice was at a record high amount of 1.9 million tons. Importations decreased in 1980 to 1.3 million tons 138 and it has been estimated that no more than 0.5 million tons was imported in 1981. It was found in the study that all small farmers in the sample villages of rural Subang already practiced new farm inputs. However, the use of fertilizer was at a lower than recommended level--with an average of 135 kg/ha of urea (as compared to the recommended dosage of 200 kg/ha of urea). It can be concluded that without more concen- trated efforts to encourage Indonesian small farmers to use increasing fertilizer dosages, it is unlikely that self- sufficiency can be reached within a near future. It should be added, however, that rice programs are not panaceas--they should be accompanied by other govern— ment development programs. Preliminary results from the 1980 census show that the population growth rate in the period of 1971-80 was still high--2.34 percent per year. Family planning programs should be intensified so that the increasing demand for food can be controlled through limited population growth. Similarly, government programs should focus more attention on increasing opportunities for small farmers to increase their non-farm incomes. In conclusion, it can be argued that progress toward enhancing small farmers' welfare will markedly improve the prospect of achieving long-term stable economic growth and, subsequently, reducing the levels of poverty. APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW SCHEDULE 139 RURAL SUBANG RESEARCH Study on Factors Influencing the Decision to Practice New Farm Inputs by Small Farmers A Dissertation Study of : Lukito Sukahar Department of Resource Development Michigan State University 1981 140 NO. Name/Code of respondent: Village: This questionnaire deals with understanding the factors that have possible relationship with the decision to prac- tice new farm inputs by small farmers. It is organized into five sections: A. Farm setting B. Social context C. Economic context D. Communication context E. Extent to which new farm inputs are practiced Section A -- Farm Setting In this section we would like to ask several questions on the farm setting in which decisions are made. ,~Q-l What was the size of the rice-field operated by res- pondent last year? Ha Q-2 What was the respondent's status to his land? (Circle number) 1. owner operator 2. renter 3. sharecropper 4. others: Dry season: Wet season: 141 Respondent's rice-field consisted of non- continguous plots/places. The average distance between each plot and respondent's house is: lst plot: m 2nd plot: m 3rd plot: m How many times did the respondent plant rice in a year? 1. one time *) 2. two times 3. three times *) What other crops did he plant after rice crop? What was the rice yield and production of the farm? Season Yield (qt/ha.) Production (kg/ha.) (Total production/year) How much did the respondents sell his rice product to the market, last year? Dry season: qt.; % Wet season: qt.; % Total: qt.; % 142 Section B -- Social Context In this section, we would like to ask some questions on the background concerning the social context of the farmer in which he makes decisions. Q-7 Q-lO How many years did the respondents attent formal school? 0 l 2 3 7 8 9 10 ll 12 more than 12 4 5 6 Does the respondents have a formal school diploma? 1. Yes 2. No If yes, what school diploma? How many family members are in the respondent's household? consist of: wife (circle); son(s) daughter(s) others What kind of local organization does the respondent belong to? List of organizations Position in the organization What is the general social standing of re5pondent in the local community? (Rated by enumerators through asking the formal village leaders or farmer's neighbors) 143 Respondent's role as: (circle number) 1. religious leader/"Kyai"/"Haji"/"Ustad" 2. higher level of social status 3. 4. Section C -- Economic Context In this section we would like to ask some questions concerning the economic context of the farmer in which he makes decisions. Q-ll What is the respondent's socio-economic standing? (Indicated by his house, some material possession, amount of tax, and his income). House: (Circle number) Possession Material Design 1. Own 1. Brick 1. Excellent 2. Rent 2. Wood 2. Good 3. Parent's 3. Bamboo 3. Fair 4. Live with 4. Poor relative's Material possession: (Circle number) 1. TV 2. Radio 3. Sewing machine 4. Motor-cycle 5. Bicycle 144 Amount of tax paid last year: - Formal government tax : Rp. lyear - Informal payment : Rp. [year Total :"ELT’m'm'EQQE" Income of the respondent: - Farm income : Rp. lyear - Off-farm income : Rp. [year Total income :--§;:—----—---7;e;;—- In these following two questions, Q-12 and Q-13, we would like to ask questions concerning respondent's econo- mic activities. Q-12 What was the respondent's level of farm input invest- ment? Amount of "rupiah" for the purchase of new farm inputs: RES. Fertilizer - HYV Pesticides Total What was the percentage of this total to the total farm income? 145 Q-l3 How much was the amount of loans received by the respondent? Loan from the rice program Rp. lyear Loan from outside the program. Rp. /year The following three questions deal with off—farm employment opportunity. Q-l4 About how many hours a week on the average does the respondent work for pay outside of his farm job? hour(s) Q-15 What was the percentage of earnings from Off-farm jobs compared to farm? % Q-16 a. How did he learn about the off-farm job availability? b. What is the primary reason to employ or net to employ off-farm jobs? c. What kind of off-farm job does he actually prefer to work at? Is he employed in that job? If not, why? Section D -- Communication Context In this section, we would like to ask some questions concerning communication context by which the farmer comes to learn about new farm practices. Q-l7 Q-18 Q-l9 146 What was the extent of respondent's contact with the local'bhange agents" in the last year? (such as: agricultural extension service, credit institution, distributor of farm inputs, etc., etc.,): a. Frequency of the change or service agents *) visit to the respondent in one year (last year) times b. Frequency of respondent's visit, and discussed problems related to new farm practices, to the change agents (at their place of work) last year times c. Frequency of the respondent's attendance in the village meeting where the change agents gave in- formation or extention times. How was the extent of respondent's extra-family con- tact in the last year? a. Frequency of respondent's visit to neighbor or "progressive farmers, last year: times b. Frequency of respondent's visit to the demonstra- tion plots, last year: times How was the degree of respondent's reliance on mass media? a. How many hours per week did the respondent spend his time for listening to the radio? ("agricul- tural extension program” or "village program") hour/week I z I, 147 b. How many hours per week did the respondent spend his time watching "agricultural exten- sion" program on TV? hour/week c. How many hours per week did the respondent use for reading materials on agricultural improvement? hour/week Q-20 How was the respondent's access to new farm inputs? a. How easy was the procedure to get each of the farm inputs? Very Very easy [Easy Difficult Difficult Fertilizer l 2 3 4 HYV l 2 3 4 Pesticides l 2 3 4 (circle number) b. How was the procedure to transport farm inputs from the kiosk to respondent's farm? (Circle number) 1. Poor 2. Fair 3. Good 4. Excellent Section E -- Extent to Which the Farmer Practices New Farm Inputs In this section we would like to ask questions concerning the dependent variable, i.e., the extent to which the farmers practice new inputs. Q-21 Q-22 Q-23 148 How was the degree to which new farm inputs were used by the respondent? a. Fertilizer: l) 2) b. HYV: 1) 2) c. Pesticides: l) 2) To what used as recommended? a. Use of fertilizer b. HYV c. Use of pesticides d. Land tilling e. Irrigation N-fertilizer: kg/ha PZOS-fertilizer: kg/ha What variety? How much? kg/ha What pesticide? How much? liter/ha extent was each of the new farm practices Great Very extent Moderate little None 1 2 3 4 l 2 3 4 l 2 3 4 l 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 What was the main reason stated by the respondent of not practicing the inputs as recommended? APPENDIX B: PROCEDURES FOR THE COMPUTATIONS OF MULTIPLE-PARTIAL R2 AND F RATIO FOR THE FOUR REGRESSIONS 149 The regression of the dependent variable on farm set- ting indicators (X1 and x2) after the inclusion of all other indicators (X3-X11): R3. R3. y xlxz...x11 y x3x4...x11 R2. 0 y (xlxz) x3x4...xll 1 _ R3. y X3x4...x11 = .16842 - .09746 = .07862. 1 - .09746 ( )/M R3. R3. y xlxz...xll y x3x4...x11 (l — R3. y x3x4...xll )/ (N - k - 1) where: k is the total number of independent variables; M is the number Of independent variables (indi- cators) in the subset; and N is the number of cases. Thus: (.16842 - .09746)/2 (l-.09746)/164 F = = 6.4474. The regression of the dependent variable on farmer's social context indicators (x3and x4), after the inclu- sion of all other indicators (x1, x2, xS-xll); 150 Summary table of the second regression Step Variable] Multiple R R: indicator 1 Socio-economic status .12149 .01476 Degree of commercialization .22528 .05075 Ease of obtaining farm inputs .26336 .06936 Use of mass media .26341 .06938 Extra-family contact .29317 .08595 Change agents contact .29320 .08597 Off—farm earnings .29332 .08603 Economic activities .32325 .10449 Size of farm .39215 .15378 2 Level of education .39319 .15460 Social participation .41039 .16842 R2. - R3. R2 = y Xlxz. o .xll Y Xlxzxso o .Xll Y (x3x4)'X132X5"°x11 1 - R2 y xlxzxs...x11 = .16842 - .15378 = .0173 l - .15378 (R2 - )/2 . R3. y X1x2"'xll y xlxzxs...x11 )/164 (l - R3. y xlxzxs...x11 = (.16842 - .15378)/2 = 1.4176 (1 - .15378)/164 3. The regression of the dependent on farmer's economic con- text indicators (Xs-X7) after the inclusion of the other indicators (xl-x4, x8-x11). 151 Summary table of the third regression Variable/indicator Multiple R Level of education .06138 Ease of obtaining farm inputs .14316 Extra-family contact .19946 Use of mass media .20034 Size of farm .23627 Change agent contact .24268 Social participation .27803 Degree of commercialization .34909 Economic activities .40348 Off-farm earnings .41036 Socio-economic status .41039 R2 O O = y (x5x6x7) xlx2x3x4x8...xll _ R3 R . y x1x2x3x4x8...xll 2 y xlxz...x11 1 - R3. y x1x2x3x4x8...x11 .16842 - .12187 = = .05301 1 - .12187 (R3. - R3. )/3 F = y xlxz...x11 y xlx2x3x4x8...xll y xlx2x3x4x8...x11 (.16842 - .12187)/3 (1 - .12187)/164 = 2.9010 152 4. The regression of the dependent variable on communica- tion context indicators (x8 - x11) after the inclusion of all other indicators (x1 - x7). Summarytable of the fourth regression Step Variable/indicator Multiple R .3: 1 Level of education .01638 .00027 Off-farm earnings .03272 .0010? Degree of commercialization .20034 .04014 Social participation .24580 .06042 Economic activities .28028 .07856 Socio-economic status .29510 .08709 Farm size .38412 .14755 2 Ease of obtaining farm inputs .39699 .15760 Use of mass media .39713 .15771 Extra-family contact .40545 .16439 Change agent contact .41039 .16842 R . - R . R2. . = y (x8x9xloxll) xlxz...x7 l - R3.x x x Y 12'” 7 .16842 - .14755 = = .02448 1 - .14755 (R3. - R3. )/4 F - y xlxz...x11 y xlxz...x7 ( y xlxz...x7)/ (.16842 - .14755)/4 = 1.0038 (1 - .14755)/164 REFERENCES Abraham, M. Francis 1980 Perspectives on Modernization: Toward a General Theory of Third World Development. University Press of America. Babbie, Earl R. 1973 Survey Research Methods. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc. Barker, Randolph 1971 "The evolutionary nature of the new rice techno- logy." Food Research Institute Studies in Agri- cultural Economics, Trade, and Development, Vol. X, No. 2: 117-130. Berry, Albert R. and William R. Cline 1979 Agrarian Structure and Productivity in Developing Countries. Baltimore and London: The John Hopkins University Press. Biggs, Huntley H. and Ronald L. Tinnermeier (eds.) 1974 Small Farm Agricultural Development Problems. Fort Collins, Colorado: Colorado State Univer- sity. Birowo, Achmad T. 1975 "Bimas: a package program for intensification of food crop production in Indonesia." New York: South East Asia Development Advisory Group (SEADAG) . Blalock, Hubert M., Jr. 1970 An Introduction to Social Research. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. Borgstrom, Georg 1967 The Hungry Planet. New York: The Macmillan Company. 153 154 Brown, Lester R. 1970 Seeds of Change: The Green Revolution and Deve- lopment in the 1970's. New York--Washington-— London: Praeger Publishers. 1977 "Population and affluence: Growing pressures on world food resources." Pp. 25-53 in Robert D. Stevens (ed.), Tradition and Dynamics in Small- Farm Agriculture: Economics Studies in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Ames, Iowa: The Iowa State University Press. Crouch, Bruce R. and S. Chamala 1981 "Communication strategies for technological change in agriculture." Pp. 267—276 in Cronch, B.R. and S. Chamala, Extension, Education and Rural Deve- lopment. Volume 2: Experience in Strategies for Planned Change. Chichester, New York; Brisbane, Toronto: John Wiley and Sons. "DINAS PERTANIAN RAKYAT DAERAH TINGKAT II SUBANG" 1977 "MONOGRAFI--DAERAH KABUPATEN SUBANG 1976/1977." "DIREKTORAT JENDRAL AGRARIA DEPARTEMEN DALAM NEGERI" 1978 "PENENTUAN LOKASI DAERAH MISKIN PROPINSI JAWA BARAT." JAKARATA, INDONESIA: DIREKTORAT TATAGUNA TANAH. Eckert, Jerry B. 1977 "Farmer response to high-yielding wheat in Pakistan's Punjab." Pp. 149-176 in Robert D. Stevens (ed.), Tradition and Dynamics in Small- Farm Agriculture: Economics Studies in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Ames, Iowa: The Iowa State University Press. Fear, Frank Anthony 1977 "Exploratory social indicator model building and testing using multiple indicators within a block- recursive system: A study of the macrosociological determinants of health status." Unpublished doc- toral dissertation, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Iowa State University. Fliegel, Frederick C. 1967 Innovation in India; the Success or Failure of Agricultural Development Programs. Hyderabad: National Institute of Community DevelOpment. 155 Gasser, William R. . 1981 "Survey of irrigation in eight Asian nations-- India, Pakistan, IndOnesia, Thailand, Bangladesh, South Korea, Philippines and Sri Lanka." Washing- ton, D.C.: USDA, Economics and Statistics Service, Foreign Agricultural Economic Report 165: 43-61. Hansen, Gary E. 1974 Rural Local Government and Agricultural Develop- ment in Java, Indonesia. Ithaca, N.H.: Rural DevelOpment Committee--Center for International Studies, Cornell University. Havens, Eugene A. 1975 "Diffusion of new seed varieties and its conse- quences: A Columbian case." Pp. 93—111 in Dumet R.E. and L. J. Brainard (eds.), Problems of Rural Development. Leiden, the Netherlands: E.J. Brill. Hayami, Yujiro 1978 Anatomy of a Peasant Economy--A Rice Village in the Philippines. Los Banos, Raguna: The International Rice Research Institute. Isaac, Stephen Handbook in Research and Evaluation. A Collec- tion of Principles, Methods, and Strategies Useful in the Planning, Design, and Evaluation of Studies in Education and the Behavioral Sciences. San Diego, California: Edits Publishers. Kearl, Bryant; Salem,G.; Marjorie,M.; John, N.; David, N; Dunstant, S.C. (eds.) 1976 Field Data Collection in the Social Sciences. Experiences in Africa and the Middle East. New York: Agricultural Development Council, Inc. Kusumadewa, Arie Lastaria 1975 "An evaluation of socio-economic develOpment at the village level in Bandung regency, Indonesia: A methodological exploration." Unpublished doc- tora dissertation, Department of Resource Deve- lopment, Michigan State University. Lele, Uma Y. and John W. Mellor 1972 "Jobs, poverty and the green revolution." International Affair 48. Meyer, Merle E. 1976 A Statistical Analysis of Behavior. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company. 156 Mintz, Jeanne S. 1961 Indonesia--A Profile. Princeton, N.J.: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc. Mosher, Arthur T. 1966 Getting Agriculture Moving. Essential for Deve- lOpment and Modernization. New York: Agricul- tural Development Council, Inc. 1969 Creating a Progressive Rural—Structure to Serve a Modern Agriculture. New York: Agricultural Development Council, Inc. 1969 "The development problems of subsistence farmers: A preliminary review." Pp. 6-11 in Clifton R. Wharton, Jr. (ed.), Subsistence Agriculture and Economic Development. Chicago: Aldine Publish- ing Company. Nachmias, David and C. Nachmias 1976 Research Methods in the Social Sciences. New York: St. Martin's Press. Neale, John M. and Robert M. Riebert 1973 Science and Behavior, an Introduction of Methods and Research. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc. Neill, Wilfred T. 1973 Twentieth-Century Indonesia. New York and London: Columbia University Press. Netter, John and William Wasserman 1974 Applied Linear Statistical Models--Regression, Analysis of Variance, and Experimental Designs. Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin Inc. Nie, Norman H.; C. Hadlai, H.; Jean, G.J.; Karim, S.; and Dale, H.B. 1975 SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. New York: McGraw Hill Inc. Palmer, Ingrid 1978 The Indonesian Economy Since 1965: Case Studies of Politics. London and Totowa, N.J.: Frank Cass and Company Ltd. 157 Rogers, Everest M. 1960 Social Change in Rural Society. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc. 1969 Modernizations among Peasants. The Impact of Communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Rogers, E.M. and Shoemaker, F.E. 1971 Communication of Innovation: A Cross Cultural Approach. New York: The Free Press. Roy, Prodipto 1968 Agricultural Innovation among Indian Farmers. Hyderabad: National Institute of Community Development. Ruttan, V.W. ' 1978 "New rice technology and policy alternatives for food self-sufficiency." Pp. 363-381 in the International Rice Research Institute, Economic Consequences of the New Rice Technology. Los Banos, Laguna, Philippines: The IRRI. Sajogyo 1973 "Modernization without development in rural Java." A paper. Bagor, Indonesia: Bagor Agri- cultural University. Seers, Dudley 1981 "The meaning of development." Pp. 7-24 in Crouch, B.R. and S. Chamala (eds.), Extension, Education and Rural Development. Volume I: International Experience in Communication and Innovation. Chichester, New York; Brisbane, Toronto: John Wiley and Sons. Sievers, Allen M. 1974 The Mystical World of Indonesia--Cu1ture and Economic Development in Conflict. Baltimore and London: The John Hopkins University Press. Singh, K.N. 1981 "The need for a communication strategy for rural development." Pp. 15-32 in Crouch B.R. and S. Chamala (eds.), Extension, Education and Rural Development. Volume 2: Experience in Strategies for Planned Change. Chichester, New York; Brisbane, Toronto: John Wiley and Sons. 158 Soewardi, Herman 1972 Response Masyarakat Desa Terhadap Moderni-Sasi Produki Pertanian. Terutama Joad. Yogyakarta, Indonesia: Gadjah Mada University Press. Spencer, Dimstan B.C., 1976 "Employment, efficiency, and income in the rice processing industry of Sierra Leone." Pp. 77- 78 in African Rural Economy Paper. East Lansing, Michigan: MSU, Department of Agricultural Economics. Stevens, Robert D. _ 1977 "Transformation of traditional agriculture: Theory and empirical findings," and "Policies and programs for small-farm development." Pp. 3-24 and 237-255, respectively, in Robert D. Stevens (ed.), Tradition and Dynamics in Small-Farm Agriculture: Economics Studies in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Ames, Iowa: The Iowa State University Press. II Tempo n 1981 "Antara Impordan Swasembada." Jakarta, Indonesia: "Tempo", No. 38, Thn. XI, 21 Nov. 1981, pp. 70- 74. Uphoff, Norman T. and Milton J. Esman 1975 "Local organization for rural development in Asia." Development Digest, Vol. XIII, NO. 3: 31-46. Van den Ban, A.W. 1981 "Interpersonal communication and the diffusion of innovation." Pp. 293-307 in Crouch,B.R. and S. Chamala (eds.), Extension, Education and Rural Development. Volume 1: International Experience in Communication and Innovation. Chichester, New York; Brisbane, Toronto: John Wiley and Sons. Warren, Richard D.; G.E. Klonglan and C.S. Faisal 1977 Causal Model Analysis. Sociology Report No. 135, Department of Sociology and Anthropology. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University. Warren, R.D.; F.A. Fear and G.E. Klonglan 1930 Social Indicator Model Building: A Multiple- 'Indicator Approach. Social Indicator Research. Dordrecht, Holland; Boston, U.S.A.: D. Reidel Publishing Company. 159 Weisberg, Herbert F. and Bruce D. Bowen 1977 An Introduction to Survey Research and Data Analysis. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman. Wharton, Clifton R., Jr., 1969 "The green revolution: Cornucopia or Pandora's box?" Foreign Affairs, 47: 464-476. 1970 "Subsistence agriculture: Concept and scope." Pp. 12-22 in Clifton R. Wharton, Jr. (ed.), Subsistence Agriculture and Economic Development. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. 1972 Research on Agricultural Development in Southeast Asia. New York: Agricultural Development Council, Inc. Wong, John 1979 Asian Economic in Perspective: A Comparative Study of Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd. Zaltman, Gerald and Robert Duncan 1977 Strategies for Planned Change. New York—- London--Sydney--Toronto: John Wiley and Sons. HICHI N S IIII‘II‘I‘III 3129 E III ARIES IIIIIIII