Analysis on sustainability of organic farming in rice intensification

(1)

ANALYSIS ON SUSTAINABILITY OF ORGANIC FARMING

IN RICE INTENSIFICATION

(ANALISIS KEBERLANJUTAN USAHATANI ORGANIK DALAM

INTENSIFIKASI PADI)

GARDJITO

THE GRADUATE SCHOOL

BOGOR AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY (IPB) BOGOR


(2)

(ANALISIS KEBERLANJUTAN USAHATANI ORGANIK DALAM

INTENSIFIKASI PADI)

GARDJITO

THE GRADUATE SCHOOL

BOGOR AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY (IPB) BOGOR


(3)

STATEMENT ABOUT DISSERTATION AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION

I hereby solemnly state that this dissertation entitled: ‘Analysis on Sustainability of Organic Farming in Rice Intensification’ is my own work, under the supervision of my academic advisors at BAU that has not been proposed in any form and to any other universities. Sources of information coming or being cited from either published or unpublished articles of other authors had been clearly mentioned in the text and been included in the list of references.

Bogor, December 2011

Gardjito F161050062/TEP


(4)

(5)

ABSTRACT

GARDJITO. Analysis on Sustainability of Organic Farming in Rice Intensification. Under the direction of BUDI I. SETIAWAN, ARIEF S. YUWONO, and I WAYAN ASTIKA

Indonesia and some other countries in Asia are still striving for food security. This is due to the fact that the world food supply has indicated a critical condition where rice, as the staple food of the majority of Asian population, is one of the critical foods. System of Rice Intensification (SRI) claimed with high productivity and less water requirement might be one of the possible solutions to overcome the world food as well a water crisis. This method has been developed in some Asian countries including Indonesia although some researches still have to be conducted concerning the sustainability of this farming method in increasing rice production. A study was conducted in the District of Sukabumi as a case study with the objective to analyze the potential sustainability of organic rice farming using the SRI method in that area. Study on agricultural sustainability usually concerns with at least three components such as social, economic and environmental aspects. In this study, the three components were stressed on willingness of farmer to adopt new method as social factor, productivity as economic factor and utilization of agricultural wastes for fertilizer as the component that indirectly related to environmental factor. The analyses on the potential agricultural sustainability were conducted based on modeling approach. Several models were developed for uses in the calculation and prediction of the factors considered, which basically were based on Cobb-Douglas production function and Verhulst growth model. The result of this study indicated that the District of Sukabumi had the potential to develop a sustainable organic rice farming using SRI method. However, some factors involving the sustainability still had to be improved for better result of development.

Keywords: System of Rice Intensification, organic rice farming, sustainability modeling, District of Skabumi


(6)

(7)

SUMMARY

GARDJITO. Analysis on Sustainability of Organic Farming in Rice Intensification. Under the direction of BUDI I. SETIAWAN, ARIEF S. YUWONO, and I WAYAN ASTIKA

Indonesia, once was rice self-supporting country in the 1980s and soon after has become one of the biggest rice importing countries in the world, is still striving for food security. This is due to the fact that the world food supply has indicated a critical condition where rice, as the staple food of the majority of Asian population, is one of the critical foods. Proliferation of rice productivity has been endlessly conducted through researches on high yielding varieties either at national or international level, but mostly still relies on intensive application of chemical fertilizers. With this method the increase in productivity might occur, but at the same time the possibility of environmental pollution becomes higher. Such dilemmatic phenomenon requires appropriate way-outs to overcome.

One of the possible solutions to overcome the food crisis, especially in Asia, might be the utilization of the intensification system of rice production with high productivity and less water requirement. This method is popularly called System of Rice Intensification (SRI), which has been developed in some Asian countries including Indonesia. This system relies on the rooting management of paddy crop, which is based on the management of water, soil and plant. Basically, this system can utilize either organic, chemical, or combination of both types of fertilizer. The utilization of organic fertilizers in SRI has been widely conducted in Indonesia especially in Java. Based on the field experiment data, the yield varies from 10.5 to 17.5 ton/ha. However, the sustainability of the organic matter supplies appropriate for fertilizing the soil has to be secured in order to keep the high productivity when it is applied in larger scale.

A study was conducted in the District of Sukabumi as a case study with the objective to analyze the potential sustainability of organic rice farming using the SRI method. Organic rice farming using the method so far has been extensively and intensively developed in this area, where the SRI method to some extend had been applied by some of the farmers. Although the method itself could be applied either using organic or inorganic fertilizers, its application was usually associated with organic rice farming especially on Java Island. The main reason was that it could be applied using any rice variety resulting in high productivity. The organic rice produced had better taste than that of the conventional one and the price was higher.

Study on agricultural sustainability usually concerns with at least three components such as social, economic and environmental aspects. In this study, the three components were stressed on willingness of farmer to adopt new method as social factor, productivity as economic factor and utilization of agricultural wastes for fertilizer as the component that indirectly related to environmental factor. The analyses on the potential agricultural sustainability were conducted based on modeling approaches. Several models were developed for uses in the calculation and prediction of the factors considered, which basically were based on Cobb-Douglas production function and Verhulst growth model.

A production model for organic rice farming was developed for the case of the District of Sukabumi. The model was developed based on Cobb-Douglas function commonly used to represent the relationship of an output to inputs. In


(8)

the case of predicting organic rice farming production, four input factors were used consisted of seed, fertilizer, labor and water, resulting in the following model: YLD = 2.664 S-0.002 F0.00019 L0.002 W0.94. The model was capable of predicting the production of organic rice farming with SRI method. Another model was developed for the prediction of the organic rice productivity based on Verhulst growth model. The result indicated that the productivity leveled off at around 10.4 ton/ha in this area. Sensitivity analysis was also done on the production model and the results indicated that the model was sensitive enough towards the changes in its production factors or parameters. Based on the two models, an optimization was made in order to determine the optimum profit obtained from the organic rice farming in Sukabumi.

A sustainable supply of organic fertilizer was one of the factors to be secured. Sources of organic fertilizers applied by farmers could be paddy straw, animal wastes, legumes and other biomasses, as well as organic garbage from the local market. An analysis of the provision or supply of organic fertilizers for the development of sustainable SRI organic rice farming in the District of Sukabumi by means of modeling approach were conducted. Based on the available data, some predictions of essential factors required for planning of future development of sustainable SRI organic rice farming can be made. The factors include the interest of farmers in adopting new technique, land with technical irrigation and availability of sources of organic fertilizers such as household and industrial organic wastes and animal wastes.

The result of this study indicated that the District of Sukabumi had the potential to develop a sustainable organic rice farming using the SRI method. However, some factors involving the sustainability still has to be improved for better result of development.


(9)

©Copy right belongs to IPB, 2011 All Rights Reserved

No part or the entire dissertation may be cited without incorporating or stating the source. Citation is only for education, research, scientific paper writing, report making, critics writing, or problem review; and the citation is not detrimental to the interests of IPB.

It is forbidden to announce and duplicate a part or the entire dissertation without permission from IPB.


(10)

(11)

ANALYSIS ON SUSTAINABILITY OF ORGANIC FARMING

IN RICE INTENSIFICATION

(ANALISIS KEBERLANJUTAN USAHATANI ORGANIK DALAM

INTENSIFIKASI PADI)

GARDJITO

Dissertation

Submitted as partial fulfillment for the achievement of Doctoral Degree in the

Study Program of Agricultural Engineering Science

(English is unabridged)

THE GRADUATE SCHOOL

BOGOR AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY (IPB) BOGOR


(12)

Examiners in Close Examination: Dr. Ir. Erizal, MAgr

Dr. Dra. Rahayu Widyastuti, MSc

Examiners in Open Examination: Prof. (R) Dr. Bambang Prastowo Dr. Ir. Sugiyanta, MSi


(13)

Research Title : Analysis on Sustainability of Organic Farming in Rice Intensification

Name of Student : Gardjito

Student Number : F. 161050062/TEP

Study Program : Agricultural Engineering Science

Approved by, Advisory Committee

Prof. Dr. Ir. Budi Indra Setiawan, M.Agr. Chairman

Dr. Ir. Arief Sabdo Yuwono, M.Sc. Dr. Ir. I Wayan Astika, M.Si. Member Member

Acknowledged by,

Date of Examination: Date of Passing: 07 November 2011

Head of the Study Program of Agricultural Engineering Science

Dr. Ir. Wawan Hermawan, M.S.

Dean of the Graduate School of Bogor Agricultural University,


(14)

(15)

PREFACE

‘Alhamdulillah’ to ‘Allah SWT’ who always bestows thou grace and guidance so that the author eventually accomplishes this dissertation entitled:

‘Analysis on Sustainability of Organic Farming in Rice Intensification’. The theme of organic rice farming with SRI was selected because it offers a good opportunity to produce more rice with less water which important to Indonesia and other Asian countries. It means that this method can be used to meet two major challenges involving rice as a staple food in Asia, i.e., ensuring the ability to meet the food security needs with a declining natural resources base particularly regarding to water and land and the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger. Research on SRI with various topics has just been started since the introduction of this method in the 1980s in Madagascar. This research topic for dissertation was meant to study in macro aspect of how organic rice farming with SRI can be developed in the District of Sukabumi as a case study through modeling approach.

The author would like to express his gratitude to the following: Professor Budi Indra Setiawan, Dr. Arief S. Yuwono, and Dr. I Wayan Astika from IPB as my academic advisors who relentlessly and patiently gave their guidance and direction for the completion of my study in doctoral program; Dr. Tasuku Kato from Ibaraki University for his support and help; NOSC, Nagrak, especially to Mr. Jatika as the Director and Mr. Misnan; and last but not least, those other parties that he cannot name one by one, who are also very helpful in the completion of this study.

Finally, the author does hope that the result of this study would be beneficial to all stakeholders in rice production either from government agencies or NGOs especially the decision makers. The successfulness of rice farming with SRI would help farmers to improve their prosperity. Amen.

Bogor, December 2011


(16)

(17)

BIODATA

The author was born in Surakarta, Central Java Province, on January 31, 1946. I am the youngest child, with one brother and one sister, of the late father R.M. Soenoto and late mother Marjati.

The author was graduated from Bogor Agricultural University or BAU in 1975, majoring in Agricultural Mechanization. The author received his master degree (MSc) in Agricultural Engineering from Michigan State University, USA, in 1980. The author pursued a doctoral program in the same discipline at the same university until 1983, but it was incomplete due to some technical problem. Beside the degree programs, the author also participated in two 3-month non-degree (training) programs, one in Cornell University (USA, 1993) and the other in Tokyo University (Japan, 1999-2000).

The author started to work at BAU in 1972 (before graduated) as junior assistant instructor; and became the official faculty member as instructor in 1975 after graduation. The last position he took was Senior Lecturer before retired in February, 2011. The author has the responsibility to give lectures especially in fundamental as well as professional engineering courses in the Department of Agricultural Engineering. In 2008, the author joined the new department in BAU, i.e., the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. As a faculty member, he had to carry out the university tripartite (tri-dharma) during his career in BAU, i.e., lecturing, research and community service. A few scientific articles were published either in national journals (three articles, as main author and co-authors), in international journal (one article, as co-author) and in the proceedings of international conference (two, as author and co-author).

Since 2005, the author has joined the doctoral program of BAU Graduate School majoring in Agricultural Engineering Science. Several publications have been accomplished. One article was published in the accredited national journal (Productivity Analysis of Organic Rice Farming Intensification. Jurnal Irigasi. Vol. 5, No. 1, Juni 2010) and two articles will be published (still in process), i.e., 1) Sensitivity Analysis and Optimization of Model of Organic Rice Farming with SRI in the District of Sukabumi (Analisis Sensitivitas dan Optimisasi Model Budidaya Padi Organik dengan SRI di Kabupaten Sukabumi) and 2) Production of Organic Fertilizer for the Development of Sustainable Organic Rice Farming with SRI Method in Sukabumi (Produksi Pupuk Organik untuk Pengembangan Budidaya Padi Organik Berkelanjutan Menggunakan Metoda SRI di Sukabumi); both has been accepted and will be published in the volumes of October 2011 and


(18)

April 2012 of the national journal of Jurnal Keteknikan Pertanian). The scientific articles are parts of the doctoral programs.


(19)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES xix

LIST OF FIGURES xx

LIST OF APPENDICES xxi

I. INTRODUCTION ……….

1.1.Background ………...

1.2.Objectives ………..

1.3.Problem Statement ………...

1.4.Hypothesis ………..

1.5.Usefulness ………..

1.6.Novelty ………...

1.7.Literature Review ………...

1.8.Methodology ………..

1 1 3 4 5 5 6 6 12

II. GENERAL CONDITION OF THE STUDY AREA ...

2.1.Background………...

2.2.Physical Condition ………. 2.3.Social Economic Condition ………... 2.4.Closure ………...…...

15 15 16 19 21

III. INTRODUCTION OF ORGANIC RICE FARMING WITH SYSTEM OF RICE INTENSIFICATION IN

INDONESIA ..………..

3.1.Background……….

3.2.System of Rice Intensification ..………. 3.3.Sustainability of Organic Rice Farming ..………...

3.4.Conclusion ..………

23 23 25 29 34

IV. ANALYSIS ON THE PRODUCTIVITY OF ORGANIC RICE

FARMING INTENSIFICATION ……..………

4.1.Background …...……….

4.2.Method ..……….

4.3.Results and Discussion .………..………

4.4.Conclusion ..………...

35 35 36 39 44

V. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS AND OPTIMIZATION OF THE PRODUCTION MODEL OF ORGANIC RICE FARMING IN

SUKABUMI ………..

5.1.Background ..………...………...

5.2.Method ..…………...………...

5.3.Results and Discussion .………..

5.4.Conclusion ..………...

45 45 46 49 54


(20)

Page

VI. ANALYSIS ON THE PRODUCTIVITY OF ORGANIC RICE

FARMING INTENSIFICATION ……..………

6.1.Background ..………..

6.2.Method ..………...………..

6.3.Results and Discussion .………..

6.4.Conclusion ..………...

55

55 56 57 66

VII. GENERAL CONCLUSION AND

RECOMMENDATION……….…. 7.1. General Conclusion ………

7.2. General Recommendation ………..

67

67 69

ACKNOWLEDGMENT ………. 70

REFERENCES ……… 71


(21)

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1.1. Characteristics of agricultural systems ……… 11

Table 1.2. Research schedule ……… 12

Table 2.1. Soil types in the District of Sukabumi ……….. 18 Table 2.2. Change in area of paddy fields according to irrigation type

used in 2003 – 2008 (in ha) ……….. 19 Table 2.3. Population of District of Sukabumi from 1961 to 2005 …... 20 Table 3.1. Data of yields experimental rice farming using SRI method

at various locations in Indonesia ……….. 28 Table 3.2. Result of demonstration plot test of SRI in District of

Garut (2003) ………. 29

Table 4.1. Rice production data of farmers practicing SRI organic rice

farming in Sukabumi District ………... 40 Table 4.2. Parameter values of the production factors ……….. 42 Table 4.3. Yield components of the production factors ……… 43 Table 5.1. Organic rice production data of farmers applying SRI in

District of Sukabumi ……… 50

Table 5.2. Example data for minimum seed tolerance ……….. 41 Table 5.3 Data for calculating profit of rice sale ………. 52 Table 5.4. Result of productivity or production optimization ……….. 53 Table 5.5. Result of profit calculation for harvest-dry rough rice …… 54 Table 5.6 Result of profit calculation for milled rice ………... 54 Table 6.1. Organic fertilizer calculation parameters of animal waste ... 60 Table 6.2. Organic fertilizer calculation parameters of municipal

waste ……… 60

Table 6.3. Population data of human and animal in the District of

Sukabumi 61

Table 6.4. Supply of potential organic fertilizer from municipal and

animal wastes 61

Table 6.5. Land (paddy fields) with technical irrigation in the District

of Sukabumi 62

Table 6.6. Trend of change of paddy field area with technical

irrigation ………... 63

Table 6.7. Data of land (paddy field) with technical irrigation ……… 65 Table 6.8. Results of the calculation of available and required organic


(22)

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 1.1. Flow chart of research activity ………. 13 Figure 2.1. Map of the District of Sukabumi ………. 17 Figure 2.2. Location of Sukabumi in West Java Province ……….. 17 Figure 3.1. Factors involve in rice intensification using organic

farming method ……… 32

Figure. 4.1. Regression of observation data vs. model for rice

production yield ………... 41

Figure 4.2. Prediction of yield of SRI organic rice farming …………... 43 Figure 5.1. Results of sensitivity analysis for minimum seed tolerance 52 Figure 6.1. Trend of the decreasing area of land with technical

irrigation (upper curve) and the possible SRI land area development (lower curve) from 2003 through 2020 in the

District of Sukabumi ……… 64


(23)

LIST OF APPENDICES

Pages

Appendix 4.1. Result of Optimization of Productivity Model Using

Cobb-Douglas Function ……….. 76

Appendix 4.2. Prediction of Rice Productivity ………... 77 Appendix 5.1. Calculation data of Cobb-Douglas based rice

productivity ……….

78

Appendix 5.2. Calculation used in the sensitivity analysis ………. 79 Appendix 6.1. Population and Domestic Waste Production …………... 85 Appendix 6.2. Calculation of Developed SRI Area and Required


(24)

1.1. Background

World population growth, expected to reach more than eight billion by 2006, will cause problems in food as well as water supplies. The rapid population growth and industrial development have caused water shortage which is worsening from year to year. For example, 31 countries mainly in Asia and Africa, are suffering an absolute lack of water. As a consequence this scarcity of water has resulted in serious food shortage and other catastrophes especially in the developing countries (Yajima 2002).

Rice has long been very important for dietary source of human life. This commodity is vital to fulfilling human food needs, especially in Asia where the population is very high and per capita available arable land very low (Fresco 2003). Rice cultivation has been an integral part of the culture in large parts of Asia for centuries. It is not only a staple food, but also a key ingredient of the region’s culture. Growing paddy rice has been the central livelihood strategy and is in the blood of most of Asian farmers (Rijsberman 2004).

Two major challenges involving rice in Asia are ensuring the ability of nations to meet their national and household food security needs with a declining natural resource base particularly regarding to water and land and the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger. This is because rice is so central to the lives of most Asians that any solution to global poverty and hunger must include research that helps poor Asian farmers earn a decent, reliable income by growing rice that is affordable to poor consumers (Cantrell 2004). Although the global rice production has so far been able to meet population demands, a big question has already arisen on its sustainability. Appropriate action has to be taken in the near future in order to solve the problem (Nguyen & Ferrero 2006).

Other challenge for paddy rice farmers to increase their productivity is how to grow more rice with less water. According to Barker et al. (2004), irrigation consumes approximately 80 percent of developed water resources in the developing countries. Paddy fields account for approximately 50 percent of the irrigated area in Asia. It is assumed that a great deal of water could be saved in


(25)

traditional paddy rice production. Some scientists of Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) are currently engaged in a long-term assessment of the potential to achieve this. This group has also recognized the high priority of growing more food, including paddy rice, with less water. Growing more rice with much less water is necessary and possible (Rijsberman 2004).

In line with those efforts, the General Assembly of the United Nation declared 2004 as the International Year of Rice with the slogan “Rice is Life”, which is an extraordinary focus for a single crop to acquire such international recognition. This dedication to a single crop is unprecedented. It acknowledges the significance of rice as the staple food and a healthy source of grain for the majority of the developing world, and links its production and ecosystem management to broader issues of global food security, poverty alleviation, environmental conservation and the protection of biodiversity (Fresco 2003; Sato 2005).

A good opportunity to produce more rice with less water was opened when a new method of rice cultivation was introduced in the 1980s by the use of System of Rice Intensification (SRI) developed originally in Madagascar. It is claimed that “SRI is a methodology that can contribute to food security by increasing rice yields to about twice the present world average, virtually without the need of improved seeds or chemical inputs” as presented by Norman Uphoff, director of the Cornell International Institute for Food, Agriculture and Development (CIIFAD), in his keynote on “The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) and its Relevance for Food Security and Natural Resource Management in Southeast Asia” (TROZ 2002). It has been tested in China, India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh with positive results (Berkelaar 2006).

Some other scientists are, however, still skeptic and argue about the success of the SRI method. In the beginning of its development, SRI received criticisms from either practitioners or scientists. The practices recommended by SRI is somewhat counterintuitive, since it challenges assumptions and practices that have been applied for hundreds or even thousands of years by traditional rice farmers in Asia. No external inputs are necessary for a farmer to benefit from SRI. The


(26)

methods should work with any seeds that are now being used. No purchase of new seeds or the use of new high-yielding varieties (HYV) is required, although some of the highest yields obtained using SRI have been from the HYVs of paddy.

The SRI practices for paddy cultivation now being recommended to farmers in Indonesia, particularly in Java, can be categorized as organic rice farming. The applications of organic rice farming by farmers are mostly sponsored by non-government organizations (NGOs). Despite the arguments and criticisms among the rice scientists, the application of SRI method in rice production is growing among the farmers in West Java including the District of Sukabumi. This district seems to have the potential in developing the SRI method. Beside the good and long experience in rice farming of the farmers, this district also has relatively large area of paddy field with technical irrigation and other infrastructures. Furthermore, the existence of a training center of rice organic farming with SRI located in this district (NOSC) would have an important role in supporting the development of rice organic farming intensification with SRI in this district.

This system seems to be a revolution of paddy cultivation to most farmers in Asia including those from the District of Sukabumi. In fact, farmers have to have an open mind to adopt new methods and a willingness to experiment. It might take some years to get confidence that these methods could consistently raise production so substantially. Therefore, some more in-depth researches still need to be conducted concerning the socio-economic, technical, as well as environmental aspects. One of the research themes at macro level is the analysis on the potential sustainability of the SRI method when applied in larger scale using modeling approach.

1.2. Objective

The objective of this study was to analyze the sustainability of organic farming in rice intensification in the District of Sukabumi through modeling approach by considering the following aspects:

(1) Productivity and profitability in organic rice production with SRI. (2) Awareness and attitude of farmers towards the SRI method.


(27)

(3) Potential production of organic fertilizers to supply the requirement in the development of organic rice farming with SRI in the District of Sukabumi.

1.3. Problem Statement

Basically, the concept of SRI comprises certain management practices for intensive and efficient paddy rice cultivation. The management practices involve transplanting method and management of soil, nutrient and water which provide better rice plants conditions, particularly in the root zone. This method is different from the traditional one with constant field flooding that has been practiced by Asian farmers for thousands of years. SRI is based on the fact that paddy is not aquatic plant but it needs more water in the right time. Therefore, flooding is not necessary and less water is needed through the use of periodical intermittent irrigation, although increased weeding is required. To some extent, flooding is even detrimental to paddy plants, i.e., retarding the development of root and the growth of tillers.

Despite the successfulness of the SRI in rice production as claimed in many countries including in Indonesia as stated above, there is still a big question about the sustainability of this system when practiced in large scale, especially the sustainability of the organic matter supplies appropriate for fertilizing the soil. So far SRI has only been tried in small scale where water requirement and organic fertilizers were still manageable. The sustainability of this organic farming system would still be in question when it is applied in large scale due to its promising future in intensive rice production. The change from the traditional system into this SRI system might cause some changes in socio-economic, technical, as well as environmental aspects of the rice production. Some of the problems that might be encountered when SRI system is applied in large scale among others are:

(a) Change in environmental factors related to paddy cultivation, particularly in soil ecology, when the irrigation is changed from flooding to intermittent system. This will include the soil microorganisms and chemical compounds produced.

(b) SRI method requires good water management, i.e., water should always be available and easily managed when needed for intermittent irrigation system.


(28)

Block to block irrigation as traditionally applied in paddy fields cannot be suitable to the intermittent method required in SRI. New irrigation scheme and land consolidation might be needed in order to apply appropriately the SRI system in large scale.

(c) Recently organic farming is recommended to produce organic rice which is preferable by consumers and has less environmental impact compared to the utilization of chemicals. Large quantity of organic materials or biomass as the source of organic fertilizers such as compost and bokashi is required. In small scale, it can be provided by the farmer locally. In large scale, however, the production of organic fertilizers must be in industrial scale which requires secured sources of raw materials.

(d) A new approach in macro socio-economic systems related to the adoption of SRI is needed to develop in order that it can be appropriately applied for efficient and profitable agri-businesses involving intensive rice farming, animal farming and organic fertilizer industry.

1.4. Hypothesis

The following hypothesis is used in this analysis: ‘With the adoption of new method, level of organic rice productivity and production of organic fertilizers, District of Sukabumi has the potential in the development of sustainable organic rice farming with SRI’.

1.5. Usefulness

Effort in increasing rice production is a must in order to overcome problems in food in the near future, especially in Asia where rice is the staple food for most of the population. System of Rice Intensification (SRI) is claimed to be a new methodology that can contribute to food security by increasing rice yields to about twice the present world average, virtually without the need of improved seeds or chemical inputs and requires less water compared to the conventional one. The models developed in this dissertation in general can be used as the methodology in planning the development of organic rice farming with SRI in larger scale in Indonesia.


(29)

1.6. Novelty

Novelty of this research is the utilization and modification of some fundamental models previously developed by other researchers. Verhulst’s growth model can be used to make predictions of population growth, trend of change of land-use and productivity of rice. Cobb-Douglas production function can be developed with new variables in order to calculate the rice production and profitability. These models can be used in the analysis on the sustainability of agricultural development in general.

1.7. Literature Review

1.7.1. Organic Farming for Rice Intensification

Development of SRI

The SRI method was developed by Fr. Henri de Laulanie, S.J., a Jesuit priest, in the early 1980s. He came to Madagascar in 1961 from France and spent more than 30 years of his life in that country. He worked with Malagasy farmers to improve their agricultural systems, particularly in rice production, as rice is the staple food of the country population. Before he died in June, 1995, Laulanie published one article on SRI in the Journal Tropicultura in 1993 (Berkelaar 2006; DISIMP 2006).

Laulanie established an agricultural vocational school in 1981 to help rural youths receive an education relevant to their family or community needs. In 1990, he together with a number of Malagasy colleagues established an indigenous non-governmental organization (NGO) called Association Tefy Saina (ATS) (tefy saina in Malagasy means to improve mind). This NGO works with farmers, agricultural professionals and other NGOs to improve to improve production and livelihood. In 1994, ATS began working with the CIIFAD to promote SRI around the Ranomafana National Park in eastern Madagascar, supported by the USAID. This project helped the farmers around the area to find alternatives to their slash-and burn agriculture, which endangered the precious rain forest ecosystems (Berkelaar 2006).


(30)

Principles of SRI

The SRI practices for paddy cultivation now being recommended to farmers in Indonesia, particularly in West Java, can be categorized as organic rice farming. No chemical fertilizers are used; instead, manures and biomass are used either in its natural condition, or in the forms of compost or bokashi. The main reason for using organic fertilizers is “cheaper”, readily available and environmentally friendly. Organic fertilizers are also claimed as having the effect of improving soil condition including soil structure (Gardjito et al. 2006).

Basically, the concept of SRI comprises certain management practices for intensive and efficient paddy rice cultivation. The management practices involve transplanting method and management of soil, nutrient and water which provide better rice plants conditions, particularly in the root zone. This method is different from the traditional one with constant field flooding that has been practiced by Asian farmers for thousands of years. It should be noted that paddy is not aquatic plant but it needs water more in the right time (Berkelaar 2006; DISIMP 2006).

Four principles of SRI in paddy cultivation are: (1) Early transplanting of seedlings, i.e., between 10 and 15 days old when the first two leaves have emerged from the initial tiller or stalk, (2) Seedlings are planted singly rather in clumps in order that individual plants have room to spread and to send down roots, (3) Seedlings are planted in a wide spacing square pattern with plenty of space between them to grow and easy weeding (at least 25 x 25 cm), and (4) Periodically intermittent irrigation in order that the soil are both moist and aerated at least during the vegetative growth period, where aerated soil provides aerobic and anaerobic bacteria an opportunity to contribute to plant growth. These four practices are different from those traditionally practiced by farmers so far (Berkelaar 2006; DISIMP 2006).

There are two other practices that are very beneficial and not controversial when using SRI since they have been long recognized as valuables for crops. The two practices are weeding and fertilizing. At least two or three weeding are recommended, in which, the first weeding should be done ten to twelve days after transplanting and the second weeding within fourteen days. Another one or two weeding can significantly increase the yield. Fertilizing in SRI was initially using


(31)

chemical fertilizers especially on the very poor soils. Due to some constraints, the recommendation on fertilizing switched to the use of compost, with even better results were observed. Compost adds nutrient to the soil slowly and can also contribute to a better soil structure (DISIMP 2006).

By applying the SRI practices properly, it is claimed that rice plants have many more tillers, greater root development, and more grains per panicle. Hence, SRI methods have at least doubled the yields of any variety of rice that has been tried. However, farmers have to have an open mind to adopt new methods and a willingness to experiment. It might take some years to get confidence that these methods could consistently raise production so substantially (Gardjito et al. 2006).

Sustainability

Many studies on agricultural sustainability have been conducted and published. The term sustainability used in this research topic related to the definition used in the sustainable development in general, but limited to certain local condition. One definition states that sustainable development is defined as balancing the fulfillment of human needs with the protection of the natural environment so that these needs can be met not only in the present, but in the indefinite future. Conceptually, the field of sustainable development can be broken into four constituent parts, i.e., environmental sustainability, economic sustainability, social sustainability and political sustainability (Wikipedia Encyclopedia 2007).

Agricultural sustainability in general implies the production of food and fiber with a mission to guarantee ecological stability, economic viability and socio-cultural permanence (Lal 1991 in Sands & Podmore 2000). Sustainability has become one of the forefront issues faced by agriculture. However, it continues to remain an ill-defined concept. Current literature still struggles with developing and refining the concept. Sands and Podmore (2000) conducted a study on sustainability index for agricultural systems. The objective of the index was to provide a modeling-based, i.e., quantitative measure of sustainability from an environmental perspective comprising both on- and off-site environmental effects associated with agricultural stems. According to Singh et al. (2009), sustainability indicators and composite index are increasingly recognized as a useful tool for


(32)

policy making and public communication in conveying information on countries and corporate performance in fields such as environment, economy, society, or technological improvement. The indicators simplify, quantify, analyze and communicate otherwise complex and complicated information.

Good agricultural systems should be able to develop sustainable farming which depends on the development of production systems able to reduce soil erosion, improve physical and biological soil fertility and of course increase farmer’s income (Dogliotti et al. 2005). Poor management of the livestock waste can generate increasing rate of pollution, including the emergence of conflicts with other activities, such as tourism, due to nuisance smells. Therefore, mastering the management of livestock wastes is deemed necessary by local authorities. Agronomic research was thus required to help farmers and extensionists to find ways of matching the supply of organic matter from livestock to the demand of crops, both within and between farms (Aubry et al. 2006). Since livestock waste is one of the sources of organic fertilizer, one possible solution is the utilization of it for the production of organic fertilizer such as compost and bokashi. This in turn will reduce the risk of environmental pollution. Another source of organic fertilizer is paddy straw with ample potential production of about 1.4 times the harvest yield per hectare (Kim and Dale 2004 in ISROI 2009). The utilization of paddy straw as agricultural waste for the production of compost offers several benefits either in economic, social or environmental aspects. Economically, it is always available after harvest for free sustainable production of compost. Environmentally, it can reduce the possibility of pollution by converting the waste into compost.

1.7.2. Modeling Approach in Rice Production Study

In general, the main goal of agricultural research is to increase agricultural production. The continuing growth of the world’s population and the important share of the agricultural products in the world economy make the increase in agricultural production will continue to be important. However, the continuing production increase should currently be under different conditions. The more or less uncontrolled growth in agricultural production during the past few decades, in


(33)

industrial as well as developing countries, has pushed agricultural production to and, in many cases, over the edge of sustainability. A new challenge of how to find a new balance between agricultural development and the conservation of the natural resources is faced in increasing agricultural production by means of, e.g., land and water engineering (van Dongen & van Lier 1999).

Agricultural development is a dynamic process and is highly affected by external conditions which encompass the natural environment as well as socio-economic and political factors. Many studies concerning agricultural development, including rice production, have been conducted using modeling approach and systems simulation. Based on the characteristics of agricultural systems and dynamic processes involved, system dynamics models have been widely used in the studies. A lot of variables should be taken into account to characterize an agricultural type in a certain area more precisely. Table 1.1 shows a list of variables in agricultural systems as compiled by International Geographical Union (van Dongen & van Lier 1999).

1.7.3. System Dynamics Modeling

In conjunction with systems simulation, a model is a representation, abstraction and simplification of real world phenomena as complex systems (Law & Kelton, 1982; Ford 1999; Hannon & Ruth 2001). The model has to be detailed and valid in order that an analyst or decision maker could use it for making the same decisions about a system to be developed and making some experiments with the system itself. Like other models, a system dynamics model is also a representative of a real world system that can be used to study the behavior of the system under various test conditions (Sushil 1993).


(34)

Table 1.1. List of characteristics of agricultural systems

A. Social attributes

1. Percentage of land held in common

2. Percentage of land in labor or share tenancy 3. Percentage of land in private ownership

4. Percentage of land in state, or collective ownership 5. Size of holding according to numbers employed 6. Size of holding according to area of agricultural land 7. Size of holding according to value of output

B. Operational attributes

8. Labor intensity: number of employees per hectare of agricultural land

9. Inputs of animal power: draught units per hectare of agricultural land

10. Inputs of mechanical power: tractors, harvesters, etc. per hectare of agricultural land

11. Chemical fertilizers: nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium per hectare of cultivated land

12. Irrigation, irrigated land as percentage of all cultivated land 13. Intensity of cropland use, ratio of harvested to total arable land 14. Intensity of livestock breeding, animal units per hectare of

agricultural land

C. Production attributes

15. Land productivity: gross agricultural output per hectare of agricultural land

16. Labor productivity: gross agricultural output per employee in agriculture

17. Degree of commercialization: proportion output sold off farm 18. Commercial production: commercial output per hectare of

agricultural land

D. Structural characteristics

19. Percentage of land in perennial and semi perennial crops 20. Percentage of total agricultural land impermanent grass 21. Percentage of total agricultural land in food crops 22. Percentage of total agricultural output of animal origin 23. Animal production as percentage of total commercial output 24. Industrial crops (sugar, fiber, rubber, beverages) as percentage

of total agricultural land.


(35)

1.8. Methodology

1.8.1. Place and Time

This research was conducted in the areas of the District of Sukabumi, West Java Province. Data analysis and model simulation were conducted in Farm Structures and Environment Laboratory, Department of Agricultural Engineering and Soil Physic Laboratory, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, IPB.

The field research period was tentatively planned to be 12 (twelve) months, starting from November 2007 through November 2008. The research schedule is presented in the following Table 1.2.

Table 1.2. Research schedule

Activity

Months

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Preparation Data collection Data analysis and modeling Report and publication

1.8.2. Data Collection and Analysis

The types of data required in this research were mostly secondary data consisted of human and animal populations, rice yield, rice production, fertilizers, labors, etc. The data collected was analyzed and used either as parameters or variables in the model optimization as well as model validation. A preliminary study was also conducted in the District of Sukabumi in order to obtain general information about the application of System of Rice Intensification especially on organic rice farming. Figure 1.1 is a flow chart showing the process of this research activity.


(36)

Figure 1.1. Flow chart of research activity

1.8.3. Model Development

Several models were used in the analysis involving productivity and production models with some related parameters. Many variables have to be taken into account to characterize an agricultural type in a certain area more precisely. Referring to the characteristics of agricultural systems as stated in Table 1.1, the land productivity or yield can be formulated as follows:

YLD = f (S,F,L,W) (1)

where: YLD = Yield or productivity (ton/ha) S = Seed (kg/ha)

F = Fertilizer (ton/ha)

L = Labor (m-days/ha)

W = Water (1000m3/ha)

Preparation

Yes

No

Report Sufficient?

Data Collection Preliminary Study

1. Model Development 2. Modeling Analysis


(37)

Model for predicting the yield of organic rice farming production could be developed using Verhulst growth model (Burghes & Borrie 1981). The following Equation (2) was used as the model for the prediction of the yield of organic rice production through time.

(2)

where Y(t) = yield with respect to time (ton/ha)

Y0 = initial yield (ton/ha)

Y = maximum sustainable yield (ton/ha) γ = coefficient

t = time (year)

Equation (2) implies that the yield will level at its maximum value through time. How long the leveling or maximum condition will be reached depends upon the limitations on soil fertility and land area. Some historical data is needed to run the model in order to predict the yield.

1 1

1 )

(

   

 

  

 

    

 

 

t

o

e Y

Y Y

t


(38)

II. GENERAL CONDITION OF THE STUDY AREA

2.1. Background

District of Sukabumi is one of the districts located in West Java Province, Indonesia. The capital of this district is Pelabuhan Ratu, a small town in a coastal area, which is located in the southern part of this district. Inside this district area, there is Sukabumi City, a different but has the same administrative level as that of the District of Sukabumi. The administrative boundaries of this district are District of Bogor in the North, District of Cianjur in the East, District of Lebak in the West and Indian Ocean in the South.

This district is chosen as the study area since it has the potential for the development of rice organic farming including that using the SRI method. The latter has been developed in this district at least since 2003 after some of the leading rice farmers participated in SRI training conducted in 2002 in Bandung (capital city of West Java) as part of PU’s program to strengthen the WUAs (Water User Associations). The training was provided for farmers from every district in West Java. Actually, SRI was first practiced in 2000 by some curious agronomists/farmers (mostly members of local NGOs) in the District of Ciamis. Due to some reasons, technically and/or non-technically, initially only a few was convinced to practice it professionally as a new promising method of rice farming to increase rice production. However, afterwards the planting area of SRI in West Java has expanded steadily and the total area reached 570 ha (3,000 farmers) in 2005 (Sutarmin et al. 2005).

In 2005 about 68.29% of the total area of paddy field in the district, amounted to 42,829 ha out of 62,715 ha, was that of with irrigation. The rest was rainfed paddy field (BPSKS, 2005). Organic rice farming using SRI method needs paddy field having irrigation with easily managed water requirement. This is true since this method uses intermittent irrigation system which can save water use better compared to that of the conventional method of rice farming with flooding system. Other reason why this district is selected as study area of organic rice farming with SRI method is because there is a research center for organic rice farming using SRI method in Nagrak sub-district managed by an NGO called as


(39)

Nagrak Organic SRI Center (NOSC). The program offered in the training center is especially in the form of ‘training of trainers’ (TOT). The activity of NOSC has been recognized internationally. Considering the condition described above, it is clearly that this district has the potential to be one of the districts in Indonesia where organic rice intensification using SRI method can be well developed.

More information about the physical and social-economic conditions of this district is presented in the following parts (Anonymous 2005).

2.2. Physical Condition

Location of the Study Area

District of Sukabumi is approximately 160 km from Jakarta (capital of Indonesia). This district has an area of ± 420,000 ha with altitudes ranging from 0 to 2,958 m above the sea level (a.s.l). Geographically, it is located between 106º49’-107º00’ East Meridian and 6º57’ - 7º25’ South Latitude. The administrative boundaries of this district are 40% with ocean and 60% with land, i.e., District of Bogor in the North, District of Cianjur in the East, District of Lebak in the West and Indian Ocean in the South. Map of the District of Sukabumi and its location in the West Java Province can be seen in Figure 2.1 and Figure 2.2.

Topography

Most of this district area is hilly land, except in the southern part which is flat plane spreading from the bay of Ciletuh up to Cikaso and Cimandiri tributaries. Several mountains are in the northern part, i.e., Mt. Halimun (1,929 m), Mt. Salak (2,211 m), and the highest is Mt. Gede (2,958 m). Among the rivers flowing in this area are r. Cimandiri and r. Cikaso, which end up at Indian Ocean.

Topographical condition of this district varies from flat to hilly and mountains. From the total area (± 420,000 ha), it consists of plane with 0-2% slope (9.4%), wavy with 2-15% slope (22.0%), hilly with 15-40% slope (42.7%) and mountains with >40% slope or elevation (25.9%). The altitude of the land


(40)

varies from 0 to 2,958 m a.s.l. Flat planes are in the coastal areas and mountain bases usually used for paddy fields.

Figure 2.1. Map of the District of Sukabumi

Figure 2.2. Location of Sukabumi in West Java Province

The hydrological condition of District of Sukabumi is influenced by the climatic factor especially rainfall. According to the topographic pattern, there are five

Sukabumi


(41)

watersheds in this area: Cimandiri (with Cipelang, Cicatih, Citarik, Cibodas and Cidadap branches or sub-watersheds), Cibareno, Ciletuh, Cikaso and Cibuni.

Climatic Condition

District of Sukabumi has the potential to be a very large dry land region. Currently most of this region comprises areas of estate, yard and forest. This district has tropical climate of type B (Oldeman) with average rainfall of 2,805 mm/yr and 144 rain days. Air temperature ranges from 20ºC to 30ºC and Relative Humidity ranges from 85% to 89%. Annual rainfall of 3,000 mm to 4,000 mm occurs in the northern part and 2,000 mm to 3,000 mm occurs in the middle through southern part of the district.

Soil

Types of soil spread in the District of Sukabumi are mostly dominated by

Latosol and Podsolik in the southern part with low fertility level. Soil types of

Andosol and Regosol are in the hilly areas particularly in Mt. Salak, Mt. Gede and in the coastal area. Aluvial soil is generally in the valley and basin of the rivers. In general, the types of soil in this district are dominated by mineral soils with various grade. Table 2.1 shows the soil types and their areas as well as the percentage.

Table 2.1. Soil types in the District of Sukabumi

Type of soil Area (ha) Percentage (%)

Gleisol 6.500 1,6

Alluvial 8.720 2,1

Regosol 2.740 0,6

Andosol 13.430 3,4

Association of Renzina and Combisol 17.430 4,2

Grumosol 23.560 5,7

Mediteran 48.720 11,7

Podsol 65.550 16,0

Latosol 227.160 54,7

Total 414.770 100.0

Land Use

District of Sukabumi has quite large territorial area, i.e., ± 419.970 ha, amounting to 9.18% of West Java Province area. In 1993, the land use of this region was designated as follows: 18,814 ha (4.48%) for yards/villages; 62,083 ha


(42)

(14.78%) for paddy fields; 103,443 ha (24.63%) for uplands; 95,378 ha (22.71%) for plant estate; 1,486 ha (0.35%) for lakes/ponds; 135,004 ha (32.15%) for forest; and 3,762 ha (0.90%) for others.

This land use data may change from year to year as influenced by the local development program. For example, the change in the total area of land use for paddy fields can be seen in the data presented in Table 2.2. Some parts of the paddy fields may have been changed or converted to real estates, which currently becomes comment practice by the government especially in Java Island due to the demand of land for settlement.

Table 2.2. Change in area of paddy fields according to irrigation type used in 2003 – 2008 (in ha)

Year Technical Irrigation

Semi-technical Irrigation

Simple Irrigation

Non-PW Irrigation

Rainfed Irrigation

Others Total

2003 5,790 7,621 5,276 24,196 20,092 596 63,571

2004 5,159 8,545 10,239 18,886 15,218 59 62,715

2005 5,159 8,545 10,239 18,886 15,218 59 62,715

2006 3,630 9,254 7,705 2,358 18,402 19 62,548

2007 3,746 9,171 9,623 21,092 19,225 39 62,896

2008 3,867 10.045 15,214 20.882 19,211 20 69,239

Source: BPS Kabupaten Sukabumi (2006-20009)

2.3. Social Economic Condition

The population growth rate in this district varies from year to year (1.93% in 2005) with a population density 539 persons/km2 in 2005. Settlement with high population density is generally located in the town-like center of a sub-district and along the major roads. The lowest population density occurred in Ciemas Sub-district (183 persons/km2) and the highest occurred in Sukabumi Sub-district (2,447 persons/km2). Table 2.3 presents the population data of the District of Sukabumi from 1961 to 2005 for further information.

The local government of District of Sukabumi has a vision for 2006 -2010 in its development program: ‘the realization in change of the District of Sukabumi towards decent, productive and prosperous society’. It has three major missions: (a) Upgrading the quality of decent human resources, (b) Stabilizing the government performance and (c) Growing the local economy based on seeded sector and populace economy.


(43)

Table 2.3. Population of District of Sukabumi from 1961 to 2005

Year Population (persons)

1961 1970 1980 1990 2000 2003 2004 2005

958,317 1,210,638 1,517,631 1,848,282 2,092,450 2,201,258 2,210,091 2,224,993 Source: BPSKS (2005)

Economic or business sectors having the biggest contribution to the Gross Regional Domestic Product (GRDP) are agriculture sector (38.72%), followed by industrial sector (17.78%), trades, hotel and restaurant (16.15%). These average figures are for the condition in 2005 and expected to increase in the coming years.

The local development policy of the District of Sukabumi in 2006 – 2010 is regional based poverty alleviation with the objective to reduce the number of poor people in each sub-district and interregional gap. The goals are less poor people, acceleration of development in the less developed areas and the realization of local poverty alleviation system.

There are nine business sectors for the fulfillment of decent life that are divided into three groups, i.e., primary, secondary and tertiary. The primary group consists of agriculture, mining and excavation; the secondary group consists of processing industry, utilities (electricity, gas and clean water); and the tertiary group consists of trades, hotel and restaurant, transportation & communication, finance and services. The primary group dominates in the creation of value added in this district.

Among the nine sectors, several sectors have dominant influences on the economy of District of Sukabumi, i.e., agriculture sector with the biggest contribution followed by the sectors of trades, hotel and restaurant, and processing industry. The agriculture sector is the core business that has side impact on other sectors like trades and processing industry, which sector has several sub-sectors of food crops, plantation estates, animals and their products, forestry and fishery. In order to push the economic development in this district, the agriculture sector should smartly make priority in developing commodities that have prospect and


(44)

high economic value. The policy conducted by the local government in pushing the agriculture sector among others are strengthening the farmer group institutional, dissemination of technology and development of agribusiness in the villages or rural areas.

The potential of the agricultural resources is spread mainly in the northern part of the r. Cimandiri. Good water management and climate causes relatively more fertile agricultural land area compared to that of the southern part. Most of the paddy fields are located in this area. Horticultural products, animals and fresh water fishery are also well undertaken. Besides, this area is also recognized with plantation commodities such as rubber and tea which are very important to the economy of this district. Other potential agricultural resource is forestry.

The potential coastal and marine resources are spread particularly in seven sub-district areas that have direct borders with the Indian Ocean, i.e., ± 117 km long from the sub-districts of Cisolok, Palabuhanratu, Ciemas, Ciracap, Surade, Cibitung and Tegalbuleud. The potential products of the areas are fishery, marine biota, seaweeds, mangrove, turtles, mineral and mining materials, as well as tourism. Beside for beach tourism, so far the coastal area of this district has been utilized for fisherman ports.

District of Sukabumi has big market opportunity that has not been optimally utilized. This becomes the challenge for the local government to make strong efforts in increasing the prosperity of its society. The potential of the natural resources needs wise, sustainable and environmentally friendly utilization. From the regional aspect, it needs the improvement in regional accessibility. From the human resources aspect, adequate improvement in quality is needed. Therefore, optimization of the potential utilization is expected to be able to increase the prosperity of the society characterized by its accessibility to services especially health and education.

2.4. Closure

District of Sukabumi is the biggest district in the West Java Province. Agricultural sector gives the biggest contribution to the economy of this district. This sector is the core business that has side impact on other sectors like trades and


(45)

processing industry, which sector has several sub-sectors of food crops, plantation estates, animals and their products, forestry and fishery. The policy conducted by the local government in pushing the agriculture sector among others are strengthening the farmer group institutional, dissemination of technology and development of agribusiness in the villages or rural areas.

In order to push the economic development in this district, the agriculture sector should smartly make priority in developing commodities that have prospect and high economic value. One of the important commodities that could be developed further in this district is rice. Based on the potential agricultural resources, i.e., good water availability and management as well as suitable climate, make this district have the big opportunity to increase rice productivity with the application of new technology or new method available. One of the promising methods is the System of Rice Intensification (SRI) which is now being assessed internationally since it promises higher productivity as much as twice the conventional method in average. Furthermore, organic rice farming using SRI method is mostly applied in West Java since it is assumed to be environmentally friendly and have better rice taste and price.


(46)

III. INTRODUCTION OF ORGANIC RICE FARMING WITH SYSTEM OF RICE INTENSIFICATION (SRI) IN INDONESIA

3.1. Background

World population growth, expected to reach more than eight billion by 2006, will cause problems in food as well as water supplies. From earth’s yearly precipitation of 110,000 km3, about 70,000 km3 (60 percent) returns to the atmosphere again through evapotranspiration process from forests and other natural ecosystems, cropland and other land surfaces. This portion of water is called “green water”. The remaining part of about 40,000 km3 (40 percent), which is called “blue water”, becomes potential water resources for agriculture, industries, domestic and other uses. About 6,780 km3 (54 percent) of the accessible blue water necessary for human life is utilized various purposes, and about 70 percent of that is for irrigated farming (Horie 2002; Yajima 2002). The rapid population growth and industrial development have caused water shortage which is worsening from year to year. For example, 31 countries mainly in Asia and Africa, are suffering an absolute lack of water. As a consequence this scarcity of water has resulted in serious food shortage and other catastrophes especially in the developing countries (Yajima 2002).

Rice has long been very important for dietary source of human life. This commodity is vital to fulfilling human food needs, especially in Asia where the population is very high and per capita available arable land very low (Fresco, 2003). Rice cultivation has been an integral part of the culture in large parts of Asia for centuries. It is not only a staple food, but also a key ingredient of the region’s culture. Growing paddy rice has been the central livelihood strategy and is in the blood of most of Asian farmers (Rijsberman 2004). There are two major challenges involving rice in Asia. The first is ensuring the ability of nations to meet their national and household food security needs with a declining natural resource base particularly regarding to water and land. The second is the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger. This is because rice is so central to the lives of most Asians that any solution to global poverty and hunger must include research that helps poor Asian farmers earn a decent, reliable income by growing


(47)

rice that is affordable to poor consumers (Cantrell 2004). Although the global rice production has so far been able to meet population demands, a big question has already arisen on its sustainability. Appropriate action has to be taken in the near future in order to solve the problem (Nguyen & Ferrero 2006).

Water scarcity and increasing rice production are two major challenges in the efforts of overcoming the food shortage especially in Asia regions in the near future. According to Barker et al. (2004), irrigation consumes approximately 80 percent of developed water resources in the developing countries. Paddy fields account for approximately 50 percent of the irrigated area in Asia. It is assumed that a great deal of water could be saved in traditional paddy rice production. The major challenge for paddy rice farmers to increase their productivity is how to grow more rice with less water. Some scientists of Consultative group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) are currently engaged in a long-term assessment of the potential to achieve this. This group has also recognized the high priority of growing more food, including paddy rice, with less water. Growing more rice with much less water is necessary and possible (Rijsberman, 2004). In line with these efforts, the General Assembly of the United Nation declared 2004 as the International Year of Rice with the slogan “Rice is Life”, which is an extraordinary focus for a single crop to acquire such international recognition. This dedication to a single crop is unprecedented. It acknowledges the significance of rice as the staple food and a healthy source of grain for the majority of the developing world, and links its production and ecosystem management to broader issues of global food security, poverty alleviation, environmental conservation and the protection of biodiversity (Fresco 2003; Sato 2005).

A good opportunity to produce more rice with less water was opened when a new method of rice cultivation was introduced in the 1980s by the use of System of Rice Intensification (SRI) developed originally in Madagascar. It is claimed that “SRI is a methodology that can contribute to food security by increasing rice yields to about twice the present world average, virtually without the need of improved seeds or chemical inputs” as presented by Norman Uphoff, director of the Cornell International Institute for Food, Agriculture and


(48)

Development (CIIFAD), in his keynote on “The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) and its Relevance for Food Security and Natural Resource Management in Southeast Asia” (TROZ, 2002). It has been tested in China, India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh with positive results (Berkelaar 2006).

This paper presents the results of field observation in Indonesia, including District of Sukabumi, about the practice of SRI done by farmers. Despite the successfulness of the SRI in rice production as claimed in many countries stated above, there is still a big question about the sustainability of this system when practiced in large scale.

3.2.System of Rice Intensification

3.2.1. Development of SRI

SRI system was developed in Madagascar during the 1980s after two decades of observation and experimentation conducted by Laulanie. In the beginning of its development, SRI received criticisms from either practitioners or scientists. The practices recommended by SRI is somewhat counterintuitive, since it challenges assumptions and practices that have been applied for hundreds or even thousands of years by traditional rice farmers in Asia. No external inputs are necessary for a farmer to benefit from SRI. The methods should work with any seeds that are now being used. No purchase of new seeds or the use of new high-yielding varieties (HYV) is required, although some of the highest yields obtained using SRI have been from the HYVs of paddy.

The SRI offers many insights into ways that production can be increased efficiently and water saved by managing rice crops with more attention to biology and agro-ecology. The changes in practice that differentiate SRI cultivation from standard rice culture were initially all that was focused on, especially on using of seeds, fertilizer and water. SRI is better understood as a set of principles. The validity of SRI concepts and methods has been seen now in 42 countries including Indonesia. The governments in China, India, Indonesia, Cambodia, and Vietnam, where two-thirds of the world’s rice is produced, have come to accept and promote these alternative methods based on their own evaluations and experience.


(49)

Based on that situation the controversy that has accompanied SRI should begin subsiding (Uphoff et al. 2011).

According to Kassam et al. (2011), SRI is a production system based on alternative understandings of rice agro-ecology and on alterations in the practices for crop, soil, water, nutrient, and pest management. Under most of the circumstances evaluated thus far, SRI can raise the productivity of land, water, seeds, capital, and labor used for irrigated rice production. This method is taking root on an international scale, moving far beyond its origin in Madagascar.

3.2.2. Principles of SRI

Basically, the concept of SRI comprises certain management practices for intensive and efficient paddy rice cultivation. The management practices involve transplanting method and management of soil, nutrient and water which provide better rice plants conditions, particularly in the root zone. This method is different from the traditional one with constant field flooding that has been practiced by Asian farmers for thousands of years. It should be noted that paddy is not aquatic plant but it needs water more in the right time.

Four principles of SRI in paddy cultivation are: (1) Early transplanting of seedlings, i.e., between 10 and 15 days old when the first two leaves have emerged from the initial tiller or stalk, (2) Seedlings are planted singly rather in clumps in order that individual plants have room to spread and to send down roots, (3) Seedlings are planted in a wide spacing square pattern with plenty of space between them to grow and easy weeding (at least 25 x 25 cm), and (4) Periodically intermittent irrigation in order that the soil are both moist and aerated at least during the vegetative growth period, where aerated soil provides aerobic and anaerobic bacteria an opportunity to contribute to plant growth. These four practices are different from those traditionally practiced by farmers so far.

There are two other practices that are very beneficial and not controversial when using SRI since they have been long recognized as valuables for crops. The two practices are weeding and fertilizing. At least two or three weeding are recommended, in which, the first weeding should be done ten to twelve days after transplanting and the second weeding within fourteen days. Another one or two


(50)

weeding can significantly increase the yield. Fertilizing in SRI method applied in Madagascar initially used chemical fertilizers especially on the very poor soils. Due to some constraints, the recommendation on fertilizing switched to the use of compost, with even better results were observed. Compost adds nutrient to the soil slowly and can also contribute to a better soil structure.

By applying the SRI practices properly, it is claimed that rice plants have many more tillers, greater root development, and more grains per panicle. Hence, SRI methods have at least doubled the yields of any variety of rice that has been tried. However, farmers have to have an open mind to adopt new methods and a willingness to experiment. It might take some years to get confidence that these methods could consistently raise production so substantially.

3.2.3. Field Experiments of SRI in Indonesia

In Indonesia, the SRI methods was first tested and evaluated by Agency for Agricultural Research and Development (AARD) in 1999 at its rice center in Sukamandi, West Java (DISIMP 2006). An average yield of 8.2 t/ha in wet season was reported, with one plot reaching 9.2 t/ha. The experiments on SRI was then continued throughout Indonesia by either governmental or NGO institutions. A brief history about SRI in Indonesia is summarized in the following paragraphs.

The application of SRI in paddy cultivation by farmers in Indonesia was mostly still in experiment scales. Due to some reasons, technically and/or non-technically, only a few farmers had already been convinced to practice it professionally as a new promising method of rice farming to increase rice production. In West Java, SRI was first practiced in 2000 by some curious agronomists/farmers (NGOs) in the District of Ciamis. Since then, the planting area of SRI had expanded steadily and the total area reached 570 ha (3,000 farmers). The whole of the SRI area had used organic manures provided by farmers and no chemical fertilizer was use. SRI training for farmers from every district in West Java had been conducted since 2002 in Bandung (capital city of West Java) as part of PU’s program to strengthen the WUAs (Water User Associations).


(1)

81 Appendix 5.2. Calculation used in the sensitivity analysis (continued)

Figures as the result of component sensitivity analysis on seed tolerance

Seed Tolerance (Min Sn, 1%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300%

(dYdS*dS)/dY (dYdF*dF)/dY (dYdL*dL)/dY

Min Ave Max

Seed Tolerance (Min Sn, 5%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Seed Tolerance (Min Sn, 10%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

(a) (b) (c)

Seed Tolerance (Ave Sn, 1%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300% 0.350%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Seed Tolerance (Ave Sn, 5%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300% 0.350%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Seed Tolerance (Ave Sn, 10%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300% 0.350%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

(d) (e) (f)

Seed Tolerance (Max Sn, 1%)

0.000% 0.100% 0.200% 0.300% 0.400% 0.500% 0.600% 0.700% 0.800%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Seed Tolerance (Max Sn, 5%)

0.000% 0.100% 0.200% 0.300% 0.400% 0.500% 0.600% 0.700% 0.800%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Seed Tolerance (Max Sn, 10%)

0.000% 0.100% 0.200% 0.300% 0.400% 0.500% 0.600% 0.700% 0.800%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max


(2)

82 Appendix 5.2. Calculation used in the sensitivity analysis (continued)

Figures as the result of component sensitivity analysis on fertilizer tolerance

Fert. Tolerance (Min Fn, 1%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Fert. Tolerance (Min Fn, 5%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Fert. Tolerance (Min Fn, 10%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

(a) (b) (c)

Fert. Tolerance (Ave Fn, 1%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300% 0.350%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Fert. Tolerance (Ave Fn, 5%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300% 0.350%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Fert. Tolerance (Ave Fn, 10%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300% 0.350%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

(d) (e) (f)

Fert. Tolerance (Max Fn, 1%)

0.000% 0.100% 0.200% 0.300% 0.400% 0.500%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Fert. Tolerance (Max Fn, 5%)

0.000% 0.100% 0.200% 0.300% 0.400% 0.500%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Fert. Tolerance (Max Fn, 10%)

0.000% 0.100% 0.200% 0.300% 0.400% 0.500% 0.600% 0.700% 0.800%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max


(3)

83 Appendix 5.2. Calculation used in the sensitivity analysis (continued)

Figures as the result of component sensitivity analysis labor tolerance

Labor Tolerance (Min Ln, 1%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Labor Tolerance (Min Ln, 5%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Labor Tolerance (Min Ln, 10%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

(a) (b) (c)

Labor Tolerance (Ave Ln, 1%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300% 0.350%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Labor Tolerance (Ave Ln, 5%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300% 0.350%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Labor Tolerance (Ave Ln, 10%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300% 0.350%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

(d) (e) (f)

Labor Tolerance (Max Ln, 1%)

0.000% 0.100% 0.200% 0.300% 0.400% 0.500% 0.600% 0.700% 0.800%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Labor Tolrerance (Max Ln, 5%)

0.000% 0.100% 0.200% 0.300% 0.400% 0.500% 0.600% 0.700% 0.800%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Labor Tolerance (Max Ln, 10%)

0.000% 0.100% 0.200% 0.300% 0.400% 0.500% 0.600% 0.700% 0.800%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max


(4)

84 Appendix 5.2. Calculation used in the sensitivity analysis (continued)

Figures as the result of component sensitivity analysis water tolerance

Water Tolerance (Min Wn, 1%)

0.000% 0.500% 1.000% 1.500% 2.000% 2.500% 3.000%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Water Tolerance (Min Wn, 5%)

0.000% 0.100% 0.200% 0.300% 0.400% 0.500% 0.600%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Water Tolerance (Min Wn, 10%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

(a) (b) (c)

Water Tolerance (Ave Wn, 1%)

0.000% 1.000% 2.000% 3.000% 4.000% 5.000% 6.000%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Water Tolerance (Ave Wn, 5%)

0.000% 0.100% 0.200% 0.300% 0.400% 0.500% 0.600% 0.700%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Water Tolerance (Ave Wn, 10%)

0.000% 0.050% 0.100% 0.150% 0.200% 0.250% 0.300% 0.350%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

(d) (e) (f)

Water Tolerance (Max Wn, 1%)

0.000% 1.000% 2.000% 3.000% 4.000% 5.000% 6.000% 7.000% 8.000%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Water Tolerance (Max Wn, 5%)

0.000% 0.200% 0.400% 0.600% 0.800% 1.000% 1.200% 1.400% 1.600%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max

Water Tolerance (Max Wn, 10%)

0.000% 0.100% 0.200% 0.300% 0.400% 0.500% 0.600% 0.700% 0.800%

(dYdS*dS)/ dY (dYdF*dF)/ dY (dYdL*dL)/ dY

Min Ave Max


(5)

85 Appendix 6.1. Population and Domestic Waste Production

Population Growth in Sukabumi Domestic Waste Production (m³) Parameters Values Year Data Verhulst Rate Total(m³) Organic (ton) Compost (ton) γ 0.042 1961 1,037,123 1,037,123 2.94% 3,111.37 210.70 73.75 Po 1,037,123 1970 1,306,880 1,329,789 2.58% 3,989.37 270.16 94.56 P∞ 3,400,000 1980 1,627,529 1,683,410 2.14% 5,050.23 342.00 119.70 Error 96,373 1990 1,968,263 2,038,472 1.69% 6,115.42 414.14 144.95 R 0.9988 2000 2,346,976 2,365,236 1.29% 7,095.71 480.52 168.18

2003 2,471,389 2,454,277 1.18% 7,362.83 498.61 174.51 Waste Conv. 0.003 2004 2,488,509 2,482,888 1.14% 7,448.66 504.42 176.55 Org. Conv. 0.3386 2005 2,512,753 2,510,948 1.11% 7,532.84 510.12 178.54 Compost Conv. 0.35 2006 2,535,547 2,538,447 1.07% 7,615.34 515.71 180.50

2007 2,558,947 2,565,378 1.04% 7,696.13 521.18 182.41 2008 2,591,735 1.01% 7,775.21 526.54 184.29 2009 2,617,514 0.97% 7,852.54 531.77 186.12 2010 2,642,711 0.94% 7,928.13 536.89 187.91 2011 2,667,323 0.91% 8,001.97 541.89 189.66 2012 2,691,350 0.88% 8,074.05 546.77 191.37 2013 2,714,792 0.85% 8,144.38 551.54 193.04 2014 2,737,649 0.82% 8,212.95 556.18 194.66 2015 2,759,923 0.80% 8,279.77 560.71 196.25 2016 2,781,618 0.77% 8,344.85 565.11 197.79 2017 2,802,736 0.74% 8,408.21 569.40 199.29 2018 2,823,283 0.72% 8,469.85 573.58 200.75 2019 2,843,263 0.69% 8,529.79 577.64 202.17 2020 2,862,683 0.67% 8,588.05 581.58 203.55


(6)

86 Appendix 6.2. Calculation of Developed SRI Area and Required Sources of Organic Fertilizers

Year ith Year IPF Area (ha)

Available Organic Fertlizer Available Organic Fertilizer HIOW

(ton)

Comp (ton)

AOW (ton)

Dev. Area (ha)

Straw (ton)

Compost (ton)

AOW (ton)

Compost (ton)

2003 0 5790 499 175 324247 0 - - 169276.9 60939.7

2004 1 5145 504 177 342052 10 41.7 25.0 173011.6 62284.2

2005 2 4674 510 179 359911 40 160.5 96.3 176758.1 63632.9

2006 3 4317 516 180 377690 89 552.4 331.4 180504.6 64981.7

2007 4 4038 521 182 395270 157 1368.7 821.2 184245.2 66328.3

2008 5 3814 527 184 412542 245 2423.7 1454.2 187979.9 67672.8

2009 6 3632 532 186 429402 352 3586.1 2151.6 191702.8 69013.0

2010 7 3482 537 188 445764 478 4967.0 2980.2 195413.9 70349.0

2011 8 3357 542 190 461545 623 6478.0 3886.8 199107.3 71678.6

2012 9 3251 547 191 476685 787 8189.3 4913.6 202783.0 73001.9

2013 10 3160 552 193 491135 971 10100.9 6060.6 206441.0 74318.8

2014 11 3083 556 195 504844 1174 12212.9 7327.8 210063.6 75622.9

2015 12 3016 561 196 517803 1397 14525.3 8715.2 213662.6 76918.5

2016 13 2958 565 198 529998 1638 17038.0 10222.8 217232.1 78203.6

2017 14 2907 569 199 541429 1899 19751.0 11850.6 220766.2 79475.8

2018 15 2862 574 201 552111 2179 22664.4 13598.6 224264.9 80735.4

2019 16 2823 578 202 562064 2479 25778.2 15466.9 227722.3 81980.0