Manajemen | Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji 00074910802001587
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cbie20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] Date: 18 January 2016, At: 19:54
Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies
ISSN: 0007-4918 (Print) 1472-7234 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cbie20
INDONESIAN RICE PRODUCTION: POLICIES AND
REALITIES
Pantjar Simatupang & C. Peter Timmer
To cite this article: Pantjar Simatupang & C. Peter Timmer (2008) INDONESIAN RICE
PRODUCTION: POLICIES AND REALITIES, Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 44:1, 65-80, DOI: 10.1080/00074910802001587
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00074910802001587
Published online: 16 Jul 2008.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 364
View related articles
(2)
ISSN 0007-4918 print/ISSN 1472-7234 online/08/010065-15 © 2008 Indonesia Project ANU DOI: 10.1080/00074910802001587
INDONESIAN RICE PRODUCTION:
POLICIES AND REALITIES
Pantjar Simatupang C. Peter Timmer
Centre for Agro-Socioeconomic Stanford University, Stanford, and Center Research (CASER), Bogor for Global Development, Washington DC
Indonesian rice production grew rapidly between 1977 and 1982, but the suffi ciency achieved in 1984 was short-lived. Growth declined gradually from about
1982, eventually stabilising at a low rate in the late 1990s. This paper discusses fac-tors that have infl uenced these outcomes over the last fi ve decades, in an attempt
to inform policy makers interested in trying to restore self-suffi ciency. The earlier
experience showed that self-suffi ciency was technically feasible, but also that its
achievement was costly, both fi scally and in economic opportunities forgone. Little
appears to have changed in this regard, and recent attempts to shift this cost to con-sumers by raising rice prices have increased poverty. We show that increases in rice production could best be achieved by rehabilitating irrigation infrastructure and revitalising research and extension activities. However, large investments by the government in rice should not be undertaken in the absence of thorough economic cost–benefi t analysis.
INTRODUCTION
Growth in rice production is popularly perceived as the most important indicator of agricultural development in Indonesia. Rice is the major crop for small farms, and the rice value chain is a key sector of the rural economy. Rice is also the food staple, and domestic demand for rice is very large. Historically, the thin world market for rice has meant that rice self-suffi ciency was perceived as the key to
ensuring national food security. Although the growing world market may mean that Indonesia does not need to be self-suffi cient for this purpose (Dawe 2008,
in this issue), Indonesia is likely to continue to grow more than 90% of the rice it consumes for the foreseeable future.
Much emphasis in the policy debate on rice has focused on the presence and quantity of imports. The status of rice imports is also perceived as an indicator of government policy preferences: allowing rice imports is considered anti-farmers and banning them pro-farmers. Consequently, public discussion has focused on whether the government should or should not allow rice imports, rather than on trends in rice production as the root cause of imports. In practice, because imports are administratively determined, they occur when domestic prices rise to politi-cally unacceptable levels, and this typipoliti-cally happens when domestic production fails to meet domestic demand. Thus understanding the trend and determinants of rice production is essential to formulating effective rice policy.
BIESApr08.indb 65
BIESApr08.indb 65 29/2/08 9:49:28 PM29/2/08 9:49:28 PM
(3)
The growing gap between domestic production and demand can be due to rap-idly rising demand or to slowly growing domestic supplies. We argue here that decelerating growth in rice production is the main factor in this failure, although the chronically low level of post-harvest effi ciency also keeps domestic supply
below its potential.
PADDY PRODUCTION TRENDS
Growth of rice production over fi ve decades is shown in fi gure 1. With such a
volatile series, the determination of breaks in the trend of growth is necessarily somewhat arbitrary.1 Nevertheless, we think it useful to break this period into
four separate growth phases, based simply on visual inspection of the data. These phases are 1955–77, when annual growth was constant (but highly variable) and of the order of 3.1%; 1977–82, when trend growth accelerated rapidly to about 7.0%; 1982–98, when the trend growth rate declined steadily (but with much lower vari-ance); and 1998–2005, when the growth rate stabilised at around 1.2%.
Profi le of growth in rice production
All of these trend breaks are plausible, in the sense that each corresponds roughly to a major event or change that had a signifi cant impact on rice production. The
Old Order (Soekarno) era, which encompassed more than half of the fi rst growth
phase, was a period of prolonged political turmoil created by separatist rebel-lions, frequent cabinet shuffl es, the struggle for West Irian, the ‘Confrontation’
of Malaysia, and political power plays. During this time the nation’s energy was 1 The outlier results in 1969 and 1973 made it diffi cult to derive plausible estimates of
trend breaks using econometric techniques.
Source: Raw data from the Ministry of Agriculture.
FIGURE 1 Annual Growth of Rice Production (%)
1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 -20
-10 0 10 20 30 40
Old Order
New
Order Crisis
BIESApr08.indb 66
BIESApr08.indb 66 29/2/08 9:49:28 PM29/2/08 9:49:28 PM
(4)
so absorbed by political matters that economic development—including the rice-producing sector—was neglected. The main focus of the fi rst several years
of Soeharto’s New Order government was on dealing with the macroeconomic mess inherited from the previous regime, and the incoming government had few resources with which to push agricultural development. Moreover, technological breakthroughs were unavailable during most of this period. Chemical fertilisers were in their early adoption stage and their distribution was spatially uneven and sporadic, even though sawah expansion was quite easy. The result was that the average paddy production growth rate was modest at a time when the population was still growing rapidly.
The economy was stabilised within a few years, and the incoming government pledged to focus on development rather than political issues. A main priority was to boost rice production to achieve rice self-suffi ciency. With the boom in world
oil prices that commenced in 1973, the government was able to make huge invest-ments to enhance rice production, including for sawah development, irrigation system rehabilitation and expansion, construction of input delivery systems, farm
fi nancing and an extension system. High-yield, short growing-cycle, high-input
‘green revolution’ rice varieties were also introduced on a large scale. These early efforts were frustrated by droughts and pest outbreaks that caused severe rice harvest failures (Timmer 1989), but continuing research and innovation created new pest-resistant and higher-yield varieties (HYVs), and the eventual result was that rice production accelerated rapidly from about 1977 until 1982.
A prolonged drought in 1982–83 caused signifi cant rice harvest failures, and
proved a bad omen. The trend growth rate of rice production peaked at roughly 7% around 1982, and then declined continuously through about 1998. Although self-suffi ciency was achieved in 1984, this was short-lived. Growth in per capita
consumption of rice slowed as the income elasticity of demand declined. The price of rice in world markets declined signifi cantly because of the widespread
adop-tion of green revoluadop-tion technology in rice-producing countries, and much of this decline was gradually passed through to Indonesian farmers after the mid-1980s. Perhaps more importantly, the expensive program under which self-suffi ciency
had been achieved was diffi cult to sustain following the end of the oil boom in the
early 1980s and the dramatic decline in world oil prices in 1986. Fertiliser prices were gradually increased in order to reduce the now unaffordably large budget subsidy that had been needed to achieve self-suffi ciency, so farmer profi tability
was squeezed from both sides. At the same time, higher valued crops began to be competitive with rice, and more attractive jobs in the rapidly expanding manufac-turing and service sectors began to draw labour out of agriculture.
The green revolution, which was based on breeding seed improvements, also stalled during this period, providing a further explanation for the deceleration of growth. There is some evidence that potential yields from new HYVs were even declining (Peng et al. 1999), refl ecting a world-wide phenomenon wherever the
subsequent technology breakthrough—hybrid seed—was not widely adopted.2
In addition, over-intensifi cation resulted in declining rice yields in some areas
(Pingali, Hossain and Gerpacio 1997).
2 Indonesia still has little capacity to produce hybrid rice seeds domestically, and in late 2007 announced a program to import them from China (Sijabat 2007).
BIESApr08.indb 67
BIESApr08.indb 67 29/2/08 9:49:28 PM29/2/08 9:49:28 PM
(5)
The steady decline in the rice production growth rate appears to have been arrested in the post-crisis period (although the level at which it has settled is well below that achieved during the Old Order and the early years of the New Order). The stabilisation of production growth seems somewhat paradoxical: the huge debt-service requirements of the immediate post-crisis bailout of the banking sec-tor meant that few government resources were put into rice production; mean-while reduced government spending on maintenance and expansion led to the degradation of supporting infrastructure such as irrigation, rural roads and public agricultural institutions (Simatupang, Rusastra and Maulana 2004). The stabilisa-tion of output growth in this period may partly be explained by the improvement in the relative price of tradables that resulted from the depreciation of the rupiah, coupled with a shift towards greater protection of agriculture starting in 2000 (Fane and Warr 2008, in this issue).
Since the launch of the government’s strategy for revitalising agriculture, for-estry and fi sheries in 2005, substantial new resources have been injected into the
sector, with increases in the subsidies for fertiliser, seed and credit, as well as a larger budget for public procurement and distribution through the Rice for Poor Families program (Raskin).
CONTRIBUTIONS TO RICE PRODUCTION TRENDS Harvested area and yield
Harvested area has grown at an average rate of a little over 1% per annum through-out the period under consideration, and grew signifi cantly faster during the 1977–82
acceleration phase. Increases in average yield contributed roughly twice as much as this to growth during the fi rst growth phase, and well over three times as much in
the short second phase of rapidly accelerating output. But yield increases since the early 1980s have been much lower than previously, and their contribution to the overall growth rate has been rather less than that of increases in harvested area.
Because rice has a short age to maturity, harvested area depends on both arable land area and cropping intensity. The deceleration in harvested area expansion after the short period of output acceleration could, therefore, be due both to a deceleration in expansion of arable land and to a reduction in cropping intensity. Unfortunately we do not have the data needed to compute cropping intensity except for sawah rice in some years. Still, decomposition of rice production from sawah provides revealing explanations about production constraints in the latter part of the period under consideration (table 1).
The area of sawah in Java has been declining since the early 1980s (see also table 4 below). The only positive source of growth in rice harvested area in Java came from rapidly increasing cropping intensity, which more than compensated for declining land area. Outside Java, the wetland paddy area increased in the 1980s and early 1990s, but then declined in the late 1990s. It is clear that the main rice production constraints are, fi rst, limited available arable land and, second,
declining yield (land productivity). The only source of rice production growth in Indonesia since the mid-1990s has been increased cropping intensity.
The fact that the slow growth in production results mainly from a slow expan-sion in land area and declining yields presents a problem for the government’s agricultural revitalisation program (Government of Indonesia 2005), which aims
BIESApr08.indb 68
BIESApr08.indb 68 29/2/08 9:49:29 PM29/2/08 9:49:29 PM
(6)
at increasing rice production signifi cantly. The potential for boosting cropping
intensity is quite limited, and the limits of such expansion can be reached very fast. If the recent trends in both productivity and land area devoted to paddy per-sist, it is reasonable to predict that rice production will continue to stagnate, and will even decline, in the future.
Harvest and post-harvest industry
Paddy production is regularly reported by the central statistics agency (BPS) as a standing crop estimate at farm level, but rice available for consumption is also determined by losses during harvest and post-harvest activities. Effi ciency of
the harvest and post-harvest industry is thus an important determinant of rice supply at consumer level, an aspect often overlooked in discussing rice supply in Indonesia.
To our knowledge, there are only two comprehensive studies of paddy losses in Indonesia—in 1986/87 and 1994/95. A comparison of these (Maksum 2002) suggests that total harvest and post-harvest losses were high at around 21%, and changed little over the eight-year interval between the studies (table 2). The largest losses—totalling around 15%—occurred during harvesting and threshing. Loss in transportation was quite low and decreasing, suggesting improvements in the transportation system. While storage loss increased during the 1986/87–1994/95 period, losses in milling declined. Mechanisation and government programs to develop modern rice mills undoubtedly contributed to the reduction in milling
TABLE 1 Sources of Sawah (Wetland) Rice Production Growth (% p.a.)
Region 1981–85 1986–90 1991–95 1996–2000
Java
Land area –0.32 –0.15 –0.42 –1.04
Cropping intensity 1.89 0.86 0.88 2.78
Yield 2.80 2.29 1.37 –1.29
Total 4.37 3.00 1.83 0.45
Outside Java
Land area 0.74 2.56 1.46 –4.04
Cropping intensity 2.23 0.34 1.32 5.47
Yield 2.66 1.75 0.38 –0.27
Total 5.63 4.65 3.16 1.16
Indonesia
Land area 0.22 1.40 0.70 –2.83
Cropping intensity 1.94 0.30 0.88 4.41
Yield 2.66 1.93 0.79 –0.83
Total 4.82 3.63 2.37 0.75
Source: Computed by authors from unpublished BPS data.
BIESApr08.indb 69
BIESApr08.indb 69 29/2/08 9:49:29 PM29/2/08 9:49:29 PM
(7)
losses, but evidence on milling ratios presented below indicates that this decline was reversed as milling machinery aged. Harvest and post-harvest losses may have changed signifi cantly in the 12 years since the second study, but no credible
estimates for more recent years are available, adding to the controversy over rice supply estimates. A new survey of this important issue would be very helpful.
The size of the harvesting loss is determined primarily by the system of labour organisation. There are three main systems in rice farming: open access (bawon/ keroyokan), tied-contract (ceblokan) and trader–harvester (tebasan). Losses during threshing are determined mainly by the technology used. In Indonesia, paddy threshing is conducted either by slapping (banting/gebot) or using mechanical equip-ment (powered or manually operated). The choice of threshing system is closely related to the harvesting labour system used. Open-access and ceblokan harvesting systems are generally associated with banting threshing, whereas trader–harvester systems are associated with mechanical threshers. The largest loss occurs with open-access harvesting and the slapping threshing system (18.6%), and the lowest occurs with labour-group (or trader–harvester) harvesting and mechanical thresh-ing (5.9%) (Hasanuddin et al. 2002). Utami and Ihalauw (1973) found that the har-vest loss with the bawon open-access system reached 42.5% of total yield, owing to stamp-down loss, dropping and left-over loss, transportation loss (when the rice is transported from the fi eld to the landowner’s house), losses during the distribution
of the harvesters’ share (including cheating) and handling losses. Banting remains the most widely practised form of rice threshing in Indonesia, and therefore losses remain high. This suggests that efforts to promote ‘managed harvesting’, using labour groups and mechanical threshing, would reduce harvest losses.
Another striking trend is the decline in the rice-milling ratio for paddy, from 70% in the 1950s to around 60% in the early 2000s (table 3). The declining milling ratio also reduces rice availability at the consumer level for any given level of pro-duction, but this has generally been overlooked both in policy formulation and in estimating national rice supply.3
3 Since 1996 the formal milling ratio used in estimating national rice availability has re-mained at 63.2%, and thus over-estimates rice availability.
TABLE 2 Paddy Harvest and Post-harvest Losses (%)
Activity 1986/87 1994/95
Harvesting 9.2 9.6
Threshing 5.5 4.8
Transporting 0.6 0.3
Drying 1.9 2.2
Milling 3.5 2.7
Storage 0.3 1.1
Total 21.0 20.8
Source: Maksum (2002).
BIESApr08.indb 70
BIESApr08.indb 70 29/2/08 9:49:29 PM29/2/08 9:49:29 PM
(8)
Laboratory tests show that the milling ratios of new machines with standard operating procedures have been quite stable at around 65% (Tjahjohutomo et al. 2004). The declining average milling ratio in commercial rice mills is due to the increasing number of ageing machines (which use the single-pass system), and to the prevalence of mobile operations with small-scale units. The study shows that larger rice mills have higher milling ratios, reaching 68.5%. The low industry average milling ratio indicates technical ineffi ciency in the industry, although its
economic effi ciency may actually not be low under the investment climate facing
rice millers (Timmer 1973).
Conversion of arable land to other uses
Potential agricultural land is fi xed by nature, and its conversion to arable land is
costly. At the same time, conversion of arable land to non-agricultural functions continues because of population growth, structural change in the economy and urbanisation. Since the beginning of the 1980s, total arable land area in Indonesia has increased continuously except between 1991 and 1995 (table 4). This is not true of Java, however, where total arable land has been stagnant since the end of the 1980s, while outside Java the total has increased steadily, again except between 1991 and 1995. Expansion has occurred mainly in estate plantations, which have more than doubled in area in the period under consideration. Agricultural land on Java is used mainly for food crops, and land productivity and land-use inten-sity are higher here than outside Java. This regional pattern of growth of agri-cultural land implies signifi cant change in the regional structure of agriculture.
Future growth of agriculture, including rice, will be outside Java. The historical dominance of Java, in rice in particular and food production in general, will fade gradually.
These trends in total agricultural land area seem inevitable. On the one hand, potential agricultural land for expansion is available only outside Java. On the other
TABLE 3 Paddy–Rice Milling Ratio, 1949–2004 (%)
Crop Season Location Milling Ratio
1 1949 Java, Madura 69.0
2 1950 Java, Madura 71.2
3 1974 Java 64.6–65.1
4 1979 West Java, East Java, Bali, South Sulawesi 64.8
5 1981 East Java 66.3
6 1982/83 8 provinces 64.6
7 1985 15 provinces 65.9
8 1994/95 15 provinces 63.2
9 1997/98 West Java (Karawang, Subang) 62.0
10 2002 East Java 62.0
11 2004 6 provinces 59.0
Sources: 1–8: Nugraha et al. (1988); 9: Munarso et al. (1998); 10: Handaka et al. (2002); 11: Tjahjohutomo et al. (2004).
BIESApr08.indb 71
BIESApr08.indb 71 29/2/08 9:49:30 PM29/2/08 9:49:30 PM
(9)
hand, agricultural land conversion to other functions will continue accelerating both in and outside Java. The pace of conversion is much faster in Java because of its faster expansion of infrastructure, urbanisation and industrial complexes. This is part of the structural transformation that occurs as the economy grows and the population increases. Conversion of arable land to other uses, particularly in Java, will continue accelerating.
The decline in sawah, both on Java (since the data coverage began in the early 1980s) and outside Java (in the mid-1990s), is the main reason for reduced growth in the harvested area of rice. In part this refl ects a shift towards other food crops,
and some horticultural crops such as garlic and peppers that can also be planted on that land. Such conversion does not necessarily represent a welfare loss, either for the farmers concerned (who presumably switch because they anticipate a gain from doing so), or for the country as a whole (if rice can be imported from other countries).
If increasing rice production is a policy objective, therefore, it is likely to require the expansion of agricultural land outside Java, where the potential for new land development is still quite large. There are almost 16 million hectares of land potentially suitable for sawah conversion, consisting of 3.5 million hectares of swampy land and 13.3 million hectares of dry land (Government of Indonesia 2005). Sawah development requires supporting public infrastructure, particularly irrigation systems and transport development, and thus tends to rely on gov-ernment support.4 Of course, whether such support is appropriate depends on
4 Few private actors are willing to bear the costs associated with such investments, be-cause their public good nature makes it diffi cult for private actors to capture the full benefi t
from the investment.
TABLE 4 Trends in Use of Arable Land (‘000 ha)
1981–85 1986–90 1991–95 1996–2000 2001–04 Java, of which: 7,423 7,539 7,287 7,260 7,314
Temporary fallow 89 104 8 66 61
Estate plantation 597 659 628 624 655
Wet paddy fi eld (sawah) 3,466 3,440 3,407 3,303 3,280
Off Java, of which: 33,122 36,439 35,226 39,451 45,685
Temporary fallow 8,750 9,497 7,486 8,437 9,981
Estate plantation 7,898 9,470 11,799 15,227 17,276
Wet paddy fi eld (sawah) 4,034 4,623 5,000 4,554 4,602
Indonesia, of which: 40,545 43,978 42,835 46,710 52,999
Temporary fallow 8,839 9,602 7,568 8,503 10,042
Estate plantation 8,495 10,130 12,427 15,851 17,932
Wet paddy fi eld (sawah) 7,500 8,063 8,406 7,856 7,882
Source: BPS (Central Statistics Agency), Statistical Year Book, various years.
BIESApr08.indb 72
BIESApr08.indb 72 29/2/08 9:49:30 PM29/2/08 9:49:30 PM
(10)
whether the rate of return on the investment is similar to that for other important public projects.5
Degradation of irrigation systems
Technical irrigation is the key to increasing yield, cropping intensity and produc-tion stability. This is especially true for high-yielding rice and other food crops that require continuous water availability for a good harvest. Huge investment in irrigation development was one of the key factors explaining the rapid expan-sion of rice and other food crop production in the late 1970s and early 1980s. But since the mid-1980s irrigation development and maintenance have been slowing down, and this has contributed to declining rice production. In particular, govern-ment spending on irrigation fell drastically during the years 1987–90. After a short rebound it fell again in 1998, and has increased little since (Fuglie and Piggott 2006). The reduction in funding has resulted in some degradation of irrigation systems. In particular, the most recent statistics show that about 22% of canals (serving some 6.8 million hectares of irrigated sawah) are damaged, including 5% that are severely damaged (table 5). A similar proportion of Indonesia’s 273 large dams are severely damaged.
If the government wishes to revitalise the rice industry, it will need to rehabili-tate and expand the irrigation system. Again, this is primarily a matter of public investment, although private farmers, organised into water-user groups, need to be actively involved in the design and management of these facilities. Indeed, evi-dence from the World Bank (2006) shows that the economic rates of return from such investments can be high when a participatory approach is taken towards rehabilitation. Irrigation development generally requires such large investments
5 It might be argued that reduced reliance on imports enhances food security, and that this should therefore create a premium that should be added to the rate of return on rice expan-sion. However, as noted in other papers in this issue (e.g. Dawe 2008; Dorosh 2008), this is a subject of some controversy.
TABLE 5 Condition of Irrigation Systems in 2006
Unit Total of which
Severe Damage
Some Damage
Total Damaged Canals ‘000 irrigated
hectares
6,772 341 1,179 1,520
% 5.0 17.4 22.4
Dams N 273 14 5 19
% 5.1 1.8 7.0
Reservoirs N 11,547 49 0 49
% 0.4 0.0 0.4
Source: Department of Public Works.
BIESApr08.indb 73
BIESApr08.indb 73 29/2/08 9:49:30 PM29/2/08 9:49:30 PM
(11)
that most regional (province and district) governments are unable to fund large-scale irrigation facilities, although they clearly need to be involved in their design and management. Funding still needs to be the responsibility of the central gov-ernment, because many irrigation systems cut across regional boundaries.
Over-intensive land use
A further explanation for declining land productivity is soil degradation due to excessive use of external inputs and over-intensive land use. This is especially true for sawah. Modern rice varieties require substantial external inputs (particularly inorganic fertilisers and pesticides), intensive soil preparation and continuous irrigation, which may cause long-term negative impacts on soil quality. Continu-ing excessive use of phosphate and potassium fertilisers induces unbalanced soil nutrient content (Sofyan, Nurjaya and Kasno 2004). Crop harvests take nutrients, including organic matter, out of the soil. This problem is aggravated by high land-use intensity through year-round multiple cropping.
Excessive chemical fertiliser use in rice farming has long been identifi ed as a
problem (Roche 1994). Indonesian sawah suffer from over-intensifi cation or soil
fatigue syndrome (Adiningsih 1997; Christianto 1997).6 The soil is now defi cient
in organic matter and micro-nutrients. Recent studies indicate that 66% of sawah
6 This syndrome is not unique to Indonesia. It is common in other countries that widely adopted high-input – high-output HYVs (Pingali, Hossain and Gerpacio 1997).
TABLE 6 Adoption Rate (Proportion of Planted Area) and Potential Yield of New Varieties
Year Dominant Varieties
Proportion (%)
Potential Yield (tonne/ha)
Year Released
1980 PB 36 36.2 4.5 1978
PB 38 9.4 4.5 1978
PB 32 8.0 4.5 1977
1985 PB 36 28.9 4.5 1978
Cisadane 22.8 4.5–5.5 1980
PB 42 5.2 5.5 1980
1990 IR 64 15.7 5.0 1986
Cisadane 13.3 4.5–5.5 1980
PB 36 10.3 4.5 1978
1995 IR 64 47.1 5.0 1986
Cisadane 6.4 4.5–5.5 1980
PB 42 4.1 5.5 1980
2000 IR 64 43.1 5.0 1986
Way Apo Boru 6.2 5.0–8.0 1998
IR 66 4.6 4.5–5.0 1989
Source: National Seed Agency, various years.
BIESApr08.indb 74
BIESApr08.indb 74 29/2/08 9:49:30 PM29/2/08 9:49:30 PM
(12)
suffers from low organic content (Kasno, Setyorini and Nurjaya 2003), and the prevalence of zinc defi ciency has reached 30% (Al-Jabri, Soepartini and Ardi
1991). Sofyan, Nurjaya and Kasno (2004) found that some degree of magnesium defi ciency in Java affects 18–83% of total sawah. The physical properties of the soil
have also been degraded. All of these aspects have caused long-term declines in land productivity. Under such conditions, fertiliser subsidies may not only fail to increase yield, but may exacerbate the decline in soil health.7
Over-intensifi cation may be one reason why total factor productivity of rice
farming in Indonesia has been declining (Simatupang et al. 1995) because over-intensifi cation causes not only declining yields but also increased production
costs and hence declining farmer competitiveness. Tackling over-intensifi cation
will require new farming techniques, including the use of organic fertilisers and site-specifi c nutrient management technologies.
Declining emphasis on technology innovation and dissemination
Most food crops have faced either lower or stagnant yields since the second half of the 1980s. One of the causes for this is the failure to introduce land-saving technological innovations. This is due both to a failure to achieve technological breakthroughs by means of research and development (R&D) and to barriers to technological dissemination from R&D institutions to farmers. The high-yielding variety most commonly used in 2000 was introduced 14 years earlier (table 6), and the new varieties introduced since the crisis have failed even to maintain the yield potentials achieved by the late 1990s (table 7).
Fuglie and Piggott (2006) identify at least four critical issues facing agricul-tural R&D. First, R&D systems are heavily dominated by the government, whose budget allocation for R&D is highly unstable and has declined in real value since 7 However, the degree to which soil degradation explains the stagnation in rice yield is controversial. Lindert (2000) undertook an exhaustive study of long-term soil quality trends in Indonesia between 1940 and 1990. He found that in sawah on Java, soil nitrogen and organic matter did decline up to around 1970, but remained stable after that, while phosphate and potassium levels improved. In off-Java sawah, he found more evidence of soil quality decline, especially after 1970.
TABLE 7 Average Yield Potential of New High-yielding Rice Varieties (tonne/ha)
1970–75 1976–80 1981–85 1986–90 1991–95 1996–2000 2001–03
Wetland 5.0 4.8 4.8 5.0 5.7 6.5 6.2
No. of varieties
3 11 21 7 8 14 13
Dryland n.d. 3.8 3.3 3.5 3.6 4.0 3.2
No. of varieties
2 6 6 6 2 2
n.d. = no data available.
Source: National Seed Agency, various years.
BIESApr08.indb 75
BIESApr08.indb 75 29/2/08 9:49:31 PM29/2/08 9:49:31 PM
(13)
1986. Second, universities have signifi cant intellectual capacity but rely primarily
on winning competitive grants and other projects from the Ministry of Science and Technology and other government agencies. Third, private sector agricul-tural research is still relatively small in scale and is focused on a few estate crops, hybrid crops, poultry and pesticide utilisation. Fourth, intellectual property rights for inventions are relatively new for Indonesia and remain poorly enforced.
Experience from the East Asian region suggests that revitalising the R&D system will require a signifi cant increase in government funding and private
participa-tion. Recent initiatives to promote research universities could be supported by the government, and policies could be designed to encourage private sector support. Agricultural R&D could be liberalised to open up opportunities for private par-ticipation in this strategic sector, especially by reviewing the existing tight regula-tions on seed importation, new variety release and multi-location trials. Finally, intellectual property right regulations and enforcement could be reviewed with a view to providing better incentives for the private sector, including individual researchers, to undertake research.
During the 1970s and 1980s the government developed an integrated rice tech-nology delivery system. For seed multiplication, it built seed production centres at the provincial level. An integrated national extension service was also developed, with fi eld extension offi ces (balai penyuluhan pertanian) built in all sub- districts
(kecamatan) and fi eld extension agents (penyuluh pertanian lapangan) assigned to all
villages. The government also established village cooperatives to distribute farm inputs. The overall system was centrally coordinated by the Mass Guidance (Bimb-ingan Massal, Bimas) Coordinating Board, headed by the president at the national level, the governor at provincial level, and district, sub-district and village heads at each lower level. This centralised command system was quite effective in deliver-ing input-embodied technologies from research institutes to farmers.
The extension service systems have been decentralised in recent years, and are now managed by district governments. Unfortunately, not all district govern-ments are supportive of, or capable of facilitating, effective extension services. Bimas has been closed down and, without government support, many village cooperatives have closed as well (although many were in any case corrupt and did not pursue the interests of villagers).
Thus the agricultural technology delivery systems are in disarray. This may explain why some newly developed technologies in the research institutes are slow to reach farmers. Although many new HYVs have been released, only a few are widely used, with most farmers still using very old varieties. IR-64 rice, released in 1986, is still the most commonly used. The experience of the last several years suggests that the policy of reducing government involvement in technology delivery systems has not been managed properly. Some elements of these systems are private goods, but if the government reduces its involvement, it needs to pro-mote private business involvement to take over government roles.
CONCLUSION
The phase of rapidly accelerating growth in Indonesia’s rice production lasted only a few years, from about 1977 to 1982; growth then began to decelerate gradu-ally until the late 1990s, stabilising at a low rate following the crisis. With the
BIESApr08.indb 76
BIESApr08.indb 76 29/2/08 9:49:31 PM29/2/08 9:49:31 PM
(14)
average post-crisis production growth rate lower than the population growth rate, and far lower than the rate of growth of average incomes, steadily increas-ing imports of rice would appear inevitable unless there is a signifi cant
produc-tion turnaround. Given political sensitivities attaching to rice imports, this is an opportune moment to investigate the problems facing rice production and ana-lyse the costs and benefi ts of boosting its growth again.
The analysis above shows that the slow growth rate of paddy production is due to stagnant growth in the absolute extent of sawah, declining soil fertility caused by over-intensifi cation, and degradation of supporting infrastructures
(particu-larly irrigation and extension systems). These production problems cannot be solved with price policies, which have been the main focus of government policy. If increasing rice production is the aim, then it will be necessary to concentrate on new sawah development, rehabilitation and expansion of irrigation systems, creation of an environment conducive to private investment in R&D, promotion of a better balance between chemical and organic fertilisers in rice farming, and revitalisation of the extension system.
There appears to be some scope for increasing the paddy-to-rice conversion ratio if problems with existing labour institutions in harvesting and ineffi ciencies
in the post-harvest industry can be alleviated, although this would amount to a one-off, rather than ongoing, source of increased production. Improving effi
-ciency would require the gradual replacement of the traditional bawon harvesting system with contracted harvesting, and substitution of mechanical threshers for the banting threshing system. The rice milling industry could be revitalised by rehabilitation and replacement of under-performing rice mills, but such invest-ments may not be profi table, even with stronger attempts to improve the rural
investment climate.
The government’s current approach uses rice price support (through import restrictions) and fertiliser and other input subsidies, but these are relatively inef-fective because production capacity seems to be fully utilised with existing tech-nology and infrastructure. Restricting rice imports tends, rather, to ignite rice price escalation, harming rice consumers, and thus increasing poverty. If the aim is to increase rice production, the direction of rice policy would need to be read-justed from import controls to enhancing production capacity.8 Policy is already
beginning to move in this direction.
The experience of the late 1970s and early 1980s shows that rapid acceleration of rice output is possible, but suggests also that the costs of bringing this about may be large both fi scally and in terms of the better economic opportunities forgone.
Redirecting the large budget for fertiliser subsidies might pay for some of the pro-posed programs, but a broader analysis of the costs and benefi ts of investments
to expand rice production is also needed. Rice self-suffi ciency ‘at any cost’ is not a
viable policy, nor is it sensible. Indonesia easily has the fi nancial capacity to import
rice, even if foreign exchange earnings from other parts of the agricultural sector alone are considered. A careful study of demand growth, the economic potential of land for crops other than rice and alternative earning opportunities for rural
8 It is not clear that there is much of a role for the government in infl uencing the
renova-tion of the post-harvest rice industry, however, since this involves private sector decisions about the profi tability of the investments.
BIESApr08.indb 77
BIESApr08.indb 77 29/2/08 9:49:31 PM29/2/08 9:49:31 PM
(15)
labour all need to be part of the analysis. If such a study indicates that continued public support for rice production is needed, then the evidence presented in this paper can help to focus policy makers’ attention on the real problems facing the rice sector—ineffi ciency and declining productivity—rather than on the size of
the import gap and the degree of rice self suffi ciency.
REFERENCES
Adiningsih, J.S. (1997) ’Peranan efi siensi penggunaan pupuk untuk melestarikan
swasem-bada pangan [The role of fertiliser use effi ciency in sustaining food self-suffi ciency]’, in
50 Tahun Agronomi Membangun: Prosiding Simposiun Nasional dan Kongres VI Peragi [50 Years of Agronomy Development: Proceedings of the National Symposium and the Sixth Congress of the Indonesian Agronomy Association (Peragi)], eds A.S. Karama, S. Yahya, F. Bahar, P. Wahid, E. Syamsudin, S.S. Haryadi, I.H. Utomo, S. Djakamiharja, A. Saubari and A. Ginting, Indonesian Agronomy Association, Jakarta: 65–85.
Al-Jabri, M., Soepartini, M. and Ardi, D. (1991) ‘Status hara Zn dan pemupukannya di lahan sawah [Zinc’s nutrient status and its application to wetlands]’, in Prosiding Lokakarya Nasional Efi siensi Penggunaan Pupuk V, Cisarua, 12–13 Nopember 1990 [Proceedings of the Fifth National Workshop on Fertiliser Use Effi ciency V, Cisarua, 12–13 November
1990]: 427–64, Pusat Penelitian Tanah dan Agroklimat (Indonesian Research Centre for Soil and Agroclimate), Bogor.
Christianto, L. (1997) ‘Potensi dan kendala sumberdaya tanah menunjang produksi perta-nian Indonesia [Land resource potential and constraints in supporting Indonesian agri-cultural production]’, in 50 Tahun Agronomi Membangun: Prosiding Simposiun Nasional dan Kongres VI Peragi [50 Years of Agronomy Development: Proceedings of the National Symposium and the Sixth Congress of the Indonesian Agronomy Association (Peragi)], Jakarta 25–27 June 1996, eds A.S. Karama, S. Yahya, F. Bahar, P. Wahid, E. Syamsudin, S.S. Haryadi, I.H. Utomo, S. Djakamiharja, A. Saubari and A. Ginting, Indonesian Agro-nomy Association, Jakarta: 1–14.
Dawe, David (2008) ‘Can Indonesia trust the world rice market?’, Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 44 (1): 115–32, in this issue.
Dorosh, Paul (2008) ‘Food price stabilisation and food security: international experience’, Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 44 (1): 93–114, in this issue.
Fane, George, and Warr, Peter (2008) ‘Agricultural protection in Indonesia’, Bulletin of Indo-nesian Economic Studies 44 (1): 133–50, in this issue.
Fuglie, K.O. and Piggott, R.R. (2006) ‘Indonesia: coping with economic and political insta-bility’, in Agricultural R&D in the Developing World: Too Little, Too Late?, eds P.G. Pardey, J.M. Alston and R.R. Piggott, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington DC: 65–104.
Government of Indonesia (2005) Revitalisasi Pertanian, Perikanan, dan Kehutanan Indo nesia 2005 [Revitalisation of Indonesian Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 2005], Coordinat-ing Ministry for Economic Affairs, Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Maritime and Fisheries and Ministry of Forestry, Jakarta.
Handaka, Harsono, U., Budiharti, C., Sriyanto and Rahmat, R. (2002) Pergeseran sistem penggilingan padi stasioner ke penggilingan padi keliling di Jawa Timur [The shift from stationary to mobile rice milling systems in East Java], Balai Besar Pengemban-gan Alat dan Mesin Pertanian (Indonesian Research Centre for Agricultural Tools and Machinery), Jakarta, mimeo.
Hasanuddin, A., Setyono, A., Soetjipto, P. and Ananto, E.E. (2002) Tinjauan berbagai hasil kaajian/penelitian tentang kehilangan hasil pascapanen padi [A review of the fi ndings of
some research on rice post-harvest losses], Paper presented to a Workshop on Rice Post-harvest Losses, Direktorat Jenderal Bina Pengolahan dan Pemasaran Hasil Pertanian (Directorate General for Processing and Marketing of Agricultural Products), Jakarta.
BIESApr08.indb 78
BIESApr08.indb 78 29/2/08 9:49:32 PM29/2/08 9:49:32 PM
(16)
Kasno, A., Setyorini, D. and Nurjaya (2003) ‘Status C-organik lahan sawah di Indonesia [C-organic status of wetland in Indonesia]’, Prosiding Himpunan Ilmu Tanah Indonesia (HIPI) [Proceedings of the Indonesian Soil Science Society], Indonesian Soil Science Society, Padang.
Lindert, P.H. (2000) Shifting Ground: The Changing Agricultural Soils of China and Indonesia, MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Maksum, C. (2002) Survei susut pasca panen padi [The rice post-harvest survey], Paper presented at a Workshop on Rice Post-harvest Losses, Direktorat Jenderal Bina Pengo-lahan dan Pemasaran Hasil Pertanian (Directorate General for Processing and Market-ing of Agricultural Products), Jakarta.
Munarso, S.J., Setyono, A., Suismono and Jumali (1998) ’Tinjauan tentang rendemen beras giling dan susut pascapanen: evaluasi mutu dan rendemen beras di tingkat petani [A review of milled rice conversion rates and post-harvest losses: rice quality and yield evaluation at farm level]’, Balai Penelitian Padi (Rice Research Centre), Sukamandi. Nugraha, U., Munarso, S.J., Suismono and Setyono, A. (1988) Tinjauan tentang rendemen
beras giling dan susut pascapanen: masalah sekitar rendeman beras giling, susut dan pemecahannya [A review of milled rice conversion rates and post-harvest losses: prob-lems surrounding milled rice conversion rates, losses and the solutions]’, Balai Peneli-tian Padi (Rice Research Centre), Sukamandi.
Peng, S., Cassman, K.G., Virmani, S.S., Sheehy, J. and Khush, G.S. (1999) ‘Yield potential trends of tropical rice since the release of IR8 and the challenge of increasing rice poten-tial’, Crop Science 39: 1,552–59.
Pingali, O., Hossain, M. and Gerpacio, R. (1997) Asian Rice Bowls: The Returning Crisis?, CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon.
Roche, F.C. (1994) ‘The technical and price effi ciency of fertiliser use in irrigated rice
pro-duction’, Bulletin of Indonesian Economics Studies 30 (1): 59–83.
Sijabat, Ridwan Max (2007) ‘Hybrid rice benefi cial: seed fi rm’, Jakarta Post, 17 October,
accessed 1 November 2007 at <http://www.thejakartapost.com/Archives/Archives-Det2.asp?FileID=20071017.D02>.
Simatupang, P., Sudaryanto, T., Purwoto, A. and Saptana (1995) Projection and policy implications of medium- and long-term rice supply and demand in Indonesia, Centre for Agro-Socioeconomic Research, Bogor, in collaboration with the International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington DC.
Simatupang, P., Rusastra, I.W. and Maulana, M. (2004) ‘How to solve supply bottlenecks in agricultural sector’, Analisis Kebijakan Pertanian [Agricultural Policy Analysis] 2 (4): 369–92.
Sofyan, A., Nurjaya and Kasno, A. (2004) ’Status hara tanah sawah untuk rekomendasi pemupukan [Nutrient status of wetland for fertiliser recommendation]’, in Tanah Sawah dan Teknologi Pengelolannya [Wetland and Its Management Technology], eds F. Agus, A. Adimihardja, S. Hardjowigeno, A.M. Fagi and W. Hartatik, Pusat Penelitian Tanah dan Agro Klimat (Indonesian Research Centre for Soil and Agro-climate), Bogor: 83–136. Timmer, C.P. (1973) ‘Choice of technique in rice milling on Java’, Bulletin of Indonesian
Eco-nomic Studies 9 (2): 57–76.
Timmer, C.P. (1989) ’Indonesia: transition from food importer to exporter’, in Food Price Policy in Asia, ed. Terry Sicular, Cornell University Press, Ithaca NY: 22-64.
Tjahjohutomo, R., Handaka, Widodo, T.W., Harsono and Asari, A. (2004) Perbaikan ren-demen dan kualitas beras giling melalui revitalisasi sistem penggilingan padi rakyat [Improving milled rice conversion rates and quality by revitalising small rice milling systems], Indonesian Research Centre for Agricultural Tools and Machinery, Jakarta. Utami, W. and Ihalauw, J. (1973) ‘Some consequences of small farm size’, Bulletin of
Indo-nesian Economic Studies 9 (2): 46–56.
World Bank (2006) Making the New Indonesia Work for the Poor, Poverty Assessment, World Bank Offi ce, Jakarta.
BIESApr08.indb 79
BIESApr08.indb 79 29/2/08 9:49:32 PM29/2/08 9:49:32 PM
(17)
The 26th
Indonesia Update Conference
INDONESIA BEYOND THE WATER’S EDGE:
Managing an Archipelagic State
The Australian National University
Friday and Saturday, 19–20 September 2008
Indonesia is the world’s largest archipelagic state. More than half its share of the earth’s surface is sea, and the marine frontier presents Indonesia with economic opportunity and political and strategic challenges.
Indonesia has been affected more than most countries in the world by a slow revolution in the management of the seas. Whereas Indonesia’s seas were once conceived administratively as little more than the empty space between islands, successive governments have become aware of the need to establish regulatory regimes in marine areas to manage the allocation of marine resources, to guard national security and to provide human services to those at sea. The effective transfer to the seas of regulatory regimes such as territoriality that took shape on land has been an enduring challenge to Indonesian governments.
This conference examines Indonesia’s response to that challenge. Presentations will address maritime boundaries and security, marine safety, inter-island shipping, the development of the archipelagic concept in international law, marine conservation, Indonesian sea-farers, illegal fi shing, and the place of the
sea in national and regional identity.
Speakers include Hasjim Djalal, Djoko Sumaryono, Rili Djohani, Gerry van Klinken, Howard Dick, John Butcher, James Fox, Michele Ford, Lenore Lyons, Vincent Ashcroft and David Ray.
Conference convenor
Robert Cribb Research School of Pacifi c and Asian Studies,
ANU College of Asia and the Pacifi c
robert.cribb@anu.edu.au
The annual Indonesia Update is presented by the Indonesia Project, Economics Division, Research School of Pacifi c and Asian Studies (RSPAS), and the
Department of Political and Social Change (RSPAS) in the ANU College of Asia and the Pacifi c, The Australian National University (ANU). Support from the
Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID) and the ANU is gratefully acknowledged.
Enquiries Indonesia.Project@anu.edu.au Ph +61 2 6125 3794
Fax +61 2 6125 3700
<http://rspas.anu.edu.au/economics/ip/IU08/>
BIESApr08.indb 80
BIESApr08.indb 80 29/2/08 9:49:32 PM29/2/08 9:49:32 PM
(1)
suffers from low organic content (Kasno, Setyorini and Nurjaya 2003), and the
prevalence of zinc de
fi
ciency has reached 30% (Al-Jabri, Soepartini and Ardi
1991). Sofyan, Nurjaya and Kasno (2004) found that some degree of magnesium
de
fi
ciency in Java affects 18–83% of total
sawah
. The physical properties of the soil
have also been degraded. All of these aspects have caused long-term declines in
land productivity. Under such conditions, fertiliser subsidies may not only fail to
increase yield, but may exacerbate the decline in soil health.
7Over-intensi
fi
cation may be one reason why total factor productivity of rice
farming in Indonesia has been declining (Simatupang et al. 1995) because
over-intensi
fi
cation causes not only declining yields but also increased production
costs and hence declining farmer competitiveness. Tackling over-intensi
fi
cation
will require new farming techniques, including the use of organic fertilisers and
site-speci
fi
c nutrient management technologies.
Declining emphasis on technology innovation and dissemination
Most food crops have faced either lower or stagnant yields since the second half
of the 1980s. One of the causes for this is the failure to introduce land-saving
technological innovations. This is due both to a failure to achieve technological
breakthroughs by means of research and development (R&D) and to barriers to
technological dissemination from R&D institutions to farmers. The high-yielding
variety most commonly used in 2000 was introduced 14 years earlier (table 6), and
the new varieties introduced since the crisis have failed even to maintain the yield
potentials achieved by the late 1990s (table 7).
Fuglie and Piggott (2006) identify at least four critical issues facing
agricul-tural R&D. First, R&D systems are heavily dominated by the government, whose
budget allocation for R&D is highly unstable and has declined in real value since
7 However, the degree to which soil degradation explains the stagnation in rice yield is controversial. Lindert (2000) undertook an exhaustive study of long-term soil quality trends in Indonesia between 1940 and 1990. He found that in sawah on Java, soil nitrogen and organic matter did decline up to around 1970, but remained stable after that, while phosphate and potassium levels improved. In off-Java sawah, he found more evidence of soil quality decline, especially after 1970.TABLE 7
Average Yield Potential of New High-yielding Rice Varieties
(tonne/ha)
1970–75 1976–80 1981–85 1986–90 1991–95 1996–2000 2001–03
Wetland 5.0 4.8 4.8 5.0 5.7 6.5 6.2 No. of
varieties
3 11 21 7 8 14 13
Dryland n.d. 3.8 3.3 3.5 3.6 4.0 3.2 No. of
varieties
2 6 6 6 2 2
n.d. = no data available.
Source: National Seed Agency, various years.
BIESApr08.indb 75
BIESApr08.indb 75 29/2/08 9:49:31 PM29/2/08 9:49:31 PM
(2)
1986. Second, universities have signi
fi
cant intellectual capacity but rely primarily
on winning competitive grants and other projects from the Ministry of Science
and Technology and other government agencies. Third, private sector
agricul-tural research is still relatively small in scale and is focused on a few estate crops,
hybrid crops, poultry and pesticide utilisation. Fourth, intellectual property rights
for inventions are relatively new for Indonesia and remain poorly enforced.
Experience from the East Asian region suggests that revitalising the R&D system
will require a signi
fi
cant increase in government funding and private
participa-tion. Recent initiatives to promote research universities could be supported by the
government, and policies could be designed to encourage private sector support.
Agricultural R&D could be liberalised to open up opportunities for private
par-ticipation in this strategic sector, especially by reviewing the existing tight
regula-tions on seed importation, new variety release and multi-location trials. Finally,
intellectual property right regulations and enforcement could be reviewed with
a view to providing better incentives for the private sector, including individual
researchers, to undertake research.
During the 1970s and 1980s the government developed an integrated rice
tech-nology delivery system. For seed multiplication, it built seed production centres at
the provincial level. An integrated national extension service was also developed,
with
fi
eld extension of
fi
ces (
balai penyuluhan pertanian
) built in all sub- districts
(
kecamatan
) and
fi
eld extension agents (
penyuluh pertanian lapangan
) assigned to all
villages. The government also established village cooperatives to distribute farm
inputs. The overall system was centrally coordinated by the Mass Guidance
(Bimb-ingan Massal, Bimas) Coordinating Board, headed by the president at the national
level, the governor at provincial level, and district, sub-district and village heads at
each lower level. This centralised command system was quite effective in
deliver-ing input-embodied technologies from research institutes to farmers.
The extension service systems have been decentralised in recent years, and are
now managed by district governments. Unfortunately, not all district
govern-ments are supportive of, or capable of facilitating, effective extension services.
Bimas has been closed down and, without government support, many village
cooperatives have closed as well (although many were in any case corrupt and
did not pursue the interests of villagers).
Thus the agricultural technology delivery systems are in disarray. This may
explain why some newly developed technologies in the research institutes are
slow to reach farmers. Although many new HYVs have been released, only a
few are widely used, with most farmers still using very old varieties. IR-64 rice,
released in 1986, is still the most commonly used. The experience of the last several
years suggests that the policy of reducing government involvement in technology
delivery systems has not been managed properly. Some elements of these systems
are private goods, but if the government reduces its involvement, it needs to
pro-mote private business involvement to take over government roles.
CONCLUSION
The phase of rapidly accelerating growth in Indonesia’s rice production lasted
only a few years, from about 1977 to 1982; growth then began to decelerate
gradu-ally until the late 1990s, stabilising at a low rate following the crisis. With the
BIESApr08.indb 76
BIESApr08.indb 76 29/2/08 9:49:31 PM29/2/08 9:49:31 PM
(3)
average post-crisis production growth rate lower than the population growth
rate, and far lower than the rate of growth of average incomes, steadily
increas-ing imports of rice would appear inevitable unless there is a signi
fi
cant
produc-tion turnaround. Given political sensitivities attaching to rice imports, this is an
opportune moment to investigate the problems facing rice production and
ana-lyse the costs and bene
fi
ts of boosting its growth again.
The analysis above shows that the slow growth rate of paddy production is due
to stagnant growth in the absolute extent of
sawah
, declining soil fertility caused
by over-intensi
fi
cation, and degradation of supporting infrastructures
(particu-larly irrigation and extension systems). These production problems cannot be
solved with price policies, which have been the main focus of government policy.
If increasing rice production is the aim, then it will be necessary to concentrate
on new
sawah
development, rehabilitation and expansion of irrigation systems,
creation of an environment conducive to private investment in R&D, promotion
of a better balance between chemical and organic fertilisers in rice farming, and
revitalisation of the extension system.
There appears to be some scope for increasing the paddy-to-rice conversion
ratio if problems with existing labour institutions in harvesting and inef
fi
ciencies
in the post-harvest industry can be alleviated, although this would amount to
a one-off, rather than ongoing, source of increased production. Improving ef
fi
-ciency would require the gradual replacement of the traditional
bawon
harvesting
system with contracted harvesting, and substitution of mechanical threshers for
the
banting
threshing system. The rice milling industry could be revitalised by
rehabilitation and replacement of under-performing rice mills, but such
invest-ments may not be pro
fi
table, even with stronger attempts to improve the rural
investment climate.
The government’s current approach uses rice price support (through import
restrictions) and fertiliser and other input subsidies, but these are relatively
inef-fective because production capacity seems to be fully utilised with existing
tech-nology and infrastructure. Restricting rice imports tends, rather, to ignite rice
price escalation, harming rice consumers, and thus increasing poverty. If the aim
is to increase rice production, the direction of rice policy would need to be
read-justed from import controls to enhancing production capacity.
8Policy is already
beginning to move in this direction.
The experience of the late 1970s and early 1980s shows that rapid acceleration of
rice output is possible, but suggests also that the costs of bringing this about may
be large both
fi
scally and in terms of the better economic opportunities forgone.
Redirecting the large budget for fertiliser subsidies might pay for some of the
pro-posed programs, but a broader analysis of the costs and bene
fi
ts of investments
to expand rice production is also needed. Rice self-suf
fi
ciency ‘at any cost’ is not a
viable policy, nor is it sensible. Indonesia easily has the
fi
nancial capacity to import
rice, even if foreign exchange earnings from other parts of the agricultural sector
alone are considered. A careful study of demand growth, the economic potential
of land for crops other than rice and alternative earning opportunities for rural
8 It is not clear that there is much of a role for the government in infl uencing the renova-tion of the post-harvest rice industry, however, since this involves private sector decisions about the profi tability of the investments.
BIESApr08.indb 77
BIESApr08.indb 77 29/2/08 9:49:31 PM29/2/08 9:49:31 PM
(4)
labour all need to be part of the analysis. If such a study indicates that continued
public support for rice production is needed, then the evidence presented in this
paper can help to focus policy makers’ attention on the real problems facing the
rice sector—inef
fi
ciency and declining productivity—rather than on the size of
the import gap and the degree of rice self suf
fi
ciency.
REFERENCES
Adiningsih, J.S. (1997) ’Peranan efi siensi penggunaan pupuk untuk melestarikan swasem-bada pangan [The role of fertiliser use effi ciency in sustaining food self-suffi ciency]’, in 50 Tahun Agronomi Membangun: Prosiding Simposiun Nasional dan Kongres VI Peragi [50 Years of Agronomy Development: Proceedings of the National Symposium and the Sixth Congress of the Indonesian Agronomy Association (Peragi)], eds A.S. Karama, S. Yahya, F. Bahar, P. Wahid, E. Syamsudin, S.S. Haryadi, I.H. Utomo, S. Djakamiharja, A. Saubari and A. Ginting, Indonesian Agronomy Association, Jakarta: 65–85.
Al-Jabri, M., Soepartini, M. and Ardi, D. (1991) ‘Status hara Zn dan pemupukannya di lahan sawah [Zinc’s nutrient status and its application to wetlands]’, in Prosiding Lokakarya Nasional Efi siensi Penggunaan Pupuk V, Cisarua, 12–13 Nopember 1990 [Proceedings of the Fifth National Workshop on Fertiliser Use Effi ciency V, Cisarua, 12–13 November 1990]: 427–64, Pusat Penelitian Tanah dan Agroklimat (Indonesian Research Centre for Soil and Agroclimate), Bogor.
Christianto, L. (1997) ‘Potensi dan kendala sumberdaya tanah menunjang produksi perta-nian Indonesia [Land resource potential and constraints in supporting Indonesian agri-cultural production]’, in 50 Tahun Agronomi Membangun: Prosiding Simposiun Nasional dan Kongres VI Peragi [50 Years of Agronomy Development: Proceedings of the National Symposium and the Sixth Congress of the Indonesian Agronomy Association (Peragi)], Jakarta 25–27 June 1996, eds A.S. Karama, S. Yahya, F. Bahar, P. Wahid, E. Syamsudin, S.S. Haryadi, I.H. Utomo, S. Djakamiharja, A. Saubari and A. Ginting, Indonesian Agro-nomy Association, Jakarta: 1–14.
Dawe, David (2008) ‘Can Indonesia trust the world rice market?’, Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 44 (1): 115–32, in this issue.
Dorosh, Paul (2008) ‘Food price stabilisation and food security: international experience’, Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 44 (1): 93–114, in this issue.
Fane, George, and Warr, Peter (2008) ‘Agricultural protection in Indonesia’, Bulletin of Indo-nesian Economic Studies 44 (1): 133–50, in this issue.
Fuglie, K.O. and Piggott, R.R. (2006) ‘Indonesia: coping with economic and political insta-bility’, in Agricultural R&D in the Developing World: Too Little, Too Late?,eds P.G. Pardey, J.M. Alston and R.R. Piggott, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington DC: 65–104.
Government of Indonesia (2005) Revitalisasi Pertanian, Perikanan, dan Kehutanan Indo nesia 2005 [Revitalisation of Indonesian Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 2005], Coordinat-ing Ministry for Economic Affairs, Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Maritime and Fisheries and Ministry of Forestry, Jakarta.
Handaka, Harsono, U., Budiharti, C., Sriyanto and Rahmat, R. (2002) Pergeseran sistem penggilingan padi stasioner ke penggilingan padi keliling di Jawa Timur [The shift from stationary to mobile rice milling systems in East Java], Balai Besar Pengemban-gan Alat dan Mesin Pertanian (Indonesian Research Centre for Agricultural Tools and Machinery), Jakarta, mimeo.
Hasanuddin, A., Setyono, A., Soetjipto, P. and Ananto, E.E. (2002) Tinjauan berbagai hasil kaajian/penelitian tentang kehilangan hasil pascapanen padi [A review of the fi ndings of some research on rice post-harvest losses], Paper presented to a Workshop on Rice Post-harvest Losses, Direktorat Jenderal Bina Pengolahan dan Pemasaran Hasil Pertanian (Directorate General for Processing and Marketing of Agricultural Products), Jakarta.
BIESApr08.indb 78
BIESApr08.indb 78 29/2/08 9:49:32 PM29/2/08 9:49:32 PM
(5)
Kasno, A., Setyorini, D. and Nurjaya (2003) ‘Status C-organik lahan sawah di Indonesia [C-organic status of wetland in Indonesia]’, Prosiding Himpunan Ilmu Tanah Indonesia (HIPI) [Proceedings of the Indonesian Soil Science Society], Indonesian Soil Science Society, Padang.
Lindert, P.H. (2000) Shifting Ground: The Changing Agricultural Soils of China and Indonesia, MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
Maksum, C. (2002) Survei susut pasca panen padi [The rice post-harvest survey], Paper presented at a Workshop on Rice Post-harvest Losses, Direktorat Jenderal Bina Pengo-lahan dan Pemasaran Hasil Pertanian (Directorate General for Processing and Market-ing of Agricultural Products), Jakarta.
Munarso, S.J., Setyono, A., Suismono and Jumali (1998) ’Tinjauan tentang rendemen beras giling dan susut pascapanen: evaluasi mutu dan rendemen beras di tingkat petani [A review of milled rice conversion rates and post-harvest losses: rice quality and yield evaluation at farm level]’, Balai Penelitian Padi (Rice Research Centre), Sukamandi. Nugraha, U., Munarso, S.J., Suismono and Setyono, A. (1988) Tinjauan tentang rendemen
beras giling dan susut pascapanen: masalah sekitar rendeman beras giling, susut dan pemecahannya [A review of milled rice conversion rates and post-harvest losses: prob-lems surrounding milled rice conversion rates, losses and the solutions]’, Balai Peneli-tian Padi (Rice Research Centre), Sukamandi.
Peng, S., Cassman, K.G., Virmani, S.S., Sheehy, J. and Khush, G.S. (1999) ‘Yield potential trends of tropical rice since the release of IR8 and the challenge of increasing rice poten-tial’, Crop Science 39: 1,552–59.
Pingali, O., Hossain, M. and Gerpacio, R. (1997) Asian Rice Bowls: The Returning Crisis?, CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon.
Roche, F.C. (1994) ‘The technical and price effi ciency of fertiliser use in irrigated rice pro-duction’, Bulletin of Indonesian Economics Studies 30 (1): 59–83.
Sijabat, Ridwan Max (2007) ‘Hybrid rice benefi cial: seed fi rm’, Jakarta Post, 17 October, accessed 1 November 2007 at <http://www.thejakartapost.com/Archives/Archives-Det2.asp?FileID=20071017.D02>.
Simatupang, P., Sudaryanto, T., Purwoto, A. and Saptana (1995) Projection and policy implications of medium- and long-term rice supply and demand in Indonesia, Centre for Agro-Socioeconomic Research, Bogor, in collaboration with the International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington DC.
Simatupang, P., Rusastra, I.W. and Maulana, M. (2004) ‘How to solve supply bottlenecks in agricultural sector’, Analisis Kebijakan Pertanian [Agricultural Policy Analysis] 2 (4): 369–92.
Sofyan, A., Nurjaya and Kasno, A. (2004) ’Status hara tanah sawah untuk rekomendasi pemupukan [Nutrient status of wetland for fertiliser recommendation]’, in Tanah Sawah dan Teknologi Pengelolannya [Wetland and Its Management Technology], edsF. Agus, A. Adimihardja, S. Hardjowigeno, A.M. Fagi and W. Hartatik, Pusat Penelitian Tanah dan Agro Klimat (Indonesian Research Centre for Soil and Agro-climate), Bogor: 83–136. Timmer, C.P. (1973) ‘Choice of technique in rice milling on Java’, Bulletin of Indonesian
Eco-nomic Studies 9 (2): 57–76.
Timmer, C.P. (1989) ’Indonesia: transition from food importer to exporter’, in Food Price Policy in Asia, ed. Terry Sicular, Cornell University Press, Ithaca NY: 22-64.
Tjahjohutomo, R., Handaka, Widodo, T.W., Harsono and Asari, A. (2004) Perbaikan ren-demen dan kualitas beras giling melalui revitalisasi sistem penggilingan padi rakyat [Improving milled rice conversion rates and quality by revitalising small rice milling systems], Indonesian Research Centre for Agricultural Tools and Machinery, Jakarta. Utami, W. and Ihalauw, J. (1973) ‘Some consequences of small farm size’, Bulletin of
Indo-nesian Economic Studies 9 (2): 46–56.
World Bank (2006) Making the New Indonesia Work for the Poor, Poverty Assessment, World Bank Offi ce, Jakarta.
BIESApr08.indb 79
BIESApr08.indb 79 29/2/08 9:49:32 PM29/2/08 9:49:32 PM
(6)
The 26th
Indonesia Update Conference
INDONESIA BEYOND THE WATER’S EDGE:
Managing an Archipelagic State
The Australian National University
Friday and Saturday, 19–20 September 2008
Indonesia is the world’s largest archipelagic state. More than half its share of the earth’s surface is sea, and the marine frontier presents Indonesia with economic opportunity and political and strategic challenges.
Indonesia has been affected more than most countries in the world by a slow revolution in the management of the seas. Whereas Indonesia’s seas were once conceived administratively as little more than the empty space between islands, successive governments have become aware of the need to establish regulatory regimes in marine areas to manage the allocation of marine resources, to guard national security and to provide human services to those at sea. The effective transfer to the seas of regulatory regimes such as territoriality that took shape on land has been an enduring challenge to Indonesian governments.
This conference examines Indonesia’s response to that challenge. Presentations will address maritime boundaries and security, marine safety, inter-island shipping, the development of the archipelagic concept in international law, marine conservation, Indonesian sea-farers, illegal fi shing, and the place of the sea in national and regional identity.
Speakers include Hasjim Djalal, Djoko Sumaryono, Rili Djohani, Gerry van Klinken, Howard Dick, John Butcher, James Fox, Michele Ford, Lenore Lyons, Vincent Ashcroft and David Ray.
Conference convenor
Robert Cribb Research School of Pacifi c and Asian Studies, ANU College of Asia and the Pacifi c robert.cribb@anu.edu.au
The annual Indonesia Update is presented by the Indonesia Project, Economics Division, Research School of Pacifi c and Asian Studies (RSPAS), and the Department of Political and Social Change (RSPAS) in the ANU College of Asia and the Pacifi c, The Australian National University (ANU). Support from the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID) and the ANU is gratefully acknowledged.
Enquiries Indonesia.Project@anu.edu.au Ph +61 2 6125 3794
Fax +61 2 6125 3700
<http://rspas.anu.edu.au/economics/ip/IU08/>
BIESApr08.indb 80
BIESApr08.indb 80 29/2/08 9:49:32 PM29/2/08 9:49:32 PM