Analisis perilaku ekonomi rumahtangga petani di tiga desa pangan dan perkebunan di Provinsi Lampung
The analysis of farm household economic behaviors at three food and estate villages in Lampung Province
Asmarantaka, Ratna Winandi
MetadataShow full item record
The agricultural policies issued by the government are generally homogenous. In reality, farmers and families cannot be treated homogenously since there are behavioral differences in econo~ that are different in agro ecosystem and the main commodities being cultivated. The succe~ f agricultural development (Agricultural Revitalization), especially in improving the agriculmu-al productivity and the farmer income, the policies applied should consider the behaviiraI differences. ~.The characteristics of farm households in Lampung Province specifically between food crops ~ce and cassava) and estate crops (coffee) is assumed to have different impacts on the farm ~usehold economic behaviors. It especially has differences in the farm household workf(jce system, income, consumption, investment and saving. Therefore, it is interested to study $ e farm household economic behaviors in Lampung Province. The purposes of this study are cB to analyze the farm household economy especially the structure of workforce use, incomi expenditures and food sustainability in the villages with food and estate crops (2) to analyz! the factors influencing the economic behaviors of the farm household of food and estate crops, ~d (3) to evaluate the impacts of external and internal factor changes on production, fertili~r use, income, consumption, investment and saving of food and estate crop farm houselihlds. ~. The analysis uses tabulation, test of differences and econometric methods using simulTeous equations. The results of economic analysis show that the income of rice and estate villages mainly comes from agriculture, whereas that of cassava comes from non agriculture. The use o~amily workforce to earn living has not fulfilled the Central Statistic Bureau criteria for full time workers, even though it has met those of food sustainabiIi ty. The rice production is not responsive against price changes (except estate village), but responsive against the workforce use. Cassava and coffee productions are affected by prices even though it is not responsive. The use of workforce in the food viJIages are influenced by and responsive against the wage levels, whereas in the coffee village is influenced by and responsive against the values of coffee production. Food consumption in the three villages are influenced by the number of family members, even though it is responsive only in the rice village. In the estate village, the food consumption is very much influenced by and responsive against the values of coffee production. Human investment and saving of rice and estate villages are influenced by and responsive against agricultural income, whereas those in cassava village is influenced by non agricultural income. The increase of output priceUtls a positive impact on production and input use, especially in food villages. On the other hanle increase on input price has negative impact on production, especially in the rice village . The crease on the use of family workers has positive impact on farming productivity and hou old income, especially in rice village. In the estate village, the increase in agricultural equi~nt investment has a positive impact on production and income.