.Promoting of Urban Agriculture in Indonesian Cities Case Study: Urban Livestock System in Bandar Lampung City Tesis untuk memenuhi sebagian persyaratan mencapai derajat sarjana S-2

Program Studi Magister Perencanaan Kota dan Daerah

diajukan oleh: Dwi Retno Mulyaningrum 07/262819/PTK/4352

Kepada PROGRAM PASCA SARJANA FAKULTAS TEKNIK UNIVERSIT AS GADJAH MADA YOGYAKARTA 2008

-

-

--

~-

--

--

-----

Tes is PROMO TING OF URBAN A GR/CULTURE IN INDONESIAN CITIES CASE STUDY URBAN LIVESTOCK SYSTEM IN BANDAR LAMPUNG CITY

dipersiapkan dan disusun oleh Dwi Retno Mulyaningrum 07/262819/PT K/4352 telah dipertahankan di depan Dewan Penguji pad a tanggal 30 Desem ber 2008

Susunan Dewan Penguji Pembimbing

Utama

Anggota Dewan Penguji Lain

Ir. Bakti Setiawan, M.A.,Ph.D. Pembimbing

Retno Widodo Dwi Pramono, .S.T.,M.Sc.

Pendamping

Ir. Suryanto, MSP.

Tesis ini telah diterima sebagai salah satu persyaratan untuk memperoleh gelar Magister

Tanggal 30 Desember 2008

___

_J

l>EDICATION

Thu

work i• dedkuted to:

My parent and my parent in law fur their support and pray My dear husband and my beloved thJW children (p11tri, adit and rtajwa) For their love, support, loyalty and sacrifice My fourth children that almost come to my llfo Everyone who always eupport lo my successfulness

.......

PJ;RNYATAAN

Dengan ini saya menyatakan babwa dalam tesis ini tidak terdapat karya yang pernah diajukan untuk memperuln~umptl\.'n by squone"

ASIA: ChiNI

In the 1980's. ovtr 90% or >egcuble demand :and OVC'l half of mc•t ••d J)01Jltry drmMd ;,, China's 18 largr:u clti.. w0> lnCl 11'roosh pro4vcc grown In urbon

.,,,,.. Hongkong

V e~lcs sufficlcni lo .....,1 CS% of local demand 111-e proI 1..,d.,... In J .x.n.._ olmo-..1 20% oflhe IOod couwrne>Iby squauas Is self-produced

Nepal Singapun

In K•t~m•ndu. J7% of food produoen survcrcd met lhcfr ho11seholJ plant fwd needs ond 11 % - '"!''ir 111\inml rood nccdi:

d

l\i;ihty perwnl of IJ\e poulll)' ond ?N oJ the vrxtubles ounsume

l.3

Urban LivestockKeeping Urban livestock rearing is practiced by both larger and small producers and highincome as well as low-incomer

farmers. The large producers may be poultry farmers

with a thousand of birds, cold storage facilities. purchasing agreements for large

nmount of teed and specialist staff. The small producers might have a small herd of goats or a few of pigs and some agreements about access to grazing land or access to

market or restaurant waste (Smit, Ratta and Nasr, 1996). Then Smit, Rana and Nasr (1996) explain that the range of livestock raised in cities includes chickens, pigs, cows, goats, guinea pigs, rabbits, ducks, geese, pigeons, and hyl:rid member of rat fa111ily. Sometimes the animal presence is not appar~n•, since they are raised in backyard and their food is brought to them there. The type of livestock in urban areas can be clustering in lhn:e groups.

I. !>oultry Urben poultry production has an impona.1t role ID play in the future food supply of the world's cities.

In Asia, poultry production is shifting to large-scale

"factory" systems. Jn Ali'ic
2.6 The &lcialand .Economical Alla~

of' Urtuin Lives~k

Economic aspects of urban agriculture of nrban farmer household according to Wibowo (200 l) in are: I. Net income 2. Percentage of Added Valueof Mooey (PAVM}

3. Contribution of Secondary Income of UA to Primary Income In his research he also was studying sboet ec.}J>Omic impacts of urban agriculture to the city with these parameters: I . Conl:Jibution of production to ecooomic of city

2. Contribution to Gross Regional Domestic Product (GORP) 3. Contribution to decrease low-income household. Overseas Dewlopment Administration (1995) stated that the starting point for social analysis is that all proiects are embedded within society and, because society is dynamic, any kind of planned intervention will, to greater or lesser extent contribute to sccial change. In the next table will be described key social processes in a matrix. Table 8. Matrix of Key Social Processes

Social Processes Key J\spec(s .r ··~1.-cl~.i-vo~.li~h~oo~d~s:,--~~~~~~~-.~Llw.--"r.~hoods:--,,.~~inco~m-e-,~.-m-~~D-)'Jl) lmprovanen'/Jmpovenshnte"lt

nub'itio-n,. assee, Yulnetuhitiiy: Security, risk

'"'"u~

"'-nw"1110S4n.

t:uldtenure. :;c.rv~:s

[ 2.

Resour'Is guidance. Uasically, questionnaire and secondary data was divided into 3 themes: 1. Financial C.asibility of urban livestock keeping by urban former and the social

impact to its househeld. This data was gathered in primary data by questionnaire to urban farmer. 2. Conttlbuting ofUA to socic-eccnonue impacts of the city. Most of this analysis

will bb inti:rpre~d from secondary data. 3. The Policy ond program tho.twill support promoting of Urbwi Livestock. System. This d11ta will be gathered from collected secondary daw and on the spot interview with government officials.

Unit of allalysis is related to !he way tile Initial research questions have been defined. Unit of analysis of this research is Bandac Lampung City. The sub unit of analysis is the urban farmer that classified in three type of business. 3.2. 7 Data an:a.lysis The data aaalysis can be dividing into three; I . Docwnentation analysis on type of UA which applled by urban farmer: by picture on site, cage, and species. 2. Quantitative anolysis was calculated in:

29

•

Net income of farmer household to measure feasibility of UA

•

Total production (both in unit and rupiah) and its advantage per farmer household.

•

Economic impact of UA

to

Most of them are secondary data

the city.

analysis, The data arc GroS3 Domestic Regional Product, the number of urban livestock household, the number of urban livestock production, the number of urban livestock farmer, the number of urban agriculture flinncr, the number of unemployment, the nwnber of low-income household (rumah tangga miskin). and city population.

All analysis is comparison that got

resu It in a percentage. •

Budget of government program to promote and enhance urban agricult11re especially in urban livc:sloo.i

ofac• ! C~buetOA Gmt1 Rqtt.alilf Oome:ta.e trod.Q (GORI')

'°

"'bm h\..,lcclc ,., ee F.SC.RJPTION

of Lampuog

Bt111dar Lampung Is a capital city of Lampung Province. Larnpung is one of ten provinces in Sumatera lsland, the second big island of Indonesia.

It has nine.

regencies and two cities. Since fourteen years a go Lampung province was be one of supplier areas of livestock production to national consumption. For cow ii was reside in third rank after East Java Province and Central Java Province. This

Province is even also ordained as feedlot development area utili:i.c::• to support the Indonesia flesh sufficiency al year 2010. figure 2. Maps of'Lampung Province

Source: http://geography. about.r.ow/lihrery/Ginl'lcindone&i e. b1m

37

This condition

was supported by other excellences such as abundance source of

feed and tilt strategic sltuaiion since this province is directly facing Java Island. Its capability

10

be one of national main producers of maize makes this province pre-

eminent compare to other plllCC. Produce its maize per annum reach I million ton totally and maize farm reach 350 ha. Lampung also offerthe opportunity of cow lllld goat Bocrawa feedlot lhrough the partnership, and also build the industry of feed livestock. The location that was on the marlcet to investor is in regencies outside of Bandar Lampung City such as Centnll Lompung, East Lampung. Non Lampeng and T ulang Bawang. Based on that condition, ii is fair enough to Bandar Lampung City to try fulfilling its livestock demand trough inter-supply because other regencies concern t.o fulfill nlltiolllll demand. Urban livci;IOCk seems to be a right choice for increasing city production. 4.l. 4.2.l.

Daeriptloo of B111clar L111pung The Position, Jlrootier, and Topography

Gcgugraphically, Bandar Larnpung is localtd at

s"2o•.s030•

South Latitude and

105°28'·105°37' East Latitude. 111is lampwig provincial capital city is located at Lampung Bay on the southern part of Surnall:ta Island. It was shown in the next figure. Bandar Lampung has an area of 192 km2; consist of 13 districts

1111d

98 villages.

Administratively, Banda: Lampung city confined with: I • Naw di strict of Lampung Selatan regency on the northem side 2. Padang Cermln district and Ketibung Di!ltrict ofLampung Selnta.n regency vn t be sou them side

38

3. Gedung Tataan district and Padang Cermnin

Dlstrict of Lampung Setaran

regency on the western side 4. Tanjung Binlan8 district of T .ampung SeIatan regency on the eastern district. Figure 3. Maps of Bandar Lampung City

< ·--"-

-

011111.4..... ,

!•

Bandar Lampung is located on the height between 0 and 700 meters above the sea level with the topography which consists of:

I. Coastal region on the southern side ofTelukbetuog and P1mjang Z. Hilly region on the northern side ofTelukbetnng 3. High land and a bit rolling hill.~ on the western side of Tanjung Kaiang which influenced by Balau mount and Batu Sersmpok hills in the southeastern side 4,

Lampung Bays and small islands

011

the southern side

Jn the middle of the city some rivers flow, such as Way Halim, Way Balau, Way Awi, Way Simpur in Tanjung Karang area, and W31 Kuripan, Way Balau, Way

Kupang, Way Kuwala, in Telukbetung area. The upstream is loi:ated at the western side, while the downstream is located at lhe southern side on the coastal area. 39

flatter region covered up 10 60 percent of total area, while the sloppiest covered 35

percent and the steepest region covered up IO 4 pen:e nt. A part of Aan

I

I

s

I

1

4

s

6

(.

2

.

l

.

-

6 0

s 4

2

l

2

3 I ;;

4

2

4

R al• basa

3

I

Taniuno Senano

2

2

s

K.cmili•• gu kabu m i Cirf A......,.H

3 I

2

6 4 5

2

I

-

2 2 2 J

Pan i e n e sek arame

She

3 2

s

6

Local Chic. 7

Layer

cue.

llAAh:r Cllic.

Qll;n

-

6.750

l,J77

14 1~

1.175

16.375

1.5QO

41.ll67

1,193 1,183

.

4.125

-

-

1.000

25 ?2 9

-

.

4

22 20

-.

s

14

3,2$0

s

29

2.000

5

10 16 29

75()

.,,,.., -

.

[7

1 .. 7

211.768

s 2 5

-

..

.

-·-.

~.000 2, 125 29,500 _ 500 !,SSC 3,VO 1.063

-

73.JJJ

1.000

500 J.45•_

In poultry reared, average animal that was reared by urbaJI farmer are 17 animals for focal chicken. 20.761! animals for broiler chicl:eo and 1.957 animals for layer

so

chickm.

Quill that also poultry chicken has 1.450 animals of business scale per

urban farmer household.

Actually, all of the business scales above are not enough in economic scale of

li~estock rearing. Some literatures give calculation that it should be S animals for cow am! 8 animals for goat or sheep. In that number. the business will reach break event point. lt means for livestock rearing with total livestock is under an economic scale, it can be unfeasible business. Balitbang Departcmen Pertanian (2007) also susgested that the minimum SCAie for goat and sheep is 8 female and I male. For rumina11tia rearing such as cow, goat and sheep, govenneot suggested farmer to make a group or association. It means co incrase their bussines scale, accesbllity to caiptal and technique of rearing. Rearing of indegenous chicken in Indonesia mosny is traditional/extensif type of business.

It used household waste as feed 3nd reared in backyard (Balitbang

Depertemen l'ertanian, 2007 and Dr. Rustidra in http;i/rusfidra.multiply.com/

eccesed November 25, 2008). Ur. Rusfidra also suggested to program Family Poul11y in Indonesia, the: base populetion is 10 animals nffemale chicken (hen)ond I animal of male chicken (cock). S.2.1 Tbe Economic Impacts of Vrban Farmer Hoasehold The economic impi11:t~ of urban farmer household of urban livestock in the city

of Bandar Lampung were dividtd into three indicators, namely: net income, added value of money/bank rate, and regioml standard minimum wage S.2. J.J Net income for Urban Farmer All of net income of Sllltlple of urban farmer in this research is bigger than zero. It means that all urban livestock activities give positive SI

impact to urbao farrner.

Dr. Rusfidn

in bllP:/lrusfidra.multiply.oomf

(sccesed November 25, 2008) from 10 animals oihen that reared in l ye;ars it will yield: 48 hen, cash money Rp.670.000,·. consume 150 ega

and 24 baby chicken. It means that tbere is S,8 times

increasing of

pO(lulation !Tom base population. In trulicional cluster that exist 17 urban filnners, the highest net income per mo11l~ is Rp. 91 ~ . .100,· and lhe lowest is Rp. 10.333,-. Total Income and •veragc inoo111c in this cluster, respectively Rp. S.609.676,· and Rp.329.981,· In 20 urban formcr.i that clas.~lf..:4 in semi in~~ive cluster. lhe hiahcst net income per month is Rp. 1.617.500,· and the lowest is Rp.602.083,. Total income and avenge income lo tliis cluster arc respectively Rp. 21.002.622,· ud Rp. 1.050.131,· In lntcMive cluster !Ml exist 8 urban fanncn, the highest oet income per month is Rp. 10.057.7711,· and the lowest is R.p.1.749.0113,-.

To1al

income and avensc income in this clustu are respectively Np. 41.234.917,-andRp. S.IS4.365,Table 12. Net income per mooch of urban farmer household en....,

Nncnbtrol. Ust..n f•tmu

N•l lnlllll (l!upw.) Highest

T r.adi eon.I

17

ra,-

S.n\i lf\f\.""'ntliYe lnt.ens1,,....

20

I J;f7.5QO

a

1n,..7:J7ll

Total

l..nw&

8'l.67l

..

42M%

~1183

l.37'1sn

27 !>0%

9,"82,!IOO

3,lW,1\)3

29,703,33)

7,US,tl.)3

'216%

-

The income is not enough lu fulfill the daily or monthly expense but the fact !hey still keep goi11& with this activlty, from other question, tbey give an answer, Income from liv1'lit0Ck keeping actually was prepared to fulfill bi11 expenditure that comes ine11ularly.

It was so beneficial

when they

need money to pay education expense or they will make an

religious ceremony such as baby born ceremony (aqiqoh), circumcision (khilaJ1) or other unpredicted cost. In range 3 (Rp2.000.000,- till Rp.S.000.000,-), UA income only

contrihme 2?% to fonn total income of urban farmer household. There is a tendency that the higher level of total Incume the lower of U A income contribution.

Table 14. Contribetion UA income to !Oto! income per cluster No I 2 J

• 5

Twl ln\

3od un fuel".

It means that those urban funner can fulfill their household need in food from urban livestock activities. Urban farmer i11 tnditlonal type had net income lower tlt&n UMK. so they can not fulfill their expense from this activity. Meanwhile, because those entire urban farmers w:t this activity only as a side joh. so they still can did this eetivlty to support their main job. Table 16.

Result of Indicator Regional Standard Minimum W•ge in BMdar Lampung City

Cluster Tradltiolllll Semi lntc11sive Intensive

Result of ComJ)llCison to Regional Standard Minimum

wa-

Not oronr Prcper Proper

.

·-

The result was different io second and third chiseers. Urbanfanncrs in these clusters have net income that tilgller than regional standard minimum wage, It means tl111t urban farmers in those clusters most got benefit from urban livestock business rather than worlc just as worker or labour. They can fulfill their basic expense from these activlties. 57

From three indicators above (net income, percentage added value of money and siandard regional minimum wage), it can be drawn the remarks of the research

like in lhe table 17 below. The remarl< CCII'\ be a conclusion for economic impacts of urban livestQck system in Bandar Lampung City for urban farmer household.

Table 17. Remarics of Cluster Based on &:onomic Impact No.

Clualer Trad.1nonal Semi lnte""'~ 3 lnlfnsl-.e

-

l 2

Remub

l

~b!e but Not ProFeasible 6' Proper

i

f'f'_asiblt • ;

I

I

Urban livestock business in the traditional cluster is a kind acli•ities that

feasible but not proper. Businesses in this cluster have net income that higher th1111 zero

and have l)

Pernw'J1a/yeor)

ijandar Lamoun2 CondiHon l'ttllOr, researcher more prefer to use GORP that based on constant price. The reasm is that the nwnber from this GORP is more stabi le, since there are no intluences from others aspect such as change of price and inflation. It will more clear lo make analysis in time series such as trend of contribution urban !ivcsto~k system to

GDRI' in constant price. 'The oumber is real con1rib1ation from those sectors. Urban livestock :ictivitic:s in Bmldar Larrrpang City have contribution to

form toi.al gross region&) dormstic product, even IOUgh its contribution

ts low. For total GORP, the contribution ofdtili business is 0.66% (see in 1ablc 24).

ll is sensible enou@ll, because th" contribution of

~gricultnre sector to form total GORP of the city only 4.600A.. In agriculture sector, utbao liYCSIOck has contribution number that is equal to 14.38%.

to

perform the

It was in second rank. 'lhe biggest

contributor is come from fishery sub sector; its contribution is equal

to

64% from total GORP in agricult.~ sector. ODRP depict the regions! ability i:i yicldffit goods uld service in \lCl'lain range of time, Theoretically, at certain level the value of GORP also expresses the level of added value or socttty earnings

llS

a whole.

GORP of Regencies and cities in Lampung Province was calculated lha:t was based only In production approach.

So cite number was

68

describing difference among value of goods and service yielded by economic acttvity unit, with tu~ level of terminal expense (biaya antara]

lhlit released to yield the service and goods (Stlllistics of L3mpong

b,

2007).

From this meaning above, the low value of ugh, there arc some pl'ognuns or project f/iaf not specifically has its own budget. They were done by this agency using routine budget that occur in administratio11 budget. The official of this agency also gives explanation that those budgets is to low compared with so many responsibility about animal husbandry issue. There is limitation of city budget that was being reason why this budget is too small. The percentage is only around 0,02 to 0,04 % fmm tOtal city budget. It can be

a reason also for this agency that sometimes they can facilitate all expectations of lllilan fanner.

To anticipate this condition, some official try to get additional budget from pro'llincial govemment or national govemmenl Using deooncentralion budget 79

in provincial program and Aid Work (wgas pembantuan) budget in national program, lhe city agency can ~

extra power to hdp urban farmer or lO

promote urban Ii vestoek ac1ivities. In the next table (table 28) was shown that sometimes the supported budget is higher than city budget. In year 200J, provincial level was gave the supported budget that equal to R3% from total project budg&t. But the weakness is this budget not every year can be gm for the agency. In the last three years (20052007) lhe agency did not getting supported budget from provincial level. From national budget by APBN, this ageocy only ger supponed budget in year 2006. rr is only 7% frorn mtal budget !hat was realized by tlti~ agency. Table 28.Comparison budi:ct to promote url>an livcstoc:lc among city bud&et.. aid or provincial bun\M
'f1Ullg City, 200S Acx:uumabillry of J>erfamri:mce Anrrual Repor: (loporOll tilculllabilitas Kinerja Instansl PtJmerlmalr/UKJP) 1004, B1111dar LamJ)IJng. 11.

Food Crop and Livestock Agency of Sandar Lam)>Wlg City, 2006 Accoumabillty of Perfonna11CtJ Annwal Report (lapcrun A.tWILabllitaa Kinerja Instansi Pemerinta/VL.A.KJP)200J, Bandar Lamptr1,.

I:?. Food Crop ond Livestock Agency of Bandar Lamp1ing City, 201>7 Ac:coumability of Performance Annual Report (Laporan Ak:untabililu.v Kinerj" ln.'iunsi PemerintahlUl(JP) 2006, Bandar Lampung.

13. Food Crop and Livestock Agency of Bandar Lampung City, 2008 .Accountobility of Pel'ji:Jrmance AnJtJuJ Repon (laporan At.1111.abiliras Kinerja IAStan.vi Pet11erintaJr/LA.J(JP) 2()()7, Bandar Lampung.

14. Frankfort-Nachmias, C. and David Nachmias. 1996. Research M~tltods In the Social Scie111g b£1juoJ11l "Pmgemhtmgw" Perl11nw11 Perkollllln pa"4 Kotu-lrota di fndt!nesia (Studi Kasus: Sistem Peterna/am Petlrot111m di knta Randnr/nmpung) ". St111Ua informaJi yimg rlipen:ddi aka11 dian4lisa dm digunakmt lumytt llntuk frepenringan ilmiah semata.

I. Introduction ( Pendahuhum) 1. Name oi Respondent (N11111a Rnponun) 2. Gender (Jen.ls Kelamin 3. Addt~ (A!amat)

4. Age

.................................................. a. Male (Pria}

b. Fem.tit= (Wanita)

··············· ......... years (lahu11)

(Umur)

5. I .asr Education (pendidlk.in lerakhlr) a. Diploma, University (diploma, unlwrsitas) b, Senior High School (SMA) c. Junl.or High School (SMP) d, Elementary School (SD) e. Un-educated (lidak se/wlail) 6. l'ooition in the household (posisl dalam keluarga} a. Head of household (k.epala lcelurga) b. Women as head of household (wanita sebagal l.en rearing livestock (berapa lama anda memdihara temak)? a. < l year (tahun)

b. e. d. e.

1-5 years (tahun) 6-1 O years (tahun) 11-15 years (tahun) > 15 years (tahun)

3. Whero is the position of th.ill activity iJ1 your livelihood (Bngalmanakah p-

"

•

z

~ It It I [ ! i It I a ft f i I 1 I i I i I i I t 1 i ii f i 1• [

.

~

~

~

~ ~ I!' ~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

fi. .i1 ..) j fl. f ! J.. .Ifl.. 1~. fl fi. fi.. fj I!.. fi. J.. I~ f~ fi .r j f ~ff ii ff 11 J .. ff ff ff l JI Jl f jl fl fl • I .. ~

i:i

!

I!'

I!'

! ..

~ ~

~ !!

~I!'

~

1

2

~! /J,

js .i ! -

l!

Ill

k

J! jJ

II

• •

1

I

d

'5 v

Ill

•

!

~

I

.

l

1

.! .I 1 ! ! ..! ..r ..i ..I ..i

Q

"'

0

0

!



0

z

0

z0

£

"'

!

s

z0

z0

i

z0

z0

J

Ii

j "I ..l,

•

"~

..I j

1i

~

0

0

z

; JI

~

0



0

0



0

"'

~ J f.

~

£

z0

!

z0

!

z0

z•

~

:i 0

f

j

l l ~ !

1

·~

..,.

!;'!

1

t i

I

s i

0

0

!

z

0

} .il

J

•

0

0

l

z0

!

!f

~ ~ • !l.

s

j i

c

.ii •

...

i l

ti

~I t; -r lJ JJ 8 f 1· I 1 i I ..1- .. "' ,_ I J .. .. f .. : ~ §. tl•

j

f~ sj

'

x

... .•

~

..

! fi

0

0

s

l

!

!

,.. I

~E

J

!"

ii

s

Q

1

1 I j J j J J i ~

!l. ~

s

*

c

t

•

"

0

"'

~ : & ~ ~ ~ !l. ~ ~ jg • ~ ~

g '

...

I

g

,,

l

~ E 8 s

0

I~J

~

! ,.

,.a

!

~

:

~

~

•

,.

•

~

J

! !

!

::.•

::.•

>•

i• z

~

!

~

•

$

:

I ~

~

~

!

!

~

•

,.I

g >

>

:

>

I!

,..g

'

eI!" I

'

!

!

•

1~1 rzi .. I

R

I

~

~1• = It

~i

;!

~~

&g

ii j IR .I • • r '!

~

~

•

'?

l

I .

l

11

~

:c

..• . !l

I ~

! ~ ~

"'

.. "

~ ~

i I

~

;:;

Si

~

"

-0

! • gj

fl

:c

")

!

'Q

~