The food data polemic between the Minister of Agriculture Syahrul Yasin Limpo (SYL) with the former Minister of Agriculture Andi Amran Sulaiman (AAS), and the Central Statistics Agency (BPS) some time ago – which marked the beginning of the activities of the new agriculture minister in the Advanced Indonesian Cabinet – gave quite meaningful wisdom, namely the need for gradual reformulation of food agriculture development policies towards complete food self-sufficiency.

The former Minister of Agriculture insisted that the data on paddy fields published by the Central Statistics Agency (BPS) was inaccurate, even gets very high deviations. As an example of deviation, according to AAS, is the case of Musi Banyuasin Regency, South Sumatra. According to satellite imagery published by BPS, the area has 0 hectares of paddy land, whereas according to data from the Ministry of Agriculture, the area should have 9 700 hectares of rice fields (Media Indonesia, 25/10/19).

For this statement, BPS, of course, cannot accept. BPS feels that it has carried out systematic research steps in accordance with scientific principles; and technically BPS has coordinated and involved experts from various related institutions, such as the Geospatial Information Agency, the Ministry of Agrarians and Spatial Planning, the Agency for the Study of Technology Application and the National Aeronautics and Space Agency; and the preparations have been directly supervised by Vice President M. Yusuf Kala (MI, 25/10/19). To calculate the number of milled dry grain produced, BPS has also used area sampling techniques. In short, BPS insists, there is no reason the data is inaccurate.

Finally, The Minister of Agriculture, SYL, stressed that he had more confidence in BPS data, and the Minister would use BPS data – as the only data – to establish policies in the ministries he leads.

 

Basic Conception of Policy

The data polemic of paddy field area and the amount of rice production is related to the basic concept of agricultural development policies, which raises questions about the accuracy of paddy field data and harvest yields.

The agricultural land in Indonesia – or generally in Southeast Asia – belongs to individual farmers or to family farmers. Then, came the term family farming system. According to Rahardjo (2014), this family farming system is characterized by narrow land, the purpose of farming is subsistence (only to meet family needs) and weak market & profit orientation, rice as the main crop, interspersed with intercropping, and often supplemented by small-scale livestock . The condition of such farmers has continued since the Dutch colonial era hundreds of years ago.

The results of the Inter-Census Agriculture Survey published by BPS (2018) show that rice farmers households in Indonesia in 2018 were 13 155 108 families; palawija farmers 7 129 404 families; and horticultural farmers as many as 10 104 683.

The Government policy in agricultural development acts more as a facilitator for these farmer families, not as a provider of food for the people. Rice producers are farmers. If the government wants food self-sufficiency, the government will carry out various persuasions so that farmers increase the productivity of their rice farming, where the government provides stimulus in the form of subsidies and means production assistance. If the government wants the sustainability of agricultural land, the Government will designate the land owned by the farmer as a sustainable food agriculture area that cannot be converted into other functions, and if the farmer changes it, he will be subject to legal sanctions in prison. If the farmer- owned-land increases in price or the farmer will get greater profits if their land is used for non-agricultural activities, then the opportunity is closed to the farmer – if the provisions on the protection of sustainable agricultural land have been effectively implemented.

Likewise, if the Government wants a relatively cheap and affordable price of rice, the Government will set a maximum selling price for milled dry rice per kilogram. The farmers may not get profits above the specified price. So, it is not surprising if there are cynics who say, that the farming family is actually the subsidy giver for rich people who have more abilities.

Furthermore, if the Government wants to know whether we are able to be self-sufficient in food from the results of the efforts of the farming families, the Government will calculate the area of land owned by farmers; calculate the tonnage of yields per hectare from farmers’ private fields. In this case various stakeholders will conduct a survey of the area of land and yields per hectare. In Indonesia we have the habit of conducting agricultural censuses once every 10 years, such as the agricultural census of 1993, 2003, 2013, and we will conduct an agricultural census in 2023. There is also an inter-census agriculture survey, as was done in 2018.

The census produces more accurate data. But a census is not possible every year. The problems arise when the Government wants to know about rice shortages every year. What is the actual production of rice produced by farmers in a certain year? What is the lack of rice to meet the population in a given year? How many shortages of rice do we have to import in a certain year? To answer that question, anyone will definitely do a sample survey, with various sampling techniques and statistical predictions. It will also use the latest technology such as satellite imagery. Also they will rely on reports from officials in various relevant agencies. In this case as if the Government is an outsider who wants to know the internal problems of farm households. If a large expanse covers all of Indonesia, and the data must be known quickly, while the budget is limited, this becomes a separate issue that affects the accuracy of the data

In addition, the farmer’s land is very dynamic. The government may not be able to accurately control the transfer of land functions carried out by farmers every year, such as land that is needed for house construction or other interests related to the family life of farmers internally. As an illustration, if farmers have 5 children, and among them already have a family, then it is likely that farmers will build a house on a portion of their land. If the new family needs a place of business, then he will use it. The land use change is often not done formally (through official processes) but is done secretly, does not use proposals and is not done through a formal building permit

The issue of the dynamics of land owned by farmers is self-acknowledged by BPS itself. “Data on the area of this paddy field is dynamic. If it is indeed found, there are still points that have not been monitored we are very open to perfecting. Because the spirit of forming this data is to create a credible data and it requires a process that is not instant,” said Director of Statistic of Food Plant, Horticulture and Plantation of the Central Statistics Agency (MI, 25/10/19).

We do not deny the predictive ability and accuracy of data from the results of analysis and statistical tests. We also do not reject the ability of satellite imagery technology to identify rice fields spatially in all parts of the archipelago. But in the statistical analysis there is the expression, “garbage enters, then garbage comes out.”

In some studies – where we have dialogues with agricultural extension workers, staff of Local Agriculture Service, and with the Head of the Service Branch, frankly they often report yields more than the actual figure; also reports that land area is larger than it actually is. Even though they knew that the paddy field had been converted, they still reported it as a complete paddy field. In this case there is a “ewuh pakewuh” culture – where they want to please the leader and want to show it better. They do not want to report the less good, because it affects the unwanted for them and for their leaders. That is our bureaucratic tradition.

 

 

What we want to convey in this regard is the emergence of the issue of data accuracy regarding land area and crop yields is as a result of the basic conception of agricultural development policies. Therefore, reformulation of food agriculture policies is needed.

 

It is not a Facilitator but a Food Provider

As an alternative, the basic conception of food agriculture development policies should place the Government not only as a facilitator but as a “food provider.” Raharjo (2014) put forward the term “state farming” in addition to family farming. If the “facilitator” only directs, encourages, and develops farmland owned by farmers, the “food provider” is active in producing food by providing agricultural land, conducting cultivation, providing agricultural human resources, conducting supervision during the production process, distributing, and overseeing the distribution process strictly.

More clearly, each regional government in carrying out a regional spatial planning (RTRW) allocates land for food production, which comes from state-owned land, or community’s land that is purchased by the state. The area of land provided by the Government is proportional to the amount of rice needed by the community in accordance with the predicted increase in population for a certain period of time. The government also provides human resources to manage agricultural land, as well as formulating a partnership pattern between the Government and farmers/farmer groups. Furthermore, the Government’s tasks in providing food are mandated to state owned land/local state owned land.

Thus, each Regional Government will form a local state owned land (BUMD) tasked with: (1) managing food agricultural land owned by the Regional Government, (2) cooperating with farmers/farmer groups in conducting rice cultivation; (3) conduct postharvest processing; and (4) distributing rice production to the community. Food distribution is not left to the market mechanism but is carried out and controlled by the Government.

However, individuals are welcome to use their land to produce rice, but are optional. Each individual agricultural land can be used for rice cultivation, cultivation of other commodities, or even welcome for non-agricultural activities. The task of providing food is not the burden of the individual community but rather the task of the government; although the Government continues to encourage individuals to meet food needs for their families and let their agricultural land productive. In this context, we will adopt a dual system, namely the family farming system and the state agriculture.

 

Food supply for citizens is indeed special, not to be confused with the procurement of other commodities. Food is a basic need, so it is the duty of the government to fulfill it. Other commodities which are secondary needs can be delivered to individuals or individual families, not to be borne by the Government; and its distribution is entirely left to market mechanism. It is completely is different from the distribution of staple food which is fully controlled by the Government.

By this mechanism, the Government will know perfectly the certain the amount of agricultural land owned by each Regional Government, the amount of rice/rice produced, food sufficiency and the opportunity for shortages within a certain timeframe; even the Government will know the number of citizens in each region that still lack of food. At the same time, indicators of development success are not measured based on per capita income, or based on the human development index, but based on the presence of individual communities who are still unable to meet their basic needs. Development is said to be successful if all individuals are able to meet their basic needs.

 

It is not Too Late

The basic conception of this policy is not difficult to implement, and it is not too late even though the family farming system in Indonesia has been hundreds of years ago. Innovatively, each regional government can allocate state-owned/regional-owned land for the rice fields, and the regional government should manage it directly by forming Local State Owned Land as food producers. The Government Regulation (PP) No. 65/2019 makes it easy for farmers to utilize state-owned land for rice fields. Of course, this PP needs some improvements if the Government will act as a food provider.

Furthermore, the local state owned land can work a partnership with farmer groups to manage state-owned agricultural food lands. This land must not be converted into other function outside a sustainable food agriculture area. Through this process, food self-sufficiency will be achieved in a certain time slowly but surely. The implementation of this policy certainly requires changes and improvements to various supporting systems, but the policy direction is clear and focused. ***

 

Daftar Rujukan

Statistical Center Agency, 2018, The Result of Agricultural Inter Census 2018, Statistical Center Agency.

Media Indonesia, 25/10/19

Rahardjo. 2014. An Introduction to The Rural Sociology and Agriculture Gajah Mada University Press, Yoyakarta, Indonesia [Indonesian]