yogyakarta, indonesia” - 東京大学サスティナ … files/s1-irham.pdf“people’s...
TRANSCRIPT
“PEOPLE’S WILLINGNESS TO
SUSTAIN AGRICULTURAL
ENVIRONMENT IN
YOGYAKARTA, INDONESIA”
Irham *)
Senthot Sudirman **)
Slamet Hartono *)
Azwar Maas *)
*) Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta
**) Land Science Higher Education, Yogyakarta
Cities pull factors:
• Job opportunities
• Infrastructures
• Urban hedonism,etc.
Industries Commercial Housing Public facilities
• Spectacular pop. increase
• Pollution
• Other urban externalities
INTRODUCTION
Year 1995-2020
World population increase
73 millions/year
2015 ± 52% of population
live in urban areas
In developing countries
Urban population increase
from 1,7 billion (1995)
3.4 billion in year 2020,
Rural population increase
300 millions
Year 2000 24 million ha
of green land (agriculture,
forest, etc)
converted to
urbanized areas.
Loss of food supply for 84 million
of population, Urban externalities,
Rural-urban disharmony
Multifunctionality of Agriculture
Socioeconomic benefits: •Local food availability
•Source of job opportunity
•Emergency way out strategy
•Social safety net
•Poverty alleviation
•Cost saving transportation
•Local rural market creation
Environmental benefits: •Urban ecosystem balance
•Source of biodiversity
•Recycling & Re-using of
•Balance of O2 and CO2
•Improving micro climate
•Source of amenities
•Flood control
•Ground water improvement
•Source of local cultures
Vital roles of Agricultural Environment in
Establishing Nature Harmonious Society
WE MAY IGNORE THIS….
AND ALSO…WE IGNORE
SOME OTHER THINGS.. • The importance of understanding farmers’
appreciation towards their own
fundamental property…agricultural
environment (farm land, farming activities,
greenery landscape, etc.).
• The importance of understanding the
urban people’s appreciation towards
agricultural environmental services they
enjoy in their daily live.
WHY IMPORTANT TO
UNDERSTAND… • From the farmers’ point of view: in urban
and sub urban areas, there is a very strong
conflicting interest (trade off) between
keeping agricultural activities moving
(Moshers’ terminology) or selling their farm
land and “divorce” with farm activity..
• From people’s point of view: we are still
doubt to their appreciation towards the
importance of agricultural activities and
farmers live.
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
• To estimate the value of agricultural
environment in sub urban area of
Yogyakarta.
• To see the farmers’ willingness to pay for
keeping themselves in farming activity.
• To study the people’s awareness towards
agricultural sustainability.
AREA OF THE STUDY
• Six sub districts in sub urban area of Yogyakarta – Three sub districts of Sleman District
– Three sub districts of Bantul District
• There are 29 villages within those 6 sub districts.
• Due to the existence of ring road, the study area
is divided into 3 clusters (zones): inside ring
road (ZDRR), close outside ring road (ZLRR),
and far outside ring road (ZJRR). Within those 3
clusters, there are 47 sub clusters.
• The study was conducted in August 2010 until
March 2011.
Location of the
Study
Yogyakarta Province
Java Island
THE RESPONDENTS
• The respondents are farmer’s and non farmer’s
households
• Six to ten respondents were taken from each sub
cluster.
• The total respondents:
– 470 farmer’s households
– 282 non farmer’s households
NET = NGL + NGTL + NNG
NET = Total economic value of Agriculture
within sub urban area of Yogyakarta
NGL = Direct use value of Agriculture within sub
urban area of Yogyakarta
NGTL = Indirect use value of Agriculture within
sub urban area of Yogyakarta
NNG = Existence value of Agriculture within sub
urban area of Yogyakarta
ESTIMATING ENVIRONMENTAL
VALUE OF AGRICULTURE
Direct Use Value of Farming
Activities (NGL)
Direct use value (NGL)= summation of farm
income in 47 sub-clusters within the sub
urban area of Yogyakarta.
NGL is calculated as follow:
)(47
1
i
i
i xIANGL
Notes:
Ai = Size of agricultural land lost due to irreversible
conversion within 47 sub-clusters (sub-zones)
between 1996 to 2006 (ha).
Ii = Average farm income in each sub cluster in 2006
by using shadow price (SER = Shadow Exchange
Rate) (Rp/ha).
i = Number of sub-clusters within sub urban areas in
Yogyakarta (47 sub-clusters)
Indirect Use Value of Farming
Activities (NGTL)
• Indirect use values (NGTL) = summation of
Willingness to Pay (WTP) of people within sub
urban area of Yogyakarta.
• WTP is withdrawn from 47 sub-cluster within the
sub urban area of Yogyakarta.
• NGTL is calculated as follow:
47
1
)(i
iinf WTPxPopNGTL
Notes:
(Popnf)i = Number of non farm families within sub urban
area of Yogyakarta.
= Average real WTP from people within sub
urban area of Yogyakarta from each sub-cluster
(Rp).
i = Number of sub-cluster (47 sub-cluster).
WTPi
Existence Use Value of Farming
Activities (NNG)
• Existence value of agriculture (NNG) =
summation of Willingness to Accept (WTA) of
farmers within sub urban area of Yogyakarta.
• Value of WTA is estimated from replacement
costs as a guarantee for the lost of farming
activities.
• Value of WTA is estimated from 47 sub-
clusters within sub urban area of Yogyakarta.
• NGTL is calculated as follow:
Notes:
47
1i
ii WTAxANNG
Ai = Size of agricultural land lost due to
irreversible conversion within 47 sub-clusters
(sub-zones) between 1996 to 2006 (ha).
= Average real WTP from people within sub
urban area of Yogyakarta from each sub-
cluster (Rp).
i = Number of sub-cluster (47 sub-cluster).
WTAi
MEASURING WTA AND WTP
• WTA of each respondent is obtained from the
results of bidding during the interview to figure
out the willingness of farmers to accept
compensation to sustain farming activities.
• The higher the WTA the lower the willingness of
farmers to sustain their farm.
• WTP of people is obtained by measuring the
willingness of them to pay for the environmental
services produced by agriculture (through
bidding process).
• The higher the WTP the higher the willingness of
people to sustain agricultural existence.
Factors Affecting WTA
Ln WTA = β0 + β1LnX1 + β2LnX2 + β3LnX3 +
β4LnX4 + β5LnX5 + β6LnX6 + β7LnX7 +
d12 ZLRR + d13 ZJRR + ε
Expected signs: β1, β4, β6, β7 > 0; β2, β5, d12, d13 <
0; dan β3 > 0 atau < 0.
Notes:
R2 = Coefficient of determination
β0 = Intercept
βi = Coefficients of regression
ε = Error term
WTA = Value of WTA of farmers in each sub-cluster (Rp).
X1 = Farm income (Rp/ha/year)
X2 = Non farm income (Rp/tahun)
X3 = Age of farmer (tahun))
X4 = Education level of farmer(skor)
X5 = Size of land (ha)
X6 = Knowledge of farmers on multifunctionality of agriculture
(%)
X7 Family members (persons)
d12 = Dummy ZLRR (d12 = 1 if within ZLRR; d12 = 0 if others
d13 = Dummy ZJRR (d13 = 1 if within ZJRR; d13= 0 if others
Ln WTP = β0 + β1LnX1 + β2LnX2 + β3LnX3 +
β4LnX4 + β5LnX5 + β6LnX6 + d12
ZLRR+ d13 ZJRR + ε
Expected signs: β1, β3, β5 > 0; β4, β6, d12,
d13 < 0; dan β2 > 0 atau < 0.
Notes:
R2 = Coefficient of determination
β0 = Intercept
β1 = Coefficients of regression
ε = Error term
Factors Affecting WTP
WTP = Value of WTP of sub urban people of Yogyakarta to secure
the existence of agricultural environment (Rp)
X1 = Age of household head (years)
X2 = Household income (Rp/month)
X3 = Member of household (persons)
X4 = Education level of household head (score)
X5 = Knowledge of farmers on multifunctionality of agriculture
(%)
X6 = Distance of house from farm land (km)
d12 = Dummy ZLRR (d12 = 1 if within ZLRR; d12 = 0 if other
d13 = Dummy ZJRR (d13 = 1 if within ZJRR; d13= 0 if others
PROFILE OF FARMER RESPONDENTS
Items ZDRR ZLRR ZJRR
Freq. % Freq. % Freq. %
Age categories (year)
20-30 10 5,00 12 6,67 7 7,78
31-40 17 8,50 17 9,44 11 12,22
41-50 34 17,00 35 19,44 19 21,11
51-60 101 50,50 74 41,11 43 47,78
> 60 38 19,00 42 23,33 10 11,11
Total 200 100,00 180 100,00 90 100,00
Education categories
Unfinished elementary 20 10,00 21 11,67 15 16,67
Complete elementary 104 52,00 102 56,67 52 57,78
Complete junior high school 47 23,50 35 19,44 16 17,78
Complete senior high school 23 11,50 18 10,00 6 6,67
Higher education 6 3,00 4 2,22 1 1,11
Total 200 100,00 180 100,00 90 100,00
Items ZDRR ZLRR ZJRR
Freq. % Freq. % Freq. %
Number of family
members
0 4 2,00 5 2,78 4 4,44
1 22 11,00 18 10,00 8 9,00
2 38 19,00 28 15,56 9 10,00
3 77 38,50 72 40,00 39 43,33
4 53 26,50 50 27,78 26 28,89
5 6 3,00 7 3,89 4 4,44
Total 200 100,00 180 100,00 90 100,00
NUMBER OF FAMILY MEMBERS
ZDRR ZLRR ZJRR
Experience in farming Freq. % Freq. % Freq. %
1-5 12 6,00 9 5,00 4 4,44
6-10 18 9,00 14 7,78 7 7,78
11-15 23 11,50 27 15,00 9 10,00
16-20 42 21,00 32 17,78 14 15,56
21-25 50 25,00 46 25,56 21 23,33
> 26 55 27,50 52 28,89 35 38,89
Total 200 100,00 180 100,00 90 100,00
EXPERINECE IN FARMING ACTIVITIES
Items ZDRR ZLRR ZJRR
Freq. % Freq % Freq %
Average land
holdings
< 300 m2 32 16,00 16 8,89 5 5,56
301- 500 m2 96 48,00 26 14,44 9 10,00
501 - 750 m2 28 14,00 75 41,67 13 14,44
751 -1000 m2 23 11,50 28 15,56 42 46,67
1001 - 1250 m2 11 5,50 17 9,44 10 11,11
1251- 1500 m2 6 3,00 10 5,56 6 6,67
> 1500 m2 4 2,00 8 4,44 5 5,56
Total respondents 200 100,00 180 100,00 90 100,00
LAND HOLDINGS
Items ZDRR ZLRR ZJRR
Average operating land Freq. % Freq. % Freq. %
< 500 m2 20 10,00 12 6,67 6 6,67
501 - 1000 m2 76 38,00 17 9,44 8 8,89
1001 - 1500 m2 32 16,00 30 16,67 10 11,11
1501 - 2000 m2 26 13,00 66 36,67 12 13,33
2001 - 2500 m2 17 8,50 20 11,11 13 14,44
2501 - 3000 m2 14 7,00 15 8,33 31 34,44
3001 - 3500 m2 9 4,50 12 6,67 6 6,67
> 3500 m2 6 3,00 8 4,44 4 4,44
Total 200 100,00 180 100,00 90 100,00
AVERAGE OPERATING LAND
Items ZDRR ZLRR ZJRR
Types of side job Frek. % Frek. % Frek. %
Artisants 33 16,50 19 10,56 11 12,22
Construction 39 19,50 26 14,44 13 14,44
Market porter 6 3,00 12 6,67 9 10,00
Farm labor 23 11,50 38 21,11 34 37,78
Non farm labor 60 30,00 56 31,11 11 12,22
Trading 25 12,50 21 11,67 8 8,89
Repair shop 14 7,00 8 4,44 4 4,44
Total respondents 200 100,00 180 100,00 90 100,00
NON FARM JOBS
PROFILE OF NON FARMERS
RESPONDENTS
Items ZDRR ZLRR ZJRR
Frek
. % Frek. % Frek. %
Age categories
(year)
20-30 7 7,00 7 7,78 4 8,89
31-40 14 14,00 14 15,56 9 20,00
41-50 44 44,00 31 34,44 11 24,44
51-60 23 23,00 24 26,67 13 28,89
> 60 12 12,00 14 15,56 8 17,78
Total
respondents 100 100,0 90 100,0 45 100,0
EDUCATION
Education
categories
ZDRR ZLRR ZJRR
Freq. % Freq. % Freq. %
Incomplete ES 7 7,00 11 12,22 8 17,78
Complete ES 14 14,00 19 21,11 11 24,44
Complete JHS 18 18,00 18 20,00 10 22,22
Complete SHS 46 46,00 32 35,56 13 28,89
Universities 15 15,00 10 11,11 3 6,67
Total resp. 100 100 90 100 45 100
KNOWLEDGE ON MULTIFUNCTIONALITY OF
AGRICULTURE
Agricultural multifunctions ZDRR ZLRR ZJRR
Freq % Freq. % Freq. %
Producing food 120 100,00 108 100,00 54 100,00
Producing fibres 90 75,00 78 72,22 36 66,67
Source of jobs 120 100,00 108 100,00 54 100,00
Recreation objects 94 78,33 78 72,22 36 66,67
Local culture conservation 33 27,50 24 22,22 5 9,26
Source of ground water 120 100,00 108 100,00 54 100,00
Flooding controller 120 100,00 108 100,00 54 100,00
Fresh air 119 99,17 105 97,22 49 90,74
Organic recycle 34 28,33 24 22,22 5 9,26
Absorbing CO2 118 98,33 105 97,22 49 90,74
Producing Oxygen (O2) 120 100,00 108 100,00 54 100,00
Source of amenity 120 100,00 108 100,00 54 100,00
Source of biodiversity 33 27,50 24 22,22 5 9,26
Absorbing air pollutants 33 27,50 24 22,22 5 9,26
RESPONDENTS INCOME
Pendapatan/Bln ( Rp) ZDRR ZLRR ZJRR
Frek. % Frek. % Frek. %
1.000.000-2.000.000 4 4 5 5,56 5 11,11
2.000.001-3.000.000 7 7 8 8,89 12 26,67
3.000.001-4.000.000 10 10 23 25,56 14 31,11
4.000.001-5.000.000 25 25 30 33,33 8 17,78
5.000.001-6.000.000 38 38 15 16,67 5 11,11
6.000.001-7.000.000 10 10 7 7,78 1 2,22
> 7.000.000. 6 6 2 2,22 0 0,00
100 100 90 100 45 100
7,333,54
10,87 12,428,51
20,92
12,639,76
22,39
15,6513,04
28,69
16,73
8,77
25,50
32,38
21,81
54,19
0,00
10,00
20,00
30,00
40,00
50,00
60,00
Sw
h+
Tg
l
Pk
rn
gn
Jm
l
Sw
h+
Tg
l
Pk
rn
gn
Jm
l
Sw
h+
Tg
l
Pk
rn
gn
Jm
l
Sw
h+
Tg
l
Pk
rn
gn
Jm
l
Sw
h+
Tg
l
Pk
rn
gn
Jm
l
Sw
h+
Tg
l
Pk
rn
gn
Jm
l
ZDRR ZLRR ZJRR Bantul Sleman Bantul+Sleman
Nil
ai
Gu
na
L
an
gsu
ng
(M
ily
ar R
p)
Jenis Lahan Pertanian dan Zona
Kab. Bantul
Kab. Sleman
Jumlah
DIRECT USE VALUES
25,6821,46
19,5622,23 22,04
18,58
29,14
23,2521,48
17,08 15,5018,02
16,98 15,71
24,19
18,96
13,58
8,88 6,589,68
7,174,47
0,00
5,82
0,00
5,00
10,00
15,00
20,00
25,00
30,00
35,00
Ra
ta
-ra
ta
WT
P (
Rib
u R
up
iah
)
Wilayah
ZDRR
ZLRR
ZJRR
INDIRECT USE VALUES
238,78 219,7453,27
511,79381,69
217,53450,35
1049,56
1561,35
0,00200,00400,00600,00800,00
1000,001200,001400,001600,001800,00
Ke
c. B
an
gu
nta
pa
n
Ke
c. S
ew
on
Ke
c. K
asi
ha
n
Jml.
. B
an
tul
Ke
c.G
am
pin
g
Ke
c. M
lati
Ke
c. D
ep
ok
Jml.
Sle
ma
n
Kab. Bantul Kab. Sleman Jml Bantul + Sleman
Ag
reg
at
WT
P (
Juta
Rp
)
Wilayah
ZDRR
ZLRR
ZJRR
Jumlah
AGREGATE INDIRECT USE VALUES
4,084,46
3,423,99
3,263,47
3,574,63
3,89
2,943,38 3,322,94
3,21 3,303,54
3,733,52
2,89 2,29 2,56 2,58 2,461,80
0,00
1,42
0,000,501,001,502,002,503,003,504,004,505,00
Ke
c. B
angu
nta
pan
Ke
c. S
ew
on
Ke
c. K
asih
an
Re
rata
zo
na
Re
rata
Ban
tul
Ke
c.G
amp
ing
Ke
c. M
lati
Ke
c. D
ep
ok
Re
rata
zo
na
Re
rata
Sle
man
Kab. Bantul Kab. Sleman
Rat
a-ra
ta W
TA (
Juta
Rp
)
Wilayah
ZDRR
ZLRR
ZJRR
EXISTENCE VALUES
3,282
11,495
4,579
10,803
22,298
4,761 4,7183,452
1,5060,000
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
Ke
c. B
angu
nta
pan
Ke
c. S
ew
on
Ke
c. K
asih
an
Jml Z
on
a
JmlB
antu
l
Ke
c.G
amp
ing
Ke
c. M
lati
Ke
c. D
ep
ok
Jml Z
on
a
Jml S
lem
an
Jml B
antu
l+Sl
em
an
Kab. Bantul Kab. Sleman
Agr
ega
t W
TA (
Mily
ar R
p)
Wilayah
ZDRR
ZLRR
ZJRR
AGGREGATE EXISTENCE VALUES
15,06 12,13 13,52
40,70
12,849,85
14,66
37,35
78,05
0,0010,0020,0030,0040,0050,0060,0070,0080,0090,00
Ke
c. B
an
gu
nta
pa
n
Ke
c. S
ew
on
Ke
c. K
asih
an
Jum
lah
Zo
na
Ke
c.G
am
pin
g
Ke
c. M
lati
Ke
c. D
ep
ok
Jum
lah
Zo
na
Jml
Zo
na
Ba
ntu
l +
Sle
ma
n
Kab. Bantul Kab. Sleman Sleman+Bantul
Nil
ai
Ek
on
om
i T
ota
l (M
ily
ar R
p)
Wilayah
ZDRR
ZLRR
ZJRR
Jumlah
TOTAL ECONOMIC VALUE
WILLINGNESS OF FARMERS TO
SUSTAIN AGRICULTURAL
ENVIRONMENT
4,08
4,46
3,42
3,99
3,47 3,57
4,63
3,89
3,38 3,322,94
3,21
3,3 3,54 3,523,45
2,89
2,29 2,58 2,592,46
1,8
0
2,13
3,45 3,362,98 3,26 3,08
2,97
4,08
2,92
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
4,5
5B
ngn
tpn
Swo
n
Kas
ihan
Re
rata
Gam
pin
g
Mla
ti
Dep
ok
Re
rata
Kab. Sleman Kab. Bantul
Rat
a-ra
ta W
TA (
Juta
Rp)
Wilayah
ZDRR
ZLRR
ZJRR
Rerata Zona
FACTORS AFFECTING WTA
Variables Expected
sign
Reg.
coefficient Prob. Significance
Constant 117.577
Farm income + 0.4643 0.0006 **
Non farm income - 0,5263 0,0536 *
Age of farmer ± 0.3073 0.0200 **
Education level of farmer + 0.1328 0.6704 ns
Size of land holding - 0.2955 0.0033 **
Knowledge of farmer on
multifunctionality of
agriculture
+
0.3128
0.0678
**
Number of household member + 0.1375 0.0430 **
Dummy ZLRR - -0.2326 0.0000 ***
Dummy ZJRR - -0.9574 0.0000 ***
R2 0.889484
Jarque Bera Prob. 84,89%
F-test 0.000000
VIF of independent var. < 10
WILLINGNESS OF PEOPLE TO SUSTAIN
AGRICULTURAL ENVIRONMENT
25,68
21,4619,56
22,23 22,04
18,58
29,14
23,2521,48
17,0815,50
18,02 16,98
15,71
24,1918,96
13,58
8,806,58
9,657,17
4,470,00 5,82
20,2515,78
13,8816,64 15,40
12,92
26,67
16,01
0,00
5,00
10,00
15,00
20,00
25,00
30,00
35,00
Bn
gtp
n
Se
wo
n
Ka
sih
an
Re
rata
Ga
mp
ing
Mla
ti
De
po
k
Re
rata
Kab. Bantul Kab. Sleman
Ra
ta-r
ata
WT
P (
Rib
u R
p)
Wilayah
ZDRR
ZLRR
ZJRR
Rerata Zona
FACTORS AFFECTING WTP
Variables Expected
sign
Reg.
coefficient Prob. Significance
Constant 7.577
Household income + 0.3643 0.0006 ***
Age of respondent ± 0.2073 0.0100 **
Education + 0.0328 0.6704 ns
Distance of house from farm - 0.1955 0.0033 ***
Knowledge of farmer on
multifunctionality of agriculture + 0.2128 0.0678 *
Number of household member - -0.0375 0.3430 ns
Dummy ZLRR - -0.1326 0.0000 ***
Dummy ZJRR - -0.9374 0.0000 ***
R2 0.8994
F-test 0.0000
VIF of independent var. < 10
CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATION
• Development of harmonious nature-
society relationship in urban environment
can only be achieved when we understand
clearly the nature of farmers and urban
people awareness towards agricultural
environment.
• This becomes one of the important
preconditions for resilience condition of
harmonious rural-urban relation to be
established.
• Sustainable urban development can only
be achieved when the nature of farmers’
and urban people’ willingness to sustain
agricultural environment is clearly
understood.
• Since the trade off between sustaining and
losing agricultural environment is
increasing from time to time, therefore,
providing appropriate incentives to the
farmers become becomes very much
important.
Thank you for your kind
attention