CHAPTER VII FARM HOUSEHOLD LIVELIHOOD AND COPING WITH CRISIS A.

The Livelihood Condition Assessment method of the household welfare and poverty has evolved and been adapted to the dynamic of contemporary development. It has been since 90s that livelihood studies are applied as a more comprehensive method to assess household welfare. Income has been important factor to appraise household level of welfare and poverty, however livelihood is more than merely synonymous with income. The dictionary meaning of livelihood is a means of a living. It directs attention to the way in which living is obtained. A livelihood comprises of assets natural physical, human, financial and social capital! the activities, and access to these assets that together determine the living gained by the individual or household "llis.#000!. Access may vary from place to place due to different role of institutions and social relations to mediate the access. This ma$es rural livelihood holds distinct character to urban livelihood. The application of livelihood in this study is the combination of assets, capabilities, and need satisfaction that configure certain living typology. The elements of assets in this study comprise also access to resources, ownership, and relations in assets. Arrangements of access to assets cover land renting and sharecropping, social status and s$ills. %wnership of livelihood assets concerns especially with land, implements and machineries. &apabilities are represented by pro'y variables indicating pattern of use resources which comprises among other( level of income and income security, e'penditure of consumptive items, saving, labour participation, and the use of capital and technology. The element of need satisfaction is represented by three main variables i.e. coverage of basic needs and subsistence level, room for wealth accumulation, and social safety networ$. )ith the help of these determinants variables, the in*depth data from interview process is arranged to classify livelihood condition. According to this livelihood condition, farm household is then classified into three typologies i.e. better off, reasonable, and shortage. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses

aid shoc$s, maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets, while not undermining tile natural resource base. The +99, monetary crisis is considered to be shoc$ factor disturbing the livelihood condition. )ith regard to sustainable livelihood, this study also ta$es notice on the impact of that period of crisis and study of livelihood coping to it. -ore than livelihood and crisis, this chapter is an effort to put together the elements discussed in preceding chapters with the livelihood approach. The focus discussion on farm household livelihood and coping with crisis is especially to provide insight to the fifth research .uestion on the topic of resistance and vulnerability of farm household livelihood in coping with crisis and gradual change. This chapter presents the view on livelihood condition, livelihood strategy and life cycle, the impact and coping responses to crisis. 1. The A et In rural agrarian based area, land is the most important asset for livelihood. The general simplicity is that the larger the si/e of the land, it will usually lead to a better livelihood. 0owever, more than the physical si/e, the consideration on land .uality should ma$e clearer the difference in livelihood If the si/e is comparable, then fertile land with regular irrigation should generate better livelihood than infertile rain*fed land. If land factor is homogeneous, than the decisive factor after land is the cultivation itself. 1ood crop cultivation may generate less level of livelihood than horticulture or commercial cash crops. Table 2.+ indicates that the si/e of land in constructing livelihood is varying according to area. 0owever, the landless represent category of shortage household, either as farm labourer, sharecropper or tenants. It is only in upland 3iriasih shortage household still holds small land. It means that in area where land is in low .uality, small land ownership could not support the decent livelihood. As usually mentioned in conventional view, the better*off farm households in four areas are also landowning elite holding larger si/e of farm land. 0owever the si/e of ownership among better*off farm household in different area is not the same. The better*off farmer in 3iriasih holds the largest in comparison to the three other areas. This may stress the importance of considering .uality of land si/e in rural livelihood study of assets and not to merely concern with physical si/e. The second assets in livelihood study concern with ownership of machineries

and implements. This asset highly relates with mode of production. There is a tendency that more varied and advance agricultural tools and implements much prevail in lowland horticulture crop production in Tirtohargo. 4uch area demands implements for stages of agricultural cultivation i.e. land preparation, water control, pest eradication, and harvestment. Another horticulture area of )ono$erto, the agricultural tools for sala$ cultivation and harvestment are homogeneous and of traditional nature including among other( scissors, inlay, hoe, and $nife. This is because land preparation ta$e*place once time at the beginning of cultivation and then it last long years as long as the age of the sala$ trees. There is almost no pest eradication and therefore farmers re.uire no sprayer. 4ala$ farm households also do not re.uire valuable or modern implements to harvest and to handle post harvest yields. Therefore, there is not yet mechanical, machine operated, or automated implements that differentiate the category better off and reasonable farmer e'cept of the number of tools. Table 2.+ indicates that very limited farmer owns hand*tractor. 5iesel driven water*pump is the second valuable implement 6etter*off farmers in Tirtohargo mostly own this implement. The third valuable implement and more widely distributed among reasonable and better*off farmer is sprayer for insecticide eradication. In general( horticulture farmers in Tirtohargo own more advanced and valuable implements than other area. The shortage category of farm household in Tirtohargo does not have valuable implements. They usually only have traditional and simple tools li$e hoe. The better*off farmer also gets some income from renting out their implements. %wnership of valuable implements may also means that socio* economic condition of farm household in this area is much better in comparison to other area. The ownership and access to the instruments may facilitate the cultivation method and the yield. The table indicates that for the other area, the type of implements consist of less valuable than water*pump i.e. sprayer, thresher, and plough. 7enting out implements also ta$e place in 4idohar8o. The implements for cultivation are less various and less developed than Tirtohargo. 0owever, the gap on the ownership of implements seems to be distinct in this area. 7easonable farmer owns only traditional tools. They should borrow or rent sprayer from their better*off

neighbour. The distribution of ownership of implements in 3iriasih loo$s similar to 4idohar8o. The most developed and valuable implements in this area are sprayer. The difference lies to the fact that in 3iriasih there is no commerciali/ation for implements. The implements have social orientation and not for renting purposes. Those who do not own implement then they may borrow it for free from the better* off farmer or from farmers group association. 4ocial status has correlation with livelihood typology. The better*off farmers are usually belonging to reasonable or high level social status as well. In the two upland areas, formal occupation represents much of the high level social status. 9and ownership comes the second. Teacher or civil servant in upland community gets peoples respect as having high social status more than large holding. In Tirtohargo, the better*off farmer does not always have high social status. 0owever they can never be in low status. 4ome are reasonable status because they are in young age group, have never seat a position in village local institution, or wor$ as government civil services. 4imilar with Tirtohargo, the better*off farmer in )ono$erto may get reasonable or high social status. The reasonable status is given to those who are better off in economic sense but do not have record of being local or village communal institution. They do not either wor$ as civil service or teacher. The better*off farmers have some e'cess of their assets that give them opportunity to get income from this e'cess. 0owever there is variation in the asset to commerciali/e and the system of access arrangements. In Tirtohargo, the asset to commerciali/e is land and implements. In this area, land ownership is relatively small and has been intensively cultivated. The access arrangements for the landless and small farmer to ma$e utili/e of land is through money*based renting. In 3iriasih land is still available in si/eable amount. There is no landless farmer or tenant to ma$e use of others land. In this village, the asset for gaining additional income outside cultivation is cattle. The table indicates, that better*off farmers in this area, provide opportunity for shortage household to raise cattle in partnership mode through the so*called share breeding. The sharing of livestoc$ may use material or money. The term of material in this regard, refers to dividing e.ual share for new livestoc$ that has been generated. The local term for this is maro ana$, which literally means dividing young cattle. The term of money refers to dividing e.ual

share of the added value that has been generated since the share*breeding contract mara bathi, dividing benefit!. In 4idohar8o, the assets for tenancy are valid for both land and cattle. The system of access arrangements is different with other area formerly mentioned. The system of land*tenancy is predicated with the term as the one*fifth pro-liman! sharecropping. The :;< will go for capital, and the #;< will be divided onto two i.e. the owner and the sharecropper. !. The C"#"$ilitie 9evel of income as elements of capabilities in livelihood shows varying between categories of livelihood. The better*off farmer has high category of income. 0owever the income from agriculture is sub8ect to change albeit it is minor. It depends on the interwoven of many factors in its line of production that ranges from input to product and mar$eting. The type of crops and commodity for instance has different degree of ris$. Although they are in similar group of horticulture crops, income from shallots is more ris$y crops than sala$ sna$e fruit. The more diversified cropping, system is considered to provide less ris$y income than monoculture. As shown by table 2.+, the gap in income is less severe in upland 3iriasih. The better off farmer has income ranges from reasonable to high. Apart from income, there is also no distinct picture of materials achievement in 3iriasih. The house, for instance, loo$s similar one to another in its traditional design. The egalitarian and non*materialism character of upland 3iriasih also appears in the ownership of valuable goods. =ehicle, for instance, does not show a distinct character between reasonable and better*off farmer. %wnership of land and cattle are the two indicators that may indicate the variation in livelihood. The income and material classless community do not happen in other areas. 3iriasih also indicates the egalitarian of living atmosphere as non*consumptive type of community. As Table 2.+ shows the better*off farmer has similar pattern of e'penditure and consumption with their neighbour in reasonable category. They renovate their house from wooden and traditional to be permanent type to be permanent. 4ome also use ceramic floor tile in gradual process of construction. They have colour T= but do not see the importance of refrigerator to ma$e difference with their neighbour. "galitarian condition of up* land 3iriasih does not seem to prevail in other area. In Tirtohargo, the better*off

farmers show different capabilities as indicated by among other their home appliances, automotives, and physical appearance of the house. The wealth of sala$ farmer in )ono$erto also appears in the house, car, and home appliances. 0ouse is usually big or multi*storied with modern design. It is furnished with T=, refrigerator, &5; =&5 players set, and the li$e. All sala$ farmers have motor*cycle but in general only the better*off own car. 4aving as a variable of capabilities in livelihood approach show variation between upland farming and the other two horticulture areas. In commercial agriculture areas, saving is high among the better off in various income generating assets li$e cattle, land, and machine. The saving also ta$es places in the form of valuable and non*depreciated goods li$e gold and 8ewellery. In this regard, the process of accumulating happens within this class. 1or the upland better*off farmer, find also becomes sub8ect for saving. 0owever, land in upland areas has less commercial value than in the commercial horticulture areas. It is different because land is still entitled for its social contents. The land is not rented out in 3iriasih whereas in 4idohar8o, it is also not for rented but for sharecropping. Therefore there is small income being generated from saving of asset in land that does not bring better*off farmers in accumulation process. The same case is also valid for cattle. 4aving in the form of cattle still $eeps its social contents through share breeding for their neighbour. As indicated by the table, shortage and reasonable farmer cans get benefit from better*off farmer through share*breeding process. "mployment status is also important aspect of capabilities. The better*off farmer generally combines with other non*farm activities. In the two*uplands, most better off wor$s as government civil service notably teacher. In sala$ area, )ono$erto, the better*off farmer combines either with government civil service or non*government formal sector. It is only in Tirtohargo, where most sala$ farmers do not combine with non*farm activities. "mployment combination is typical rural mode of occupation. >ot only the better off perform this, but also reasonable and shortage category of household. 0owever, as the table suggest, the type and .uality of 8ob indicate differentiation. The middle category of livelihood combines agriculture with more independent self*employing wor$ li$e trade, artisan, cottage and household industry, driver, and motorcycle bro$er* The lowest layer of livelihood combines

agriculture wor$s with low return labour type of wor$ either in agriculture or in non* agriculture. The type of wor$s includes agriculture labour, construction labour, sewing labour, and general labour. In upland area, type of labour relates to agriculture wor$. )hereas in Tirtohargo it more relates to more urban type non* agricultural 8obs li$e construction wor$er and sewing wor$er. The common pattern of labour participation is that all better off farmer use non*family labour. This wage labour is dominant in all mode of agriculture production. In the second category of livelihood, family ta$es part in production. The role of family from reasonable household is dominant in upland horticulture. "specially in upland 3iriasih, family is prime e'ecutor of cultivation. ?roduction activities are important element of capabilities in rural livelihood study. It is reali/ation of asset for livelihood. 4i/e of land as an asset for livelihood is still potential to build livelihood condition. In this regard, similar si/es of land may have different contribution in livelihood due to different farmer choice in production activities. The table indicates that variation in production activities does not only happen between areas, but also between livelihood categories The e'ception in this case is for )ono$erto where production activities concentrate on monoculture of sna$e fruit sala$. In general, the characteristic of the better off farm household is to cultivate income*generating crops whereas the shortage category has orientation on subsistence crops. This still prevails even in commercial agriculture area li$e Tirtohargo. The shortage category of farm household $eeps cultivating food crops and secondary crops. This choice is not merely subsistence reason but also the unaffordable cost of cultivation commercial crops. %. The Need S"ti &"'tion &ommercial agriculture brings also materialism. It does reduce social content of agriculture and shifts toward more money*based system in rural agricultural community. 9and tenancy for instance, has bein shift from share cropping mode toward renting mode. In commercial area, money*less farmer do not have access to cultivate land e'cept as labour. This happens especially in Tirtohargo where land* less should have money to have access in land cultivation. %n the contrary, in upland 4idohar8o, land*less farmer still have access through sharecropping in one*fifth

agreements. As table indicates, in commercial area, the better off farmers show distinct difference wealth between the belier off and other class in community. The wealth of better off farmer is observable in physical appearance of the house( complete and modern home appliances, and vehicles. 0ouse of better off farmer is different with their neighbour. It has modern style aid sometimes double*storey 0ome appliances have also been moderni/ed and differ with their neighbour. If the shortage household still use fuel*wood for their $itchen matter, the reasonable farmer use $erosene stove, then the better off has already used gas stove. In ownership of vehicles as part of wealth indication, there is also hierarchy. The shortage has only bicycle, the reasonable owns motorcycle, then the better off has car. The more commercialised the area the more distinct livelihood class differentiation. In the less commercial area li$e upland 3iriasih, the wealth differentiation on the basis of lu'urious goods and housing does not come out. In basic needs coverage, farm household in commercial area do not have any difficulty to fulfill it. They can even e'ceed basic needs. This happens to )ono$erto sala$ farmers where the better off and the reasonable has been in the level of e'ceeding basic needs. In other area, the reasonable category of livelihood has been in sufficient category, a little lower than e'ceed category. In upland less commercial area li$e 3iriasih. The simple ness of community live style has resulted in the level of modest fulfillment of basic needs. They have different but simple standard of basic needs in. comparison to more modern life in commercial agriculture area. In food, for instance, the better off in upland has similar menu with other neighbour to eat daily rice, local vegetable, and soybean ca$e. %nce a while they may have egg, but they*way have meat or chic$en in their dish when the wives go to mar$et in wee$ly period. 4ocial networ$ in general is important element of need satisfaction, but not for the better off. They are out off scheme for social networ$ with emphasis for subsistence purposes li$e social safety networ$ @?4 A @aring ?engaman 4osial, cheap rice for poor people ras$in A beras untu$ pendudu$ mis$in!. They also do not use social networ$ for cultivation purposes li$e farmer credit BCTA $redit usaha tani! to buy agricultural inputs. In 3iriasih, the better off farmer provide remittances for their children in urban areas. As indicated by table, social networ$ also indicates

hierarchy according to different level of livelihood. 6etter off farmers do not relevant for social networ$, they even become provider of social networ$. 4ocial networ$ is important source for reasonable farmer especially for education and investment, and important element for shortage household for subsistence! food, and education. (. Shi&t And Ad)* t+ent The elements of livelihood are sub8ect to change. The pace of change and factors may different between individual and area. In commercial area, livelihood has been much easier to shift than*in subsistence area. It is because the cash and the price have shaped the line of the production structure. The additional cash invested as capital either in better or more input, in tools and implements, and also in land may stimulate the .uality and .uantity or yield. In contrary, the reduced, loss, or shift in capital may wea$en production structure, yield and income. The second factor is that commercial area much depends on mar$et demand and purchasing power. )hen the purchasing power gets better, the demand will be stimulated to increase as well The commercial crops may get benefit from it. %n the contrary, when the purchasing power drives down, the demand will be wea$en. The result is that the income from commercial crops will be lessening. This process does not happen in more subsistence character of agriculture. The change in productions structure is less dynamic. In this area, the natural process may act as dominant factor in the shift of livelihood condition. Agriculture relies on family labour. )hen one member of family wor$er leaving home to migrate, or getting old mid withdraw themselves from the wor$, this will affect the production process and yield. The change in livelihood condition may ta$e one between the two forms i.e. a shift or an ad8ustment. The term shift in livelihood means to refer the conversion in category, either step up to higher category or step down to lower category of livelihood condition. The term of ad8ustment means to refer to modification within respective category. It is 8ust the internal process without changing category, but its condition e'perience improvement to be better or deterioration to be worsening.

". Shi&t,Conve- ion in C"te.o-/

Table 2.# indicates that in every village there is at least one case of a shift in livelihood condition due to different reason. In 3iriasih, a case of shift is from shortage to reasonable condition. The ma8or factor is due to the addition of wealth and capital through remittances from children in city. This shortage category of tamer was used to combine agriculture with petty trader. The remittance is significant enough. That it can compensate to the withdrawal from petty trader. The family support through remittance also prevails in Tirtohargo. This remittance has been used to e'pand land for cultivation. This has lead to the shift of livelihood condition from reasonable to be better off. The second case in this area is a $ind of occupational diversification through cross*investment from agriculture income to chic$en trader. This routine has then gradually helped to shift from livelihood condition of shortage to reasonable. The opposite course has ta$en place in 4idohar8o i.e a shift from better off condition to be reasonable. This happens to a female*headed household that reducing involvement in agriculture due to becoming old. The withdrawal from agriculture has resulted to leasing land to other and, therefore, decreasing income from agriculture. In sala$ area )ono$erto, the two processes ta$e place. The positive case is the shift from livelihood category of reasonable to better off. This is because of cross* investment process. Income from non*farm source has been utilised to e'pand land under cultivation. The negative case is a step down category from better off to be reasonable livelihood condition. This is due to the loss of asset in the form of car. It used to be employ for transportation wor$. The e'pensiveness, of maintenance has resulted in selling of the asset. The result is that the loss of household income from non*farm source $. Modi&i'"tion 0 "d)* t+ent 1ithin C"te.o-/ In 3iriasih internal ad8ustment for improvement happens in reasonable category of livelihood condition. The source for such process comes from compensation money of early resignment from urban wor$s. The compensation money is utili/ed for buying cattle and for capital to become wood trader. 5ifferent process ta$es place in Tirtohargo. The ma8or cause is more natural process than. economy. It relates to the live cycle factor. &hildren have been grown*up and go for

wor$s. This does not mean only reducing parents burden but parents get also support from children. The help of children has resulted in improvement of household livelihood condition. In 4idohar8o, there is a case of farm household in the category of reasonable livelihood that e'periencing improvement. This happens due to saving from agricultural income in combination with remittance from children in the city are utili/ed to e'pand land, and to diversify, occupation by opening stall ; $ios$ in local mar$et. The variation on the agricultural change indicates that agriculture is relatively stable. It can suffice household needs and e'penses. 0owever, to fasten the process of welfare improvement the role of non*agricultural income or remittances become apparent. The non*agricultural sources of income drives has been important to stimulate welfare improvement in all area. 2. Livelihood St-"te./ "nd Li&e C/'le 1. Livelihood St-"te./ 4trategy refers to a set of measured handling in following route to achieve certain ob8ectives. 1arm household has some differences in their production orientation. "ven, in similar livelihood condition can show contrasting orientation. %ne may already feel satisfy with the current condition, the other is still occupied with obsession to e'pand and foster its business. To elaborate the variation on its orientation, it is important to apply livelihood strategy approach. 9ivelihood strategy has differentiated farm household into three different categories i.e accumulation, consolidation, and survival. Titus. #00< )hite.+92D!. Accumulation household has orientation to improve profit and income through e'panding and adding production asset, commerciali/ation, and efficiency of the activities. This type of strategy tends to be progressive, ris$ ta$er, and e'pansionist. The moderate category is consolidation. It is different with the former for it gives priority to household sufficiency, and stability in production asset. This category belongs to the schism of security first. The third category is attributed with survival to mean ma'imi/ation of household own resources in order to fulfill household basic needs. Cnder the pressing of this orientation, the survival household tends to avoid any ris$ of

activities and therefore ta$e a distance from any innovation. 7esource ma'imi/ation, especially manpower, cannot yet to uplift the household to appropriate standard of living. There is significance difference between farm household categories. As indicated by table 2.#, household in survival category shows having minus value of some variables. This indicates that reduction and lessening happens to the variables in order to secure the basic needs. 5ifferent with survival strategy, the accumulation households e'perience the strengthening in assets, activities, and, accordingly, wealth. These three elements ma$e dialectical process. The increasing asset in the form of production land demands more labour and also demands increasing capital input and technology. The result will be more products with mar$et orientation. The increasing product and mar$eting has resulted in increasing income to open room for wealth accumulation. !. Livelihood "nd Live,'/'le The e'planation on livelihood condition and strategy do not always come from socioeconomic factors. -any wealth conditions may have strong correlation with natural demographic processes. %ne important process is the so*called life* cycle. 7ural community does have considerable value that places life cycle into important factor to establish rural resistance and resilient livelihood. %ne stage of life cycle has different demand on consumption and e'penses to other stages. In a young stage family, for instance, a family with children in primary school, the e'penses for education and child caring has not been yet as large as a family with grown*up children. 0owever, children do not always mean economic burden li$e most urban people may usually see it. In rural community, they may become family labour and be part of production factor. 9ife cycle can be grouped into four categories. These are( +. #. :. the young couple family, it is a young married couple with children in the elementary school or less, the adult married couple family, it is an adult married couple with children still attending school of above elementary school enrolment, the old married couple, it is an old married couple with no more children in

school, E. the cross generation married couple, it is a family consisting of grand children, their parents, and their grand parents, or 8ust grand parents with grand children. The study indicates that the dominant type of life cycle is adult family and cross generation family. It is distributed in all livelihood categories. 0owever, they are dominant in consolidation category. The cross generation family is interesting from socio*cultural perspective. It is also special character of eastern, particularly @ava tradition that differentiate it from nuclear base family such as in "uropean family structure. The table indicates that this has been dominant in upland 3iriasih and to a lesser e'tent in 4idohar8o. The observation in the two upland areas shows that many school*age children has been entrusted to their grand parents while their parents live in the cities or even wor$ing abroad. This is the practical way usually being ta$en as strategy to cope with the e'pensiveness of living cost, education cost, and child caring cost in cities. The same amount of cost is more than enough to do the same thing in village. There is still e'cess money if parents send their children to their grand parents in village. The e'cess money can form remittances for improving livelihood condition in rural area. The remittances value will be much higher if the sources come from wor$ing abroad. There is an indication that those who ta$e this approach are mostly consolidation household. This is understandable considering that children of accumulation household in the cities are usually also doing well that they do not send their children to the grand parents in the village. They can $eep and support their own children to school at the cities for better .uality. %n the contrary, the survival category of farm households does not have capability to facilitate appropriate education and child caring. &ross generation e'tended family in general dominant in upland 3iriasih and very limitedly happen in commercial agriculture )ono$erto. This may stress the fact that in commercial agriculture, the household wealth has been significant. They can afford to facilitate the good living of their children to stand on their foot. In upland 3iriasih, the prevalence of out*migration of young and educated group is significant. This has led to the labour shortage for agriculture and other sectors. The depopulation trend and aging can be observed from the number of senior household. They are 8ust a couple family living with no more children. This

has affected to the declining intensity of land utili/ation. In upland 3iriasih agricultural land is differentiated into three types. 1lat valley land or ngare in local term!, is designated for rice field. 4loping area above the valley is called perengan it is terraced field and especially for cultivation of secondary crops. The better off household may cultivate cash crop li$e tobacco or chili in this field. The third layer of land classification is called alasF literally means forest. This part is for wood products and forest production. %ut migration process of economically active population has resulted in the limitation of available labour for cultivation. Aging process has resulted in the withdrawal of senior labour from agricultural activities. The result is that agricultural cultivation and labour force has been focused only on ngare where water is available for rice cultivation. 9abour shortage has made the perengan no longer being cultivated to grow food and horticulture crops but forest woods. This is because growing perennial woods demand less labour and maintenance. This becomes farm households e'it and adaptive choices to labour limitation. Aging and depopulation through out migration has reduced population pressures on land and stimulated process of reforestation. C. The I+#"'t o& C-i i 1. In#*t 3 Av"il"$ilit/4 P-i'e4 "nd U e In all research areas, crisis does not give worsening effect on the availability of seed. 1armers still feel that seed for their cultivation is still available up to the demanded .uantity. The ma8or reason for this condition may be related to the fact that seeds are not imported. it is all locally produced. The second factor is related to the seasonality of cultivation period that

A.-i'*lt*-"l P-od*'tion ". Food C-o# The food crops in agricultural census and survey cover two types i.e. rice paddy! and secondary crops. ?addy is differentiated into i.e. wetland paddy and dryland paddy. The name has already indicated the type of field for growing the crops as well as the mode of production. )etland paddy is cultivated in lowland and irrigated field, whereas dryland paddy is cultivated in upland rainfed field. 4econdary crops encompass grains and cereals, tuber and roots, and beans. The following table :.9 indicates that from harvested area, paddy is the most dominant type of food crops. The main source of lowland paddy in 5IG is 4leman. The harvested area of paddy in 4leman is <#,EH of total area in 5IG. The capacity of its production supplies E+,EH of total paddy production in 5IG. 0owever, the productivity of paddy in 4leman is slightly lower than productivity in 6antul and Bulonprogo. )ith regard to dryland paddy. 3unung$idul is almost the sole producer of dryland paddy. The harvested area is 9,,+ H of total area of dryland paddy in 5IG and the production is 92,,H of total dryland production in 5IG. 5ryland paddy has reasonably important position in food production. %ne third #9,:H! of paddy production is dryland whereas the rest two third is lowland paddy. 0owever, most of dryland paddy is for one year round self*consumption subsistence!. The second important food crop is mai/e. The harvested area of mai/e is the second after paddy. The primary producer of mai/e is 3unung$idul. The share of harvested area of the regency is <9,,#H whereas the contribution of production is 2E,D0H of mai/e in the 5+G. 0owever, the productivity level of mai/e in 3unung$idul catches only half of other area. This stresses the agro*ecological condition of the area which is less favourable for agricultural production. Cnli$e production of dryland paddy which is $ept for self*consumption of people in 3unung$idul, mai/e is mar$eted for cash. The rest one fourth of production is distributed in another three regencies. The third important crop, as indicated by the si/e of harvested area and production, is cassava. The proportion of harvested area in 3unung$idul is ,:,#2H. It contribute to 2#,22H of production of cassava in 5TG. &assava has been important 1ood crop for people 3unung$idul, it was used to be the main dish for

people in 3unung$idul during the period of malaise and agricultural stagnation up to +9D0s. 0owever, as in the case of mai/e, agricultural land productivity in the regency is lower than the other three regencies. The productivity of cassava is almost half of other regency cassava productivity. The fourth important food crop is soybean. 3unung$idul regency seems to establish as agricultural area for food crop. After dryland paddy, mai/e, and cassava that dominates the food crop production in 5IG, 3unung$idul also ma8or producer of soybean. The proportion of harvested area constitutes 29,2H of soybean harvested area in 5IG, whilst the production share is 2:,< H of soybean yield in 5IG. The same problem with the formerly discussed foodcrops production in 3unung$idul is that in productivity is the lowest in comparison to other regency in 5IG. ?eanut is the fifth important food crop in 5IG. The rest food crops shown in table have very limited harvested area and production. These are( sweet potatoes. green peanuts, and cantel. 3unung$idul also leads in production of peanuts. The proportion of harvested area is 20,,H of total harvested area in 5IG whereas the share of production is DD,:<H. The land productivity of peanuts in 3unung$idul is the lowest in 5IG, although the difference is not as high as the former four discussed food crops. This again stressed the fact that 3unung$idul is more specialised in food crop cultivation. $. Ve.et"$le There are two vegetables in 5IG, which have e'ceptional si/e of harvested area and value of production. Table :.+0 shows that harvested area of chili is +.92E ha with production value worth of +D,E99 ton, whereas harvested area of shallot is +.29< ha and production value of #+,<+E ton. They are e'ceptional in comparison with harvested area of other vegetables which have si/e less than +000 ha. The table indicates that 6antul is the highest harvested area of chili E+,+H!. 0owever, the cultivation of chili is not only widely distributed among the four regencies, but in each regency the harvested area of chili is dominant. In Bulonprogo and 4leman, the harvested area of chili is the highest among vegetables. In 6antul it is the second after shallot whereas in 3unung$idul it comes the second after string bean. The si/eable harvested area of chilli may suggest that this vegetables becomes important source of agriculture income in 5IG. The other vegetable in the first category of

highest harvested area is shallot. 5ifferent with chili with tend to be distributed, there is no shallot cultivated in 4leman. 4hallot is highly concentrated in 6antul up to proportion of 2E,2H. The rest one fourth is divided into +9.DH in Bulonprogo and <.EH in 3unung$idul. The second vegetables are those having harvested area less than +000 ha but above <00 ha. They are string bean, &hinese cabbage, and spinach. The third group of vegetables concerns with harvested area between +00*<00 ha. These vegetables are $idney beans, swamp cabbage, lee$, and cucumber. The rest vegetables are belonging to the least harvested are that are below +00 ha. These are tomato, green bean, cabbage, and potato. 4leman and Bulonprogo have some vegetables with large scale harvested area, but the si/e is lower compare to especially 3unung$idul. "ach of these two regencies concentrates on four main commodities if harvested area is concerned. 0owever they may be specialised area due to dominant in production of certain crop. Bulonporogo is almost the sole producer of lee$. 4leman is ma8or producer of &hinese cabbage. 1rom area point of view it can be assumed that there are area differentiation according to mode of production. The speciali/ation area is represented by 6antul which tend to concentrate on chili and shallot. The diversification area in vegetables is represented by 3unung$idul where several commodity is cultivated in si/eable area this encompasses string bean, shallot, spinach, $idney beans, &hinese cabbage and swamp cabbage. The problem is that the productivity is low. This ma$es their share of yield is lower than other regency that has smaller harvested area. This fact is in line with conventional views that the more specialised the area, the more production tends to be commercialise. In contrary, the more diversified the mode of production, the less commercialised the production orientation 0inderin$ and 4ter$enhurg, +9,2( -aurer, +992! '. F-*it C-o# There are two types of 1ruit crops i.e. perennial and non*perennial typeI The cultivation and treatment of perennial fruit trees have not yet been as intensive as non* perennial fruit crops. In fact, there is only limited number of non*perennial fruit crops that are cultivated and treated in intensive form li$e the case of commercial horticulture. 1rom number of fruit tree, salacias; sala$ is the most leading fruit tree in

5IG. As table :.++ indicates that the difference in number of trees between sala$ and the other fruit trees is si/eable. There is no tree that can reach + million stal$s, however sala$ stal$s amount to #,9 million. The interesting figure of sala$ is that it is solely concentrated in 4leman area. 0owever, the leading in production .uantity is not sala$, it is only less than half of total production of banana in 5IG that reach <:,#90 tons. The interesting figure with regard to banana is that it widely distributed among the four regencies. Although the large number of banana tree prevails in 3unung$idul. 1rom number of tree, banana is the second after sala$. The difference between banana and sala$ relates to the intensity of cultivation. 4ala$ is cultivated in intensive mode. 1urthermore, it even replaces paddy and converts rice field into sala$ orchard. 6anana is not prime fruit tree. It is almost rarely being cultivated in specially treated arable plot. -ango is the third leading fruit in 5IG with respect to number of tree as well as production. It also tends to be distributed to all four regencies especially with regard to the yield. The larger part of mango tree is in 3unung$idul <<.:H!. 0owever, the productivity of in this regency is lower than 6antul and 4leman. This ma$es the production of mango tends to be widely distributed. As the case of banana, mango is usually cultivated not in intensive sense. A farmhouse may have two or three mango trees in their yard or orchard, nevertheless it is rarely cultivated in special plot in si/eable number. 4ala$, banana, and mango is the first category of dominant fruit tree in 5IG. The second category between less than #00 and above +00 stems trees encompass among other papaya +,E,92+trees!, polybemal +20,#<2 trees! ramboostan +20,+<+ trees!, guava +<2,#+E!, and pineapple +<D,#:2 trees!. "'cept of pineapple, these all trees are usually not being planted in intensive mode in purposely*designated plot and in large number of tree. This may provide insight that the dominant mode of production of fruit trees and crops is diversification. This is performed through less intensive input and +ow maintenance. The result is that productivity is low.

E. C-o##in. Co+$in"tion The meso level analysis of agricultural development is performed to see the spatial distribution and cropping pattern in 5IG. The unit analysis for this analysis is village whereas the variable is types of crops including food crops, horticulture, and plantation crops. As has been discussed in the research method, the analysis is performed through factor analysis. There are #, $inds of crops as input for factor analysis. The result of gradual reduction has e'tracted four components which are considered to have correlation to each other. The findings of the spatial variations indicate that the cropping pattern in 5IG can be grouped into four E! ma8or crops combination which are then labeled as div*upland food crop cultivation, commercial community plantation, commercial horticulture and community plantation, and commercial horticulture. The following table shows component matri' that 8ustifies this observation. The spatial distribution of this cropping combination is presented in the sub*se.uent thematic maps 1igure : J D! 1. D-/ U#l"nd Food C-o# The first cropping combination that resulted from data processing and presented in 1igure : is food crops. To be specific, it is cropping pattern of upland food crops as opposite to lowland food cropping. The prevalence of the upland food crop cultivation almost e'clusively characteri/es the dry up*land 7egency of 3unung$idul. The table shows that among the crops constituting each food crop category, cassava and upland rice prevail more and correlate more with each other than with corn. As the name indicates, upland rice is less water demanding mid therefore suitable for a dry upland area such as 3unung$idul. It is usually planted at the beginning of rainy season for subsistence purposes. This food crop is not so important in a commercial sense. Cpland rice is seldom to be traded. 9arger part of the yield is to fulfill self*consumption. %nly very limited portion, that is the consumption e'cess if available is for sale or for barter with other goods. Cpland rice has functions more as domestic goods than commercial goods. The harvest will be stored for household consumption up to ne't years harvesting period. The role of domestic goods of rice also concerns with the provision of seedlings for the ne't

cultivation. The second typical dry upland boil crops after upland rice is cassava. Table :.+# shows that cassava and upland rice has strong correlation. In lowland areas, cassava is not a preferred crop for cultivation because it has some economic and ecological limitations, such asK +. #. :. It has low commercial value, It competes with other more valuable crop, and It is environmentally considered negative because it decreases soil fertility. In 3unung$idul 7egency, cassava is still considered as one of the crops with some potential. 1ormerly it was planted as main staple food for self*subsistence. In +9,0s the green revolution has been successful to generate sufficient rice yield. The sufficient national level of rice production and the changing food preferences has removed cassava from being the main dish on the menu of the people in the regency. >owadays, cassava is planted for commercial purposes. Although it has a relatively low commercial value, it has some comparative advantages since it is suited to the agro*physical characteristics of the regency. &assava is drought resistant, easy to grow, demands almost no inputs and treatment, and, therefore, does not re.uire farmers to spend cash. >owadays its commercial value increases with the opening opportunity to e'port to @apan and Taiwan for cattle feeder. The e'port has then increased and stabili/ed the value of cassava. This cassava e'port channel has performed important role in protecting farmers income to fall due to monetary crisis in Indonesia in +99,. Another and e.ually important aspect of &assava relates to the provision of vegetables from tile multiple harvested leaves, either for home consumption or for sale. !. Co++e-'i"l Co++*nit/ Pl"nt"tion The second cropping combination as presented in table :.+# consists of commercial community plantation including coffee, snap beans, cloves, and cocoa. The distribution of combination of these four crops, as presented in figure E, seems to be in opposition with the distribution of the first cropping combination i.e. dry upland food crops as previously discussed. &onsidering that distribution of the upland food crops relates to the unfertile land, then as opposite this second cropping

combination indicates that the distribution of commercial community plantation covers areas with better land .uality. As presented in figure. E, the distribution of the crops tends to dominate the upland areas e'cept of calciferous upland 7egency of 3unung Bidul. These among others encompass the western part of 5IG stretching north to south along -enoreh mountain range. It also widely spreads around the sloping part northern part of 5IG on the foot slope of -erapi mountain. The distribution commercial community plantation tendency along the upland areas differ from the former upland food crops. The term upland in this case differs with the dry up*land as discussed in the first cropping combination in the sense that this category has better land fertility than the first. The crops that belong to this farming combination, coffee, snap beans, cloves and cocoa, have already indicates that it demands better land fertility than the first category especially upland rice and cassava. The figure also shows that the spatial distribution has certain concentration in the fertile up*land areas of the 5IG where the altitude, climate and agro physical conditions are most suitable. In 4leman 7egency this particular farming combination has a strong prevalence throughout the districts located at the foot slope of the -erapi =olcano. These encompass sub*regencies of Turi, ?a$em and &ang$ringan. These districts, especially Turi and ?a$em, have been discusses formerly to shows dominant horticulture cultivation. Turi is already well $nown as horticulture production centre of salaccias sala$! whereas ?a$em is $nown as producer of horticulture in forms of vegetables. This indicates that the area where the commercial community plantation prevail is that the areas that endow not only good land fertility but also good water availability. In Bulonprogo 7egency, commercial community plantation dominates the landscape of the -enoreh 0ill range encompassing, 3irimulyo, 4amigaluh, Balibawang and Bo$ap districts. This area is situated in western part of 5IG. In addition, this farming combination also prevails in ma8or parts of 4entolo districts. 4ome parts of this district are also characterised with hilly physiography. It might be assumed therefore that this second cropping pattern prevails in this upland part of the area. In upland 3unung$idul regency, this farming combination is concentrated in the northeastern part of the regency i.e. in parts of the districts of 4emin, and

?on8ong. The similar characteristic of upland commercial community plantation also prevails in 6antul 7egency in the sense that this cropping dominantly governs the upper part of the area. This covers districts of 4edayu, and districts of Imogiri, 5lingo and ?iyungan, which are situated in the eastern upland and stretched from the north to the south. It is also interesting to note that this community plantation crops also prevail in some part of lowland area. These are especially in the middle part of the province and some mart of coastal area. The cultivation of these crops out from the upland areas indicates the process of spreading and adoption of commodity. The information collected from resource person in this respect shows that the production and the productivity in these areas are not as good as the upland production. This is importantly due to the micro*climate of the lowland mid coastal area is less suitable to support the yield. %. Co++e-'i"l Ho-ti'*lt*-e "nd Co++*nit/ Pl"nt"tion The third cropping combination as the result of factor analysis consists of eggplant, chili, and tobacco. According to crops classification of &entral 6ureau of 4tatistics eggplant and chili are in the group of horticulture, whereas tobacco belongs to community plantation. These crops are generally cultivated for commercial purposes. =ery limited yield portion may be ta$en for self*consumption. %n this basis, this third cropping combination is labeled as commercial horticulture and community plantation. 1rom table :.+: it can be observed that among this cropping group, eggplant and chili more correlate with each other than with tobacco. 6oth crops have a high commercial value, especially their hybrid types. The hybrid type of eggplant is called with @apanese eggplant whereas the hybrid type of chill is called hot*beauty chili. 6oth crops ate one*season horticultures with multiple harvests. The crops demand significant capital investments and intensive treatment that ma$es the mode of cultivation of these crops to be inputs intensive. -ap of figure < shows that the spatial distribution of this cropping combination is more prevail in the middle pail of 5IG. &hili, eggplant and tobacco are dominant in 4leman and 6antul 7egencies than other parts of the 5IG. As discussed in chapter three on physiography of 5IG, this is fertile area and provided

with availability of water resources for cultivation. In 4leman 7egencies, these crops are concentrated along the line of spring*belt of the -erapi volcanic foot slope where water flows a whole year round. This cropping combination lies in a less steep part of the area and below the previously discussed second cropping combination i.e. the up*land commercial community plantation. In 6antul, these commercial horticulture and community plantations tend to dominate the eastern part of the area which seems to cluster along the %pa$ 7iver. As the case of distribution of the crops in 4leman 7egency, the closeness distribution to river indicates that a year round water availability and the soil fertility facilitates the crops cultivation. (. Co++e-'i"l Ho-ti'*lt*-e The fourth cropping combination e'tracted by principal component analysis as presented in Table.:.+:, refers to combination of shallots and garlic. 6oth crops are commercial, being cultivated for gaining income from the yield. %n this basis, the fourth cropping combination is attributed as commercial horticulture. The distribution of this cropping combination shows different pattern with the first three cropping combination. The least dominant prevalence is in 4leman 7egency i.e the northern part of 5IG toward -erapi =olcano. 4leman regency, therefore, is much in favour of the second i.e. upland commercial community plantation and the third cropping combination i.e. commercial horticulture and community plantation. The relative absence of shallot and garlic in 4leman 7egency might be due to humidity of the area that is insufficient to support these crops to be properly grown. 9i$e 4leman, the distribution of this fourth cropping ta$es the area that different with the second and the third. &ultivation of shallot arid garlic ta$e place in the middle part of 6antul toward southern direction reaching the coastal area. In fact the tendency of dominating coastal area may he observed from the distribution of these commercial horticultures as presented in figure D. Apart from coastal area of 6antul, these crops also govern the southern coastal of Bulonprogo 7egency. It may mean that coastal agro*ecosystem seems to facilitates better grown for shallot and garlic. The discussion on the variation and comple'ity of farming types has provided some information that( +. Although it is ta$ing place in a relatively small and densely populated area,

the 5IG agriculture is highly diversified, and #. In spite of the limited agricultural land resources, the types of dominant cropping in 5IG represent commercial cultivation. :. &ombining the first and second insights, this means that 5IG development of agriculture is driven toward two currently important development orientation vi/ agricultural commercialisation and diversification.

F. A.-i'*lt*-"l Re o*-'e As far as data availability concern, elements related to agriculture resources analysis consist of( agricultural land, farmer organi/ations, agricultural e.uipment and technology, and agricultural services and e'tension. Agricultural land is specified into variables of si/e and type of land i.e. irrigated land and two times harvesting land. The detail variables for e.uipment covers two wheels tractors, eradicators, water pumps, and agriculture product processing machines. Agricultural service and e'tension consist of variables on village cooperative unit BC5!, agro* input $ios$, seedling house, demonstration plots, and mar$ets semi and permanent mar$ets!. The factor analysis on the agricultural resources has e'plored +9 variables. )ith a gradual e'clusion of variables having a less significant correlation, the assumed final combination of agricultural resources combination is < variables divided into # component factors as presented in following table. As shown by the table, there are two groups of factors which have strong internal correlation. The first combines agricultural e.uipment with agricultural land .uality, whereas the second combines two agricultural e.uipments. These two factors are then labeled as( +. )etland agriculture factor This factor combine three variables with strong correlation, these are percentage of irrigated land to total agriculture land, percentage of two times harvesting area to si/e of wetland, and percentage of two*wheels tractors to agriculture household #. Agriculture technology factor

This factor is combination of percentage of eradicator tools to agriculture household, and percentage of water pumps to agriculture households. The spatial distribution of the pattern and the combination is presented in the thematic maps in figure 2 and ,. 1. Wetl"nd A.-i'*lt*-e F"'to)etland agriculture may represent the .uality of land as well as the .uality of irrigation facilities. 4uch condition may facilitate more than one time production harvesting. That is why it has strong correlation with the harvesting variables. 4uccessful agricultural transformation during the green revolution period has been ac$nowledged to ta$e place especially in such wetland rice cultivation. 4uch area is also considered to be dynamic and adoptive to the introduction of innovation. 0ands tractor is among the agricultural e.uipment being widely spread in this area. Therefore, the prevalence of two wheels tractors shows a high correlation with these two land .uality variables. The thematic map in figure 2 indicates that this combined factor prevails more dominantly in the lowland part of 5IG. This area is in the middle part of the 5IG encompassing ma8or part of 7egency 4leman and 6antul, and south eastern part of Bulonprogo 7egency. The area stretches out from -erapi slopes of the northern part of 5IG and reaches out southern 6antul coastal area of Indian %cean. In the dry up*land of 3unung$idul, this factor is very limited, the only e'ception is a small spot around the basin area in district of Barangmo8o. This suggests that moderni/ation and technological advancement is eventually being applied in lowland fertile and better irrigated which already densely populated areas than up*land areas. !. A.-i'*lt*-e Te'hnolo./ As far as the correlation matri' in table :.+: concerns, eradicator tools have a strong relation with water pumps. It shows a negative correlation with irrigated land resource and most especially with the two wheels tractor. This factor is not widely distributed nor constitute a compact pattern li$e the previous factor. 0owever, some information can be obtained from this finding. This type of agricultural technology tends to relate with the upland and coastal agriculture than to lowland agriculture.

%bservation from thematic map in figure , supports this assumptive conclusion. The lowland area surrounding Gogya$arta -unicipality is in clu<ter of low category. The factor apparently dominates the upland 3unung$idul especially in the middle part, upper part of 4leman, and also Bulonprogo 7egency. It also loo$s to cluster along the southern coastal area especially in Bulonprogo and 6antul 7egency. In coastal agriculture in the southern part of the 5IG water pumps seem to be important for drainage purpose so to avoid flooding of the area. In the dry up*lands, water pumps are importantly present in view of overcoming problems of water scarcity. 1rom the above discussion on agricultural resources, it appears that the lowland middle part of 5IG is potential agricultural area for it has good .uality of land and supported with better irrigation facility leading to production intensity. It should be noted that land ownership in this area is already small. -oreover the area is being situated in a densely populated part of 5IG and therefore it has potential to intensify the agricultural land conversion leading to the decreasing agriculture production. The shift on the mode of production has already ta$en place as observable in the application of hand tractor. It may imply the shift toward more capital than labour intensive, meaning that labour replacement ta$e place. This moderni/ation and the more capitalistic type of farming may stimulate to the changing tenurial system. In 3eneral, the technological application varies with the agro*physical condition and dominant farming type of the region. 5. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATION )ithin the smallness of the area, 5IG shows great agricultural diversification and commerciali/ation within prevailing phisiographical variation of the area. This is shown by spatial pattern of cropping combination. The result of this analysis may be ta$en as initial steps to formulate functional /oning for further development. This may help to identify competitive commodity within specific area. 0omogeneity and the widely spread commodity has resulted in disadvantage due to over*supply during harvesting season may push down the price for the commodity. There is a tendency that mass of farmers may adopt and follow to cultivate the pt*oven mar$etable commercial crops. Therefore it is important to manage this natural process into spatially structured commodity area.

Agriculture sector maintains to contribute to economic development e.uity of the area through employment absorption but not to economic growth. The inde' intensiveness of agriculture in 5IG is low that brings it into conventional views as slow growth sector and contribute low value added. The dynamic of development process in 5IG much prevail in lowland fertile area. The shift of population density intensely increases in this area more than urban municipal area. It creates intensifying pressure to agriculture and land conversion. Agriculture in 5IG therefore is also sub8ect to e'periencing the law of diminishing return. The yield of agriculture is going to diminish due to the cultivation area gets smaller and fragmented. This condition should stimulates to identify possible area for agricultural e'tensification and to strengthen the development of upland agriculture where the land is reasonably available and away from land fragmentation and conversion. The development in lowland is more dynamic and provides better prosperity than other area. &onsidering that agriculture contributes more to employment opportunity than to economic growth it may means that the source of prosperity in lowland does not come from agriculture. It is important, therefore, to ma$e micro level study to clarify the finding at meso regional level.

)ith regard to the effect of agricultural development in rural socio*economy welfare, there is ob8ection to the view that social stratification has been more pronounced in rural area. There is not enough evidence to claim the general tendency of economic classes polari/ation due to introduction of agriculture technology, or increasing deprivation of rural poor as a result of labour displacement from agriculture. The ma8ority of farm labourer and small farmers has been considered to ma$e improvement in their economic condition. 5uring the period of 20s and ,0s, overall income per capita of rural household e'periences meaningful improvement. This is reflected in the increasing income and e'penditure. In general, the income disparity and discrepancy between socio*economy classes in rural area has been much lessening. $. Re.ion P-o$le+ 6efore monetary crisis in +99,, the Indonesia economic development has been appreciated as achieving impressive performance. 1or about #< years, the Indonesia economy has annual growth rate above DH. There are not so many developing countries that capable to achieve such economic performance and sustain it for reasonably long period. &onsidering that the national economic performance is the aggregate of regional economy, and therefore, the underlying assumption is that the variation in economic growth may prevail at regional level or even lower level. Apart from regional hierarchical perspective, sectoral differentiation may also valid in appraising economic growth. 5ifferent economic sectors may also shows different performance and contribution in economic sectors. The position of agriculture in development is sometimes miss* understandable. The economic growth is interpreted to shift agriculture to fade away. A country or region e'periences economic development when the share of agriculture in income and employment decreases due to being out*competed with industry and service sectors. In short, there is no country or region being labelled modern, developed, or industriali/ed due to its agriculture sector performance. "conomic growth is also mista$enly admitted to inversely effect and sacrifice the agriculture sector. The fre.uently mentioned e'ample in this respect deals with increasing agriculture land loss and the process land conversion to non*agricultural

uses. The agricultural census data indicates that within : +,.<,0 hectare of the 5IG area, wetland rice area covers an area of D:.E<, hectares or about #0H of total area. The agricultural census of +99: shows that the rice wetland lefts to be D+.E92 hectare. %n the contrary, dry land which covers land for building and its surrounding has grown from ,:.+<2 hectare #D.+H! to be ,2.E2< hectares #2.<H!. This means that, the process of agricultural land conversion to non*agricultural designation has been ta$ing place in Gogya$arta. The dominant force behind this conversion is to fulfill the needs of increasing number of population for settlements and its supporting infrastructures and services facilities. It is assumed that agricultural intensification may become the visible respond for such increasingly limited land. -ore than conversion of agricultural land, the effects of economic growth on the agricultural production also reach production orientation. The orientation shills from subsistence toward commerciali/ation. The ma8or drive of this change is due to increasing product demand and purchasing power as a result of integration of rural economy into wider mar$et economy. -oreover, the economic growth of +920s is aided by increasing foreign e'change from e'porting oil. This period is $nown and mar$ed by oil boom. It provided path for toe government to perform investment and construction of rural infrastructures. Apart from employment absorption, the construction of rural infrastructures and socio*economic facilities has important contribution in the integration of rural economy in wider commercial mar$et. At regency to rural level, and even household unit level, the effect of economic changes may have different responds and spatial patterns. It is therefore interesting to find*out such variation of spatial pattern of agricultural changes. Agriculture is accounted for main income of ma8ority of population residing in rural area. 0owever the degree of importance is varying between places. 1armers response to agricultural development and commercial mar$et stimulant shows great variation. It is important to study decision*ma$ing process of agricultural changes at individual farmer and household level. 1emale has significant role in agricultural production and changes. In some cases, female farmer and labour spend longer wor$ing hours than male. They contribute important role in agricultural development and in their household decision ma$ing process. In conse.uence, they may also be

affected for any change in agricultural production. ?osition and contribution of female farmers and labourers in agricultural activities and decision*ma$ing The research on me agricultural development becomes more interesting to he conducted in Gogya$arta. This is due to within its relatively small area as compared to other provinces in Indonesia. Gogya$arta shows a great variation and comple'ity of physical and environment. -oreover, agriculture in this area has e'isted for long period and play important role for large proportion of population and for regional development. !. O$)e'tive o& the St*d/ This study is carried out in the ?rovince of Gogya$arta 4pecial region 5IG!. Among the provinces in Indonesia, the 5IG is the smallest i.e. about :.+D9 s.uare $ilometers 0.+DHL! In spice of the smallness of the 5IG, the area is an interesting one since it is situated between the sea and the active volcanic mountain of -ount -erapi. &onse.uently the phisiography of the 5IG is varied and leads to different farming systems. The percentage of population residing in rural areas is 2:,EH among which E,H engages in agricultural activity. The average si/e of land* ownership is 0.#< ha per head of household. This si/e is considered to be under the standard ownership to $eep sustainable productivity, which is assumed to be around 0.E ha. The 5IG is a region displaying a continuum in rural*urban development as well as different $inds of agro*economic systems. The systems react differently to the opportunities and constraints created by increasing levels of urbani/ation, rural* urban interaction, and population pressure upon resources, as well as to the various government programs for agricultural development. As such, the 5IG might be perceived as interesting laboratory for what will happen in other densely * populated areas in the shadow of growing urban economies. %n the basis of this bac$ground, the main ob8ective of the research is to understand the varying pattern of agricultural development in the 5IG, and the effect of the development on the rural firm households livelihood and rural areas at large. The specification of this main research ob8ective helps to clarify the scale and scope of the research. The operational brea$down of the main ob8ective is as followK +. to formulate and to e'plain the spatial pattern and regional topology according to

agricultural characteristic, #. to assess the main production structure and processes in the different farming types and to e'plain the various effects of agricultural dynamics and outcome on the living conditions of population :. E. <. to e'plain the variation of farmer responses and decision ma$ing process to opportunity and stimulants for agricultural change and innovation. to appraise the role of supporting services and infrastructures in agriculture and the role of government policy and intervention in rural agricultural development to analy/e resistance and vulnerability of farm household livelihood in coping with crisis and gradual change. %. Re e"-'h 6*e tion The discussions on the research bac$ground, and research ob8ectives, have provided basis for the formulation of research .uestion. This research .uestion may function as guiding .uestion to formulate research methods. The main research ob8ective is to focus on what varying pattern and the structure agricultural development in the 5IG, and the impact of the development on the rural farm households livelihood and rural areas at large. This main ob8ective is then specified into more operational research .uestions as follows( +. )hat patterns of the agricultural cropping can be identified and how this pattern is distributed at meso level of 5IG ?rovince and at four different agro*ecosystem areasL #. )hat are variation on the main production structure and processes in the different agro ecosystems types and how the effects of the different agricultural dynamics and outcome on the living conditions of respective rural communityL :. )hat are the variation of farmer responses to opportunity and stimulants for agricultural change, and how the process of ma$ing decision to adopt any induced innovationL E. )hat is the role of supporting services and infrastructures in agriculture and what has been the role of government policy and intervention in rural agricultural developmentL <. )hat are the impacts of crisis as sudden pressure of changes on different fanning

activities and different household category, and how they show varying degree of adaptability resistance and vulnerability in coping with crisis and gradual changeL (. 7* ti&i'"tion &o- the U e&*lne o& the Re e"-'h

The formal usefulness of the research is the basis for the writing of dissertation as part of the re.uirements to ac.uire ?h5 degree at the ?ost 3raduate ?rogram 3ad8ah -ada Cniversity Gogya$arta. The practical usefulness of the research result is to contribute to the scientific development and the development of community at large. &ontribution to science is especially in the field of agricultural and rural development. The assessment of the spatial pattern of agricultural development may reflect the integration of rural area into wider mar$et as well as the changing mar$et preferences that leads to agricultural commercialisation. The micro level study on and farm household respond to agricultural change and development and decision*ma$ing process may contribute to approach and theoretical conception about agricultural development. -oreover, the contribution may come from methodological aspect of the research as well as the empirical findings. &omparing four villages located in different agro*ecosystems setting may provide more comprehensive views than focusing on one research area. The research may also provide useful source for comparative study in the same field. 1urthermore it may wor$ as stimulant and inspiration for thither research in the similar and related sub8ect. 1or the community at large, the research may provide advantage through government institution that responsible from development planning and implementation, this is especially related with better and wider understanding on the effect of agricultural change and development on the farm household livelihood. C. Theo-eti'"l Vie1 1. A.-i'*lt*-"l Develo#+ent %ne universally recogni/ed feature of structural economic change is that as countries develop, the proportions of 35? and employment accounted for by agriculture decline. This shift stands to reason, for improved living standards entail a change in consumer demands through an increasing personal consumption of good

and services other than food. A concomitant rise is necessitated in the proportion of human aid other resources allocated to non*agricultural production. This economic transformation indicates a change in the relative importance of the different economic sectors i.e. the shill from predominantly agricultural economics to one dominated by the industrial sector and the service sector with related to sectoral shifts in income or labour force 6ilsborrow and 3eorges, +99E( 4tevens and @abara, +9,,!. In the development process of a country, agriculture plays a ma8or role. According to Bu/nets as .uoted by &olman and >i'on, I 92,K :#!, the contribution or agriculture to development covers aspects of product contribution, factor contribution, and mar$et contribution. ?roduct contribution refers to condition whereby an increasing amount of food is supplied to the e'panding non*agricultural population, and industrial crops are produced as a basis for processing industry. 1actor contribution means that agriculture supplies the rest of the economy with labour and e'periences a net outflow of capital. -ar$et contribution is that whereby agricultural revenue from cash sales domestically and for e'ports! creates a demand for products of the industrial sector, agricultural e'ports also create a flow of foreign e'change which can be used to purchase capital items from abroad. These contributions imply that a large and increasing domestically produced agricultural surplus is a necessary condition for successful and interlin$ed economic development. Agriculture thus is an important precondition for national development. The currently rich countries were favoured with accesses to ample and cheap food supplies during the +,th and +9th centuries at the start of industriali/ation &olman and >i'on, +92,!. In this respect, it is the e'istence of a relatively homogeneous agricultural structure in the initial stages of industrialisation process that facilitates the spread of technological progress and ma$es possible growth with e.uity. 4che8tman, +99E! !. A##-o"'he to A.-i'*lt*-"l Ch"n.e Agriculture can be studied in a number of ways, and even the simplest farm comprises a large number of components and types of relations among them. 4ocial sciences concentrates on the components of the human sub*system, for instance cm the rules that govern resource use e.g. land tenure!, on labour intensity and

availability, on human demography, on communication and diffusion of innovation, on the relation between social and economic units, on consumption variables, on decision ma$ing, and on lin$s between these features and the environmental subsystems 6rush and Turner. 0, +9,2!. The term of agrarian change implies a change in the total system of relationships with respect to agrarian economics and societies. This system includes technological and environmental factors relationships as well as social and cultural ones, and a wide range of processes affect such systems and may contribute to bringing about changes within them. The agrarian system is considered to be more than a farming system, which denotes a more restricted set of technical factors and relationships 0arris, +9,#!. Agricultural change can be defined along two broad a'esK technological and structural. Technological change can be observed in many ways, in terms of the types and amounts used, management practices, productivity, and efficiency. Intensification is often used to describe technological change involving greater use of labour or other inputs per unit of land. 4tructural change involves changing social and economic relations in the production process, for instance in land ownership and tenure and in the relation between labour and capital 6rush and Turner. ++l, +9,2!. As part of a system, agrarian change cannot be defined by agriculture alone. The ma8ority of rural households combine several sources of income both in agriculture and non*agricultural activities. Therefore, satisfactory treatment of interaction between the two activities is important. 4aith +99#! has formulated stages of non*farm economic developments in relation to farmer categories according to degree of landownership. In the first phase, both agricultural wage employment and self*employment are important to the poor farmer, but not to the rich farmer. The farm employment pattern shows an inverse relationship. In the second phase, due to processes of moneti/ation, technological change, and economic growth, the importance of wage employment is increasing to poor farmers but self*employment is still highly important. 1or the rich farmers self*employment is also getting more important, hut it is performed by investment of agricultural surplus. The farm employment pattern changes into a C type. In the third phase, due to e'posure to urban competition, agricultural wage employment for the poor farmer is intensified.

4elf*employment for poor farmers is eroded progressively while for rich farmer it is still important. In this stage, the emerging farm employment pattern is positive. In fi' fourth phase, due to competition from the modern farm sector, self*employment for the rich farmers begins also to erode, whereas agricultural wage employment shows tendency towards an inverse relationship. In the final phase, agricultural wage employment no longer is important and the poor tend to complete leave out, whereas income from self*employment for the rich is substituted by income in form of remittances from household members. Approaches to the study of agrarian change might be distinguished broadly into system approaches, decision*ma$ing models, and structural; historical approaches. 4ystems approaches are emphasi/ing the systemic relationships of environmental, technological, and demographic conditions within the farming system, as well as the social responses to them. 5ecision*ma$ing model studies of farm economics in the neo*classical mould are concerned with the allocation of resources on the farm and with the farmers responses to mar$ets and to innovations. These $inds of social science studies have become .uite good at e'plaining the success or failure of the individual within the system but in this case the system itself is left out of the analysis. The structural; historical approaches are concerned withK +. #. :. Inter*relationships of people and the natural environment, 7elationships of people in the process of production in the sense that it places the ownership and control of resources at the centre of analysis, and 7elationships between e'panding capitalism and various forms of production which, on the face of things at least, might be described as non or pre* capitalist 0arris, +9,#!. 0istorical e'perience suggests that seen in a long*term perspective economic growth has been accompanied by speciali/ation, centralisation, ma'imisation, urbanisation and industrialisation. 9ea and &haudry, +9,:!. In line with the development process of the country and the integration of rural areas into wider mar$ets, agricultural commercialisation is an unavoidable process. Three ma8or points of view maybe distinguished in the role of agricultural commercialisation in the process of development( +. An economic*technocratic view point, emphasi/ing economic and technical

measures as instrumental in increasing agriculture productivity and production for the mar$et, #. The psychological variant of the first, which pays specific attention to the individual characteristics of farmers, to theft attitudes and motivations. 6ehavioural factors are seen as barriers to or channels for the diffusion and adaptations of innovations. In both views, commercialisation is used more or less as synonymous for modernisation and development, and :. The politico*economic point of view on the commercialisation of agriculture ta$es into account the political conte't of the nature of power relationships at various geographical scales. Agriculture is regarded as a factor contributing to development when accompanied or preceded by structural change at various geographical scales 0inderin$ and 4ter$enhurg. +9,2!. There are also different views on the impacts of the process of commercialisation and commoditisation of agriculture 6aths, l9,#. There are those in favour of the view that with increasing commoditisation and commercialisation in agrarian societies, a process is set in motion whereby rural producers are set apart into distinct classes. Another view states that although development of commodity production is not unimportant the distinctive peasant economy, that of small producers persists as they are not yet separated from their means of production and retain a degree of control over land and family labour, survive. The view that technology and commercialisation play a ma8or role in stimulating agricultural growth and alleviating poverty is now widely accepted. -any regions in the developing world that produce commercial crops for domestic and for e'port mar$ets are better off than regions that are under subsistence production. 6ut there is also a tenacious tradition of pessimism about technology and commercialisation, whose adherents claim that both of these movements may bring adverse conse.uences for the poorest 6inswanger and 6raun, +99+!. In a moderni/ation approach to agricultural development, progressive usually large owners! tanners play important role. This assumes a top down development in which progressive farmers are approached e'tension services provision and offered facilities; inputs to adopt new technologies, crops and mar$eting systems!. It is assumed that the agricultural innovations will be diffused

from the progressive or big farmers to the traditional or smaller farmers and from the more favoured area to bac$ward areas. 5iffusion and tric$ling down effects, therefore, are essential elements in the adoption process of the innovations. In Indonesia 0ard8ono, +9,:!, the success of the rice intensification programme has been attained through government patronage of large*owners, many of whom are not themselves farmers. ?olitical*economic approach to agricultural development focuses on the mode of production characteristics of agriculture i.e. the role of dominant social relations of productions including the political power structure. The progressive incorporation of the rural economics into the world mar$et system is deeply affecting these relationships in the rural communities. Agricultural commercialisation may lead both to processes of peasantisation and depeasantisation. The former process involves only a partial transformation of subsistence agriculture into a mar$et oriented agriculture. &haracteristic of the peasant mode of production small operated farms, use of unpaid 1amily labour, production type mainly for own household consumption, self e'ploitation of labour! are persisting. The main reason for this being that the small marginal 1armers can not afford the means and the ris$ of complete forms of commercial farming, while at the same time their low but cheap surplus production, is an indispensable contribution to the national food supply because of their sheer numbers. The peasant economy thus is an integral part of the national economy supplementing the capitalist sector. %n the other hand, a process of de*peasantisation may prevail among the richer farmers, mainly producing cash crops for the domestics or e'port mar$ets. 0ere the use of capital inputs and new varieties; crops is ubi.uitous while, at the same time, the process of commercialisation is inducing a more businessli$e attitude towards agricultural production. >ew properly relations are coming into e'istence while traditional land and labour sharing mechanisms are being eroded. The rising capitalist mode of production leads to an increasing rural differentiation through alienation of land and the e'pulsion of labour from the modernising agriculture sector 0ail, +9,9( 0inderin$ and 4ter$enburg. +9,2( 9ong, +9,E( 7uthenberg, +9,0.! In spite of the development of capitalist agriculture, tendencies towards the polarisation of peasant society may be wea$ened. This is because of factors such as( the brea$*up of large

units at inheritance, and the reproduction of small*scale holdings by the intervention of merchant and moneylenders capital, or in the more recent past of state capital. %. F"'to- o& A.-i'*lt*-"l Ch"n.e The changes in agriculture encompass among others( land tenurial and structural characteristic of agriculture, technology and farming methods, and rate of growth of total output 6ayliss and )anmali, +9,E!. 4harecropping is a form of land tenancy with the payment for the use of land the rent! as a percentage of the total physical output obtained in the crop season, and, therefore, the amount of rent varies with the level of harvest "llis, +9,,!. This tenancy arrangement tends to be shifted to a cash mode of payment for tenancy. )ith increasing levels of commerciali/ation the tendency of land concentration will be one of the reason for the shift in the mode of tenancy. According to 4tevens and @abara +9,,! with respect to the relation of the si/e of land and productivity, it is supposed that in agriculture there are intrinsic diseconomies of scale; si/e. )hile economies of scale are usually accompanied by increases in output per twit of input due to enlarging the si/e of the farm or business, in agriculture an increasing farm si/e usually is associated with decreasing land productivity. This relationship, according to @ohnson and 7uttan +99E!, used to be widely accepted, particularly as a 8ustification for land reform. 4everal important .uestions remain unanswered, however, particu+arl concerning land .uality differences between small and large farms, differing factor proportions, labour productivity, and institutional disincentives to investments by large*scale farmers. 9and tenure combines two types of rulesK control and access. &ontrol implies durable rights to use land, as e'pressed in the ownership in the "uropean tradition. 7ules of control are held originally by the social group and delegated to families, households, or individuals. &ontrol means that the holder of the right is permitted to use the land in manner approved by the group. "ven though control may ultimately be vested with the group, many societies recogni/e that individuals or households have de facto control over land. &ontrol may be loaned, sold, rented and passed to others, although most societies regulate these passages. 7ules of access concern how control is e'ercised. They are important in translating land control into land use. Access implies temporary rather than durable 6rush and Turner, +9,2!.

The changes in technology and farming methods have some conse.uences in social, economic and physical conditions of rural areas. In fact technology is neutral, as stated by Boppel and %asa, +9,2! it does not favour anyone in any consistent social, political, or economic sense. Technology only favours rational resource allocation. Technology is accepted and used because it is economically appropriate. If new agricultural technology is ever socially unfavourable, an assessment should be made on the policy environment that is preventing a normal adaptive evolution of rural social and economic institutions to proceed. The new agricultural technology though theoretically scale neutral, was not in practice resource neutral, because most of the advantages accruing to richer cultivators. 6yres +9,< as .uoted by 0arris, +99#! pointed out that the process of change might aptly be described as one of partial proletarianisation, given that the evidence strongly suggests an increasing dependence upon wage labour and the loss by poor peasants of an increasing share of the operated area to rich peasants, though without them necessarily losing the ownership of the land. The technical changes are concerned with the adaptation of the production to the changing circumstances, pressures, and opportunities, which confront the farm household. They are a reflection of the adoption of new or different methods of production "llis, +9,2!. &hanges in agriculture are strongly influenced by innovations in technology and firming methods that lead to an increasing production. According to 6inswanger and 6raun +99+! when a new technology, such as 3reen 7evolution variety, is being introduced into a region, higher farm profits initially accrue to all producers who adopt it, including poor farmers. Therefore, the complementarities between yield increasing technological change in staple foods and commercialisation of agriculture can be e'ploited to help alleviate poverty. Adoption of innovation is seen to be variable as well. According to "i8$emans +99<! the e'istence of incremental analysis e'plains why peasants seldom adopt all components of a so*called integrated technology pac$age all at once on a voluntary basis, as they were e'pected to do when they were offered the green revolution programme. 5iffusion and adoption of innovations are determinative in this case. There are several problems with regard to the diffusion of innovations. The 9ine duration ta$en is important because the diffusion is based on

observations from farmer to farmer. -ore time is needed for innovations to reach remote areas. To stimulate the adoption, prove of the gain of new methods is needed. "'tension services are not only e'pensive but according to 4tevens and @abara +9,,! they usually leads to little increase in production. Apart from these problems, there are constraints of adoption of innovation due to the fact that not all farming methods are suitable for all regions 6ayliss and )anmali, +9,E!. Technical change in agriculture according to 0ayami and 7uttan as .uoted by Boppel and %asa, +9,2! is essentially endogenous mid hence should be incorporated into an economic e'planation of agricultural development!K changing factor prices and their indirect effects through a variety of forces such as population growth, variation in land .uality, physical remoteness! create opportunities for technologically improving factor productivity. A broad effect of technical change is that it integrates agricultural production more closely into the mar$et economy, and hastens the demise of the peasant status. )hether agricultural commercialisation also means polarisation into distinct rural social classes depends on a number of other factors than technology alone "llis, +9,,!. Agricultural commercialisation implies an increasing moneti/ation and mar$et orientation of agricultural production. It affects productivity and growth of output, and stimulates speciali/ation and diversification. 0inderin$ and 4ter$enburg, +9,2!. The si/e, density, structure, and change of populations are ma8or topics in understanding fanning systems. In subsistence agriculture consumption*production! the amount of production sought, and hence the land and labour employed is strongly related to local demographic conditions. In commercial or mar$et agriculture commodity*production! local demographic conditions may not directly affect production goals, but they may play important roles in crop scheduling, selection of cultivars, and so forth. 6ecause of this, the relationships between population change and agricultural change have been crucial topics in studies of fanning systems, particularly in the underdeveloped world 6rush and Turner II, +9,2, 6ilsborrow and 3eores, +99E!. )ith regard to agricultural output, there are various methods to measure changing rates of growth of total output. -easuring the input*output inde' indicates the efficiency. The inde'es on partial factor of productivity cover labour productivity i.e. changes in total output in relation to changes in total labour input!,

and land productivity growth i.e. changes in total output per hectare of agricultural land which is commonly applied for ma8or food crop!. The more general measure is total food output in relation to total population. The application of the inde'es measuring productivity should consider data availability, fluctuativeness and seasonality characteristics of farming, and changing in! cropping pattern. (. A.-i'*lt*-"l G-o1th Lin8".e The role of agriculture in economic development can be referred to as comprising bac$*ward and forward contributions to other economic sectors. As mentioned by the )orld 6an$ +990!, the development of agriculture may provide the opportunity for efficient development of the entire commodity system, from input production and mar$eting to downstream processing, thus fostering both vertical and hori/ontal diversification with e'tensive bac$ward and forward lin$ages between production, processing, and mar$eting. )ithin these lin$ages, the demand; income lin$age also plays an important role. The growth iii income generated by agriculture means a higher purchasing power of rural inhabitants. The increasing purchasing power will not only stimulate further diversification of agricultural production, but also the development of oilier economic sectors. Income lin$ages are also understood as the capability of agriculture to generate cash from mar$eting to other regions or even e'port elsewhere, and presupposedly strengthens the local*capital investment. The theory of multiplier effects of agriculture within a rural economy describes the effects on net*farm incomes and agricultural outputs, and on generating non*farm income, and thereby reducing rural poverty. 0owever, this theory of functional growth lin$ages is still in .uestion due to the limited evidences, among others, on whether agricultural growth goes along with increasing demand, whether production or consumption lin$ages are contributing most to production or consumption, and whether cross*investment from agriculture to the non*farm sector does really ta$e place 5unham, +99+!.

5.

The Pe" "nt F"-+eIn many poor countries a relatively small number of large or modern

agricultural holdings, which provide a large proportion of the mar$et output, e'ist alongside a vastly larger number of subsistence or peasant holdings. The primary activity of the peasant farmer is producing basic foods for his own household consumption, with surplus land and resources devoted to producing crops and livestoc$ products for sale &olman and >i'on. +92,, +:,!. The dual orientation of peasant production for consumption and for sale is a ma8or concern and is emphasi/ed in all agricultural development studies. )ith regard to farm inputs. peasants use their own unpaid family labour, although the hiring and selling out of labour power is also .uite possible and compatible with peasant society. ?easant commodity production is also characterised by the use of simple technology 0arris, +9,#( 0inderin$ and 4ter$enburg,+9,2!. According to "llis +9,,! peasant farming can he described as agricultural production by farm households with access to their own means of livelihood in land, utilising mainly family labour in farm production, and that is always part of a larger economic system, but is fundamentally characteri/ed by partial engagements in mar$ets, which tend to unction with a high degree of imperfection. ?easants may also be described as an apart society defined by their sub*ordinate relationships to e'ternal mar$ets, the state and dominant culture. The peasantry is sub*ordinated to other classes within the state and may be re.uired to yield some tribute to them. The poor are usually well integrated in the rural labour mar$etK whether hired wor$ers or small farmers, they participate in the e'change economy and, despite the high share of income allocated to food, their cropping patterns and crop*livestoc$ mi'es show large involvement in mar$ets. This fact is important for the spreading of effects of commercialisation and technology in the economy 6inswanger and 6raun. +99+!. In fact, peasant villages, both open and closed, are always connected with larger, regional forms of social orgnisation. These include economic forms, such as mar$et systems, and political forms, such as nation states 6rush and Turner II. +9,2!. According to "llis +9,,! peasant farmers as social group are part of larger economic systems. ?easant production is therefore e'posed in some degree to mar$et forces and the input*output production elements are sub8ect to valuation by wider mar$ets. In the national development process, the e'istence of a peasant mode of

production is considered differently by different views. In the conservative old* orthodo'y view, until +9D0, the peasant is a passive victim of e'ternal forces, and large scale, mechani/ed agriculture is a prere.uisite for agricultural modernisation. The >eo*classical view is also still in favour of large scale farmers and its main concern is still with economic growth, efficiency and adaptations to mar$ets. The important issue in this view is that agriculture is the foundation for overall development. The >ew orthodo'y sees peasants as profit*ma'imising producers having willingness and ability to manipulate and e'ploit forces if given the possibility to do so. In the new orthodo'y view, the small farm could offer an efficient and e.uitable basis for agricultural development. In the political view, peasants are seen as always sub*ordinated by state or by large farmers in the development process @ohnson. +99+( "llis, +9,,( 6eny. +99:!. It is important to be noted, however, that peasant posses a certain degree of independent control over the resources and the e.uipment that they use in production. ?easant society is not homogeneous and may be mar$ed by .uite considerable ine.ualities. 9. F"-+e-: De'i ion M"8in. In confrontation with the larger system, farmers ma$e changes and adaptations. According to "i8$emans, +99<! there are several factors that structure the farmer decisions, namely the bio*physical environment and the conte'tual constraints. The bio*physical environment encompasses the environmental conditions important for land use( soil, climatological, morphology, hydrological, and biological conditions i.e. aspects vital toward the well functioning of land* holdings( productivity, stability, and suitability. The conte'tual constraints on farmers decisions, encompassK decisions within the individual farmers effective reach, and decisions outside the farmers scope use of common resources, land ownership, cost of resources and products!. -ostly government has created these conditions( the construction of good infrastructure, price stabilisation this includes input*output!, agricultural e'tension, provision of credit facilities, regreening, reforestation pro8ects etc. In most cases, large farmers devote a larger share of their land to cash crops than small farmers. This may be due to the following causes 1afchamps +99D!( +!

The presence of credit constraints, limited capital re*investment, technological differences giving advantage to large scale farming, and differentials in relative factor costs across firms. In short differences between crops in factor intensity, #! different ability of farmers to sustain ris$s with respect to crop choices and cropping patterns, and :! third world farmers often have to be self sufficient in basic staples so that farmers allocate land to cash crops provided that their food security is guaranteed. 1or most farmers, farm capital availability, inade.uate credit, and poor technology are seen as the principal constraints to improve productivity and are a serious constraint to price responsiveness 7iedinger, +99E!. 9imited farmer $nowledge and access to technical information also slow the pace of response to mar$et incentives. =arious constraints *land tenure, farm capital, farmer $nowledge, perceived ris$ and uncertainty, and in the poor areas! agro*climate, limit the capacity of farmers to respond rapidly to changing mar$et signals. 1or e'ample, due to the uneven distribution and insufficiency of land to provide a living for their family, smallholders tend to rent more land or to rent out the land if they find wor$ elsewhere. 1armers response, as appraised by &ederroth +99<!, to the speed of changing agriculture development methods are diverse. There are rapidly diminishing but still large group! of traditional farmers who are s$eptical of innovation and continue their traditional farming methods. There are modern, capitalistic minded farmers. There are groups of landowners who have handed over responsibilities to other people; careta$ers. In view of such situation, government intervention should smooth the process of technological introduction. The governments role is to ensure that the policy environment minimi/es price distortion and that the public goods needed by agriculture are made available. According to 0ayami and 7uttan as .uoted by Boppel and %asa, +9,2! the government canK +. #. :. ma$e vigorous efforts to ensure that appropriate technology is generated and is made widely available redirect windfall profit streams to investment in agricultural infrastructure through appropriate ta' policy, and, in principle, ma$e compensatory payments to those who are technologically

displaced with regard to factor prices, agricultural factors will be allocated efficiently because they are priced correctly. In @avanese agriculture, )hite +99+! distinguished different household strategies in agricultural development i.e. +. a dynamic strategy of accumulation by large farmer or landowner households in which surpluses from one activity are used to gain access to higher incomes in another one both agricultural and non*agricultural!, #. :. a strategy of consolidation by the middle group of small farm households which first of all is geared towards security its own food supply, a strategy of sheer survival by the sub*marginal farmers and landless households, which drives them to accept any activity without capital investment and conse.uently with very low returns. 1arm household from different socio*economy strata and among different agricultural ecosystem may show different response to stimulant for agricultural changes. In the recent developments, the potential changes may ta$e shape in the combined form of agricultural diversification and commercialisation. The farmer responses to agricultural development may be differentiated as follows( +. The non*response, in which farmers proceeds their agricultural activity in traditional way. There is no distinct difference with the previous generations and any introduced innovation is neglected. #. The growth response, in which the farmers adopt agricultural modernisation that lead to land intensification, increasing productivity, increasing diversification, etc. :. The satisfier response, in which agricultural land no longer been functions in an optimal sense and does no longer function as a ma8or source of income compared to non*farm income. E. The withdrawal response, in which agricultural wor$ and land are no longer attractive. 4ome sell the land, rent the land out, or leave the land fallow. ;. R*-"l Livelihood In their daily life, rural farm household may confront with e'ternal environment potential to change their livelihoods. There are seasonal shifts, trends,

and even shoc$s that may have direct impact to farm household to different, scale and intensity 51I5.+99<!. 4easonal shifts do not only concern with wet to dry nature season, but also with prices, inputs availability and production. Trends are more gradual and predictable, for instance population trend, and resource trend. 4hoc$s are more sudden and unpredictable. Csually it ta$es shorter period although the impact may be much longer and multiplied. It ranges from natural ha/ard( flood and storm, humanitarian conflict, and also economic shoc$ li$e monetary crisis. A livelihood is more than merely synonymous with income. Its dictionary definition is a means of a living, which straightaway ma$es it direct attention is to the way in which living is obtained. A livelihood comprises assets natural, physical, human, financial and social capital! the activities, and access to these mediated by institutions and social relations! that together determine the living gained b the individual or household. "llis, #000!. 7ural livelihood holds distinct character to urban livelihood. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses and shoc$s, maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets, while not undermining the natural resource base. -onetary crisis in +99, is a great e'ample of e'ternal factor affecting rural livelihood. It has become ma8or attention for those who concern with rural livelihood. The finding of 6urger #00E! indicates that the e'istence of strong redistributive mechanisms and the planting of low e'ternal input types of rice varieties, still allowed people to survive once price started to fall due to monetary crisis. This finding is based on his study of agricultural practices around the buffer* /one of the Berinci 4eblat >ational ?ar$, Berinci 7egency, 4umatera. The redistributive mechanism has been for long time become social*economy support system in the traditional community. 0owever, the mechanism increasingly restricted only to heirs, or to friends, and to co*villagers. The access to field is also restricted only to rice field which is mandated to be rotated by social system sawah giliran system!. %utsiders and migrants, therefore, became increasingly e'cluded from these fall*bac$ mechanism. In line with the study in upland "ast @ava >oteboom. #00:!, it also stresses, however, that those with effective social networ$ were better able to cope with crisis than those who had not. The concept of borrowing pinjam! of land for cultivation for both the rice fields and upland fields was developed as coping

mechanism for those in needs. 4olidarity mechanism of borrowing under conditions of increasing land shortages has caused, borrowing arrangements to change into renting, especially once annual crops began producing saleable surplus. Another redistributional character is also based on $inship, which oilers temporary access to a rice* field in line with Adat -inang$abau. This has always been an effective way of managing wet rice land in a sustainable way. 4harecropping in upland areas had also been part of adat! regulations as another sharing mechanism. This is in line with progressing commerciali/ation and decreasing options for obtaining food security through on*farm wet rice cultivation. "fforts to stabili/e livelihoods were increasingly geared towards upland areas. The above 6urgers research finding s the answer of the research .uestion on indigenous resource use strategies under conditions of increasing pressures upon local resources and livelihood system. Csing rapid rural appraisal method and semi structured interview with ::0 respondent randomly selected the research also try to answer .uestion on what response mechanisms can be identified in resource use strategies during the economic crisis and characteristic of the household can be attributed as winners or loser due to economic crisis. It is found that the advancing process of commerciali/ation arid integration into wider national and international political, social, and economic systems has already transformed livelihoods from a mainly subsistence*oriented system of wet rice cultivation into an integrated system of mi'ed food crops and cash crops agriculture. In the era of globali/ation, e'ternally induced stresses and shoc$s continue to impinge on livelihoods of particularly the rural poor. 6etter of households however, remain rooted in the villages, as they appear to engage in all $inds of higher .uality non*farm and off*farm employment opportunities. Investment are usually aimed at the ac.uisition of land and standing stoc$s of cinnamon trees for the purpose of accumulating wealth, or at annual crop cultivation for .uic$ yields. 4ource of investment is also ta$en from migration process. 9abour migration and remittances are limited to the head if the household, usually in connection with savings for buying land. Titus #00<! also stresses the importance of social networ$ in sustaining livelihood of farm household in ?arigi =illage, of 3owa 7egency, 4ulawesi. The research was carried out at two levels, i.e. the community level, and the household or

enterprise level. The data collection is performed through participatory rural appraisal, interview, and in*depth interview. ?arigi is an upland village. The village economy is dominated by agricultural activities which can be categori/ed into three ma8or systems, i.e. wet*rice sawah! cultivation, thy upland cultivation of food crops tegalan!, and dry upland cultivation of perennial cash crops kebun campuran!. Tegalan farmers have fewer opportunities for switching to other type types of farming or accumulate reserves for bad years than the more productive sawah or kebun. 5ominant type of resource use, in this case, determines the scope of facing problems in cultivation. The second important means to respond to crisis is assets and capacities to use the resources. The better*off farm households have an initial advantage over survival households in using their surpluses and potentials to switch to other crops or activities, to more rewarding types of nonfarm employment, or simply to shift the burden of the crisis on to their debtors, tenants, and farm wor$ers. In ?arigi, the underprivileged farm households ta$e typical response to crisis by reducing the use of capita; inputs in agriculture and retreat into subsistence food crop farming. In flying to compensate income losses in agriculture they might try to loo$ for additional incomes from marginal types of non*farm employment. The general tendency is that the negative impacts of the recent crisis n the village economy of ?arigi have remained limited and have only been severe for the survival households. -ost of the village households were still more or less self*sufficient in food production and conse.uently were relatively resilient to crisis impacts on food prices. 4imilar to 6urgers finding in Berinci, 4umatera, the system of mutual help and sharing in ?arigi seems to come under increasing stress due to the advancing process of commerciali/ation, mid increasing social differentiation and ine.uality. %n the other hand the crisis has contributed to acceleration of the erosion of traditional gender role in the division of labour. 1emale household members will have more opportunities to participate in off*farm! economic activities. 4imilar to approach to livelihood study in ?arigi, the division of land use is also employed by "i8$emans +99<! on ?easant 5ecision -a$ing on 9and Cse in >orth 4umatera. The division according to dominant fanning types irrigated versus dry*land agriculture systems! is considered to be more appropriate than traditional division. Irrigated agriculture systems encompass rain*fed, semi technical, and

technical irrigation whereas dry*land system refers to non paddy field i.e. annual crops farming tegalan!, agro*forestry kebonan and pekarangan! and pasture farming alang*alang, grass fields!. ?easant is considered to be able gradually to si/e up and adapt to any management problems and ris$, and to determine the conflict with the input demands of e'isting activities. According to "i8$emans there is no stagnant farmers. As economic ma'imi/ers, peasant would do their utmost to reach ma'imum economic returns from their input but constrained by social value, biophysical environment and incomplete pac$age practitioners or conte'tual factors such as irrigation and drainage, fertili/ation, pesticides, and terracing. The discussion indicates that rural livelihood study should move into direction to stimulate the betterment of outcome in the process of change and adaptation to e'ternal factors. The outcome may be identified in term of more income, increasing well*being, reduced vulnerability, improved food security, and more sustainable use of the natural D. Theo-eti'"l F-"+e1o-8 The review of theories in preceding sub*chapter provides insight for theoretical 1ramewor$ of this research. As indicated by the following flow*chart, there are four main elements which constitutes the research on agricultural change and development i.e. 1. The 2"'8.-o*nd Settin. 3eographic studies concern with interaction and interdependence of elements in places and spaces to compose certain ecosystem. It is therefore, this study proceeds through a stepwise method from meso to micro level analysis and starts with constructing spatial variation of cropping combination. Agricultural ecosystems or agro ecosystems is a comple' system of interacting biotic and abiotic elements performing certain functions and processes such as primary production, consumption, and decomposition resulting in energy flow and nutrient cycling. The agro ecosystem is further characteri/ed by a hierarchy of integrated system e.g. farms within communities, within watersheds, within regions and so forth! composed of interconnected and interrelated biophysical elements soil, water, air, climatic resources. plants and animals!, and socioeconomic elements social, cultural,

economic, institutional and political concerns!. The interactions among these elements determine the properties of the agro ecosystem. The four different agro*ecosystems have been selected in this research. +. &ommercial horticulture of sna$e fruit sala$! in volcanic slope located in )ono$erto =illage of 4leman 7egency. This is fertile area and gets benefit from irrigation, water availability, and accessibility, #. Cpland agriculture of calciferous southern hill range of 3unungsewu which is represented by 3iriasih =illage in 3unung$idul 7egency, The dominant form of cultivation is mi' cropping of subsistence food*crops, and forest and perennial trees. 3iriasih =illage in 3unung$idul 7egency is a dry up*land area with low fertility and very limited surface water availability. It is a rain*fed up*land agro* ecosystems with low infrastructure and low accessibility. :. Cpland agro*ecosysterns of -enoreh hill range in western part of 5IG which is represented by 4idohar8o village. The mi' cropping in 4idohar8o =illage of Bulonprogo 7egency consists of food crops, commercial horticulture chili!, and commercial plantation crops coffee, clove, and vanilla!. It has reasonable surface water with reasonable land fertility as compare to Cpland 3unung$idul. Although hilly area, and in a distance to economic centre of Bulonprogo town. 4idohar8o has good asphalt road connection. E. &oastal lowland agriculture in southern part of 5IG. The cultivation is focused on commercial horticulture crops of chili and shallot, and rice. Tirtohargo is water rich and fertile area, and en8oys good infrastructure and accessibility. The bac$ground setting, in this framewor$, refers to elements potential to determine the agricultural practices and orientation. These bac$ground*setting elements comprises( characteristics of the farmer i.e. the head of the household, characteristics of the household, assets and resources, and government intervention factors. Among these four elements it is assumed that farmer characteristics are among the strongest elements in determining agricultural practice and performance. 1armer may he regarded as decision ma$er at its own scale. )hether to change or to stay the same, it depends much on farmer decision. The pattern of decision can be accessed from socio*demography and socio*economic condition of the farmer. 1armers age, for instance, may influence agricultural performance in the sense that

the younger the age, there is a greater tendency to adopt innovation and more advance mode of production if compared with old generation. The essential assumption is that younger age tends to have greater media e'posure than the old generation. Although not as important as personal characteristic of farmer as decision ma$er, there are other elements that are supposed to have important contribution in the process of agricultural development. These elements include the household condition, assets and resources, and development intervention. The household condition may provide resource for farm operation either in the form of, for instance, human resources especially family labour and capital resources, !. The P-o'e "nd the Ch"n.e

The implementation of the choice on agricultural activities appears and may be observable in two main features. The first relates to non*crop material aspect, which is, $nows as production structure or line of production process. The second relates to crops non*production value aspect. The aspect of production structure or line of production comprises agriculture inputs, processing, output, mar$eting and distribution. Agriculture inputs may relate with some material influencing the .uality and .uantity of the yield. The material input comprises among others seed( chemical and organic fertili/er( insecticide, pesticide and herbicides( family labour and paid labour( agricultural tools and implements( financial capital and credit( and mar$eting of the product commodity. The second aspect of agricultural process concerns with crops non*production value. This aspect refers to types of cultivated crop and mode of cultivation. The type of crop and cropping combination is assumed to reflect ob8ective of production or production orientation. -ost farmers who grow rice or other staple foods tend to be self*subsistence. 5uring harvesting period, when they carry the yield from the field to the home, the larger part may be $ept in rice storage for one year consumption. -ost farmers who grow horticulture or plantation crops may indicate commercial orientation in production. %. The O*t'o+e "ach process of agricultural change and development may bring to certain

outcome. The assumed outcome may appear in identifiable mode of production and in orientation of production. -ode of production can be differentiated into two simple and contrasting figures whether to follow agricultural diversification or specialisation. The agricultural specialisation concerns with ultimately mono*crop cultivation. 0owever, in rural area of @ava, this case does not commonly happen due to variation in season, and the time*span of crop maturity from crop cultivation to harvesting. In one round year there is possibility that farmer cultivate single crop for single cultivation period, but in one year round cultivation there are cultivation of three different crops successively. 0owever, there are also several types of horticulture that have one year time span or even more. The production orientation may also be differentiated into two polar of orientation i.e. commercial or subsistence. &ommercial orientation refers to trade conte't of the commodity encompassing( selling and e'change. In this regard, the commercial crops or cash crops for commercial orientation mostly concerns with horticulture and plantation crops. 1arm household may also consume the product of these horticulture cash crop and plantation crops. 0owever the proportion is very small. &ultivation for subsistence orientation refers to self consumption of the commodity. 4elf consumption crops are mostly staple food crops, especially rice. The degree of self*consumption may depend on the intensity and production .uantity. In upland non*irrigated area, the cultivation of rice may ta$e only once time and depends on rainfall. In such a situation, the harvest may be $ept for one year duration and almost nothing left for sale. In other more fertile and irrigated area, once time rice cultivation may generate sufficient .uantity and even surplus for sale.

(.

The I+#"'t "nd The P-o$le+ The se.uential flow of thought is understood to end up at constructing farm

household living condition in the conte't of wealth and livelihood. The living condition is not stationary. There are some impulses that may provide insight on the sustainability of condition and the future tendency. -onetary crisis is considered to be powerful impulse to bring the wealth and livelihood to shift and change. It is recogni/ed to be

powerful due to its sudden, and unanticipated drive. It has wider impact coverage in sectoral and regional senses. All sector e'periences effect of monetary crisis to varying degree. Although many are suffered and loss not only the profit but the investment as well, there are some sectors winning higher profit from crisis. In view of regional respect, urban area is supposed to suffer more from monetary crisis than rural area. The basic assumption is that the living of urban area is much related with monetary economic. It is therefore, the ruling process might be synthesi/ed into proposition that the higher the level or urbani/ation of an area, then the higher it suffers from monetary crisis. It means that rural area with higher degree of urban influence may suffer more than rural area with higher independence from urban. -onetary crisis is one and most phenomenal pressure to rural and agricultural area. 0owever there are also gradual and intensifying stimulus that may contribute to change in agricultural practices mid farm household wealth and livelihood. 1arm households are assumed to be aware of this stimulus and identify it as problems and potential for development of their farm. The increasing population pressure or the limitedness of wage labour are among the intensifying problems of agricultural practices. The introduction of new method and innovation of new variety or new type of crop are also issue that may change and give different direction of cultivation method.