TIPOLOGI KONFORMITAS SOSIAL KELOMPOK PETANI KECIL DALAM MERESPON KEBIJAKAN PERTANIAN ORGANIK DI TASIKMALAYA JAWA BARAT
Abstract
Organizations of small-scale farmers in organic farming are typically formed through close bonds among members involved in specific regional groups. These farmer groups are established to facilitate members in adhering to the applicable rules and standard regulations implemented in organic farming. The level of compliance of farmer groups in implementing rules varies depending on many sociological factors. This study attempts to uncover the arguments behind the fact of how a group of small-scale farmers can comply with enforced regulations while other groups fail to adapt. The research aims to analyse the typology of suitability of pioneering organic rice farmer groups consisting of small-scale farmers in meeting the governance standards of organic agriculture in Tasikmalaya Regency. This research utilizes a qualitative approach using case study. The research results indicate that there are three types of conformity among small-scale organic rice farmers, namely: (1) fully compliance with regulations, (2) partially compliance with regulations, (3) non-compliance or rejecting compliance with regulations and provisions. This study also reveals the diversity of motivations, interests, and rational choices of each farmer that affect conformity. Based on this, it is known that local farmers have different compliance with organic farming rules. Therefore, policies are needed that are in accordance with group typologies that accommodate diversity in the implementation of organic farming practices. One of them is a policy that is able to support the sustainability of organic farming implementation in local communities.
Metrics
Downloads
References
Arifin HS, Munandar A, Nurhayati HSA, Kaswanto RL. 2009. Potensi Kegiatan Agrowisata di Perdesaan (Buku Seri IV: Manajemen Lanskap Perdesaan bagi Kelestarian dan Kesejahteraan Lingkungan). Kementerian Pertanian Republik Indonesia.
Arifin HS, Munandar A, Schultin KG, Kaswanto RL. 2012. The role and impacts of small-scale, homestead agro-forestry systems ("pekarangan") on household prosperity: An analysis of agro-ecological zones of Java, Indonesia. International Journal of AgriScience. 2(10) 896-914.
Brinkerhoff DW, Goldsmith AA. 1992. Promoting the sustainability of development institutions: A framework for strategy. World Development. 20(3): 369–383. doi: 10.1016/0305-750X(92)90030-Y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(92)90030-Y
Budiman VP, Nurhayati HSA, Arifin HS, Astawan M, Kaswanto RL. 2013. Optimalisasi fungsi pekarangan melalui Program Percepatan Penganekaragaman Konsumsi Pangan (P2KP) di Kabupaten Bogor, Jawa Barat. Prosiding Lokakarya Nasional dan Seminar FKPTPI, Bogor, 2-4.
Buggle JC. 2020. Growing collectivism: irrigation, group conformity and technological divergence. J Econ Growth. 25: 147–193. doi: 10.1007/s10887-020-09178-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10887-020-09178-3
Cialdini RB. Godstein NJ. 2004. Sosial influence: Compliance and conformity. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 55: 591-621. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015
DeLind L. 2000. Transforming organic agriculture into industrial organic products: Reconsidering national organic standards. Human Organization. 59(2): 198-208. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17730/humo.59.2.hm8263678687n536
Feldman S. 2003. Enforcing sosial conformity: A theory of authoritarianism. Political Psychology. 24(1): 41-47. doi: 10.1111/0162-895X.00316. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00316
Fitriyani N, Widodo PB, Fauziah N. 2013. Hubungan antara konformitas dengan perilaku konsumtif pada mahasiswa di Genuk Indah Semarang. Jurnal Psikologi. 12(1): 1-14. doi: 10.14710/jpu.12.1.1-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30872/psikostudia.v1i1.2123
Hidayanti NW. 2016. Hubungan harga diri dan konformitas teman sebaya dengan kenakalan remaja. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Indonesia. 1(2): 31-36.
Hubeis M, Widyastuti H, Wijaya NH. 2014. Prospek cerah produksi sayuran organik bernilai tambah tinggi berbasis petani. Risalah Kebijakan Pertanian dan Lingkungan 1(2): 110-115. https://journal.ipb.ac.id/index.php/jkebijakan/article/view/10302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20957/jkebijakan.v1i2.10302
Karami E, Keshawarz M. 2010. Sociology of sustainable agriculture. sociology, organic farming, climate change and soil science. Sustainable Agriculture Review. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-3333-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3333-8_2
Ma Junqiao, Zhou W, Guo S, Deng X, Song J, Xu D. 2022. Effects of conformity tendencies on farmers’ willingness to take measures to respond to climate change: evidence from Sichuan Province, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 19(18): 11246. doi: 10.3390/ijerph191811246. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191811246
Moser CM, Barrett CB. 2002. Labor, Liquidity, Learning, Conformity and Smallholder Technology Adoption: The Case of Sri in Madagascar Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19680, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.328662
Nee V. 2005. New Institutionalism, Economic And Sociological. Princeton (US): Princeton University Press.
Padmanabhan M, Beckman V. 2009. Institution and sustainability: introduction and overview. In Book: Institution and Sustainability: Political Economy of Agriculture and The Environment: Essay In Honour of Konrad Hagedorn. London (UK): Springer.
Sartika M, Yandri H. 2019. Pengaruh layanan bimbingan kelompok terhadap konformitas teman sebaya. Indonesian Journal of Counseling and Development. 1(1): 9-17. doi: 10.32939/ijcd.v1i1.351. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32939/ijcd.v1i1.351
Sjaf S, Kaswanto RL, Hidayat NK, Barlan ZA, Elson L, Sampean S, Gunadi H. 2021. Measuring achievement of sustainable development goals in rural area: A case study of sukamantri village in Bogor District, West Java, Indonesia. Sodality: Jurnal Sosiologi Pedesaan. 9(2). doi: 10.22500/9202133896. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22500/9202133896
Suminar E, Meiyuntari T. 2015. Konsep diri, konformitas dan perilaku konsumtif pada remaja. Persona: Jurnal Psikologi Indonesia. 4(2): 145-152. doi: 10.30996/persona.v4i02.556. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30996/persona.v4i02.556
Vanclay F, Silvasti T, Howden P. 2007. Styles, parables and scripts: diversity and conformity in australian and finnish agriculture. Rural Society. 17(1): 3–8. doi: 10.5172/rsj.351.17.1.3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5172/rsj.351.17.1.3
Vanclay F, Silvasti T. 2009. Understanding the sociocultural processes that contribute to diversity and conformity among farmers in Australia, Finland and The Netherlands. Andersson, K., et al., (Ed.) in Beyond the Rural-Urban Divide: Cross-Continental Perspectives on the Differentiated Countryside and its Regulation Research in Rural Sociology and Development. 4: 151-167. doi: 10.1108/S1057-1922(2009)0000014009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/S1057-1922(2009)0000014009
Vatmawati S. 2019. Hubungan konformitas siswa dengan pengambilan keputusan karir. Empati: Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling. 6(1): 55-70. doi: 10.26877/empati.v6i1.4114. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26877/empati.v6i1.4114
Wibisono RA, Kartodihardjo H. 2017. Kelembagaan hutan rakyat studi kasus kelompok tani taruna tani Desa Karyasari Kecamatan Leuwiliang Bogor. Risalah Kebijakan Pertanian dan Lingkungan. 4(3): 226-238. https://journal.ipb.ac.id/index.php/jkebijakan/article/view/25999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20957/jkebijakan.v4i3.25999
Wollni M, Andersson C. 2013. Spatial effect in organic agriculture adoption in Honduras: The role of social conformity, positive externalities, and information. Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 149911, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
Wollni M, Andersson C. 2014. Spatial pattern of organic agriculture adoption: Evidence from Honduras. Ecological Economics. 97: 120-128. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.11.010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.11.010
Copyright (c) 2024 RISALAH KEBIJAKAN PERTANIAN DAN LINGKUNGAN: Rumusan Kajian Strategis Bidang Pertanian dan Lingkungan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
PUBLICATION ETHICS
Jurnal Risalah Kebijakan Pembangunan Pertanian dan Lingkungan (JRKPL) is a peer-reviewed journal publishing original research to develop a coherent and respected network of landscape architecture knowledge. JRKPL committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics that clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in publishing a scientific article in JRKPL.
As publisher of JRKPL, PSP3-LPPM IPB and PERHEPI takes its duties of guardianship all stages of publishing process and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities.
Duties of Authors
An author should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal is unacceptable and constitutes unethical publishing behavior. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the manuscript and should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism are include passing off another paper as the author own paper, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another paper (without attribution) and claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Plagiarism detected works will be banned for further publication procedure.
The authors acknowledge that they have disclosed all and any actual or potential conflicts of interest with their work or partial benefits associated with it. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
Duties of the Editorial Board
Review Process
JRKPL is committed to objective and fair double-blind peer-review to prevent any actual or potential conflict of interests between the editorial and review personnel and the reviewed material. JRKPL chooses reviewers based on their expertise (whose most closely matches the topic of the paper). At least 2 reviewers are invited to evaluate a manuscript. In cases of controversy or disagreement regarding the merits of the work, an additional review will be solicited. The JRKPL editor mediates all interaction between authors and reviewers, and the review results owned by JRKPL.
Publication Decisions
The editor of a peer-reviewed JRKPL is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The final decision on article acceptance based on reviewer's opinions, suggestions, and comments. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Fair Play
JRKPL evaluates manuscripts only based on the intellectual content. No race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophies of the authors are considered in the evaluation process.
Confidentiality
JRKPL assure the confidentially of the manuscripts, actors, and other related information on the publishing process. Only corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher are allows for the information.
Disclosure
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Duties of reviewers
(1) Objectivity: Reviewer should provide written and unbiased feedback to the authors, personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewer comments should be clearly with supporting arguments indicating whether the writing is concise and relevant
(2) Expertise: Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
(3) Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewer suggest relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors to improve the quality of the manuscript,
(4) Confidentiality: Reviewer should maintain the confidentiality of the review process. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
(5) Disclosure and conflict of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer own research without the express written consent of the author. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
