REKOMENDASI KEBIJAKAN UNTUK PENGEMBANGAN PEKARANGAN PRODUKTIF DAN BERKELANJUTAN
Abstract
The potential of Metro Municipality's pekarangan contributes to food security, environmental sustainability, and community welfare in the post-Covid-19 era. Metro Municipality's pekarangan have a variety of plants that provide many benefits, including a source of fresh and healthy food for households. This research aims to raise awareness about the flexibility of pekarangan in adapting to changes, enabling them to withstand, recover from, and prepare for future disturbances. The typical size of a pekarangan, generally between 417 and 899 m2, provides an excellent opportunity to develop a complex agroforestry system. To fully realize this potential, policy recommendations include: 1) launching environmentally conscious education campaigns, 2) providing incentives and technical, 3) assistance integrating pekarangan management into urban development plans, and 4) establishing monitoring and evaluation systems for pekarangan. Maintaining the variety of plants found in 50% of the pekarangan is crucial. These plants include ornamental species (such as Aglaonema commutatum Schott, Sansevieria trifasciata Prain, Dieffenbachia seguine (Jacq.) Schott, and Adenium obesum (Forssk.) Roem. & Schult., fruit-bearing plants (like Carica papaya L., Musa paradisiaca L., and Persea americana Mill.), vegetables (including Capsicum frutescens L. and Allium fistulosum L.), and starch-producing plants (such as Manihot glaziovii Muell.Arg). The popularity of these plants is supported by the conducive growing environment in Metro Municipality.
Metrics
Downloads
References
Adriyani AY. 2021. Desain penyelenggaraan penyuluhan mendukung program kawasan pertanian sejahtera (sapira) di Kabupaten Pringsewu Provinsi Lampung. Risalah Kebijakan Pertanian dan Lingkungan. 8(2): 77–86. doi: 10.29244/jkebijakan.v8i2.28040. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29244/jkebijakan.v8i2.28040
Arifin HS, Munandar A, Kaswanto RL, Schultink G. 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. Int’l J of Agri Science. 2(10): 896–914.
Arifin HS, Munandar A, Nurhayati HSA, Kaswanto RL. 2009. Pemanfaatan Pekarangan di Perdesaan (Buku Seri II: Manajemen Lanskap Perdesaaan bagi Kelestarian dan Kesejahteraan Lingkungan). Kementerian Pertanian Republik Indonesia.
Arifin HS, Nurhayati HSA, Kaswanto RL, Budiadi, Irwan SNR, Faisal B, Dahlan MZ, Nadhiroh SR, Wahyuni TS, Ali MS. 2021. Landscape Management Strategy of Pekarangan to Increase Community Immunity during the Covid-19 Pandemic in Java Indonesia–Inductive Research. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 918(1): 012029. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/918/1/012029
Arifin HS. 1998. Study on the vegetation structure of pekarangan and its changes in West Java, Indonesia. [dissertation]. Japan: Okayama University.
Arifin HS. 2013. Pekarangan Kampung untuk Konservasi Agro-Biodiversitas dalam Mendukung Penganekaragaman dan Ketahan Pangan di Indonesia. Orasi Ilmiah Guru Besar. Bogor (ID): IPB.
Faisal B, Dahlan MZ, Arifin HS, Nurhayati HSA, Kaswanto RL, Nadhiroh SR, Wahyuni TS, Irawan SNR. 2022. Landscape Character Assessment of Pekarangan towards Healthy and Productive Urban Village in Bandung City, Indonesia. International Conference on Sustainable Environment, Agriculture and Tourism (ICOSEAT 2022). 778-784. Atlantis Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6463-086-2_102
Firdausi AP, Indriastuti CE, Kusumanti I, Ramadhani DE, Tunisa RA, Maulana AZA, Sasmita GAT, Rizky MFA, Eiyoto W, Adycha PA, Ihsan MFM. Efektivitas budidaya ikan lele dengan Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) di Sujafis Farm, Kecamatan Cikole, Kota Sukabumi. Risalah Kebijakan Pertanian dan Lingkungan. 11(1): 1–12. doi: 10.29244/jkebijakan.v11i1.51105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29244/jkebijakan.v11i1.51105
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
Jesica J, Kaswanto RL, Arifin HS. 2019a. Characteristics of pekarangan in organic settlement and planned settlement along Ciliwung River riparian, Bogor Municipality, Indonesia. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 399(1): 012036. IOP Publishing. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/399/1/012036. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/399/1/012036
Jesica J, Kaswanto RL, Arifin HS. 2019b. Management of “Pekarangan” in Informal Settlement of Ciliwung River Riparian Landscape. KnE Social Sciences. 408-420. doi: 10.18502/kss.v3i21.4984 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i21.4984
Kaklauskas A, Lepkova N, Raslanas S, Vetloviene I, Milevicius V, Sepliakov J. 2021. Covid-19 and green housing: a review of relevant literature. Energies. 14: 1–38. doi: 10.3390/en14082072. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/en14082072
Karyani T, Djuendah E, Sukayat Y. 2021. Pemberdayaan masyarakat di masa pandemi melalui pertanian organik di lahan pekarangan kawasan perkotaan Jawa Barat. J Aplikasi Ipteks untuk Masyarakat. 10(2): 139–144. doi: 10.24198/dharmakarya.v10i2.32492. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24198/dharmakarya.v10i2.32492
Kaswanto RL, Filqisthi TA, Choliq MBS. 2017. Revitalisasi pekarangan lanskap perdesaan sebagai penyedia jasa lanskap untuk meningkatkan kesejahteraan masyarakat. Jurnal Lanskap Indonesia. 8(1): 50-60. doi: 10.29244/jli.v8i1.17638. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29244/jli.v8i1.17638
Krols J, Somers B. 2022. Residential green space, gardening, and subjective wellbeing: a cross-sectional study of garden owners in Northern Belgium. Landscape and Urban Planning. 223: 1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2022.104414. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2022.104414
Mardiyanto A, Pramukanto Q, Mugnisjah WQ. 2014. Perencanaan lanskap pekarangan dengan sistem pertanian terpadu. J Lanskap Indonesia. 6(2): 37–47. doi: 10.29244/jli.2014.6.2.37-47.
Priyadi S, Soelistijono R, Azies AF, Haryuni, Wiyono, Soemarah TKD. 2023. Inovasi pengelolaan sampah rumah tangga dengan teknologi zero waste berorientasi pada good management-garbage practices. GANESHA: J Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat. 3(1): 23–30. doi: 10.36728/ganesha.v3i1.2247. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36728/ganesha.v3i1.2247
Qisthina N, Kaswanto RL, Arifin HS. 2023. Manajemen pekarangan ramah lebah tanpa sengat sebagai upaya peningkatan jasa lanskap perkotaan. Jurnal Ilmu Pertanian Indonesia. 28(1): 46-58. doi: 10.18343/jipi.28.1.46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18343/jipi.28.1.46
Tokazhanov G, Tleuken A, Guney M, Ali Turkyilmaz A, Karaca F. 2020. How is Covid-19 experience transforming sustainability requirements of residential buildings? A review. Sustainability. 12: 1–20. doi: 10.3390/su12208732. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208732
Wangke F. 2023. Optimalisasi faktor modal menunjang lapangan usaha pengelolaan sampah, limbah, dan daur ulang di Kabupaten Minahasa Utara. Risalah Kebijakan Pertanian dan Lingkungan. 10(2): 100–111. doi: 10.29244/jkebijakan.v10i2.48405. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29244/jkebijakan.v10i2.48405
Widiarti IW. 2012. Pengelolaan sampah berbasis “zero waste” skala rumah tangga secara mandiri. J Sains dan Teknologi Lingkungan. 4(2): 101–113. doi: 10.20885/jstl.vol4.iss2.art4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20885/jstl.vol4.iss2.art4
Wisnubroto EI, Jova G, Roni Y. 2021. Pendekatan partisipasi untuk pengembangan desa penyangga Taman Hutan Raya Raden Soerja. Risalah Kebijakan Pertanian dan Lingkungan. 8(3): 136–150. doi: 10.29244/jkebijakan.v8i3.28062. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29244/jkebijakan.v8i3.28062
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.
