Economic Assessment of Dual Purpose Type of Cattle Farming in Minahasa Regency – Indonesia

Yıl 2018, , 213 - 224, 30.09.2018

Erwin Wantasen , Umar Paputungan

https://doi.org/10.29023/alanyaakademik.424012

Cited By: 1

Öz

The aim of this study was to analyze dual purpose type of cattle farm households’ economy in Langowan District Minahasa Regency, Indonesia. Data relies on sample survey of 100 farm households in Tumarats Village during 2017. Descriptive and quantitative analysis using a probit model was employed. Result of this study showed that Family labor absorbed by cattle farms on the first, second and third scales were 44.34, 27.46 and 16.82 man days/AU/year respectively. The contribution of cattle income on the first, second and third scales were 52.84%, 66.31% and 70.19% respectively. Value added of cattle, selling price, family labor, cattle labor and cultivated land area had significantly positive effect on households’ decision to increase cattle scale of business.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Key words : Food expenditure, household decision, income, scale of business, non food expenditure

Economic Assessment of Dual Purpose Type of Cattle Farming in Minahasa Regency – Indonesia

Öz

The aim of this study was to analyze dual purpose type of cattle farm households’ economy in Langowan District Minahasa Regency, Indonesia. Data relies on sample survey of 100 farm households in Tumarats Village during 2017. Descriptive and quantitative analysis using a probit model was employed. Result of this study showed that Family labor absorbed by cattle farms on the first, second and third scales were 44.34, 27.46 and 16.82 man days/AU/year respectively. The contribution of cattle income on the first, second and third scales were 52.84%, 66.31% and 70.19% respectively. Value added of cattle, selling price, family labor, cattle labor and cultivated land area had significantly positive effect on households’ decision to increase cattle scale of business.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Food expenditure, Household decision, Income, Scale of business, Nonfood expenditure

Kaynakça

• REFERENCESAMIR, P. and NATNIPSCHEER. H.C.K (1989). Conducting on Farm Animal Research, Procedure and Economic Analysis. Singapore national printer Ltd. Singapore.
• ANIS. S.D., WANTASEN, E., .DALIE, S., KALIGIS, D. A. and PAPUTUNGAN, U. (2015). Beef Cattle Feasibility Study of Household Farm in Bolmong Regency, North Sulawesi Province of Indonesia”, International Journal of.Agricultural Sciences.and Natural Resources., 2(2): 36-39
• ASMAH, E.E. (2011). Rural Livelihood Diversification and Agricultural Household Welfare in Ghana. Journal of Development and Agricultural.Economics., 3(7): 325-334.
• BART, K., MAYER, A.C., GOMEZ, C.A., MUNOZ, E., HESS, H.D. and HOLMANN, F. (2013). Economic Evaluation of The Current and Alternative Dual-Purpose Cattle Systems for Smallholder Farms in The Central Peruvian Highlands”, Agricultural Systems., 101(3): 152-161.
• BOROOAH, V.K. (2002). Logit and Probit Ordered and Multinominal Models. Quantitative Vol 138, Application in The Social Sciences. Sage Publishing International
• DALIE, S., WANTASEN, E., ANIS, S.D. and PANGEMANAN, S.P. (2015). Profit Analysis Of Traditional Beef Cattle Farm in Minahasa Regency, Indonesia. 2015. Online Journal of Animal and. Feed Research,5 (3): 90-94
• .EMILY, A. O., GIDEON, A. O. and STEVEN J. S. (2003). Cattle as Assets: Assessment of Non-Market Benefit From Cattle in Smallholder Kenyan Crop-Livestock Systems”, Proceedings of the 25th International Conference of Agricultural Economists (IAAE) 16 . 22 August 2003, ISBN Number: 0-958-46098-1 Durban, South Africa p. 328-334
• FRANZLUEBBERS, A.J. (2007). Integrated Crop–Livestock Systems in The Southeastern USA. Agronomy Journal.,. 99: 361–372.
• GUJARATI, D. N. (2001).Basic Econometric, Fourth edition. McGrawHill, New York.
• HARTONO, B. 2006. Household Economic of Dairy Farmer: A Case Study in Village of Pandesari, Dictrict of Pujon, Malang Regency. Animal Production., 8(3): 226-232.
• JALETA, M. and GEBREMEDHIN, B. (2012). Interdependence of Smallholders’ Net Market Positions in Mixed Crop-Livestock Systems of Ethiopian highlands. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics.,4(7): 199-209
• KNOTTNERUS, P. (2003). Sample Survey Theory: Some Pythagorean Perspectives. Springer Science Business Media. New York.
• KALANGI, L.S., SYAUKAT, Y., KUNTJORO, S.U. and PRIYANTI, A. (2014). The Characteristics of Cattle Farmer Households and the Income of Cattle Farming Businesses in East Java. Journal Of Agriulture and Veterinary Science., 7(12): 29-34.
• MACLEOD, N.D., MCDONALD, C.K., LISSON, S.N.and RAHMAN, R. (2007). Modelling for Scenario Analysis for Improved Smallholder Farming Systems in Indonesia. Paper Presented in MODSIM International Congress on Modelling and Simulation Modelling and Simulation Society of Australia and New Zealand, 109-114.
• OBAYELU, A. E., OKORUWA, V. O. and ONI, O. A. (2009). Analysis of Rural and Urban Households’ Food Consumption Differential in The North-Central, Nigeria: A micro-Econometric Approach. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics.., 1(2): 18-26.
• POHLER, K.G., MALLORY, D.A., PATTERSON, D.J., SMITH, M.F., LAUDERDALE, J.W., MARTINS, T., PERES, R.F.G., VILELA, E.R. and VASCONCELOS, J.L.M. (2011). Reproductive Technology & Global Production Of Beef: Why Beef Producers In The U.S. Need To Pay Attention Proceedings, Applied Reproductive Strategies in Cattle August 31 – September 1, 2011; Joplin, MO :379-396.
• RAHARJO, M. and SUROYO. (2013). Beef Cattle Integration on Dry-Land Farming in Sragen Central- Java Indonesia: Improving of Economic and Environmental Carrying Capacity Aspects. Animal Production., 15(2):135-143.
• ROESSALI, W., MASYHURI, NURTINI, S. and DARWANTO, D.H. (2011). Factor Influencing Farmer’s Decision To Increase Beef Cattle Business Scale in Central Java Province. Journal of The Indonesian Tropical Animal Agriculture., 36(1): 27-35.
• SIKHWENI, N.P. and HASSAN, R. (2013). Opportunities and Challenges Facing Small-Scale Cattle Farmers Living Adjacent to Kruger National Park, Limpopo Province. Journal of Emerging Trends in Economic and. Management Science., 5(1):38-43
• STAINFELD, H.and MACK, S. (2001). Livestock Development Strategies. World Animal Review., 88: 18-24.
• UDO, H.M.J., AKLILU, H.A., PHONG, L.T., BOSMA, R.H., BUDISATRIA, I.G.S., PATIL, B.R., SAMDUP, T. and Bebe, B.O. (2011).Impact of Intensification of Different Types of Livestock Production in Smallholder Crop-Livestock Systems. Livestock Science., 139: 22-29.
• UMAR, A.S.S., ALAMU, J.F. and ADENIJI, O.B. (2008). Economic Analysis of Small Scale Fattening Enterprise in Bama Local Government Area Of Borno State Nigeria. Patnsuk Journal 4(1): 1-10
• WANTASEN, E., HARTONO, B., HANANI, N. and PANELEWEN. V.V.J. (2012). Household Economic Behavior of Traditional Cattle Farmers in Utilizing Artificial Insemination Technology: A Case Study in Village of Kanonang III, Minahasa Regency of Indonesa. Journalof Agriculture and Food Technology, 2(8) :141-152.
• WANTASEN E., HARTONO, B. and HANANI, N. (2013). Income upgrading model of cattleman in the utilization of artificial insemination : Case studi in Village of Kanonang III , Regency of Minahasa. Animal Production. 15(2):144-152