Technical Efficiency Potential of People’s Coffee with a Lane System and Grafting System (Special Connection) in Bengkulu Province, Indonesia

Eddy Silamat, Hermanto Siregar, Rachmat Pambudy, Harianto

Abstract

This study aims to determine which is more efficient between coffee cultivated in columns and technically grafted coffee. Indonesia is the largest coffee-producing country in the world after Brazil and Vietnam, with a land potential of more than 1.2 million hectares and an average productivity of less than 0.7 tons per hectare. Cross-sectional data were collected from 326 farmers, consisting of 206 lane coffee farmers and 120 grafting coffee farmers. As a coffee-producing region, Bengkulu contributes to the low productivity of Indonesian coffee. Based on SFA analysis, the research results revealed that 87 % of coffee farmers with a grafting system in the study area have a technical efficiency level above 90%, when compared to the lane system, which is only 62 %, this shows that coffee with a grafting system has proven to be technically more efficient. The low technical production has affected the efficiency of coffee farmers in Bengku Province. The government made various efforts to increase production, one of which is plant genetic engineering technology through grafting, better known to the local community as shoot grafting, which has produced coffee varieties that are superior both in growth and production and are recognized based on Geographical Indications (GI) of the region of origin.

 

Keywords: coffee; strips; grafting; technical efficiency

 

DOI：10.62321/issn.1000-1298.2024.01.06



Download Full Text:

PDF


References


MUKHLIS I, & GÜRÇAM ÖS. The role of agricultural sector in food security and poverty alleviation in Indonesia and Turkey. Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics and Sociology, 2022, 40(11): 430–436. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajaees/2022/v40i111728

LOIZOU E, KARELAKIS C, ΓΑΛΑΝΌΠΟΥΛΟΣ Κ, et al. The role of agriculture as a development tool for a regional economy. Agricultural Systems, 2019, 173: 482–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.04.002

Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Agriculture. Geographical Indication Profile (IG) of Agricultural Products in 2019. In Bureau of Foreign Cooperation Secretariat General of the Ministry of Agriculture. Bureau of Foreign Cooperation Secretariat General of the Ministry of Agriculture, 2019.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, ed. The Future of Food and Agriculture: Trends and Challenges. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2017.

PAWLAK K, & KOŁODZIEJCZAK M. The role of agriculture in ensuring food security in developing countries: Considerations in the context of the problem of sustainable food production. Sustainability, 2020, 12(13): 5488. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12135488

MARBUN P, NASUTION Z, HANUM H, et al. Classification of andisol soil on robusta coffee plantation in Silima Pungga - Pungga District. IOP Conference Series. 2018, 122: 012045. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/122/1/012045

CONTRERAS F, BAYKAL E, & ABID G. E-Leadership and teleworking in times of COVID-19 and Beyond: What we know and where do we go. Frontiers in Psychology, 2020, 11: 590271. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.590271

DAMATTA FM, ÁVILA RT, CARDOSO AA, et al. Physiological and agronomic performance of the coffee crop in the context of climate change and global warming: a review. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2018, 66(21): 5264–5274. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.7b04537

SOTT MK, FURSTENAU LB, KIPPER LM, et al. Precision techniques and Agriculture 4.0 technologies to promote sustainability in the coffee sector: State of the art, challenges and future trends. IEEE Access. 2020, 8: 149854–149867. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2020.3016325

ASHEBRE KM. The Role of Biotechnology on Coffee Plant Propagation: A Current topics paper. Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare. 2016, 6(5): 13–19. https://iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JBAH/article/view/29479/0

KUMAR V, NAIDU MM, & RAVISHANKAR GA. Developments in coffee biotechnology—in vitro plant propagation and crop improvement. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture, 2006, 87(1): 49–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-006-9134-y

MELO BD, & SOUSA LBD. Biology of Reproduction Coffea arábica. L. e Coffea canephora Pierre. Revista Verde De Agroecologia E Desenvolvimento Sustentável, 2011, 6(2):1–7.

DE ANDRADE JÚNIOR S, ALEXANDRE RS, SCHMILDT ER, et al. Comparison between Grafting and Cutting as Vegetative Propagation Methods for Conilon Coffee Plants. Acta Scientiarum-Agronomy, 2013, 35(4): 16917. https://doi.org/10.4025/actasciagron.v35i4.16917

LI H, HUANG D, MA Q, et al. Factors influencing the technology adoption behaviours of litchi farmers in China. Sustainability, 2019, 12(1): 271. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12010271

BRAVO‐URETA BE, & PINHEIRO AE. Efficiency Analysis of Developing Country Agriculture: A Review of the Frontier Function Literature. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 1993, 22(1): 88–101. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1068280500000320

SYVERSON C. What determines productivity? Journal of Economic Literature, 2011, 49(2): 326–365. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.49.2.326

MANGO N, MAKATE C, HANYANI-MLAMBO BT, et al. A stochastic frontier analysis of technical efficiency in smallholder maize production in Zimbabwe: The post-fast-track land reform outlook. Cogent Economics & Finance, 2015, 3(1): 1117189. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2015.1117189

PARTELLI FL, VIEIRA HD, SANTIAGO AR, et al. Produção e desenvolvimento radicular de plantas de café “Conilon” propagadas por sementes e por estacas. Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira, 2006, 41(6): 949–954. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0100-204x2006000600008

MYERS RY, KAWABATA AF, CHO A, et al. Grafted coffee increases yield and survivability. Horttechnology, 2020, 30(3): 428–432. https://doi.org/10.21273/horttech04550-20

WAMBUA DM, GICHIMU BM, & NDIRANGU SN. Smallholder coffee productivity as affected by socioeconomic factors and technology adoption. International Journal of Agronomy, 2021, 8852371 (1–8). https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8852371

BATTESE GE, & COELLI T. Prediction of firm-level technical efficiencies with a generalized frontier production function and panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 1988, 38(3): 387–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(88)90053-x

RAHMAN S, MATIN MDA, & HASAN MDK. Joint Determination of improved variety adoption, Productivity and efficiency of pulse production in Bangladesh: A Sample-Selection Stochastic Frontier approach. Agriculture, 2018, 8(7): 98. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture8070098

COELLI T, RAO DSP, O’DONNELL CJ, et al. An introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis. Springer eBooks. 1998. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5493-6

TAHERDOOST H. Sampling methods in research methodology; How to choose a sampling technique for research. International Journal of Academic Research in Management, 2016, 5: 18-27. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3205035

TEDDLIE C, & YU F. Mixed Methods sampling. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2007, 1(1): 77–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689806292430

ACKOFF RL. The Design of Social Research. University of Chicago Press; 1973.

COCHRAN WG. Sampling Techniques. John Wiley & Sons; 1977.

COELLI T. Recent Developments in Frontier Modelling and Efficiency Measurement. The Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1995, 39(3): 219–245. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8489.1995.tb00552.x

CHIRWA E. Sources of Technical Efficiency among Smallholder Maize Farmers in Southern Malawi. RePEc: Research Papers in Economics. 2007. http://www.geocities.ws/echirwa/techsm0103.pdf

NGANGO J, & KIM SG. Assessment of Technical Efficiency and Its Potential Determinants among Small-Scale Coffee Farmers in Rwanda. Agriculture, 2019, 9(7): 161. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture9070161

NJERU J. Factors Influencing Technical Efficiencies among Selected Wheat Farmers in Uasin Gishi District, Kenya. Nairobi, Kenya: AERC, 2010.

FATIMA H, & KHAN MA. Influence of wheat varieties on technical efficiency and production of wheat crop in Pakistan (In selected area of Punjab). Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 2015, 31(2): 114–122. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2015/31.2.114.122

APEZTEGUÍA BI, GÁRATE MR, & ZABALETA IG. Assessing the technical efficiency of horticultural production in Navarra, Spain. Agricultural Systems, 2003, 78(3): 387–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0308-521x(03)00039-8

ALAM MDF, KHAN MDA, & HUQ ASMA. Technical efficiency in tilapia farming of Bangladesh: a stochastic frontier production approach. Aquaculture International, 2011, 20(4): 619–634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10499-011-9491-3

THÉRIAULT V, & SERRA R. Institutional environment and Technical Efficiency: A Stochastic frontier analysis of cotton producers in West Africa. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2014, 65(2): 383–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12049

BINAM J, SYLLA K, DIARRA I, et al. Factors Affecting Technical Efficiency among Coffee Farmers in Côte d’Ivoire: Evidence from the Centre West Region. African Development Review, 2003, 15(1): 66–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8268.00063

BACH LG, NGUYEN NH, YEN PND, et al. Combination of mycorrhizal symbiosis and root grafting effectively controls nematode in replanted coffee soil. Plants, 2020, 9(5): 555. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9050555


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.