Energetic analysis of various production systems in West Javan agricultural landscape: looking for sustainable system

Muhamad, Dendi1); Parikesit2); Okubo, Satoru3)

1) Institute of Ecology, Padjadjaran University Jalan Sekeloa Selatan 1, Bandung, 40132, West Java, Indonesia e-mail: dendi@unpad.ac.id; zo_den@yahoo.com 2) Departmen of Biology, Institute of Ecology, Padjadjaran University Jalan Sekeloa Selatan 1, Bandung, 40132, West Java, Indonesia. e-mail: 2) parikesit@unpad.ac.id; 3) Department of Ecosystem Studies, Graduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, The University of Tokyo. Yayoi 1-1-1, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8657, Japan e-mail: aokubos@mail.ecc.u-tokyo.ac.jp

Abstract

To indicate the sustainability of agricultural landscape from its energy efficiency, energtic analysis study of various producion system was carried out in a village, West Java. Data were collected using questionnaires and direct measurements. We analyzed the energy efficiency of each system and interactions among them through energy flows, and evaluated the dependency of all systems on internal and external energy in the agricultural landscape. Regardless of important role of local resources, much amount of external materials such as inorganic fertilizers and pesticides were used in most ricefields accounted for 46

% of total inputs. The systems, thus, had low efficiency about 2.78 and depended on external inputs from outside of the agricultural landscape. On the contrary, in bamboo tree gardens and mix tree gardens, use of external materials such as pesticide and chemical fertilizer was significantly small (no more than 20 % of total inputs), particularly in bamboo tree gardens (about 4 % of total inputs). Both tree gardens had higher energy efficiency (bamboo tree garden: 28,89 and mix tree garden: 19.41) and lower external dependency than ricefield systems. In kebun-talun system, which is an unique rotation system of bamboo tree garden and “kebun” or upland field, dependency on external inputs was intermediate (38 % of total inputs) compared to ricefield, bamboo tree garden and mix tree garden since farmers used external materials only in kebun phase where the amount was still lower than ricefield. Regarding energy efficiency which is about 20.74, the system was smaller than bamboo but higher than mix tree garden and much higher than rice fields. There was relation among the four systems in terms of energy flow. To increase the sustainability by reduce high dependency on external inputs in ricefields, a new energy flow retrieved from tree gardens should be considered.

Key Words:external dependency; sustainability, input-output; kebun-talun; energy efficiency.

• Introduction

To study the agricultural production systems efficiency as an indicator of agricultural landscape sustainability, energy analysis in various production systems was carried out in a rural area, West Java. The village is located in a fringe area of Bandung City which is a rural area in a mosaic of urban-rural landscape. Thus, the village also one of typical agricultural landscape that consist of divers production systems, namely rice fields, upland fields, bamboo tree gardens (bamboo-taluns), mix tree gardens (taluns), and kebun-talun system. The energy base analysis was choose due to the fact that all the materials which used in agricultural production systems basically came from sunlight energy that had been converted to chemical substances (food) by the plants (Pimentel et al., 1983). In other words, energy is essential for accomplishing any works, without energy no action or process could occur and therefore no goods or services could be produce. These means that using energy base analysis, efficiency in different agricultural production systems could be compared and analyzed. Then, Base on

Fluck (1992) and Ramakrishnan (1990) perspective, the most useful approach in energy analysis to determine energy efficiency is to combine energy flow and input-output analysis. Then, from the energy efficiency the system’s sustainability could indicated.

There are three main objectives in this research. First, is to know and understand interaction among production systems which form an energy flow in agricultural landscape. Second, is to analyze the energy input-output of each production systems. The last, is to compare energy efficiency among different production systems, which one has is the most efficient in term of energy to indicate its sustainability.

In order to evaluate energy efficiency of different agriculture production systems, a research framework was established. Basically, energy analysis in this research begin by choose a boundary (Fluck, 1992). Agricultural landscape of the study site was imagined as an ecosystem that has boundary. The boundary was an imaginary line around the administrative boundary of the research site village. This imaginary boundary was used in order to distinguish between local (internal) and external, so there would be inputs which were used and there would also be outputs which were resulted by the components inside the systems. Then, as a system, the agricultural landscape was consisting of several components (production systems) and between this components that would be interaction that form energy flows. In this energy analysis the inputs for an agricultural production system were typically identified and quantified. Then, the energy to provide the inputs were determined and summed, and compared with the output, as energy ratio (Fluck, 1992; Leach, 1976; Pimentel, 1980, Pimentel et al., 1983). This ratio of energy outputs per inputs was used to state the agricultural production system efficiency in order to indicate its sustainability.

• Materials and methods

Data about input and output of each production system were collected using questionnaires and direct measurements. Base on preliminary survey and land ownership census, numbers of households in Karamat Mulya village were randomly selected using the formula from Lynch et al. (1974).

N.Z2 .P(1-P)

n =

N.d² + Z².P(1-P)

n = Number of sample (selected households) N = Number of population

Z = Value of normal variable (1,96)

P = Proportion of highest possibility (0,50) d = Error sampling (0,10)

Base on the formula, the selected households consist of: 72 house hold own ricefield, 23 house hold own upland field, 44 house hold own bamboo talun, 40 house hold own mix talun, and 48 house hold own talun which still conducted kebun-talun systems in last five years were selected to be interviewed using questioner. The aspects included in the questionnaires were: household profile; type(s) of energy used by households; type(s) of energy used as inputs by households in their agricultural production systems; source, mode of procurement, and usage quantity; type(s) of energy which were outputs from their agricultural production systems; usage (subsistence or to be sold); usage quantity and selling destination; and accessibility to exports the outputs destination; management intensity, and management of agricultural residues).

After all of the data were collected, then convert this input and output data in to energy base unit per area size per time unit. Researches which was used as reference for the energy conversion factors in this research are: Leach (1976), Cox and Atkins (1979), de Wit (1979) Mitchell (1979), Cervinka (1980), Pimentel (1980), Ruthenberg (1980), Fluck and

Baird (1980); Doering (1980), Lockeretz (1980), Rutger and Grant (1980), Kuether and Duff

(1981), Uhl and Murphy (1981), Freedman (1982), Dazhong & Pimentel (1984; 1990), Han et

11. (1985), Christanty (1989), Gajaseni (1994), Nguyen and Hynes (1994), Singh and Behl (1999), Sundkvist, et al. (1999). The data presented in this study were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS version 11.0) Software. The analysis includes frequency, correlation between variables, and cross tabulation.

• Results and discussion

The study site, Karamat Mulya Village, Soreang District, West Java, is located a fringe area of Bandung City (West Java Province city capital). Karamat Mulya village is a rural area in a mosaic of urban-rural landscape of Bandung Metropolitan. The village is located in elevation 700 – 1200 meter above sea level. In general, the topography of the study site is undulating hilly area to flat area. The landscape consists of several components, tree garden (talun) areas (consist of kebun-talun, bamboo talun, and mix talun) located in the hill area and rice field and upland field in more relative flat area until flat area. The village located around (±) 23km south west from Bandung (Picture 1).

The results from this research are illustrated in Picture 2, which is the quantified energy flow among agriculture production systems in the study site’s agricultural landscape. As can be seen from the picture there are many interactions between the agricultural production systems.

From the quantified energy flow (picture 2), it could be clarified that there are interaction among the four systems in terms of energy flow, however, it was small portion: it was rare case to use organic materials derived from taluns in ricefields, even though there are energy flow in form of run-off and falling leaf (litter) which brought by the wind or rain from he taluns (on the steep and upper area) to ricefieds (on the gentle and lower area) (which is appeared as the dash line on Picture 2).

Base on the energy flow which shown in Picture 2, an energy input-ouput matrix was made (Table 1). Then, from the input-output matrix energy efficiency of each agricultural production system could be calculated (Table 2).

Table 1. Energy Input-output Matrix of different agricultural production systems in Karamatmulya Village’s Agricultural Landscape (MJ ha-1 year-1)

Table 2. Energy Efficiency of different agricultural production systems in Karamatmulya Village’s Agricultural Landscape (MJ ha-1 year-1)

Regardless of important role of local resources, much amount of external materials such as inorganic fertilizers, pesticides and tools were used in most rice fields and upland fields (kebun phase in kebun-talun system) accounted for arround 45 % to 50% of total inputs. The ricefield systems, thus, had low efficiency about 2.8 and depended on external inputs from outside of the village. Even though, the ricefield energy efficiency in the research site is still higher compare to ricefield that used diesel in Madras, India (energy efficiency: 1.7) and ricefield that used machinery in Thailand (energy efficiency: 0.3) (Gajaseni, 1994; and Norman, 1977). On the other hand, if it was compare with traditional ricefield in Thailand, the efficiency is almost same, which is 2.7.

On the contrary, in bamboo tree gardens (bamboo taluns) and mix tree gardens (mix taluns), use of external materials was significantly small (about 20 % of total inputs), particularly in bamboo taluns (arround 4 % of total inputs). Both taluns had higher energy efficiency (bamboo talun: 28.89 and mix talun: 19.41) and lower external dependency than annual crop production systems (ricefield and upland field).

In kebun-talun system, which is an unique rotation system of bamboo talun and kebun or upland field, dependency on external inputs was intermediate (about 38 % of total inputs) compared to annual and perennial tree crop production systems since farmers used external materials only in kebun phase where the amount was still lower than ricefields. Regarding energy efficiency which is about 20.74, the system was smaller than bamboo talun but higher than mix talun and much higher than ricefields.

The efficiency of kebun-talun system in the research site is not so different with shifting cultivation system which has five to ten years rotation in India (Maikhuri, 1994). According to his reseach findings, the eficiency of shifting cultivation system was decreasing due to the shorten periode of rotation. So its efficiency from highest to lowest are arround 16,4 to 36,1 as the rotation periode increased. Thus, could be infere that the kebun-talun system efficency is still between the interval of shifting cultivation system’s efficency in India. In other words, the talun system, especially the kebun-talun system in the research site are under good condition.

It was clarified that although tree gardens (taluns), which were dominant agricultural land-use, had high energy efficiency, its contribution to the production systems of ricefields was low (less than 10 %). To reduce high dependency on external inputs in ricefields, a new energy flow retrieved from taluns should be considered in landscape-based sustainability.

• Conclusions

1. There are interaction among the four systems (ricefield, kebun-talun, bamboo tree garden, mix tree garden) in terms of energy flow, however, it was small portion.

1. Base on partial analysis of each producton system, it could be clarified (in term of energy base unit) :
   • Ricefield : have the highest yield productivity but have the highest dependency to external inputs and the lowest energy efficiency.
   • Bamboo tree garden: have the lowest yield productivity but have the lowest dependency to external inputs and the highest energy efficency
     
   • Mix tree garden: have intermediate yield productivity and high dependency to external inputs with intermediate energy efficiency
   • Kebun-Talun: have high yield productivity and intermediate dependency with high energy efficiency

In order to established a more sustainable agricultural landscape, the four production system (mentioned above) should be maintained and integrated.

In order to increase the sustainability, the high dependency on external inputs (particularly in ricefields) should be decreased, a new energy flow retrieved from tree gardens should be considered.

5. References

Calder, I.R., I.R. Wright, dan D. Murdiyarso. 1986. A study of evaporation from tropical rain forest-West Java. Journal of Hydrology. 89 : 13 – 31.

Ceielski, E., Dunkerley, J. and Ramsay, W., 1979. Household energy and the poor in the Third World. Resources for the Future, Inc., Washington, DC, 152 pp.

Cervinka, Y., 1980. Fuel and energy efficiency. In: Pimentel (Editors), Handbook of Energy utilization in Agriculture. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, pp. 15-21.

Christanty, L. 1989. Analysis of the Sustainability and Management of the Talun-Kebun System of West Java, Indonesia. Doctoral Thesis. The Faculty of Graduate Studies Interdisciplinary Department, Resource management Program. Vancouver: The University of British Columbia.

  , J.P. Kimmins, dan D. Mailly. 1997. “Without Bamboo, the Land Dies”: a Conceptual Model of the Biogeochemical Role of Bamboo in an Indonesian Agroforestry System. Forest Ecology and Management. 91: 83 – 91.

  . 1996. “Without Bamboo, the Land Dies”: Biomass, Litterfall, and Soil Organic Matter Dynamic of a Javanese Bamboo Talun – Kebun System. Forest Ecology and Management. 87: 75 – 88

Cox, G.W. and Atkins, M.D., 1979. Agricultural Ecology. Freeman, San Feansisco.

Dazhong, W. and Pimentel, D., 1984. Energy inputs in agricultural systems of China. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 11: 29-35.

  and Pimentel, D., 1984. Energy use in crop systems in northeastern China. In: Pimentel and C.W. Hall (editors), Food and energy Resources. Academic Press, pp. 91- 120.

  , and D. Pimentel. 1990. Energy Flow in Agroecosystems of Northeast China. In: Gliessman,

S.R. (eds). Ecological Studies. New York : Springer- Verlag. pp : 322 – 336.

de Wit, C.T. 1979. The efficient use of labour, land and energy in agriculture. Agric. Syst. 8 : 279-287.

  . 1992. Resource use efficient in agriculture. Agric. Syst. 40: 125-151.

Doering, III, O.C., 1980. Accounting for energy in farm macinary and building. In: Pimentel (Editors), Handbook of Energy utilization in Agriculture. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, pp. 9-14.

Fluck, R.C. 1979. Energy productivity: a measure of energy utilization in agricultural systems. Agric. Syst..4 : 29-37.

  . and Baird, C.D., 1980. Agricultural Energetic. AVI, Publishing, Westport, CT.

  . 1992. Analysis of Agricultural Energy Systems: Input- Output Energy Analysis for Agriculture   and   the Food Chain. Dalam: Stout, B.A., R.M. Pearl &

R.C. Brook (eds). Energy in World Agriculture. New York : Elsevier. pp : 83 – 88.

  . 1992. Energy Analysis for agricultural Systems. In: In: Fluck, R.C. (eds). Energy in Farm Production. Elsevier. Amsterdam, London, New York, Tokyo. pp : 39 – 43.

Freedman S.M., 1982. Human Labour as an energy source for rice production in developing world. Agroecosystem. 8: 125- 136.

Gajaseni, J., 1995. Energy analysis of wetland rice systems in Thailand. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 52

: 173 – 178.

Grandstaff, T.B. & D.A. Messerschmidt. 1995. A Manager’s Guide to the Use of Rapid Rural Appraisal. Thailand

: FARM Programme, FAO/UNDP & Suranaree University of Technology. pp. 10 – 13, 114.

farms in north China. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 13: 217-240.

Kuether, D.O. and Duff, J.B., 1981. Energy requirement for alternative rice production systems in the tropics. International Rice Research Institute, Manila.

Leach, G., 1975. Energy and Food Production. International Institute for Environment and Development, London, 151 pp.

          , G., 1976. Energy and Food Production. IPC Science and technology Press, Guilford, Surrey, 137 pp.

Lieth, H., 1975. Measurement of caloric value. In: H. Lieth and

R.H. Whittaker (Editors), Primary Productivity in the Biosphere. Springer-Verlag, New York, N.Y., pp. 119 – 129.

Lockeretz, W., Klepper, R., Commoner, B., Gertler, M., Fast, S. and O’Leary, D., 1976. Organic and conventional crop production in the corn belt: a comparison of economic performance and energy use for selected farms. Center for biology of natural systems. Washington University, St. Louis, MO, 42 pp.

          , 1980. Energy inputs for nitrogen, phosporus, and potash fertilizer. In: D. Pimentel (Editor), Handbook of Energy Utilization in Agriculture. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, pp. 23-24.

Lynch, S.J.F., R.M. Hollnsteiner, & C.L. Covar. 1974. Data Gathering by Social Survey. Quezon City : Philipine Social Science Council.

Maikhuri, R.K. 1996. Eco-energetic analysis of Village Ecosystem of Different Traditional Societies of Northeast India. Energy. 21 : 1287 – 1297.

Mailly, D., L. Christanty, J.P. Kimmins. 1997. “Without Bamboo the Land Dies”: Nutrient Cycling and Biogeochemistry of a Javanese Bamboo Talun – Kebun System. Forest Ecology and Management. 91: 155 – 173

Mitchell, B. 1989. Geography and Resource Analysis. 2nd Edition. Singapore : Longman Scientific & Technical.

Nguyen, M.L., Haynes, R.J. and Gob, K.M., 1992. Comparison of nutrient status in soil, pasture and crops and nutrient budgets in conventional and alternative low-input mixed cropping farms. New Zealand Institute of Agricultural Science Conference. 25-28 august 1992, Lincoln University, New Zealand.

Norman, M.J.T., 1978. Energy input and output of subsistence cropping systems in the tropics. Agro-ecosystems, 4: 355-266.

Norman, D.W. 1968. How hard do Nigerian farmers work? Samaru Agric. Newsl., 9: 18-28.

Odum, H.T., 1984. Energy analysis of the enviornmental role in agricultrure. In: G. Stanhill (Editors). Energy and Agriculture. Springer, Berlin: 24-51 pp.

Odum, E.P. 1996. Dasar-dasar Ekologi. Edisi ke-3. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.

Parikesit, Djuniwarti, and Hadikusumah H. Y., 1997. Spatial Structure and Floristic Diversity of Man-made

Ramakrishnan, P.S. 1990. Agricultural Systems of the Northeastern Hill Region of India. In: S.R. Gliesman (editor). Agroecology: Researching the Ecological Basis for Sustainable Agriculture. Ecological Studies. Vol. 78. New York: Springer-Verlag. pp : 251 – 274.

Rappaport, R.A., 1971. The flow of energy in an agricultural society. Sci. Am., 224: 117 – 132.

Rutger, J.N. and Grant, W.R. 1980. Energy use in rice production. In: D. Pimentel (Editor), Hanbook of Energy Utilization in Agriculture. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL pp. 93-97.

Ruthenberg, H. 1971. Farming System in the Tropics. Clarendon Press. Oxford, 313 pp.

Singh, G. and Chancellor, W., 1975. Energy inputs and agricultural produtcion under various regimes of mechanization in India. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng., 18: 252 – 259.

Singh H., Mishra D., Nahar N.M., 2002. Energy use pattern in production agriculture of a typical village in arid zone, India – Part I. Energy Convers Mgmt. 43 : 2275-86.

Ecosystem in Upper Citarum River Basin. The Condition , Mishra D., Nahar N.M., Ranjan M. 2003. Energy use pattern

of Biodiversity Maintenance in Asia. East-West Centre Program on Environment. Honolulu, Hawaii.

  . 2001. Kebon Tatangkalan: The Multi-Layered Agroforestry in the Changing Agricultural Landscape of the Upper Citarum Watershed, West Java Indonesia. In: Pengelolaan Daerah Aliran Sungai:

in production agriculture of a typical village in arid zone, India – Part II. Energy Convers Mgmt. 44: 1053-67.

Soemarwoto, O., Christanty, L., Henky, Hadikusumah, H. Y., Iskandar, J., Hadyana, Priyono. 1979. The Talun-kebun System: A Shifting Cultivation in a Man-made Forest. Institute of Ecology, Padjadjaran University: Bandung.

Permasalahan dan Tantangan. Ekologi dan , O., 1984. The Talun-Kebun System, A Modified Shifting

Pembangunan. Bandung: PPSDAL-Lemlit-Universitas Padjadjaran. pp : 29 – 39.

Cultivation, in West Java. Jurnal. www.google.com (SpringerLink).

, K. Takeuchi, A. Tsunekawa &   O.S. Abdoellah. 2001. , O. dan Soemarwoto, I., 1985. The Javanese Rural

Non-forest Fuelwood Acquisition and Transition in Type of Energy for Domestik Uses in the Changing Agricultural Landscape of the Upper Citarum Watershed, Indonesia. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 84 : 245 – 258.

  , K. Takeuchi, A. Tsunekawa & O.S. Abdoellah. 2004. Kebon Tatangkalan: A Disappearing Agroforest in the Upper Citarum Watershed, West Java, Indonesia. Agroforestry Systems. 63: 171–182

  , K. Takeuchi, A. Tsunekawa, O.S. Abdoellah.    2005.

Ecosystem. In: A.T. Rambo and P.E. Sajise (Eds), An Introduction to Human Ecology Research on Agricultural System in Southeast Asia. Philippines. University of the Philippines. Los Banos.

  , O. dan I. Soemarwoto. 1984. The Javanese Rural Ecosystem. Dalam: T. Rambo dan E. Sajise (eds). In Introduction to Human Ecology Research, Honolulu: East West Center and Program on Environment Science and Management, University of Philipines at Los Banos, Laguna.

Resource analysis of small-scale dairy production system , O., L. Christanty, Henky, Y.H. Herry, J. Iskandar,

in an Indonesian village — a case study. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 105 : 541- 554

Passmore, R. and Durnin, J.V.G.A. 1955. Human energy expenditure. Physiol. Rev., 35: 801 – 840.

Pimentel, D., Hurd, L.E., Bellotti, A.C., Forster, M.J., Oka, I.N., Sholes, O.D. and Whitman, R.J., 1973. Food production and energy crisis. Science, 182: 443 – 449.

  . (Editor), 1980. Handbook of Energy Utilization in Agriculture. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 475 pp.

  . 1980. Energy inputs for production, formulation, packaging, and transport of various pesticides In: Pimentel, D. (Editor), 1980. Handbook of Energy Utilization in Agriculture. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 45-48.

  . and Burgess, M.,1980. Energy Inputys in corn production. In: D. Pimentel (Editor), Hanbook of Energy Utilization in Agriculture. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL pp. 67-84.

  , Moran, M.A., Fast, S., Weber, G., Bukantis, R., Balliett, L., Boveng, P., Cleveland, C., Hindman, S. and Young M., 1981. Biomass Energy from Crop and Forest Residues. Science, 212: 111-115.

  , Beardi, G. and fast, S., 1983. Energy Efficiency of farming system: Organic and conventional agriculture. Agric. Ecosystem Environ., 9: 359-372.

Prabatmodjo, H. & T. Firman. 1996. Problems of Small Town Development in a Rapidly Growing Metropolitan Economy: The Case of Soreang, West Java. Soujourn. 11 : 314 – 333

Ramachandra, T.V. & A.V. Nagarathna. 2001. Energetic in paddy cultivation in Uttara Kannada district. Energy Conservation & Management. 42 : 131 – 155.

Hadiana, dan Priyono. 1985. The Talun Kebun: a Man Made Forest Fitted to Family Needs. Dalam: In Food and Nutrition Bulletin. 7 (3): 48 – 51.

Sundkvist, A., A. Jansson, A. Enefalk, and P. Larsson. 1999. Energy flow analysis as a tool for developing a sustainable society-a case study of a swedish island. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 25 : 289 – 299.

Tellarini, V. & F. Caporali. 2000. An Input/Output Methodology to Evaluate Farms as Sustainable Agroecosystem: An Application of Indicators to Farms in Central Italy. Agriculture, Ekosystems and Environment, 77 : 105 – 114.

Tripathi, R.S. and V.K. Sah. 2001. Material and energy flows in high-hill, mid-hill and valley farming systems of Garhwal Himalaya. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 86 : 75 – 91.

Uhl, C. and Murphy, P., 1981. A comparison of production and energy values between slash and burn agriculture and secondary succession in the upper Rio Negro region of the Amazon Basin. Biotropica. 14: 249-254.

Uhlin, E.H. 1998. Why Energy Productivity is Increasing: An I-O Analysis of Swedish Agriculture. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 56 : 443 – 465.