Farmers Perspective to the Biofuel Project: A Case Study of Jatropha Project in Gunungkidul, Yogyakarta - Indonesia
Abstract
This article tries to describe the transformation that takes place when the knowledge among farmers encounters new knowledge, in this case about biofuel. This exploration is expected to provide an understanding why jatropha in Gunungkidul is currently not developing but also not entirely abandoned either. In other words, the condition is in hibernate. Explanation of the phenomenon of jatropha development among farmers in Gunungkidul is elaborated from a cognitive and symbolic perspective, in its relation to the signification processes that farmers experience through the jatropha development programme. Crop not only consists of a material dimension but also a symbolic dimension. Through transformation process, culture infuses value that constructs social meaning to the community that depends on time, space, and place. In Gunungkidul case, the farmer’s decision to planting jatropha was intertwined with social interaction and cognitive aspect. The result of this research showing that the failure of jatropha development project in Gunungkidul because the signification process that occurs since ideas and knowledge about biofuel production firstly introduced do not met with farmer’s agriculture system knowledge. Data for this paper were collected in fieldwork among farmers in Gunungkidul. Qualitative data about daily life were collected intensively at Tepus district. Start from one village, data collection process was extended to other villages and districts that relevant to the research.
Keywords: Biofuel, Farmer, Gunungkidul, Jatropha, Social Transformation.
References
[1] Brittaine R, Lutaladio N. Jatropha: a smallholder bioenergy crop, the potential for pro-poor development. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. 2010; 8(1): 13. http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i1219e/i1219e.pdf
[2] Amir S, Nurlaila I, Yuliar S.Cultivating energy, reducing poverty: biofuel development in an Indonesian village. Perspectives on Global Development and Technology. 2008; 7: 113–132. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228442130_Cultivating_Energy_Reducing_Pover y_Biofuel_Development_in_an_Indonesian_Village
[3] Nevins J, Peluso NL. Taking Southeast Asia to market: Commodities, nature, and people in the neoliberal age. Cornel University Press. 2008. pp.15. http://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/?GCOI=80140100832600&fa= author&person_ID=3602
[4] Appadurai A. The social life of things: commodities in cultural perspective. Cambridge Universiti press,USA. 1986. pp.3. http://www.cambridge.org/ gb/academic/subjects/anthropology/social-and-cultural-anthropology/ social-life-things-commodities-cultural-perspective?format=PB&isbn= 9780521357265#mzCc2ke0PQJlUYHW.97
[5] Kopytoff I. The cultural biography of things commoditization as process. The Social Life of Things Commodities in Cultral Perspective. Cambridge Universiti press, USA. Arjun Apadurai Ed 1986. pp.64 92.https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/the-social-life-of-things/ the-cultural-biography-of-things-commoditization-as-process/ 3AD40A7B3A3BF10A57628A023587402D
[6] Geertz C. The interpretation of culture: selected essays. Basic Books Inc. USA; 1973. pp:10–12. https://monoskop.org/images/5/54/Geertz_Clifford_The_ Interpretation_of_Cultures_Selected_Essays.pdf
[7] Fatimah YA, Sonny Y. Opening the Indonesian bio-fuel box: How scientists modulate the social. Int. J. of Actor-Network Theory and Technological Innovation (IJANTTI). 2009;1(2):1 12. https://www.igi-global.com/article/ opening-indonesian-bio-fuel-box/1379
[8] Hunsberger C.The politics of jatropha-based biofuels in Kenya: convergence and divergence among NGOs, donors, government officials and farmers. The Journal of Peasant Studies. 2010;37: 4939–4962. https://www.researchgate. net/publication/233094960_The_politics_of_Jatropha-based_biofuels_ in_Kenya_Convergence_and_divergence_among_NGOs_donors_government_ officials_and_farmers
[9] Christine P. Jatropha: money doesn’t grow on trees. Friends of the Earth International. 2010. http://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/jatropha_ FoEIreport.pdf
[10] Skutsch M, de los Rios E, Solis S, Riegelhaupt, Hinojosa D, Gerfert S, Gao Y, Masera O. Jatropha in Mexico: environmental and social impacts of an incipient biofuel program. Ecology and Society. 2011; 16(4): 11. http://dx.doi.org/10. 5751/ES-04448-160411
[11] Runge CF, Senauer B. How biofuels could starve the poor. Foreign Affairs. 2007; 86(3): 41–53. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20032348
[12] Ariza-Montobbio P, Lele S, Kallis G, Martinez-Alier J. The political ecology of jatropha plantations for biodiesel in Tamil Nadu, India. Journal of Peasant Studies. 2010; 37(4): 875–897. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03066150.2010. 512462
[13] Borras Jr, Saturnino M, McMichael, Philip and Scoones, Ian. The politics of biofuels, land and agrarian change: editors’ introduction’. Journal of Peasant Studies. 2010; 37(4): 575–592. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20873025
[14] White B, Dasgupta A. Agrofuels capitalism: a view from political economy. The Journal of Peasant Studies. 2010; 37(4): 593–607. http://www.tandfonline.com/ doi/abs/10.1080/03066150.2010.512449
[15] Jongschaap REE, Corr´e W, Bindraban PS, Brandenburg WA. Claims and facts on jatropha curcas L. global jatropha curcas evaluation. Breeding and Propagation Programme, Plant Research International Wageningen UR; 2007. pp.594. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/40104292_Claims_and_facts_ on_Jatropha_curcas_L_Global_Jatropha_curcas_evaluation_breeding_and_ propagation_programme
[16] Mirco G. Evaluating the performances of rural energy service pathways and their impacts on rural livelihoods: an analysis model tested on Jatropha-based energy services in Sumbawa, Indonesia. PhD dissertation, Technische Universitat Berlin. 2012. pp.45. https://depositonce.tu-berlin.de/bitstream/11303/3513/ 1/Dokument_35.pdf
[17] Franco J, Levidow L, Fig D, Goldfarb L, Hönicke M, Mendonça ML. Assumptions in
the European Union biofuels policy: frictions with experiences in Germany, Brazil and Mozambique. Journal of Peasant Studies. 2010; 37(4): 661–698. https://www. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21125723
[18] Fernandes BM, Welch CA,Gonçalves EC. Agrofuel policies in Brazil: paradigmatic and territorial disputes. Journal of Peasant Studies. 2010; 37(4): 793–819. http://www. tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03066150.2010.512459
[19] McMichael P. The agrofuels project at large. Critical Sociology. 2009; 35(6): 825–839. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0896920509343071
[20] Food and Agriculture Organization. The state of food and agriculture, Rome. 2008. pp.6 http://www.fao.org/publications/sofa/2008/en/
[21] Suryatmojo H. Strategi pengelolaan karst di Gunungkidul [Strategy of Karzt Managemen in Gunungkidul]. Paper of Seminar Nasional Strategi Rehabilitasi Kawasan Konservasi di Daerah Padat Penduduk, Fakultas Kehutanan UGM, Yogyakarta; 2006. pp.3. http://www.mayong.staff.ugm.ac.id/artikel_pdf/strategi%20kawasan% 20karst.pdf