• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 Copyright
 Table of Contents
 List of Tables
 List of Figures
 Glossary of terms
 Acknowledgement
 Introduction
 Maize production
 Characteristics of the maize production...
 Level of technology
 Constraints to increasing maize...
 Priority constraints for resea...
 An agenda for maize research and...
 Bibliography
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
 Back Cover






Group Title: Maize in Indonesia : production systems, constrains, and research priorities
Title: Maize in Indonesia
CITATION PDF VIEWER PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00077494/00001
 Material Information
Title: Maize in Indonesia production systems, constrains, and research priorities
Physical Description: viii, 40 p. : ill., map ; 29 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Swastika, Dewa K. S
International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center
Publisher: CIMMYT
Place of Publication: Mexico D.F. Mexico
Publication Date: c2004
 Subjects
Subject: Corn -- Indonesia   ( lcsh )
Corn -- Yields -- Indonesia   ( lcsh )
Corn -- Research -- Indonesia   ( lcsh )
Corn -- Economic aspects -- Indonesia   ( lcsh )
Genre: international intergovernmental publication   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references (p. 34).
Statement of Responsibility: Dewa K. S. Swastika ... et al..
General Note: "IFAD."
Funding: Electronic resources created as part of a prototype UF Institutional Repository and Faculty Papers project by the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00077494
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 60573259
isbn - 9706481141

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

indonesia ( PDF )


Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front cover
    Title Page
        Page i
    Copyright
        Page ii
    Table of Contents
        Page iii
        Page iv
    List of Tables
        Page v
    List of Figures
        Page vi
    Glossary of terms
        Page vii
    Acknowledgement
        Page viii
    Introduction
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
    Maize production
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
    Characteristics of the maize production system
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
    Level of technology
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
    Constraints to increasing maize productivity
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
    Priority constraints for research
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
    An agenda for maize research and development in Indonesia
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
    Bibliography
        Page 34
    1
        Page 35
    2
        Page 35
    3
        Page 36
    4
        Page 36
    5
        Page 37
    6
        Page 37
    7
        Page 38
    8
        Page 38
    9
        Page 39
        Page 40
    Back Cover
        Back cover
Full Text



II
CIMMYT.


-Jf
'" 1 "-


-I'
j~r jj ~ 5J.Jr


r -, C --r


C~~f r ~


r -t -I
tno


Dewa K.S. Swastika
Firdaus Kasim
Wayan Sudalla
Rachmat Hendayana
Kecuk Suharlyanto
Roberta V. Gerpacio
Prabhu L. Pingali









Maize in Indonesia:


Production Systems, Constraints, and


Research Priorities








Dewa K.S. Swastika1
Firdaus Kasim
Wayan Sudana
Rachmat Hendayana
Kecuk Suhariyanto
Roberta V. Gerpacio2
Prabhu L. Pingali3


JJL
IFAD


CIMMYTMR


SAgency for Agricultural Research and Development (AARD) of Indonesia.
2 Agricultural Economist, CIMMYT-Philippines Office, IRRI, Los Banos, Laguna, Philippines (r.gerpacio-irri@cgiar.org.)
3 Director, Agriculture and Development Economics Division, FAO, Rome, Italy.



























CIMMYT (www.cimmyt.org) is an inter nationally funded, not-for-profit organization that conducts
research and training related to maize and wheat throughout the developing world. Drawing on
strong science and effective partnerships, CIMMYT works to create, share, and use knowledge and
technology to increase food security, improve the productivity and profitability of farming systems,
and sustain natural resources. Financial support for CIMMYT's work comes from many sources,
including the members of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR)
(www.cgiar.org), national governments, foundations, development banks, and other public and
private agencies.

International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) 2004. All rights reserved. The
designations employed in the presentation of materials in this publication do not imply the
expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of CIMMYT or its contributory or ganizations
concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning
the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. CIMMYT encourages fair use of this material. Proper
citation is requested.

Correct citation: Swastika, D.K.S., F. Kasim, K. Suhariyanto, W. Sudana, R. Hendayana, R.V.
Gerpacio, and P.L. Pingali. 2004. Maize in Indonesia: Production Systems, Constraints, and
Research Priorities. Mexico, D.E: CIMMYT.

Abstract: Maize is the second most important cereal crop in Indonesia after rice. The demand for
maize as food and feed has been steadily increasing. Total national maize production has grown at
4.07% per annum in the last three decades, thanks mainly to the adoption of improved production
technologies, particularly hybrid seed. This high production, however, still fails to meet domestic
demand and has caused a rapid increase in the net import of maize. This study characterized the
maize production systems in four major maize-producing provinces in Indonesia, namely
Lampung, East Java, West Nusa Tenggara, and South Sulawesi. Important productivity constraints
faced by maize farmers were identified and included: low grain prices during harvest; high input
prices; large distances between maize production areas, feed mills, and seed industries; lack of
promotion of local improved maize varieties (OPVs and hybrids) by government research centers;
and lack of farmer capital. Farmers, the Government of Indonesia, and private companies should be
encouraged to develop appropriate technology and policies, such as tariffs and credit systems, to
overcome some of these constraints.

ISBN: 970-648-114-1

AGROVOC descriptors: Seed production; Maize; Cropping systems; Yields; Marketing;
Technology; Agroecosystems; Agricultural resources; Agricultural
research; Indonesia.

AGRIS category codes: El6 Production Economics
A50 Agricultural Research

Dewey decimal classification: 338.162

Printed in Mexico.












Contents













Page No.
Tab le s .............................................................. ........... ...... v
Figu re s ........................................................... vi
Appendices ............. ................. ...... .. ........ ...... ...... ........... vi
G lo ssary o f Term s ................................................................ ............................ ................ ... vii
A ckn ow ledgm ents ....................................................................... .................................. viii

1. In tro du ctio n .. .. ........................... ........................................ .................... ............ ...... 1
1.1 Background ............................. ......... ... .............. 1
1.2 O bjectiv es .. .. ........................... ................................ ......................... ........... ..... 2
1.3 M ethod ology ........ ............................................................ .. ......... .. ............... 2
1.3.1 Data collection ................................. ................ 2
1.3.2 Location ......... ............. .... ........ ......... 3
1.3.3 Time schedule ....... ....... ................. ........... 3
1.3.4 N national w workshop ................................................... ................................... 3

2. M aize Produ action ....................................................................... ............................. ...... 4
2.1 N national M aize Production ............................................ ............................................. 4
2.2 Regional M aize Production ................................................. ................................... 6
2.2.1 M aize area ....................... .............................. ...... .......... .. .............. 6
2.2.2 M aize production and yield ............................ ..... ................................... 6

3. Characteristics of the Maize Production System ............................................................. 8
3.1 Biophysical Environm ent .................................................... ................................... 8
3.2 Infrastru cture ....... ........ ................................................... .. ......... .. ................ 9
3.3 Farm er Characteristics ..................................................... .................................... 10
3.4 Use of Maize Grain and Crop Residues ........................................................... 12
3.5 Sources of Incom e ........................ ............................................... .................................. 12

4 Level of Tech n ology ......................................................................... ................................ 13
4.1 M aize Varieties ............. .................... ............................ 13
4 .2 C ro p p ing P patterns ...................................................................... .............................. 14
4.2.1 Lam pung .......... .................. ..... ... .................... 14
4.2.2 East Java .................. .................. 14
4 .2 .3 N TB ............ ................ .......................................... ......... .... ........... ..... 1 5
4 .2 .4 South Sulaw esi ................... .............................................................................. 15
4.3 Land Preparation and Crop Management ......................................... ................ 16
4.4 Input Use ..................................... .......... 17
4.4.1 Lam pung ................................ .......... ........................ 17
4.4.2 East Java ............................ .............. ............ .. 18
4 .4 .3 N TB ......... .. ................................................ .............................. .. ............ 18
4 .4 .4 South Sulaw esi .............................................. ................................................. 19
4.5 Yield Levels ......... .. .................... ............... .. ............. .............. .. 20
4.6 Post-Harvest Practices and M marketing ........................................ ......................... 22











5. Constraints to Increasing Maize Productivity ........................................ .................. 23
5.1 Biotic and Abiotic Constraints ........................ ............................... ............................ 23
5.2 Socio-Econom ic Constraints ............................................... ................................. 24
5.3 Institutional Constraints ........................ ........................................ ............................ 25
5.4 O their Constraints ........................................................ ........................................ 25

6. Priority Constraints for Research ................................................................... .. 27
6.1 Methodology for Identifying Priority Constraints .................................................. 27
6.2 Priority Constraints .................................................... .......................................... 28
6.2.1 The dryland ecology of Outer Islands ....................................... ................ 28
6.2.2 The dryland ecology of Java and Bali ........................................ ................ 29
6.2.3 The irrigated areas of Java and Bali ......................................... ................ 29

7. An Agenda for Maize Research and Development in Indonesia ...................................... 30
7.1 Major Findings ..................... ...................... ...... .......... 30
7.2 Recom m endations for Future A ction................................. ........................................ 30
7.2.1 Varietal develop ent ....................... ................................. ............................. 32
7.2.2 Resources and crop management .......................................... ................ 33

8. Bibliography ................................... .......... 34











Tables












Page No.


Table 1. Growth rates of maize area, production, and yield in Indonesia, 1970-2000. .............. 5
Table 2. Growth rates of maize area, production, and yield in the study areas, 1991-2000. ........7
Table 3. Maize varieties grown in the study areas, 2000. ............... ............................... 13
Table 4. Land preparation practices for maize production in the study areas, 2000. ............... 16
Table 5. Crop management practices for maize production in the study areas, 2000. ................17
Table 6. Material input use per hectare by districts and seasons, Lampung, 2000. ................. 17
Table 7. Labor use per hectare by activity, Lampung, 2000................................................ 18
Table 8. Material input use per hectare, by agro-ecosystem in East Java, 2000........................ 19
Table 9. Labor use per hectare for maize production in East Java, 2000................................... 19
Table 10. Material input use per hectare, by district in NTB, 2000. ............................................ 19
Table 11. Labor use per hectare for maize production in NTB, 2000.......................................... 20
Table 12. Material input use per hectare, South Sulawesi, 2000. ............................................... 20
Table 13. Labor use per hectare for maize production, South Sulawesi, 2000............................21
Table 14. M aize yields in the study areas, 2000. ............................................ ................. 21
Table 15. Main constraints limiting production in all major maize production areas
and their relative importance for research and development priorities. .................... 23
Table 16. Priority ranking of major biophysical and institutional maize production
constraints in Indonesia. ................................................ .................................. 28
Table 17. Research approaches ranked by the likelihood of eliminating constraints
to m aize production. .................................................. ..................................... 31











Figures





Page No.
Figure 1. Distribution of maize area in Indonesia, 2000. ................................................... 1
Figure 2. Distribution of maize production in Indonesia, 2000. .......................................... 2
Figure 3. M aize area in Indonesia, 1970-2000. ........................................ ................... 4
Figure 4. M aize production in Indonesia, 1970-2000. .................................. ...................... 4
Figure 5 Maize yields in Indonesia, 1970-2000. ....................... ..................................... 4
Figure 6. Area planted to maize in the study areas, 1991-2000. ........................................6
Figure 7. Maize production in the study areas, 1991-2000. ............................................... 7
Figure 8. M aize yields in the study areas, 1991-2000. ........................................ ............... 7
Figure 9. Monthly rainfall and maize-based cropping patter n in Lampung ...................... 14
Figure 10. Monthly rainfall and cropping pattern in irrigated and
rainfed lowlands of East Java. .................. .............. ... ..... ................... 14
Figure 11. Monthly rainfall and cropping pattern in the drylands of East Java. ................... 15
Figure 12. M monthly rainfall and cropping patterns in NTB. ................................................. 15
Figure 13. Monthly rainfall and cropping pattern in the irrigated and rainfed areas
of Bone, South Sulaw esi. ........................................... .............................. 15
Figure 14. Monthly rainfall and maize-based cropping pattern
in the drylands of Jeneponto, South Sulawesi. .................. ............................... 15





Appendices


Page No.
M aize production centers in Indonesia. ................... ... ......................... ... 35
The location of RRA/PRA maize production sites in Indonesia, 2001 ............ 35
Biophysical environments of maize production systems in Indonesia ........... 36
Infrastructure and institutional environment of maize production
system s in Indonesia. ................................... .......................................... ... 36
Characteristics of maize farmers in four provinces of Indonesia. .....................37
Characteristics of maize farmers by class in Indonesia. ................................. 37
Utilization of maize grain and crop residues in Indonesia............................. 38
Farmers sources of income in four provinces of Indonesia. .......................... 38
Technology options for main constraints affecting maize
production systems in Indonesia. .......................................... ............... 39


Appendix 1.
Appendix 2.
Appendix 3.
Appendix 4.

Appendix 5.
Appendix 6.
Appendix 7.
Appendix 8.
Appendix 9.











Glossary of Terms











AARD Agency for Agricultural Research and Development
AIAT Assessment Institute for Agricultural Technology
BULOG National Food Authority
CASERD Center for Agro-Socioeconomic Research and Development
CBS Central Bureau of Statistics
CIMMYT International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center
CRIFC Central Research Institute for Food Crops
DG Director General
DM Downy mildew
Dokar Horse traction
DS Dry season
HYV High yielding variety
ICERI Indonesian Cereal Research Institute
IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development
Masl Meters above sea level
NGO Non-governmental organization
NTB West Nusa Tenggara
NTT East Nusa Tenggara
Ojeg Motorcycle
OPV Open pollinated variety
Palawija Secondary crops
PPL Field extension workers
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
PT Corporation/incorporated
QPM Quality Protein Maize
RFLL Rainfed lowlands
RIMOC Research Institute for Maize and Other Cereals
RRA Rapid Rural Appraisal
SRI Soil Research Institute
Surjan Raised and sunken beds
Tegalan Dryland
WS Wet season











Acknowledgments











This manuscript is taken from the report on rapid rural appraisal (RRA) and
participatory rural appraisal (PRA) conducted in 4 provinces, covering 32 villages
in 8 districts of Indonesia. Data/information were collected in November 2000-
March 2001. In addition, this document covers the constraints to maize
production identified during the National Maize Research and Development
Prioritization Workshop, held in Malino, South Sulawesi, 15-17 May 2002, and
further intensive discussion during the Fifth Annual Workshop of the Asian Maize
Socio-Economic Working Group held in Bangkok, Thailand, on 1-4 August 2002.

The authors would like to express their heartfelt gratitude and appreciation to the
many people who provided support and encouragement during the production of
this manuscript.

We offer sincere thanks to both the Director General of the Agency for Agricultural
Research and Development (AARD) of Indonesia and the Director of the Center for
Agro-Socioeconomic Research and Development (CASERD), for permitting and
facilitating the team to carry out the study. Thanks are also extended to the
Directors of Province and District Agricultural Extension Services in four surveyed
Provinces and eight Districts, for their contribution in providing secondary data
and their guidance in selecting the sites where the survey was carried out.

We also convey our gratitude to Dr. Subandi (senior maize breeder) and Dr. Faisal
Kasryno (former Director General of AARD and senior scientist), for their invaluable
comments and corrections during the preparation of this manuscript.

Finally, the authors also express their gratitude and appreciation to the CIMMYT
Economics Program, for both technical and financial support, without which this
study would not have been possible. We also acknowledge the editorial review of
this document by Sarah Fennell, consultant, and Alma McNab, senior science
writer/editor, as well as the design and formatting services of Eliot Sanchez Pineda,
CIMMYT Corporate Communications, Mexico.











1. Introduction


1.1 Background

In Indonesia, maize is the second most important cereal
crop after rice, in terms of the percentage area planted
to maize relative to the total area for all food crops.
Kasryno (2002) reported that during 1970-2000, the
area planted to maize was about 19% of the total area
planted to food crops. Rice occupied about 61% of the
total area planted to food crops over the same time
period. Another 20% was planted to other food crops
(palawija) such as soybeans, mungbeans, peanuts,
cassava, and sweet potato.

The demand for maize, especially for feed, is steadily
increasing. Several data sources were used to quantify
this level of demand. The food balance sheets data from
the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) showed that in
1998 about 69% of maize in Indonesia was used for food
(direct and manufactured food (CBS 1999)). Using Input-
Output Data, Erwidodo and Pribadi (2002) computed
that, in 1995, the total use of maize for human
consumption was about 63%, while for feed it was about
30.5%. The highest figure was shown by FAOSTAT food
balance sheets, where the total use of maize for human
consumption in 1995-1997 was about 79% (Aquino et
al. 2001). All sources of data cited above showed the
major use of maize was for human consumption. In
contrast, Kasryno (2002) estimated that in 2001 about
three million (metric) tons (43%) of maize were used for
food and four million tons (57%) for feed. His estimation
may be correct, especially in the future, since the
demand for maize by the feed industry is steadily
increasing.

In some provinces, such as East Java, East Nusa
Tenggara (NTT), North Sulawesi, South-East Sulawesi,
and Irian Jaya, maize is consumed as a staple food, as is
rice (Bastara 1988; Malian and Djauhari 1988; Subandi
and Manwan 1990). As a major component of feed
(accounting for 40% to 60%), the demand for maize
during 1988-1998 grew at a rate of about 12% per
annum (Hutabarat et al. 1993; Subandi 1998; CBS 1990-
2000). Kasryno (2002) estimated that during 1987-
2000, the demand for maize for feed grew at a rate of at
least 8-10% on average per year.


Most maize (about 57%) during the last decade was
grown in Java and contributed about 61% to national
maize production (CBS 1991-2001). In 2000, there
were at least seven provinces (namely North Sumatera,
Lampung, Central Java, East Java, West Nusa Tenggara
(NTB), NTT, and South Sulawesi) where maize was the
main food crop produced. This study took place in four
of these provinces, namely Lampung, East Java, NTB,
and South Sulawesi, as shown in Appendix 1.

The 2000 data showed that Central Java and East Java
contributed about 50% to the total area planted to
maize in Indonesia. The largest area was in East Java
(33%), followed by Central Java and Lampung, which
contributed about 17% and 11%, respectively, as
shown in Figure 1.

The contribution of each province to national maize
production was largely consistent with their area. As
shown in Figure 2, East Java was the major contributor
(36%) to national maize production, followed by Central
Java and Lampung, which contributed about 17% and
12%, respectively. The other 19 provinces contributed
about 15% to total national maize production.





Other 19 N. Sumatera
provinces 18% 6%

Lampung
11%
S. Sulawesi
7% Central Java
17%
NITT 7%

NTB 1% : :


East Java 33%


Figure 1. Distribution of maize area in Indonesia, 2000.










N. Sumatera
17%


Figure 2. Distribution of maize production in Indonesia,
2000.


During the 1980s, about 79% of maize was grown in
dryland areas (Bastara 1988; Subandi and Manwan
1990; Hairunsyah 1993). Subandi (1998) reported that
about 89% of maize was grown on rainfed lowlands and
dryland areas, with erratic rainfall.

Maize production has shown a substantial increase,
from 2.82 million tons in 1970 to 9.34 million tons in
2000, a growth rate of 4.07% per annum (CBS 1971-
2001). This production increase was mainly attributed
to the adoption of improved technologies, especially
improved varieties, including hybrids. Growing hybrid
varieties proved to be more profitable than open
pollinated and local varieties (Hadi et al. 1993;
Suhariyanto 2000).

The considerable production growth of maize, however,
failed to meet the domestic demand, causing a rapid
increase in its net imports since 1976. During 1969-
1975, Indonesia was self sufficient in maize, with
sufficiency indices of 1.02 to 1.26 (Adnyana et al.
2001). Since 1976, net imports have increased from
0.05 million tons in 1976 to 0.60 million tons in 1996.
A dramatic increase in net imports occurred in 1994
(from about 0.44 million tons in 1993 to 1.09 million
tons in 1994).

Price instability at the farm level has discouraged
farmers from producing more maize through the use of
improved technology, especially in the regions where
food and feed industries are not available. The farmers
in those regions are faced with a lack of marketing
infrastructure. Since farmers have had problems of
drying during wet season harvesting, they have been
forced to sell their grain at a low price. Only in the
regions where feed and food industries exist could


maize prices be maintained at a reasonable and quite
stable level (Subandi et al. 1998). This condition has
led Indonesia to import maize continuously. A study
conducted by Timmer (1987) in East Java showed that
demand for maize from feed mills is the key to price
setting. When feed mills in Jakarta purchased imported
maize through BULOG (the National Food Authority) or
ava
private importers, at a competitive world price, the
local price of maize in East Java decreased to a
relatively low level. In addition, although maize
producing areas are distributed throughout at least
eight provinces, most maize is sold in Java, especially
to feed mills. Movement of maize from outer islands to
Java led to high transportation costs (Amang 1993).



1.2 Objectives


This study characterizes maize production systems in
Indonesia and aims to develop appropriate
technology, required by the national research system,
to increase maize production in the country. The
specific objectives of this study are:

* To identify the characteristics of Indonesian maize
production systems including yield, level of
technology, marketing, the use of maize, and
support systems.

* To identify the constraints to increasing maize
production in Indonesia.

* To provide feedback to the national research institute
in setting research priorities, based on constraints
faced by far mers in each agro-ecosystem.

* To suggest policy alternatives in order to encourage
farmers to increase maize production.



1.3 Methodology

1.3.1 Data collection
In order to achieve the objectives outlined above, this
study was carried out using the RRA/PRA approach.
The data and information collected in this study
consisted of primary and secondary data. The primary
data were collected using group interviews and
discussions with farmers, traders, field extension
workers (PPL), and other key informants. Secondary
data were collected from sources including the Central
Bureau of Statistics (CBS), the General Directorate for
Food Crops and Horticulture, the Central Research
Institute for Food Crops (CRIFC), the Center for Agro-
Socio Economic Research and Development (CASERD),










the National Food Authority (BULOG), and the
Provincial and District Agricultural Offices. The data
collected were:

* Maize production, area, and yield at the regional and
national levels.

* Production environment (agro-ecosystem and
monthly rainfall).

* Sources of inputs (seeds, fertilizers, and other
chemicals).

* Technology applications at the farm level including:
cropping patterns; use of varieties (high yielding
varieties (HYVs) namely hybrid and improved open
pollinated varieties (OPVs), and local varieties); use of
inputs such as seeds and fertilizers.

* Maize marketing, including sales and prices.


1.3.2 Location
This study took place in four provinces, namely
Lampung, East Java, NTB, and South Sulawesi. In each
province two districts were selected, and four villages
in each district were chosen. Therefore, 32 villages
were selected in the four provinces, as presented in
Appendix 2. Three group interviews and discussions
were carried out in each village, to obtain detailed
information regarding the characteristics of the maize
production systems. Intensive discussions, using a
participatory approach, were conducted in two or three
villages in each province.


1.3.3 Time schedule
This study was conducted in three steps. First, a desk
study was carried out using secondary data and related
studies published by some institutions. This part was
conducted during November-December 2000. Second,
the field study using the RRA/PRA approach was carried
out during January-March 2001. The reporting of the
RRA/PRA part of the study was done in April-May
2001. The report was presented in The Fourth Annual
Workshop of the Asian Maize Socio-Economic Working
Group in Kathmandu, Nepal, 4-8 June 2001. Thirdly, the
National Workshop was conducted in Malino, South
Sulawesi, from 15-17 May 2002. The combined report
between the Kathmandu and Malino workshops was
presented in the Fifth Annual Workshop of the Asian
Maize Socio-Economic Working Group held in Bangkok,
Thailand, 1-4 August 2002. This manuscript is the
combination of these revised reports.


1.3.4 National workshop
For research priority setting, a national workshop was
conducted in Malino, South Sulawesi. In this workshop,
seven Directors from the Assessment Institute for
Agricultural Technology (AIAT) from seven provinces,
P.T. BISI (PT Benih Inti Subur Intani), Lampung
University, Director of Indonesian Cereal Research
Institute (ICERI), Director of Central Research Institute
for Food Crops (CRIFC), Director General of the Agency
for Agricultural Research and Development (AARD),
Director General of Food Crops Pr oduction, Governor of
South Sulawesi, and some senior scientists were
invited. The objective of this workshop was to gather
ideas from the participants regarding maize production
constraints in their respective regions and research
activities needed to overcome the identified
constraints.











2. Maize Production


2.1 National Maize Production

During the last decade, most maize (57%) was grown in
Java and contributed about 61% to national maize
production. In contrast, about 43% of maize was grown
outside Java and contributed about 39% to national
production (CBS 1971-2001). Although maize
continues to be most widely grown in Java, maize area
has tended to decline slightly over time, as shown in
Figure 3. It decreased from 2.10 million ha in 1970 to
1.97 million ha in 2000, declining at a rate of 0.23% per
year (Appendix 3). On the other hand, maize area
outside Java grew at a rate of 1.97% per year, during
the period of 1970-2000. At a national level, area
planted to maize during the same period increased at a
rate of 0.55% per year. The growth of area planted to
maize in Java, outside Java, and Indonesia as a whole
are presented in Figure 3.

For the last three decades (1970-2000), maize
production has steadily increased from 2.82 million
tons in 1970 to about 9.34 million tons in 2000 (a
growth rate of 4.07% per year). This continued growth
of production could be mainly attributed to consistent
growth in yields, both in Java and outside Java, as
shown in Figures 4 and 5.


4500


3500- Indonesia


c 2500- Java
cc


70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 9
Year
Figure 3. Maize area in Indonesia, 1970-2000.


During 1970-2000, the annual growth of yield was
3.51%, while area growth was 0.55% per year. In 1970-
1980, maize production grew at a rate of 3.52% per
year, but the peak of production growth occurred in
1980-1990. During this period, maize production grew
at a rate of 5.37% per year. The high production growth
in this period was mainly attributed to technological
progress, shown by substantial yield increases from
1.46 t/ha in 1980 to about 2.13 t/ha in 1990 (a growth
rate of 3.85% per year), while the area planted to maize
grew at a rate of 1.45% per year. During this period,


70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 00
Year
Figure 4. Maize production in Indonesia, 1970-2000.


70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 97 00
Year

Figure 5. Maize yields in Indonesia, 1970-2000.










intensification of maize production was achieved by the
introduction of new high yielding varieties, namely 10
improved OPVs and 5 newly introduced hybrids (C1,
C2, CPI1, Pioneer 1 and 2) (Subandi 1998; Maamun et
al. 2001).

During 1990-2000, the progress in technology was
slowing down. Annual yield growth rate was 2.40% per
year, while annual area growth rate was 0.92%.
Therefore, the growth rate of maize production
declined to 3.33% per year. The growth of maize area
and production in Indonesia during 1970-2000 are
presented in more detail in Table 1.



Table 1. Growth rates of maize area, production, and yield
in Indonesia, 1970-2000.
Growth rate (%/year)
Period Area Production Yield
1970-1980 -0.72 3.52 4.28
1980-1990 1.45 5.37 3.85
1990-2000 0.92 3.33 2.40
Average 1970-2000 0.55 4.07 3.51


In fact, there were many HYVs available (6 OPVs and 36
hybrids) during 1990-2000. However, there were some
constraints to the adoption of new technology (Subandi
1998; Suhariyanto 2000; Maamun et al. 2001; Kasryno
2002):

* Maize is grown mainly (89%) in rainfed and dryland
areas, with low soil fertility and erratic rainfall, and is
often exposed to drought conditions.

* Maize is grown in less developed or remote areas.

* Farmers are small landholders, have little formal
education, lack cash capital, and, therefore, are not
able to apply inputs (seed, fertilizers, and chemicals)
properly.

* There are no price incentives for the grain, and prices
for inputs are high.

* Distances of maize production areas from seed and
feed industries can be large.

* Poor management systems make it difficult to ensure
good seed quality.

* Improved OPVs and hybrids bred by government
research institutes receive little promotion. On the
other hand, hybrids bred by private companies are
expensive.


These constraints resulted in a low production growth
rate, and in-country production was not able to meet
the growing domestic demands for maize. The fast
growth of domestic livestock and feed industries has
contributed to the substantial increase in demand for
maize (Sayaka 1995). Subandi (1998) estimated that the
demand for maize, as a major component of feed, is
increasing at a rate of 12% per year. Consequently, net
import of maize has steadily increased from about 0.3
million tons in 1991 to 1.1 million tons in 1997 and
about 0.5 million tons in 1999. Based on USDA data
(cited by Erwidodo and Pribadi 2002), in 2000
Indonesia imported about 1.3 million tons of maize and
exported about 0.3 million tons, the net import being
1.0 million tons.

Despite such constraints, Indonesia has significant
potential for increasing maize production in the future.
This will be possible mainly due to the increasing role of
hybrids in maize production systems. Maamun et al.
(2001) estimated that the percentage area planted to
hybrids, relative to total area planted to maize,
increased from about 1.7% in 1990 to 14.3% in 1998.

During the period 1980-2001, Indonesia introduced
about 66 high yielding varieties. Out of these 66
varieties, 47 varieties (71.21%) were hybrids and only
19 varieties (28.79%) were OPVs (Nugraha and Subandi
2002). From 47 hybrid cultivars, only 9 (19%) were
bred by public research institutes, while another 36
cultivars (81%) were bred by private companies.

An increasing share of hybrids in the Indonesian seed
industry has also been observed. Total seed production
in 2000 was 41,600 tons, and about 29,850 tons (72%)
of it was hybrid seed (Directorate of Seeds 2000 cited
by Nugraha and Subandi 2002). In terms of the
institutions that produce hybrid seed, about 95.5% of
hybrid seeds were produced by private companies,
namely P.T. Bisi, Pioneer, and Monagro Kimia. The
government-owned companies, namely Sang Hyang
Seri and Pertani, only produced about 1,350 tons
(4.52%).

In line with the increasing share of hybrid seed used in
maize production systems, the figures indicate that the
seed industry is an attractive business proposition. This
condition should encourage more participation of the
private sector in maize agribusiness and, therefore,
maize production could continue to increase at a rapid
rate.











2.2 Regional Maize Production

2.2.1 Maize area
In Lampung, maize is mainly planted on dryland
(tegalan) and rainfed lowlands. A small portion is
planted on irrigated lowlands. In 2000, the area planted
to maize was about 32.4% of the total area planted to
food crops, while rice occupied about 42% (Kasryno
2002). This figure indicated that maize is the second
most important crop grown in this region, after rice.
During the last decade, the area planted to maize
fluctuated but, as a whole, it increased from 0.19
million ha in 1991 to 0.38 million ha in 2000 (a growth
rate of 8.09% per year).

In East Java, maize is mainly cultivated on dryland and
rainfed areas, and some on irrigated lowlands. In 2000,
the area planted to maize in East Java was about 31% of
the total area planted to food crops, while the area
planted to rice was about 47%. Again, in this area,
maize is the second most important food crop after rice.
Among the four study provinces, East Java had the
largest area planted to maize.

As in Lampung, the area planted to maize in East Java
fluctuated by year, but in general it increased from
about 1.06 million ha in 1991 to 1.17 million ha in
2000 (a growth rate of 1.07% per year). Compared to
Lampung, the area planted to maize in East Java was
relatively low. This was because of almost no possibility
to extend agricultural activities in Java, due to scarcity
of suitable land. The trends of area planted to maize in
the four study provinces are presented in Figure 6.


0
ov
( 600-
-
400-

200-


Si....___....------- I----------------------------
91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00
Lampung 190 234 253 250 364 395 359 375 400 382
- E.Java 1064 1304 1012 1118 1187 1270 1100 1330 1138 1170
*** NTB 27 20 26 28 30 35 31 40 36 33
- S.Sulawesi 271 337 296 301 343 337 322 338 241 224

Figure 6. Area planted to maize in the study areas, 1991-
2000.


As in other provinces, most of the maize in NTB is
cultivated on dryland, and only a small portion is
planted on rainfed lowlands. As shown in Figure 6,
among the four study provinces, the area planted to
maize in NTB was the smallest. However, the growth in
area was significant, increasing from 26,623 ha in 1991
to 32,512 ha in 2000, equivalent to a growth rate of
2.25% per year, during 1991-2000. In 2000, the area
planted to maize in NTB was about 7.18% of the total
area planted to food crops. It was the third most
important crop after rice (71%) and soybeans (14.6%).

In contrast, the area planted to maize in South Sulawesi
declined from 0.27 million ha in 1991 to 0.22 million
ha in 2000 (a growth rate of -2.11% per year). The
decline in area planted to maize was due to price
disincentives. During the harvesting season, maize
grain price often dropped to a level below the average
cost of production. Therefore, some farmers changed
from maize to other crops, such as cotton or soybean.
Similarly, the proportion of the total area planted to
food crops also decreased, from about 30% in 1980 to
about 20% in 2000 (Kasryno 2002). During the same
period, the proportion of the area planted to rice was
about 60% in 1980 and 66% in 2000. So although
decreasing in area, maize was still the second most
important crop after rice.



2.2.2 Maize production and yield

During the last decade, maize production in Lampung
increased from about 0.42 million tons in 1991 to 1.12
million tons in 2000, a growth rate of 11.65% per year.
Among the four study pr ovinces, Lampung had the
highest growth of production. This growth was
attributed both to the large growth in area (8.09%) and
yield (3.29%) during this period. This high growth was
made possible by the good support of infrastructure
and agro-industry. Lampung has good transportation
facilities; all roads to the villages are asphalted with
good public vehicles. There are also at least five feed
mills with a total capacity of about 500,000 tons of
feed per year. In addition, another support system is
the mutual collaboration that exists between far mers
and three companies in this province. PT Tanindo (a
seed company) provides farmers with hybrid maize
seed on credit, which farmers pay back after harvesting
at a price determined prior to the planting season. PT
Pertani collaborates with farmers by providing fertilizers
and other chemicals through farmers' groups and
extension workers (PPL). Again, the repayment occurs
after harvesting, with the chair men of these farmers'
groups and extension workers responsible for the
collection of repayments from the farmers. In 2001, PT











Darmaniaga collaborated with farmers by providing all
inputs (except labor), and farmers paid them with a
share of the ear-maize. The share was 5:7, that is 5
portions for Darmaniaga and 7 portions for farmers.
These support systems enable farmers to effectively
adopt new technologies, especially hybrids.

In East Java, maize production increased from about
2.50 million tons in 1991 to 3.39 million tons in 2000, a
growth rate of 3.42% per year. Most of the production
growth was contributed by yield growth. Maize yields
increased from 2.35 t/ha in 1991 to about 2.90 t/ha in
2000, growing at a rate of 2.36% per year. On the other
hand, area grew at a rate of 1.07% annually.

Compared to the other provinces, maize yield in East
Java was the highest. This was mainly due to the wide-
spread use of hybrids, especially in rainfed and irrigated
lowlands. The high adoption of new technology was
achieved by a good support system. East Java has good
transportation networks and well developed agro-
industry. East Java is also the center of hybrid seed
production as well as food and feed industries. Farmers,
therefore, have good access to maize seeds and maize
grain markets. Farmers grew local varieties for home
consumption only, while for commercial purposes they
grew hybrids or recycled hybrids. Only a few of them
grew improved OPVs.

In more detail, maize production and yields in the four
provinces are presented in Figure 7 and 8, while their
growth summary is presented in Table 2.

During the same period, maize production in NTB
increased from about 51,000 tons in 1991 to about
67,000 tons in 2000, growing at a rate of 3.15% per
year. Most of the production growth was attributed to
area growth (2.25%/year), and only 0.90% was
attributed to yield growth.

The low yield growth indicated slow progress in
technological improvement. This was because of
farmers' poor access to high quality seeds and the feed
industry. Pure hybrid seeds were expensive, while the
grain price was low. Most farmers used recycled
hybrids, which were much cheaper than pure hybrids,



Table 2. Growth rates of maize area, production, and yield
in the study areas, 1991-2000.
Growth rate (%/year)
Province Area Production Yield
Lampung 8.09 11.65 3.29
East Java 1.07 3.42 2.36
NTB 2.25 3.15 0.90
South Sulawesi -2.11 2.82 5.07


but their yields were much lower. There was no
difference in grain price between varieties. Farmers
grew local varieties in small plots, for human
consumption only.

In South Sulawesi, maize production increased from
0.45 million tons in 1991 to about 0.58 million tons in
2000, (a growth rate of 2.82% per year), although
maize area declined by 2.11% per year. This significant
positive growth was achieved due to substantial
growth in yields. Maize yields increased from 1.66 t/ha
in 1991 to 5.07 t/ha in 2000, a substantial growth rate
of 5.07% per year.



5.0-

4.0-
0



I 2.0-
0
1.0


0.0- ...............................
91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00
- Lampung 0.42 0.53 0.58 0.56 0.84 0.92 1.08 1.11 1.18 1.12
- E.Java 2.51 3.02 2.37 2.64 2.82 3.42 3.05 3.92 3.38 3.39
---- NTB 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.07 0.07
S. Sulawesi 0.45 0.59 0.53 0.56 0.74 0.84 0.87 0.92 0.65 0.58

Figure 7. Maize production in the study areas, 1991-2000.



3.5

3.0

S2.5

2.0 ........ -.

1.5

1.0
91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00
S Lampung 2.19 2.27 2.29 2.26 2.32 2.33 3.01 2.97 2.94 2.93
- E.Java 2.35 2.32 2.34 2.36 2.38 2.69 2.77 2.94 2.97 2.90
N*I- NTB 1.91 1.92 1.96 1.85 1.76 1.89 2.31 1.94 1.99 2.07
- S.Sulawesi 1.66 1.76 1.80 1.86 2.16 2.50 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.59

Figure 8. Maize yields in the study areas, 1991-2000.











3. Characteristics of the Maize Production System


3.1 Biophysical Environment

As mentioned earlier, maize in Lampung is cultivated
mainly in dryland areas, where it is the most important
crop, followed by cassava. The topography of the
drylands in this province is flat to hilly (undulating), with
a slope of 0-15%. The elevation of the study area
ranges from 115 to 195 meters above sea level (masl).
The major soil type is yellow-red podzolic with high
acidity (pH<5) and low fertility.

The average annual rainfall from 1989-1999 was about
2455 mm (Appendix 3). Lampung has the highest
rainfall of the four provinces. This high rainfall enables
farmers to grow maize twice a year. The common
cropping patterns are maize-maize and maize-cassava.
Although the province has high rainfall, water
availability can be a problem. The dry season maize is
often faced with drought due to uneven distribution of
rainy days. The average yield losses due to drought are
reported to be around 30%. In 1997, when El Nifo
occurred, yield losses were about 70%.

The maize-maize cropping pattern, with maize being
grown throughout the year, provides conditions that
facilitated the outbreak of downy mildew in 1974-1975.
Since then, downy mildew has been the main disease
of maize in Lampung, especially when farmers plant
late. This disease can reduce yields by 50-70%,
although farmers have used Ridomill as a seed
treatment.

In East Java, maize is cultivated in drylands, rainfed
areas, and irrigated lowlands. Farmers in dryland and
rainfed regions classify the soil according to color,
namely red or black soil. The local agricultural officers
use the term volcanic soil, whereas farmers in irrigated
areas describe it as sandy alluvial soil. The topography
is flat and hilly (plain-undulating) for dryland and rainfed
areas, respectively, while irrigated lowlands are flat.


The elevation of the irrigated lowlands varies from 100
to 300 masl, while dryland and rainfed areas are 120 to
600 masl. Of the four provinces in the study, East Java
has the largest range of elevation for maize production.
The rainy season starts in November and ends in March,
while the dry season occurs from April to October. The
average annual rainfall in the study area was 1424 mm
in the drylands and rainfed lowlands, and 1563 mm in
the irrigated lowlands. The number of rainy days was 51
days in the drylands, and 81 days in the irrigated
lowlands. The main cropping patterns in the irrigated
areas were rice-maize and rice-chili, while in rainfed
lowlands it was rice-maize. In the drylands, the
common cropping patterns were maize-chili and
maize-cassava.

The significant abiotic stress reported by farmers in East
Java was drought, which occurred every four to five
years. The worst drought occurred in 1997 and caused
a reduction in yield of about 25 to 75%. The important
pests attacking maize in the field were rats, stem-
borers, and grasshoppers, but yield losses due to these
pests were not significant. The known storage pest is
the weevil, which attacks grain stored for more than
three months. This is the case for local (white) maize,
which is stored for more than three months, for home
consumption. The losses due to this pest were reported
to be less than 5%. None of the respondents stored
yellow maize for more than four weeks.

In NTB, maize was cultivated mostly on drylands. None
of the respondents knew the name of the soil in their
area. The extension workers classified the soil as sandy
alluvial. The topography of the land is flat in Sumbawa
and hilly or undulating in East Lombok. Elevation is
about 10 to 50 masl in Sumbawa and 100 to 360 masl
in East Lombok.

The rainy season starts in November and ends in March,
while the dry season is from April to October. The
average annual rainfall in the study area was about
1479 mm, 1301 mm in East Lombok and 1658 mm in
Sumbawa. There were 83 rainy days per year in East
Lombok and 124 days in Sumbawa district.










The major cropping pattern in East Lombok was maize-
mungbean or maize-fallow. Some rich farmers grew
tobacco after maize. In Sumbawa the main cropping
pattern was maize-fallow. Only farmers with tube-wells
could practice a maize-maize cropping system.

The significant abiotic stress reported by farmers in NTB
was drought. The worst drought occurred in 1997 and
caused a reduction in yield of about 10 to 25%. Unlike
in other provinces, there was no significant pest
attacking maize in this area. Although storage weevils
were reported, there were no yield losses due to this
pest, because farmers usually stored maize for less than
four weeks.

In South Sulawesi, maize was mostly cultivated on
drylands (eneponto), irrigated areas, and rainfed
lowlands (Bone). The main soil type is latosol in dryland
areas and clay in the irrigated lowlands, with the
topography being hilly in the drylands and plain-
undulating in irrigated areas. In dryland areas, most of
the farmers made terraces to avoid erosion as a soil
conservation strategy. The elevation of the study area
ranges from 20 to 50 masl in the lowlands to about 130
to 500 masl in the drylands.

In contrast to the other regions of Indonesia, the rainy
season in the irrigated area of Bone runs from April to
October, while the dry season starts in November and
ends in March. The average annual rainfall was 2019
mm/year. In the drylands of Jeneponto, the wet and dry
seasons are similar to other regions in Indonesia. The
average annual rainfall was about 948 mm/year. Among
the four provinces, the annual rainfall in this area is the
lowest. To overcome water shortages, farmers practiced
zero tillage for dry season maize.

The significant abiotic stress reported by farmers in
South Sualwesi was drought. As in all regions of
Indonesia, the worst drought occurred in 1997. The
most common pests attacking maize in the lowlands
were rats, but yield losses due to this pest were not
significant. There was no reported pest in the drylands.
No significant disease was found in this study area. The
storage weevil commonly attacked white-grain maize,
which is usually stored for more than 3 months for
home consumption. To minimize grain losses, farmers
stored maize as un-husked ears. The biophysical
environments of maize areas in the study regions are
presented in more detail in Appendix 3.



3.2 Infrastructure

Infrastructure is one of the most important factors
affecting the performance of maize production systems.
In particular, good transportation facilities (road and


vehicle) in Lampung have facilitated the buying of
inputs and the sale of farmers' products. The most
commonly used vehicle for transportation in this
province is the minicab. Farmers usually sell their grain
soon after harvesting, without post-harvest processing.
Because of good transportation facilities, the traders can
easily travel to the villages to buy maize grain during
the harvesting season. Threshing is carried out at the
farmers' houses and drying is done in their respective
drying facilities. The traders often provide farmers with
some inputs and cash credit at an interest rate of 1.5%
per month, similar to the interest rate of commercial
banks. If traders do not come to the village, farmers are
easily able to get to the nearest market, which is
approximately 3 km away, to sell their grain.

The success of maize-based farming systems in
Lampung was also largely attributable to the farmers'
own support systems. As such, farmers were organized
into groups, each consisting of 20-30 farmers. Each
group made a common plan for maize cultivation
covering the varieties to grow, planting time, and level
of fertilizer use. The external support systems included
government intervention and involvement of the
private sector. The local government launched a special
intensification program (GEMA PALAGUNG 2001 was
launched to attain self-sufficiency by increasing yields in
rice and palawija with soybean and maize as secondary
crops), in addition to offering credit to farmers, via
provincial and district agricultural extension services.
The most important sources of information regarding
maize technology are the extension workers, followed
by seed companies as shown in Appendix 4. Another
support system for farmers is good collaboration with
private companies, in terms of providing inputs, cash
credits, and grain marketing.

In East Java, most of the villages visited have moderate-
to-good asphalted roads and moderate gravel roads.
Public transport, such as minicabs, pick-ups, and
motorcycles (called ojeg), allow easy access to and
from the villages. The transportation cost from the
villages to the local markets ranged from Rp 500 to Rp
1000 per person or per 100 kg fertilizers or grains,
depending on the distance of the market from the
village. (In January-March 2001, US$ 1.0 was
equivalent to Rp 8,500.) The average distance to the
nearest market is 3 km.

The performance of farmers' groups was good in
irrigated lowlands, while only fair in dryland areas. In
the irrigated lowlands, farmers' groups not only
successfully determined which variety, and when, to
grow, and how much fertilizer should be applied, but
they also provided their members with credit to buy
inputs. The cash capital of the group came from the










savings of their members. Most inputs were bought
from the shops in the sub-district markets. Sources of
cash capital were mainly individual farmers and
farmers' groups in irrigated areas, while the cash
sources in dryland areas were individual far mers and
private traders. In irrigated areas, the information about
maize technology was mostly provided by extension
workers and seed companies, while in the drylands
most technology was supplied by extension workers
and other farmers.

In NTB, the transportation system is not as good as in
Lampung and East Java. Most villages visited in East
Lombok have bad-to-moderate gravel roads. Only one
village has a good asphalted road. In the study area of
Sumbawa, two villages are located on the main
provincial (good asphalted) road. Motorcycle (ojeg) is
the most popular mode of transportation in East
Lombok, whereas minicab, horse traction (called
dokar), and ojeg are the most common means of public
transport in Sumbawa. Most inputs were bought in the
shops in the sub-district markets.

The unfavorable transportation systems (especially in
East Lombok) made it very difficult for farmers to sell
their maize to the district or sub-district markets,
although the nearest market is only 3 km from the
village. Most farmers sold their maize grain soon after
harvesting, either in the field or at home, at a relatively
low price. Most farmers complained about the price
they received for their maize but were unable to
improve this situation.

Farmers' groups and cooperatives in this region only
dealt with planting time and decisions about which
varieties to grow. They were not involved with maize
marketing or credit. The main source of cash capital
was a farmer's own capital and credit from private
traders with high interest rates (12.5%/month). The
sources of technology-related information were
extension workers and other farmers.

In South Sulawesi, most villages in the study area have
good asphalted and moderate gravel roads. The main
mode of public transport used by farmers was the
minicab. Most inputs were bought from shops in the
local markets. Sources of cash capital were a farmer's
own capital, farmers' groups, and commercial banks.
The performance of farmers' groups was good. All
respondents reported that farmers' groups were active
in providing their members with information about
technology. They decided when to grow, which
varieties to grow, and how much fertilizer should be
applied. Farmers' groups also provided cash credit for
their members.


The information about maize technology came mostly
from extension workers and farmers' own experiences.
Maize marketing was done in two ways, depending on
the type of maize grown. Yellow maize (mostly hybrid
and its corresponding recycled hybrid) was sold directly
to other farmers soon after harvesting. White maize was
usually stored as ears with husks, after sun-drying.
Farmers sold this maize gradually, and money earned
from this sale was used for daily household
expenditures. Part of the white maize harvest was
consumed as staple food. Details of the infrastructure in
the study areas are presented in Appendix 4.



3.3 Farmer Characteristics

The average age of maize farmers in Lampung was 42
years (ranging from 27 to 61 years). In general, most
formal education was obtained in elementary school,
with an average duration of school attendance of seven
years (graduating from elementary school and
completing grade one in secondary school). Only a few
farmers attended high school. Such limited formal
education, however, did not appear to be a serious
constraint to farmers adopting modern technologies.
Most of them had a high level of understanding of
hybrid maize technology. Most farmers in Lampung
(95%) have their own land. Landowners usually contract
the landless (5%) under a sharecropping arrangement.
The average size of the farms was 2.1 ha, with the
largest being 4.7 ha (Appendix 5).

In the dryland areas of East Java, farmers had an
average age of 39, ranging from 26 to 59 years old. The
farmers in irrigated areas were older, ranging from 29
years to 71 years old with an average age of 42 years.
Their for mal education ranged from 1 to 11 years, with
an average of 6 and 7 years, respectively, in the
lowlands and dryland areas. This means that the
majority of them had only graduated from elementary
school. There was a tendency for younger people (20-
30 years old and with higher education levels) not to
want to work in agriculture. They preferred to work in
non-agricultural sectors that promised a higher income.
Farm size ranged from 0.2 to 1.8 ha, with an average of
0.7 ha in the drylands and 0.4 ha in the irrigated
lowlands, as shown in Appendix 5. However,
productivity of the irrigated lowlands was much higher,
so that the welfare of farmers in this area was better
than their counterparts in the drylands.

As shown in Appendix 5, farmers' age in NTB ranged
from 26 to 55 years old, with an average age of 39
years. Farmers mostly attended elementary school for
an average of about six years, with many farmers










having a low level of formal education. Farm size in this
study area ranged from 0.4 to 2.5 ha, with an average
of 1.2 ha. About 99% of respondents owned their own
land. Renting land was not common in this study area.

In South Sulawesi, there was no significant difference in
age across agro-ecosystem. The respondents' ages
ranged from 24 to 68 years, with an average age of 45
years. Their levels of formal education were relatively
low, ranging from 1 to 11 years (an average of 6 years),
again showing that most farmers in South Sulawesi had
only received elementary school education. Farm sizes
ranged from 0.1 to 1.0 ha in the irrigated lowlands
(Bone), with an average of 0.4 ha. In the drylands of
Jeneponto, farm size ranged from 0.3 to 1.9 ha, with an
average of 0.6 ha. This shows that, in the region as a
whole, most farmers own less than 1.0 ha. All
respondents in Jeneponto have their own land, while
only 65% of respondents in Bone were landowners
(Appendix 5).

Farmers were grouped into three categories: poor,
medium, and rich. The indicator used for classification of
farmers was the level of land ownership.

In Lampung, farmers with less than 0.35 ha were
classified as poor farmers, those with 0.35 to 3.0 ha as
medium farmers, while those with farms larger than 3.0
ha were classified as rich farmers. All economic classes
had the same average family sizes, of five members.
The average farm sizes were 0.2 ha, 1.5 ha, and 4.3 ha,
respectively, for poor, medium, and rich farmers. The
poor and medium farmers generally grew food and
horticultural crops. On the other hand, in addition to
growing food and horticultural crops, rich farmers also
cultivated perennial crops as an extra source of income
(Appendix 6).

In the irrigated areas of East Java, farmers with less than
0.5 ha were classified as poor farmers, those with 0.5 to
1.0 ha as medium farmers, and those owning more
than 1.0 ha as rich farmers. On the other hand, in dry-
land areas, poor farmers were described as those with
less than 0.5 ha, medium farmers were those with 0.5
to 2.0 ha, while rich farmers were those with more than
2.0 ha of land. There was a tendency for poor farmers
to have larger family sizes. In irrigated areas, the
average family size of the poor farmers was 4-7, while
the medium and rich farmers had 4-5 and 2-5
members, respectively. The same trend was observed
for farmers in dryland areas. There was also a tendency
for farmers in irrigated areas to have larger family sizes
compared to their counterparts in dryland areas. For
example, the medium farmers in irrigated areas had an
average family size of 4-5 people, while in dryland


areas families had 3-5 members. In irrigated lowland
areas, poor farmers grew rice and maize, while medium
and rich farmers grew either rice and maize or rice
followed by chili. In the drylands, poor and medium
farmers grew maize and cassava or chili, while rich
farmers tended to grow maize and chili (Appendix 6).

In NTB, farmers with less than 0.75 ha were categorized
as poor farmers, those with 0.75 to 1.5 ha were
categorized as medium farmers, while farmers who
owned more than 1.5 ha were classified as rich farmers.
Similar to East Java, there was a tendency in NTB for
rich farmers to have the smallest family sizes. All
respondents in NTB cultivated food crops, especially
maize. Rice was mainly cultivated in a small area of
rainfed land. In addition to food crops, some of the
medium income and most of the rich farmers in East
Lombok also cultivated tobacco, which was very capital
intensive. Poor farmers, with limited cash capital, could
not grow tobacco.

In the drylands of South Sulawesi, farmers owning less
than 0.5 ha of land were categorized as poor farmers,
medium farmers were those with 0.5 to 2.0 ha, and
farmers with more than 2.0 ha were classified as rich
farmers. In the irrigated lowlands, the poor, medium,
and rich farmers were those with <0.5 ha, 0.5 to 1.0 ha;
and >1.0 ha, respectively. There was no significant
difference among categories in terms of family size,
which averaged five both in irrigated and dryland areas.
The main crops cultivated by farmers in the irrigated
lowlands were maize and rice. Rich farmers cultivated
cocoa as another source of income. In dryland areas,
farmers mainly grew maize and cotton. As in the
lowlands, rich farmers in dryland areas also grew cocoa
(Appendix 6).

In terms of livestock ownership, there was a tendency
in all study areas for rich farmers to have more cattle,
compared to medium and poor farmers. This is as
expected, because cattle are expensive to rear. On the
other hand, the ownership of poultry and goats was not
dependent on the economic status of the farmers,
except in NTB, where medium and rich farmers had
more goats.

Regarding farming decisions, there was no difference
between the three categories of farmers in all study
areas. All respondents reported that they made farming
decisions together with their wives (Appendix 6).










3.4 Use of Maize Grain and Crop 3.5 Sources of Income


Residues

In Lampung, all maize was grown for direct sale.
Farmers who usually grew recycled maize during the
dry season used less than 0.5% for seed. About 70% of
respondents used maize straw for mulching, while only
5% of them used the green leaves for livestock fodder.
None of them were using maize straw or cobs for fuel
(Appendix 7).

In the drylands of East Java, about 41% of local maize
was consumed as a staple food, another 58% was sold,
and only 1% was used for seed. In irrigated areas, 100%
of maize was sold. In terms of crop residues, most of
the respondents (90% in irrigated and 80% in dryland
and rainfed areas) used green leaves for feeding cattle.
None of the respondents used maize straw for
mulching. There were also about 25% of respondents in
irrigated areas and 50% in dryland areas that used dry
stems, cobs, and husks for fuel. Some farmers (10%) did
not use crops residues for any purpose. They let other
people take the residues for free.

In NTB, 99% of farmers grew maize to sell. The
remaining 1% was used for seed, most commonly
practiced by farmers in East Lombok who grew
recycled maize. About 56% of respondents used green
maize leaves for livestock fodder. None of the
respondents used maize straw for mulching. Only 2% of
respondents used crop residues for fuel. The remaining
farmers burned all crops residues in the field.

In South Sulawesi, about 21% of farmers in the irrigated
area of Bone and 14% in the drylands of Jeneponto
used maize grain as a staple food. Most of them (77%
in Bone and 85% in Jeneponto) grew maize for sale.
About 1% was used for seed. In Jeneponto, 72% of
respondents used crop residues for mulching and about
20% of them used crop residues for livestock fodder. In
Bone, 56% and 22% of farmers used crop residues for
mulching and livestock fodder, respectively. None of
the respondents in the study area used crop residues
for making compost. The details of maize grain and
crop residues' utilization are presented in Appendix 7.


The differences in crop cultivation, in different regions,
resulted in variable sources of income for farmers. Poor
farmers in Lampung earned about 62% of their income
from non-farming activities. Money earned from maize
only contributed about 22% to their income. Another
16% of their income was earned from other agricultural
activities. In contrast, 52% of rich farmers' income was
earned from maize and 46% from other commodities,
especially perennial crops, such as coffee, pepper, and
coconuts. Only about 2% of rich farmers' income was
earned from non-farm activities (Appendix 8).

In East Java, maize was not a major source of income
for any economic class of far mer. Most of the income in
irrigated areas came from other crops, namely rice and
chili. In the irrigated lowlands, only about 20% of the
poor farmers' income, 22% of the medium farmers'
income, and 15% of the rich farmers' income came
from maize. Most of the income (70% for the poor, 66%
for the medium, and 55% for the rich farmers) was
earned from other agricultural activities. Similarly,
maize in the dryland areas was a minor source of
income (22% for the poor and the medium, and 24% for
the rich farmers). This contrasted with the situation of
rich farmers in Lampung, where maize was the main
source of income.

In NTB, maize was a significant source of income. It
contributed about 49%, 44%, and 41% of the household
income of the poor, medium, and rich farmers,
respectively. The smallest source of income for all
farmers was non-agricultural activities. The largest
source of income for the medium and rich far mers was
other agricultural activities, especially tobacco
cultivation in East Lombok and livestock in Sumbawa.

In the lowlands of Bone (South Sulawesi), maize
contributed about 26%, 39%, and 44% of the income of
the poor, medium, and rich farmers, respectively. Most
of the income of the poor farmers (41%) was earned
from non-agricultural activities. On the other hand,
about 49% of the income of the medium far mers and
56% of the income of the rich farmers came from other
agricultural commodities, especially cotton and cocoa.

In dryland areas, about 57% of the poor farmers'
income came from non-agriculture activities. About
56% of the income of the medium farmers and 65% of
the income of the rich farmers came from maize
(Appendix 8). These figures show that poor farmers in
the study area have to work hard outside the
agricultural sector, while the medium and rich farmers
received most of their income from agriculture,
especially maize cultivation.











4. Level of Technology


4.1 Maize Varieties

In Lampung, most farmers (87.5%) used pure hybrids
during the wet season. Only 12.5% of them used
recycled hybrids. In contrast, during the dry season only
about 23.7% of farmers used pure hybrids, and 76.3%
used recycled seeds (selected from previously
harvested hybrids).

In East Java, maize varieties used were either local,
improved OPVs, or hybrids. The hybrids were pure or
recycled. Maize cultivation was different for each agro-
ecosystem and season. In the irrigated and rainfed
lowlands, maize was generally cultivated after rice.
Some farmers grew maize during the wet season, in
rainfed lowlands with less rainfall. In the dryland areas,
maize was planted in the wet season.

During the wet season, most farmers (47%) in dryland
areas grew the local variety, followed by hybrids (29%),
recycled hybrids (22%), and improved OPVs (2%).
Similarly, most farmers in the rainfed lowlands grew the
local variety (40%), recycled hybrids
(40%), and hybrids (20%). None of the
farmers grew maize in the irrigated
lowlands during the wet season.

In the dry season, all respondents in Province/land t
the irrigated lowlands grew hybrids, Lampung:
while about 80% of farmers in rainfed Dryland
lowlands grew the local variety,
followed by recycled hybrids (18%), East Java:
Irrigated (Kediri)
and only 2% of farmers grew
improved OPVs. None of the Dryland (Tuban an
respondents in the irrigated lowlands
cultivated the local variety. Rainfed (Tuban)
NTB-
In NTB, during the wet season of NTB:
Dryland
2000/2001, most farmers (55.4%) ryan
used recycled hybrids. About 40.6% South Sulawesi
of them used pure hybrids, 3.7% used Dryland (Jenepont
improved OPVs, and only 0.3% used
Irrigated/RFLL (Bo
the local variety. Farmers in East
Lombok, who grew maize during the Wetseason.
dry season, used recycled hybrids. Wet season.
dry season, used recycled hybrids. Dry season.


In South Sulawesi, the use of maize varieties also varied.
In the drylands ofJeneponto, there were at least four
varieties being used. During the dry season, about
59.2% of farmers used hybrids, 31.3% used recycled
hybrids, about 7.5% used the local variety, and another
2% used OPVs. In contrast, during the wet season,
about 62.5% of respondents used recycled seeds, about
21.7% used hybrids, 8.8% used the local variety, and
only 2% grew OPVs.

In the lowlands of Bone, during the dry season, about
93.7% of respondents used local maize and only 6.3%
of them used improved OPVs. Local maize was grown
mainly for human consumption. The details of maize
varieties used in the study area are presented in Table 3.

Farmers grew local maize in the study areas because:

* they use maize as a staple food;

* HYVs seeds are expensive, especially hybrids;


varieties grown in the study areas, 2000.
Local Improved Hybrids Recycled
ype Season (%) OPV (%) (%) hybrid (%)

WS 87.50 12.50
DS* 23.75 76.25

WS
DS 100
d Kediri) WS 47 2 29 22
DS
WS 40 20 40
DS 80 2 18

WS 0.25 3.75 40.60 55.40
DS

o) DS 7.50 2 59.20 31.30
WS 8.80 2 21.70 62.50
ne) DS 93.70 6.30
WS


Rainfed lowlands.











* hybrid maize needs more inputs, resulting in higher
costs to farmers; and

* farmers have less experience with hybrids, so that
growing a new variety is perceived as risky.

As shown in Table 3, only a few farmers grew improved
OPVs. This was due to limited availability of improved
OPV seeds in the market. Farmers reported that the
private companies collaborated with extension workers,
who promoted the hybrids intensively and made hybrid
seeds available. In contrast, no one promoted improved
OPVs or government-bred hybrids. Therefore, although
more expensive, the use of private-bred hybrids was
much higher than improved OPVs and government-
bred hybrids. The reasons given as to why farmers grew
hybrids and recycled hybrids were that they gave high
yields and were grown for sale. On the other hand,
there were at least two reasons why farmers used
recycled seeds (especially F2). First, the yield of F2
plants was still high (about 85-90% of the pure hybrids).
Secondly, farmers did not have to spend their limited
capital on expensive hybrid seeds.

Some interesting observations can be made from Table
3. First, hybrid maize is more important in the areas
where farmers grow maize for sale. Most of the farmers
grew hybrids on drylands, during the wet season,
except in East Java, and on irrigated lowlands during
the dry season, except in South Sulawesi. When farmers
grew recycled seeds, they were taken from the
previously cultivated hybrids. The role of hybrid maize
in the commercial maize production system is
becoming more and more important. Secondly, only
about 2% of farmers used improved OPVs. This was due
to unavailability of seed in the local market.



4.2 Cropping Patterns

4.2.1 Lampung

A long duration of wet months and a high rainfall in
Lampung enable farmers to grow maize twice a year.
Figure 9 shows the rainfall pattern and common
cropping calendar in the drylands of Lampung. Most
farmers follow a maize-maize cropping pattern, and
some of them practice maize-cassava. The first maize
(wet season) is usually planted in early November and
harvested in February, while the second maize (dry
season) is usually planted in March and harvested in
late June or early July.

There were at least two reasons why farmers grew
cassava. First, farmers with large farms were not able to
cultivate maize twice, because of a lack of labor.
Therefore, they grew cassava, which is not as labor and


mm
400 -------- ------
355 Rainfall

300 284 276

176 195
200 ... ... .. -171-

99 101 83 102
100 --- -75-

0
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Pattern-1 Maize Maize
Pattern-2 Maize
Cassava

Figure 9. Monthly rainfall and maize-based cropping
pattern in Lampung.


input intensive. Secondly, there are some cassava flour
factories in the area which means cassava can be grown
and sold directly to the processing factories.



4.2.2 East Java

Cropping patterns in East Java were considerably
different across agro-ecosystems. In general, cropping
patterns in this province are shown in Figures 10 and
11. In irrigated lowlands, maize was planted in late
March or early April (after harvesting rice), and
harvested in July, as shown in Figure 10. The cropping
pattern in the rainfed lowlands was similar to that in the
irrigated lowlands. In this area, maize was also mainly
planted after rice. Only a few respondents reported that
they grew wet season maize in rainfed areas. In the
irrigated and rainfed lowlands, rice was the most
important crop. As long as water is sufficient for rice,
farmers will grow rice. Only in the dryland areas does
maize become the first priority crop during the wet
season, as shown in Figure 11.


mm


Figure 10. Monthly rainfall and cropping pattern in
irrigated and rainfed lowlands of East Java.











4.2.4 South Sulawesi


In East Lombok, the main cropping pattern was maize-
mungbean. The rich, and some of the medium, farmers
grew tobacco (instead of mungbean) after maize.
Tobacco is a very capital-intensive crop and, therefore,
unaffordable for poor farmers. In Sumbawa, the main
cropping pattern was maize-fallow. Only a few farmers
(in a small area) followed a maize-maize cropping
pattern and this was especially in areas where a water
pump was available.

Maize is usually planted in November and harvested in
March, while mungbean is planted in April and
harvested in July. The maize-based cropping patterns in
NTB are presented in more detail in Figure 12.


mm


The irrigated area of Bone, in South Sulawesi, has a
different climate compared to the other regions of
Indonesia. The rainy season starts in March and ends in
August, while the dry season is from September to
February. Therefore, if we use October as a starting
point, the cropping pattern in the lowlands was maize-
rice, as shown in Figure 13. On the other hand, the wet
and dry seasons in Jeneponto are similar to other
regions of Indonesia and, therefore, the Jeneponto
region has different cropping patterns to Bone. In this
area there are two cropping patterns: maize-maize and
maize-cotton, as presented in Figure 14.


mm


Figure 13. Monthly rainfall and cropping pattern in the
irrigated and rainfed areas of Bone, South Sulawesi.


Figure 11. Monthly rainfall and cropping pattern in the
drylands of East Java.


mm mm


Figure 12. Monthly rainfall and cropping patterns in NTB.


Figure 14. Monthly rainfall and maize-based cropping
pattern in the drylands of Jeneponto, South Sulawesi.


4.2.3 NTB











4.3 Land Preparation and Crop
Management

Crop management for maize cultivation in Lampung
was similar across seasons; the only difference was land
preparation. During the wet season, land preparation
was done intensively (plowing twice and harrowing
once), while for the dry season, land preparation was
less intensive (plowing once and harrowing once).
About 75% of respondents used animal power and
about 23% used tractors for land preparation. Only 2%
of respondents did land preparation manually, as
shown in Table 4. Most of the respondents reported
that using a tractor for land preparation was faster than
animal power. Unfortunately, the number of tractors in
each village was not sufficient to fulfill the need for all
areas.

In East Java, land preparation was done differently
depending on the agro-ecosystem. In the drylands,
most farmers (80%) used animal traction for land
preparation and about 20% used a tractor. For rainfed
areas, about 70% of farmers used animal power and the
rest used a tractor. In the irrigated lowlands, about 51%
of farmers used a tractor and another 49% used animal
power. None of the respondents prepared the land
manually (Table 4).

In NTB, most of the farmers (86%) (in East Lombok)
used animal power for land preparation. Only 8% of
them did land preparation manually, and 6% used
tractors. In Sumbawa, about 63% of respondents used a
tractor, and the rest (37%) used animal power for land
preparation.

Most farmers in South Sulawesi used animal power for
land preparation. During the first (dry) season, about
93.7% of respondents in the drylands of Jeneponto and


Table 4. Land preparation practices for maize production in
the study areas, 2000.
Land preparation (%)
Zero Using Using
Province/land type tillage Manual animals tractors
Lampung: Dryland 2.12 75 23
East Java: Irrigated 49 51
Dry land 80 20
Rainfed 70 30
West NT: East Lombok 8 86 6
Sumbawa 37 63
South Sulawesi:
Dryland: DSt 6.3 93.7
WS* 67.5 32.5
Irrigated/RFLL : DS 25 75
SDry season.
SWet season.
Ralnfed lowlands.


75% of respondents in the wetlands of Bone used
animal power. Only 6.3% of them in Jeneponto and 25%
in Bone did land preparation manually. During the
second or wet season, about 32.5% of farmers did land
preparation by minimum tillage manually, and most of
them (67.5%) practiced zero tillage, as presented in
Table 4.

In terms of maize planting, about 87% of respondents in
Lampung used animals to prepare the rows by plowing.
Only 13% of respondents planted maize manually. Crop
spacing was about 75 cm between rows, and 25 cm
within the rows, with one seed per hole. Animal power
was also used for weeding by 43% of farmers in
Lampung. About 31% of them used human labor and
another 26% used herbicides, as shown in Table 5.

In East Java, almost all of the respondents (99%)
reported that they planted maize manually. Only a few
farmers in the drylands and rainfed lowlands used
animals for planting maize. There was no significant
difference between irrigated and non-irrigated areas in
terms of the planting practices for maize. For weeding,
there was considerable variation between irrigated area
and non-irrigated areas. All farmers in the irrigated
areas used manual weeding, while in the drylands and
rainfed lowlands the numbers of far mers who used
manual and animal power were almost equal (Table 5).
The main reason for using animal power was the
scarcity of human labor.

Weeding was generally done twice. Farmers used cattle
for weeding between rows, while weeding within the
row was done by hand. The first weeding was done
about three weeks after planting and usually done
together with fertilizer application. The second weeding
was done about five to six weeks after planting.

All of the respondents in East Lombok reported that
they planted maize manually, while in Sumbawa 45% of
farmers planted maize manually and 55% used animal
power. In terms of weeding, about 55% of farmers in
both East Lombok and Sumbawa did weeding manually
and about 45% of them used animal power, as shown in
Table 5.

Most of the respondents (62.5%) in Jeneponto, during
the dry season, used animals for maize planting, while
about 37.5% of them planted maize manually. Crop
spacing was about 75 cm between rows, 25 cm within
the row, and one seed per hole. In Bone, 56% of
respondents used animals and another 44% of them
used human labor for maize planting. Crop spacing was
75 cm between rows and 50 cm within the row, with
two seeds per hole. The difference in crop spacing was
mainly due to the difference in varieties. In contrast,











during the wet season, about 67.5% of respondents
planted maize manually and only 32.5% used animal
power. This was because most of them were practicing
zero tillage, so that planting had to be done manually.

Animal power was also used for weeding in Jeneponto,
both during the first and the second seasons (50% of
respondents). About 37% of them did hand weeding
and the rest used animals. In contrast, all of the
respondents in Bone did hand weeding. Crop
management practices in the study areas are presented
in more detail in Table 5.



4.4 Input Use

4.4.1 Lampung

In Lampung, inputs used for maize cultivation
consisted of seeds, fertilizers, manure, insecticides, and
herbicides. There was no significant difference in the
use of seeds between East and South Lampung. During
the wet season, farmers used about 15 kg maize seeds



Table 5. Crop management practices for maize production in th
2000.
Planting (%) Wee
Using U
Province/land type Manual animals Manual an
Lampung: Dryland 13 87 30.6 4
East Java: Irrigated 100 100
Dryland 99 1 52
Rainfed 99 1 50
West NT: East Lombok 100 55
Sumbawa 45 55 55
South Sulawesi:
Dryland: DSt 37.5 62.5 37.5
WS* 67.5 32.5 37.5
Irrigated: DS 43.7 56.3 100
t Dry season.
* Wet season.


per hectare, in both East and South Lampung, while in
the dry season they used 21 kg/ha and 22 kg/ha seeds,
respectively, in East and South Lampung. The amounts
of seeds used in both areas were almost identical
because farmers in these two districts used hybrids.

All farmers used urea at an average dosage of 200 kg/
ha in East Lampung and 217 kg/ha in South Lampung,
during the wet season. In the dry season, farmers used
a lower level of urea, 187.5 kg/ha on average in East
Lampung and 143.7 kg/ha in South Lampung. The
lower use of urea during the dry season was due to
some farmers using recycled seeds. Urea was usually
applied twice, together with the first and second
weeding. Phosphate fertilizer, in the form of SP36, was
commonly used in both districts and both seasons.
During the wet season, farmers used 75 kg/ha and 150
kg/ha of SP36 per hectare, respectively, in East and
South Lampung. In the dry season, they used 81.2 kg/
ha and 100 kg/ha SP36 on average, respectively, in
East and South Lampung. Potassium in the form of KCl
was used at a low rate. Farmers in East Lampung used
only about 12.5 kg/ha of KC1, during both the wet and
dry seasons. In South Lampung,
farmers used KCl at a rate of 37.5 kg/
e study areas, ha and 25 kg/ha, respectively, during
the wet and dry seasons. In addition
ding (%) to inorganic fertilizers, farmers also
sing Using applied manure, about 300 kg/ha
imals herbicide during the wet season and only 62.5
3.1 26.3 kg/ha during the dry season.

48 Farmers reported that none of them
50 used pesticides because there were
45 no significant pests infesting maize in
45 the field. The only biotic stress was
50 12.5 downy mildew. Therefore, they only
50 12.5 used seed treatment for recycled
seeds and herbicide for weeding. The
details of material input use in
Lampung are presented in Table 6.


Table 6. Material input use per hectare by districts and seasons, Lampung, 2000.
Wet Season Dry Season
East Lampung South Lampung East Lampung South Lampung
Cost Cost Cost Cost
Item Quantity (tRpOOO/ha) Quantity (tRpOOO/ha) Quantity (tRpOOO/ha) Quantity (tRpOOO/ha)
Seeds (kg/ha) 15 231.7 15 270 21 23.125 22 22
Fertilizer (kg/ha)
Urea 200 240 217 253.7 187.5 215.0 143.7 191.9
ZA
SP-36 75 143.7 150 207.5 81.2 133.1 100 147.5
KCI 12.5 21.2 37.5 68.7 12.5 21.2 25 26.1
Manure (kg/ha) 300 26.5 350 52.2 62.5 6.2
Pesticides (I/ha) 12.5 -7.5
Herbicides (I/ha) 2.5 107.7 3.25 123 1.5 60.7 1.3 51.7
Total 771 975 472 447
t In January-March 2001, US$ 1.0 was equivalent to Rp 8,500.











Labor was generally needed for land preparation,
planting, weeding, fertilizer application, harvesting,
shelling, and transportation. An average of Rp 1.22
million and Rp 1.15 million/ha were spent on labor
costs, respectively, during wet and dry seasons. Men
and women participated equally in most farm activities,
except in land preparation, where only the men were
involved. Women were slightly more involved than
men in planting, while men participated more in
weeding. For fertilizer application and harvesting, they
participated equally, both during the wet and dry
seasons. The detail of labor use in Lampung is
presented in Table 7.



4.4.2 East Java

Levels of input use in East Java were dependent on
both the agro-ecosystem and the season. Farmers used
about 20 kg maize seeds/ha for local, recycled, and
pure hybrid varieties. Planting was done by hand, either
in holes made by sticks or by the plow furrow. Crop
spacing varied from 75 x 30 cm to 100 x 40 cm,
depending on the variety and individual practices.

Similar to Lampung, all farmers in East Java used urea at
an average rate of 100 kg/ha in the rainfed lowlands,
150 kg/ha in the drylands, and 393 kg/ha in irrigated
areas. These values are equivalent to 45 kg N/ha in
rainfed, 67.5 kg N/ha in dryland, and 175 kg N/ha in
irrigated areas. Urea was usually applied twice,


Table 7. Labor use per hectare by activity, Lampung, 2000.
Wet Season Dry Season
Quantity Cost Quantity Cost
Item (days)t (*RpOOO/ha) (days)t (*RpOOO/ha)
Land preparation
Manual 4.5 51.7 13 149.5
Animal 193.5 148.1
Tractor -80.5
Planting
Men 7 80.5 8 92
Women 8 84 8.5 89.2
Animal 3 45 3 45
Weeding
Men 6 69 14.5 86.2
Women 5.5 57.7 5 52.5
Animal 6 90 6.5 97.5
Fertilizer applic.
Men 6 69 5.5 63.2
Women 6 63 5.5 57.7
Harvesting
Men 11.5 132.2 9.5 109.2
Women 11.5 120.7 9.5 99.7
Shelling
Transportation 78.7 63.7
TOTAL 1,216.0 1,154.0
SDays are interpreted as "person-days" for human labor, "animal-days" for
animals, and "machine-days" for tractors and other machinery.
In January-March 2001, US$ 1.0 was equivalent to Rp 8,500.


together with the first and second weedings. Another
form of nitrogen used by farmers in the irrigated
lowlands was ZA (N with S). Phosphate fertilizer, in the
form of SP36, was commonly used in irrigated areas,
but relatively few farmers used it in the rainfed
lowlands. The average use of SP36 in rainfed areas was
25 kg/ha, while in irrigated areas it was 150 kg/ha.
Potassium (in the form of KC1) was only used by farmers
in irrigated areas at an average rate of 52 kg/ha.
Farmers in dryland and rainfed areas did not apply
potassium. In addition, most of the far mers in the study
area applied manure. In fact, farmers applied manure
ranging from 1500 kg to 7500 kg/ha. Farmers in
irrigated areas applied much more manure than farmers
in dryland and rainfed lowlands. The total cost of inputs
used by farmers in East Java was about Rp 1.46 million/
ha in irrigated areas and about Rp 0.23 million/ha, in
both dryland and rainfed lowlands. The summary of
material input use is presented in Table 8.

Regarding crop protection, farmers did not use
pesticides or herbicides. In this study area, white grubs
often infested maize in the early stages of growth. A
major factor causing this infestation was late planting of
maize. Late planting during the rainy season was
usually due to uneven distribution of early rains and
competition for labor with other wet season crops,
especially rice in rainfed areas.

As in Lampung, labor in East Java was also needed for
land preparation, planting, weeding, fertilizer
application, harvesting, shelling, and transportation, as
shown in Table 9. Land preparation was completely
done by men. In irrigated areas, for planting and
harvesting, men and women contributed equally.
Weeding and fertilizer application were mostly done by
men. Total labor costs for maize cultivation were about
Rp 1.25 million/ha in irrigated areas, about Rp 0.57

million/ha in dryland areas, and Rp 0.76 million/ha in
the rainfed lowlands.



4.4.3 NTB

Unlike in East Java, none of the farmers in NTB used
manure for maize cultivation, although many of them
had cattle. Farmers in this province only used inorganic
fertilizers, urea and SP36. They used, on average, 20 kg
maize seeds/ha, in both East Lombok and Sumbawa.
Crop spacing commonly used by farmers was 75 x 40
cm for both hybrids and recycled maize.

Farmers in East Lombok used urea at an average rate of
150 and 175 kg/ha, respectively, for recycled and pure
hybrids. The average uses of SP36 were 50 and 62.5
kg/ha, respectively, for recycled and pure hybrids.
Farmers in Sumbawa used more urea than farmers in











Table 8. Material input use per hectare, by agro-ecosystem in East Java, 2000.
Land Type
Irrigated Dryland Rainfed
Cost Cost Cost
Item Quantity (tRpOOO/ha) Quantity (tRpOOO/ha) Quantity (tRpOOO/ha)
Seeds (kg/ha) 20 350 20 30 20 30
Fertilizer (kg/ha)
Urea 392.5 451.4 150 172.5 100 115
ZA 112.5 135 0 0 0
SP-36 150 270 0 0 25 45
KCI 52 104 0 0 0
Manure (kg/ha) 7,500 150 1,500 30 2.3 45
Pesticides (I/ha)
Herbicides (I/ha)
Total 1,460.4 232.5 235
t In January-March 2001, US$ 1.0 was equivalent to Rp 8,500.



Table 9. Labor use per hectare for maize production in East Java, 2000.
Land Type
Irrigated Dryland Rainfed
Item Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost
(days)t (*Rp000/ha) (days)t (*Rp000/ha) (days)t (*Rp000/ha)
Land preparation
Manual 4 60 3 45 3 45
Animal power 7 245 6 270 6 270
Tractor 2 350
Planting
Men 10 125 6 86
Women 10 90 6 60.8 6.75 71.2
Weeding
Men 17.5 136.5 3 41.8 2.75 40.7
Women 9.5 104.5 2 15 2.75 30.5
Fertilizer Appl.
Men 3.5 56 2 27 3 40.5
Women 1 13.3 2 22
Harvesting
Men 10.5 108.5 9 43 11 64.5
Women 10.5 87.5 7 32 8 33
Shelling
Men 42 2 9 2 13.5
Women 1 3 1 4.5
Transportation 142 -7 -37.5
Total 1,249.5 566.9 758.9
SDays are interpreted as "person-days" for human labor, "animal-days" for animals, and "machine-days"
for tractors and other machinery.
* In January-March 2001, US$ 1.0 was equivalent to Rp 8,500.
Farmers were either using animal power or tractor.


East Lombok, but they did not use
SP36, as shown in Table 10. The
low and imbalanced use of fertilizer
(especially in Sumbawa), together
with the common use of recycled
hybrids (particularly in East
Lombok), were thought to be the
factors causing low yields of maize
in NTB. The total costs of inputs
were about Rp 317,500 and Rp
666,250/ha, respectively, for
recycled and pure hybrids in East
Lombok, and about Rp 685,000/ha
for hybrids in Sumbawa.

Manual labor used in NTB was
mostly done by men. It was only
during planting that women were
more involved than men. In East
Lombok, fertilizer application and
harvesting were done by men and
women together. For other
activities, men generally
participated more than the women
did, especially in Sumbawa. The
total labor costs to farmers were Rp
1.30 million/ha and Rp 2.12
million/ha, respectively, in East
Lombok and Sumbawa. The details
of labor use and their costs in NTB
are presented in Table 11.



4.4.4 South Sulawesi

During the dry season, farmers in
Jeneponto used about 16 kg maize
seeds/ha, while in the wet season
they used 18 kg/ha. In Bone,
farmers used about 24 kg seeds/
ha. The fact that more seeds were
used in Bone compared to
Jeneponto was due to the use of
local maize in Bone, while in
Jeneponto most farmers used
hybrids. Local maize was usually


Table 10. Material input use per hectare, by district in NTB, 2000.

Seeds Urea SP36 Material
Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost cost
Location (kg/ha) (tRpOOO/ha) (kg/ha) (tRpOOO/ha) (kg/ha) (tRpOOO/ha) (tRpOOO/ha)
E. Lombok
Recycled maize 20 55 150 192.5 50 70 317.5
Hybrids 20 345 175 222.5 62.5 98.8 666.3
Sumbawa
Hybrids 20 355 275 330 0 0 685
t In January-March 2001, US$ 1.0 was equivalent to Rp 8,500.











planted 2-3 seeds per hole, while hybrids were mostly
planted at a density of 1 seed per hole, although some
farmers planted 2 seeds per hole. In terms of costs for
seed, farmers in Jeneponto who used hybrids spent
much more than farmers in Bone who used local maize.

Fertilizer use was indicative of the level of technology
application. Farmers in Jeneponto used urea at an
average rate of 175 kg/ha during the dry season and


Table 11. Labor use per hectare for maize production in
NTB, 2000.
East Lombok Sumbawa
Quantity Cost Quantity Cost
Activities (days)t (tRp000/ha) (days)t (tRp000/ha)
Land preparation
-Manual 0 0 0 0
-Animal 7 280.0 10 400
-Tractor 0 0 4 450
Planting
-Men 5 90.6 0 0
-Women 7 85.0 4 40.0
-Animal 0 0 6 262.5
Weeding
-Men 12 201.2 12 180.0
-Women 9 119.0 10 118.7
-Animal 2 72.5 4 150.0
Fertilizing
-Men 2 35.0 0 0
-Women 2 25.5 0 0
-Animal 0 0 0 0
Harvesting
-Men 10 150.0 18 275
-Women 10 125.0 8 89.0
Shelling
Men O 0 0 0
-Women 0 0 0 0
Transportation 8 120 10 150
Total tRp 000/ha 1,303.8 2,115.2
SDays are interpreted as "person-days" for human labor, "animal-days" for
animals, and "machine-days" for tractors and other machinery.
In January-March 2001, US$ 1.0 was equivalent to Rp 8,500.
Farmers were either using animal power or tractor.


about 160 kg/ha in the wet season. In contrast, farmers
in Bone used on average only 75 kg/ha. Another
nitrogen fertilizer used by farmers was ZA. Farmers in
Jeneponto also used SP36 and KC1, while farmers in
Bone did not use either of these two fertilizers. In
addition to inorganic fertilizers, farmers also applied
manure at an average of 1,250 kg/ha and 1,125 kg/ha,
respectively, in Jeneponto and Bone, during the dry
season.

Farmers reported that there were no significant pests
attacking maize in the field. Therefore, none of them
used pesticides. They only used herbicides for weeding,
as shown in Table 12. In Jeneponto, the total cost of
inputs for maize cultivation was about Rp 1.05 and Rp
0.67 million/ha, respectively, during the dry and wet
seasons. In contrast, farmers who used local maize in
Bone spent only Rp 0.24 million/ha, during the dry
season.

The role of women and men in the activities of maize
production in Jeneponto were equal, both in the dry
and wet seasons. In contrast, men carried out most
maize production activities in Bone. Women were only
involved in harvesting. The total labor costs (including
animal power) in Jeneponto were Rp 1.23 million/ha
during the first season, and Rp. 0.79 million/ha in the
second season. The relatively low labor costs for the
second season in Jeneponto were mainly due to the
application of zero tillage. In Bone, labor costs were Rp
0.88 million/ha, as shown in Table 13.



4.5 Yield Levels

The average yield of hybrid maize per hectare in
Lampung was 4.75 t (in the wet season) and ranged
from 3.0 to 7.5 t/ha. In the dry season, the average
yield was 4.3 t/ha (a range of 3.0 to 5.0 t/ha). The
maximum yields obtained by farmers were 7.5 t/ha in


the wet season and


Table 12. Material input use per hectare, South Sulawesi, 2000.
Dry Season Wet Season
Jeneponto Bone Jeneponto
Cost Cost Cost
Item Quantity (tRpOOO/ha) Quantity (tRpOOO/ha) Quantity (tRpOOO/ha)
Seeds (kg/ha) 16 266.5 24 24.0 18 299.8
Fertilizer (kg/ha)
Urea 175 210.0 75 90.0 160 192.0
ZA 117 140.0 50 60.0 95 113.7
SP 36 138 220.0 123 196.0
KCI 50 100.0 50 100.0
Manure (kg/ha) 1,250 1,125
Pesticide (I/ha) -
Herbicide (I/ha) 1.4 70.0 0.5 30.0 1.0 50
TOTAL 1,050.2 243.4 669.7
S In January-March 2001, US$ 1.0 was equivalent to Rp 8,500.


5.0 t/ha in the dry season, as
presented in Table 14. This shows
that the yield potential of hybrid
maize in Lampung is high.

The average yield of recycled
maize in the wet season was 3.5
t/ha (a range of 3.0 to 4.5 t/ha),
while in the dry season it was 3.5
t/ha (a range of 2.0 to 4.5 t/ha).
Based on the maximum yield, the
yield potential of recycled maize
is 4.5 t/ha in both wet and dry
seasons. The yield of recycled
maize in the wet season was
26%, and in the dry season 16%,
below that of the hybrids.











Based on the yield potential of hybrids or recycled These differ
maize, there is an opportunity to increase maize yields factors: (1) p
at the farm level, both in the wet and dry seasons. in irrigated 1
Farmers reported that the main reason for the observed recycled mai
yield gap was input use, especially fertilizer application rainfed lowla
and planting time. irrigated low
areas; (3) du
In the study area of East Java, the yields obtained by irrigated low
farmers in irrigated areas (6.35 t/ha) were much higher especially fe
than in dryland (1.53 t/ha) and rainfed areas (1.61 t/ha).


Table 13. Labor use per hectare for maize production, South Sulawesi, 2000.


Dry Season Wet Season
Jeneponto Bone Jeneponto
Quantity Cost Quantity Cost*Rp Quantity Cost*Rp
(days)t (RpOOO/ha) (days)t (RpOOO/ha) (days)t (*RpOOO/ha)
Land preparation
-Manual 7 70 5 50
-Animal 12 300 15 300
-Tractor -
Planting
-Men 4 40
-Women 5 40 5 40
-Animal 5 125 5 125 5 125
Weeding
-Men 7 70 12 120 5 50
-Women 8 64 5 40
-Animal 4 100 5 100 4 100
Fertilizing
-Men 3 30 3 30 3 30
Women 3 24 3 24
-Animal
Harvesting
-Men 10 100 3 30 10 100
-Women 10 80 3 30 10 80
Shelling
-Men
-Women
Transportation
Men 225 54 200
Total 'Rp(00) 1,228 879 789
t Days are interpreted as "person-days" for human labor, "animal-days" for animals, and "machine-days"
for tractors and other machinery.
SIn January-March 2001, US$ 1.0 was equivalent to Rp 8,500.


nces in yield were mainly due to three
ure hybrids with high inputs were grown
lowlands, as compared to local and
ize with low inputs grown in dryland and
inds (Table 8); (2) soil fertility in the
lands is higher than in rainfed and dryland
ring the wet season, farmers in the
lands planted rice with high inputs,
rtilizers. The residual effect of slow release


fertilizer, especially SP-36,
enhances maize yields when it is
grown after rice in such a system.

As shown in Table 14, yield
levels from recycled maize,
obtained by farmers in East
Lombok, ranged from 1.5 to 3.6
t/ha, with the average yield
being 2.5 t/ha. The yield from
pure hybrids ranged from 2.5 to
4.5 t/ha, with an average yield of
3.5 t/ha (1 t/ha higher than the
yield of recycled maize). In
Sumbawa, the yield of hybrids
ranged from 2.5 to 6.0 t/ha, with
an average yield of 3.3 t/ha.
None of the farmers in the study
area of Sumbawa used recycled
hybrids in the wet seasons of
1999/2000 or 2000/2001.

In South Sulawesi, the average
yield of the local variety grown in
dryland areas was 2.0 t/ha
during the dry season and 1.8 t/
ha during the wet season (a
range of 1.0 to 3.0 t/ha). The
average yield of OPVs was 3.5 t/
ha, with a range of 3.0 to 4.0 t/
ha. The average yields of hybrids


Table 14. Maize yields in the study areas, 2000.

Province/land Local (t/ha) Improved OPV (t/ha) Hybrids (t/ha) Recycled hybrid (t/ha)
type/season Average Range Average Range Average Range Average Range
Lampung: WSt 4.75 3-7.5 3.49 3-4.5
DS* 4.32 3-5 3.46 2-4.5
East Java: Irrigated -6.35 5.4-7.7
Dryland 1.53 0.8-2.6 2.32 1.5-3.7
Rainfed 1.61 1.0-2.5
NTB: East Lombok 3.5 2.5-4.5 2.5 1.5-3.6
Sumbawa 3.3 2.5-6.0
South Sulawesi :
Dryland: DS 2.0 1-3 3.5 3-4 5.4 3-8 4.6 2-6
WS 1.8 1-3 3.5 3-4 5.3 3-8 4.0 3-6
Irrigated 1.8 0.5-2.5 2.5 2-4
SWet season.
Dry season.










and recycled maize were relatively high compared to
those obtained by local and improved OPVs.

The yield of hybrids in the drylands ranged from 3.0 to
8.0 t/ha, with average yields being 5.4 t/ha and 5.3 t/
ha, respectively, during dry and wet seasons. Hence,
there is a significant opportunity for increasing maize
yields at the farm level, to get closer to the potential
yield of 8 t/ha. To achieve that objective, factors that
caused yield gaps need to be investigated, so that the
appropriate technology can be transferred to farmers.
The yields of recycled maize were 4.6 t/ha and 4.0 t/ha,
respectively, during dry and wet seasons. These yields
were higher than those of improved OPVs and local
maize.

In the lowland area of Bone, the average yield of local
maize was 1.8 t/ha, and the range of yield was 0.5 to
2.5 t/ha, as shown in Table 14. The average yield of the
improved OPV being grown was 2.5 t/ha, with a range
of 2 to 4 t/ha. This yield was higher than that of the
local variety. Since farmers are still growing the local
variety, the opportunity to increase maize yields is
limited and more progress could be made by changing
to improved OPVs or hybrids.

From Table 14, one can observe that, in all study areas
and in all agro-ecosystems, yields of hybrids were the
highest, followed by recycled hybrids, improved OPVs,
and then the local maize.



4.6 Post-Harvest Practices and
Maize Sale

Maize farmers in Lampung usually harvested manually.
The husks were removed before handling and the ears
were piled up in their own houses. Farmers reported
that they had never dried ears before selling them.

Maize, in the form of ears, was sold from the farmers'
houses, immediately after harvesting. Traders who each
had their own thresher usually did the threshing. The
maize was usually paid for 3 to 7 days after the
transaction. Traders came to the villages every
harvesting season. Farmers who grew recycled maize
selected seeds for the next planting soon after
harvesting. This was done by selecting big, healthy and
brightly colored ears. The husked ears were thoroughly
sun-dried and stored for the next season.

In East Java, farmers harvested maize 120-130 days
after planting, depending on the variety, and harvesting
was done manually. Some farmers sold maize directly
in the field soon after harvesting, and some carried their


maize (particularly local maize) to the house, where it
was sun-dried for several days. After drying and
shelling, the moisture content of the grain was 17-20%.
The local (white) maize was usually stored for home
consumption and sold gradually in small quantities.
Farmers stored yellow maize (the hybrid or its
corresponding recycled hybrid) for a limited period (1-4
weeks), until they could get a better price.

Seeds for the next planting were mostly selected from
the last harvest and stored above the cooking place
(stove) to prevent infestation by storage pests,
particularly weevils. Only a few farmers in the dryland
and rainfed lowlands bought new seeds after the
original purchase of a new variety. Only farmers in
irrigated areas bought new pure hybrids.

About 80% of farmers in dryland and 90% in irrigated
areas used green leaves for livestock fodder. About 50%
of farmers in the drylands and 25% in irrigated areas
used dry stems, dry cobs, and husks for fuel, and about
10% of farmers in both areas did not use crop residues
for any purpose.

As in East Java, harvesting in NTB was done manually.
Most farmers sold their maize directly in the field soon
after harvesting. The traders did the drying and
threshing. Only a few of the farmers carried the maize
to their houses for sun-drying and storage for a few
weeks, while they waited for a better price. Farmers
who grew recycled hybrids selected seeds from the last
harvest and stored them above the traditional stove to
prevent the infestation by storage pests. In East
Lombok, about 80% of farmers used crop residues for
cattle feeding and another 20% did not use crop
residues for any purpose. In Sumbawa, only about
32.5% of farmers used crop residues for fodder, about
5% of them used crop residues for fuel, and about 67%
of them did not use crop residues at all.

In South Sulawesi far mers also harvested their maize by
hand. The husks of yellow maize were removed before
hauling, while for white maize ears with husks were
brought to their houses. For yellow maize, the ears
were piled up in the house where shelling was usually
done by hand with a simple implement made of wood.
The grains were immediately sold (without sun-drying)
to the trader for cash. For the white maize, the husked
ears were sun-dried thoroughly for 5-7 days by
spreading them on the floor. After drying, the husked
ears were tied in bunches consisting of about 20 ears
per bunch. The maize was stored in this way for about
6-12 months, unless some maize was required for
consumption or was sold to the local market to meet
daily expenses.












5. Constraints to Increasing Maize Productivity


The production system adopted by maize farmers in
Indonesia depends on the geographical area, the
cropping system, and management choices. Due to the
significant variation between the different agro-
ecological zones that make up the country's maize
growing areas, there is a broad spectrum of production
constraints. Subandi (1998) concluded that the low
level of national maize productivity is attributed to
many interacting factors:

* low or poor soil fertility;

* resource-poor farmers;

* limited or no specific technologies;


* low adoption of improved technologies;


* inappropriate or poor post-harvest handling,
especially for wet season maize;

* grain price uncertainty during harvest time.

Major constraints to maize production have been
examined and the solution to address the problems has
been identified several times (Subandi et al. 1988;
Subandi and Manwan 1990). Despite the increasing
trend of maize yields during the last two decades, the


current national yield of 2.8 t/ha is still low considering
that most recently released cultivars have high yield
potential (6 to 9 t/ha). The constraints found during the
RRA/PRA study were discussed, clarified, and
elaborated during the country workshop held in S.
Sulawesi in May 2002. These findings will be presented
in this chapter along with a prioritization of the
constraints. For this section of the report, maize
production constraints were identified by reviewing
available information, interviewing farmers, and directly
observing maize fields. The problems associated with
maize production were identified and grouped into
socio-economic constraints, biotic and abiotic
constraints, and institutional constraints.



5.1 Biotic and Abiotic Constraints

A wide array of diseases and pests have been known to
attack maize plants throughout their life cycles and
during storage (Sudjadi 1988; Baco et al. 2000).
However, only a few of these biotic stresses cause
damage of economic importance. In 2001, a panel of
ICERI maize researchers reviewed the documented list
of maize production constraints. Attempts were made
to determine solutions to the problems highlighted and
to set up research programs (Table 15).


Table 15. Main constraints limiting production in all major maize production areas and their relative importance for
research and development priorities.
East Central South North East Nusa North New Opened
Constraints Java Java Lampung Sulawesi Sumatra Tenggara Sulawesi areat
Yield potential **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****
Soil problems ***** ***** **** ***** **** ***** ***** *****
Early maturity *** *** *** **** *** **
Drought *** *** *** *** ***** *** ****
Waterlogging ** ** ** *** *** ***
Downy mildew **** **** ***** **** **** **** **** ****
Leaf blight *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
Stem borer *** *** **** *** *** *** *** ***
Storage insects ** ** ** *** **** **** *** ****
Seed system ** ** *** ** *** ** **
Source: Subandl et al. (1988) and re-evaluated in 2001 by ICERI.
Low priority for research and development.
***** High priority for research and development.
S Includes transmigration area.










Downy mildew (DM) is the most important biotic stress
affecting maize production in Indonesia, and poor soil
quality is the predominant abiotic limiting factor. Other
important diseases often found, but causing less
damage, include leaf blights (Helminthosporium spp.),
leaf spots (Curvularia spp.), rusts (Puccinia polysora),
stalk and ear rots (Fusarium spp., Diplodia spp.), and
banded leaf and sheath blight (BLSB) (Rhizoctonia
solani). A report by a private seed company pathologist
familiar with the region confirmed that DM, leaf blights,
BLSB, southern rusts, stalk/root rots, and Diplodia ear
rots were important diseases in Indonesia (Dalmacio
2000). BLSB is prevalent in many of the maize
producing areas in Indonesia but no yield losses have
been recorded to date. Recently, a serious attack of
gray leaf spot (Cercospora leaf spot) was reported to
affect hybrid cultivars in farmers' fields located in the
high altitude area of Tanah Karo (North Sumatra), but no
information was available regarding the extent of these
yield losses.

Downy mildew disease affecting maize in Java and
Sumatra is believed to be caused by Peronosclerospora
maydis, which has spherical shaped conidia. The DM
pathogen commonly found in Sulawesi has elongated
shaped conidia, and resembles Peronosclerospora
philippinensis. This fungus has been identified as the
causal organism of the serious damage observed in
major maize production centers in East, Central, and
West Java, S. Sulawesi, Lampung, and North Sumatra.
Because downy mildew is the most important maize
disease in the region, the committee for variety release
requires that any promising variety must possess DM
resistance as well as having high yield potential.
Despite the DM resistance conferred by the released
varieties, farmers still usually apply Ridomil, an
expensive and non-environmentally friendly fungicide.
Recent research conducted by an ICERI pathologist in
South Sulawesi indicated that most of the released
varieties showed susceptibility to DM when grown
under high disease pressure (Wakman 1999).

The important insect pests of maize are shoot flies
(Atherigona sp.), Asian corn borers (Ostrinia furnacalis),
and weevils (Sitophilus sp.). Shoot flies can cause
severe damage if maize is seeded late in the rainy
season (Dahlan 1994). Other than these, the Directorate
of Plant Protection of the Department of Agriculture
(1996) reported that army worm (Mythimna sp.), corn
ear worm (Helicoverpa sp.), rats, and wild pigs were
also important pests.

Weevils are important in areas where humans consume
maize. The extent of grain damage depends on the
duration of storage. In the areas covered by the current
study, it was observed that most harvested maize was


sold directly by farmers to the traders. Only a few
farmers carried the harvested ears to their houses, to be
sun-dried and stored for a few weeks, as they waited for
a better price. Some portion of their maize, especially
the white type, is stored for their own consumption. In
the drier areas of eastern Indonesia, such as East Nusa
Tenggara and some part of Sulawesi, farmers usually
store their dried maize ears for longer periods (6-12
months). Hence, despite thoroughly sun-drying the ears
before storage, weevil infestation is very common.

In general, yield losses due to borers and shoot flies
were not significant. But there were instances where in
a few areas, borers and grasshoppers caused significant
yield losses. In 1987 borer infestation was recorded as
attacking 9,100 ha of maize fields, but the figure was
only 1,300 ha in 1996 (Directorate of Plant Protection
1996).



5.2 Socio-Economic Constraints

Several socio-economic constraints relating to maize
productivity were identified during the field study and
include: the high price of inputs particularly hybrid seed
and fertilizers; the low price of outputs; and lack of cash
capital. The high price of hybrid seeds has forced some
farmers to use recycled hybrids, with lower yields than
the pure hybrids. At present, the main factor causing
high price of seeds is the distance between farmers and
the seed industry, especially hybrids bred by private
companies.

In the dry land ecology of outer Java (except Lampung),
poor infrastructure and low purchasing power of
farmers are also associated with low maize productivity.
The low price of outputs is mainly due to poor access of
farmers to the market. This condition is common in the
areas where no big feed mill industries exist. The
situation is often worst during the wet season harvest
time, when the farmers have no choice but to sell their
grain (sometimes as harvested ears) because no
appropriate drying or storage facility is available.

The high price of quality seeds, especially of hybrid
cultivars, is the main reason why improved germplasm
is not widely adopted. It is not surprising to observe
farmers growing advanced generations of the hybrids,
resulting in lower yields. Farmers who do not have
enough capital at the start of the gr owing season
commonly grow recycled materials. The public maize
research institute has released hybrid cultivars, and
these seeds can be sold at a reduced price. However,
since the maize seed production and distribution
systems of the publicly bred cultivars is not yet










established, the dissemination and adoption of their
research products are not well developed. There are no
strong, or regularly managed, maize seed production
agencies available for publicly bred cultivars. In none of
the surveyed sites did we find seeds of any improved
publicly bred OPVs (Arjuna, Bisma, Wisanggeni,
Lagaligo) or hybrids (Semar 1 up to Semar 9) that were
being sold by agro-input shops at the local markets.

Application of fertilizers is recognized as an important
factor influencing increased productivity, especially for
farmers who grow hybrid maize. But the price of
fertilizers has increased due to a reduction in the level
of government subsidy provided. The high price of
fertilizers coupled with a lack of purchasing capacity
have led farmers to reduce the dose and rate of
fertilizer application. The exception to this situation is
that observed in irrigated and other favorable maize
production areas in East Java, where farmers still
applied fertilizers at a relatively high rate because they
expect larger profits from their high yielding hybrid
maize.

The low price of maize grain is mainly associated with
farmers' poor access to the market. Except for areas
near the feed mill industry in East Java and Lampung,
most dryland maize farmers, especially in remote
areas, do not have strong bargaining power when
selling their grains.



5.3 Institutional Constraints

Low adoption of improved technology is, to some
extent, related to poor technology dissemination and
distribution mechanisms. This is particularly true for
publicly generated technologies. The national maize
research institute-recently renamed the Indonesian
Cereal Research Institute (ICERI)-has released a number
of OPVs and hybrid cultivars. Under the Indonesian
system, ICERI is responsible for producing breeder's
seeds (coming directly from research programs) of the
released cultivars. Foundation seed (coming from
breeder's seed) is handled by provincial seed centers,
and seed growers commonly do the mass production
of extension (or commercial) seed. Most commonly,
the seed growers sell seed directly to farmers or
cooperatives. But sometimes their seed is packaged
and marketed by public corporations such as Sang
Hyang Seri and Pertani.

The system lacks effective promotion of quality seed,
and uncertainties exist about the timely distribution of
seed. No organization is yet available nor fully
committed to regular management and promotion of
the ICERI germplasm products. There have been


occasional links between ICERI and the two public
corporations but the desired and sustainable
partnerships between the companies and the public
research institute are not yet well established. Ironically
there has been a growing interest among national
private sector companies to become ICERI partners in
promoting maize cultivars. Presently the national AARD
does not have a strong or clear policy on releasing or
commercializing hybrid cultivars.

Lack of promotion of appropriate technology is also
associated with weak research-extension linkages.
During the last decade, there has been a decline in the
role and impact of public extension agencies.
Agricultural extension workers have not received
enough effective training, and contacts with research
institutes from where they could acquire new
technology and information are weak. Under such
circumstances, reorganization and reorientation of
research and development took place in 1995. In each
province,under the AARD system, the AIATs were
established. The ideal AIAT consists of researchers and
extension personal working together in the assessment
of research products developed by commodity research
institutes, as well as testing and promotion of the
selected technology packages.

Another institutional constraint is the marketing system
for maize grain and other products. In our study, farmer
groups and cooperatives were not found to be
marketing any agricultural products. The cooperatives
did not even provide credit for their members.
Therefore, farmers generally borrowed cash from
traders, at high interest rates.

Most of the feed industries that buy maize grains are
located in East Java, Lampung, and N. Sumatra. The
large distances between the maize buyers in these
areas and other major producing areas such as
Sulawesi, Nusa Tenggara, and Central Java mean that
farmers incur high transportation costs. As a result of
these high costs, farmers receive a lower price for their
maize grain at the farm gate. Price uncertainty is even
more common for the wet season harvest, when most
farmers do not have appropriate shelling, drying, or
storage facilities.



5.4 Other Constraints

Other constraints causing low productivity of maize are
poor soil and crop management. The majority of corn is
grown on dryland areas either once or twice per year.
Survey results have shown that almost 60% of these
drylands have low productivity (Mink et al. 1987)
largely due to acidity of soils such as ultisol, oxisols,










and histosols. The two most important environmental
stresses affecting maize production are poor soils and
lack of water. Other factors limiting maize production
under acid dryland conditions are: low nutrient content
of the soils; low levels of organic matter; aluminum and
manganese toxicities; and lack of high yielding varieties
adapted to stressed environments. Maize is usually
poorly adapted to strongly acidic soils. Root growth of
acid-stressed maize is inhibited, resulting in inefficient
absorption of nutrients. Nitrogen and phosphorus have
been the major nutrients found to be deficient in the
soils of most maize production centers in Indonesia.
There is very limited improved germplasm available for
acid soils and drought-stressed environments. The yield
of most potentially high yielding maize varieties, grown
under conditions of low availability of nutrients, can be
reduced even more by quite minor water deficits during
the growing season, since the root systems are not well
developed.

Since the majority of maize is grown in the rainfed
dryland regions, the crop is commonly sown with the
first rains. Once the crop is established, there may be an


unpredictable and erratic moisture supply from rainfall.
Early drought stress may begin after only a few days
without rain, resulting in poor plant stand. Drought
stress during the flowering and grain filling stages can
cause significant yield loss (Lafitte 2000).

Subsistence crop maintenance practices are still
common in remote areas. Farmers usually burn plant
residues, hand hoe the land, sow the seed manually
after making the holes with wooden sticks, remove
weeds with hand hoes or by hand. The practice of
hand weeding is common even in highly productive
maize areas of Java, since labor is cheap there.
Minimum tillage and weed control using herbicides
are common practices in Lampung, where there is a
shortage of labor.

In irrigated and rainfed lowland areas, where maize is
usually grown during the late wet season, excess
moisture can often be a problem if high rainfall occurs
late in the season. Waterlogging generally occurs on
heavy soils with poor drainage where a hardpan, due
to previous rice planting, restricts the vertical
movement of water.











6. Priority Constraints for Research


6.1 Methodology for Identifying
Priority Constraints

The main constraints to maize production were
identified during the field survey in 2000/01, conducted
in four provinces. The first draft of the study report was
presented at the Annual Meeting of the Socio-Economic
Working Group held in Nepal in June 2001. Later in
May 2002, a country workshop was held in S. Sulawesi
to discuss the RRA/PRA findings, to clarify and identify
more constraints, and to set up priorities for research
and development to address some of these problems.

The workshop was attended by senior NARS scientists,
policy makers, extension personnel, and seed
corporations engaged in maize development in
different parts of the country. Senior CIMMYT scientists
facilitated discussions directed at establishing priorities.

The plenary session of the workshop on the first day
included presentations on:

* An overview of Indonesia's National Maize
Production Program, by the DG, Directorate of Food
Crop Production;

* The National Maize R&D Program, by the Director of
ICERI;

* Private Sector Maize R&D Program, PT Benih Inti
Subur Intani; and

* RRA/PRA results from the International Fund for
Agricultural Development (IFAD)-CIMMYT study in
Indonesia, presented by the country team.

After a general discussion of the topics during the
plenary session, the participants were divided into four
working groups. The four groups further clarified and
elaborated the constraints based on four maize
ecosystems: drylands, irrigated lowlands, rainfed
lowlands, and swampy areas. Each group considered


the yield gain that could be achieved if the particular
constraints were alleviated. The working group
presented their findings in the following session, which
were further discussed, validated, and conclusions
presented.

The second part of the workshop involved discussion on
technology/policy options for constraints alleviation.
Efficiency indices for each specific constraint were
estimated considering the following factors: the
importance of the constraint; the yield gain associated
with alleviation of the constraint; the total production of
maize in each specific agro-ecosystem; the probability
of finding a solution to the constraint; and the adoption
history (1, i i l..' of farmers who have adopted the
new technology).

Given the many constraints reported in each agro-
ecozone, one must find a way to combine and compare
the constraints across agro-ecozones to obtain some
idea of a prioritized agenda for maize research and
development in Indonesia. This study used the
methodology that CIMMYT developed (Pingali and
Pandey 2001) to help prioritize maize productivity
constraints across maize ecologies and geographic
regions for tropical maize systems. Three criteria are
used for prioritizing public research: efficiency, the
extent of poverty, and the extent of marginality of the
production agro-environment. Efficiency index
estimates the returns a given research investment
would yield, or the biggest bang for the research buck.
It approximates how the alleviation of constraints, by
either research or extension-cum-research, would most
likely contribute to total production gains. Poverty index
modifies the efficiency index to give some weight to
poor farmers and their food security situation. With a
higher proportion of poor people, the poverty index
associated with the constraint is higher. Constraint
ranking based on a poverty index should be closely
looked at when poverty alleviation is a major concern
for researchers and policymakers.











The marginality index modifies the efficiency index by
targeting investments toward the more marginal agro-
environmental areas, with the presumption that more
commercial areas are being, or will be, served by the
private sector. The inverse of the estimated average
maize yield in a particular maize-producing geographic
region or ecology was used as a measure of the
marginality index. Weights of 0.5, 0.3 and 0.2 were
given to efficiency, poverty, and marginality indices,
respectively. The combined index is, therefore,
calculated by adding the products of 0.50 x efficiency
index, 0.30 x poverty index and 0.20 x marginality
index.



6.2 Priority Constraints

In early sessions of the working group the maize eco-
zones were divided into four: Java and Bali, Sumatra,
Sulawesi and Nusa Tenggara, and Kalimantan. The
calculation of indices based on islands did not give
satisfactory results. The participants of the workshop
agreed on grouping the region into two: Java and Bali
and outer islands. In total there were 98 constraints
covering Java and Bali and outer islands (outside Java
and Bali) across four ecosystems. Based on the data
gathered from the Central Bureau of Statistics,
efficiency, poverty, marginality, and combined indices
were calculated. Finally, 20 constraints across all
regions and agro-ecosystems were established. These
constraints are more or less similar in ranking
regardless of which index is applied (Table 16). The
priority constraints for each agro-ecology are discussed
in the following paragraphs.


6.2.1 The dryland ecology of Outer
Islands

The dryland maize production system in outer islands is
mainly characterized by poor farmers living either in
relatively wet environments (Kalimantan) or dry
climates (NTT and NTB). In most of Sulawesi, maize is
grown by poor far mers in relatively dry environments,
often on acid soils with low inherent fertility and
productivity. Food maize is important in these regions.
However, areas in the higher altitude region of North
Sumatra and the low altitude area of Lampung consist
of high productivity drylands where more commercial
maize farming is carried out. Hybrids are the main
varieties used in these two provinces.

Weeds are a constraint in outer islands, where a lack of
labor causes this biological problem to become more
important. Drought is a problem particularly in the
eastern and drier part of the country. On the acid soils
of Sumatra and Kalimantan, which have a higher annual
rainfall, a few rainless days during the maize growing
season may cause drought stress, due to poor root
growth related to toxic aluminum sub-soils. In general,
the maize production system in dryland areas outside
Java and Bali is associated with unfavorable
environments, except in the highland areas of North
Sumatra and the dryland/rainfed lowland areas of
Lampung.

Post-harvest problems, caused by weevils attacking
maize where it has been poorly dried and stored, lead
to low quality grain and yield losses. These constraints
are associated with low input purchasing power, poor


Table 16. Priority ranking of major biophysical and institutional maize production constraints in Indonesia.
Efficiency Poverty Marginality Combined
Eco-zone Region Constraint rank rank rank rank
Dryland Outer islands Acid soils 1 1 1 1
Dryland Outer islands Weeds 2 2 2 2
Dryland Outer islands Drought 3 3 3 3
Dryland Outer islands Post-harvest 4 4 4 4
Dryland Outer islands Low soil fertility 5 5 5 5
Dryland Outer islands Infrastructure 6 6 6 6
Dryland Outer islands Downy mildew 7 7 8 7
Dryland Outer islands Low price of output 8 8 10 8
Dryland Outer islands Seed availability 9 9 12 9
Dryland Outer islands Lack of labor 10 12 14 10
Dryland Outer islands Poor purchasing power 11 14 15 11
Dryland Java and Bali Drought 14 11 7 12
Irrigated Java and Bali Inappropriate fertilizer application 12 10 33 13
Dryland Java and Bali Weeds 15 13 9 14
Dryland Outer islands Soil erosion 13 18 21 15
Dryland Java and Bali Low nitrogen 18 17 11 16
Irrigated Java and Bali Lack of capital 16 15 36 17
Irrigated Java and Bali Waterlogging/ crop establishment 17 16 37 18
Dryland Java and Bali Soil erosion 21 20 13 19
Dryland Outer islands Stem borers 19 24 25 20










bargaining position of farmers when selling their
outputs, as well as unavailability of quality seeds.
Although many pest and disease constraints were
identified, downy mildew was the only important
biotic stress.



6.2.2 The dryland ecology of Java and
Bali

Similar to most of the drylands in outer islands, the
drylands of Java and Bali are characterized by low
productivity, where farmers are generally poor and
only apply technology to a limited extent. Drought,
soil erosion, and low nitrogen are the main physical
constraints, while weeds are the notable biological
problem. These constraints, along with low cash
capital, have caused low maize yields. Therefore,
more effort is needed to increase maize yields in this
agro-ecosystem.


6.2.3 The irrigated areas of Java and Bali
This maize area is characterized by high productivity,
and maize farmers are generally advanced in adopting
technology. But the use of fertilizer is inappropriately
high, up to 650 kg/ha. Lack of capital is a constraint
especially at the start of the growing season when
farmers need to purchase expensive seeds (usually
hybrids) and fertilizers. Among the important
constraints, waterlogging is the most important
problem when unexpectedly high rainfall occurs during
the dry season.











7. An Agenda for Maize Research

and Development in Indonesia


Public research institutes remain important sources of
maize technology. During recent years, multinational
seed companies have had an increasing impact,
especially on hybrid maize technology. However, the
private sector generally serves commercial maize
farmers. Considering a wide array of constraints, the fact
that less emphasis has been given to research targeting
subsistence and traditional maize producing areas, and
the low and declining financial support experienced by
the public sector, the research agenda for country maize
must be addressed.

During the last session of the country workshop, the
participants tried to estimate the probability of success
in eliminating each of the 20 priority constraints in each
agro-eco zone and the probability of farmers adapting
the new technology. Based on an index that combined
these criteria, research approaches were ranked. The
most effective approaches for dealing with the
identified priority constraints and the likelihood of
producing an impact to eliminate the constraints are
summarized in Table 17. The higher the likelihood index
the more likely it is that the constraint to maize
production can be overcome.

Appendix 9 gives details on the probability of success,
adoption, and potential suppliers of the technologies.



7.1 Major Findings

The prioritization exercises indicated that top priority
should be given to the dryland agro-ecosystem of outer
Java, where acid soils, weeds, and drought problems
are the main constraints. Because there are many
constraints to maize production on poor, dry, acid soils,
more emphasis should be placed on developing early
maturing varieties tolerant to stressed environments.
Another related problem that needs to be addressed
concerns the low availability of quality seed of released
tolerant varieties.

In Java and Bali, the main constraints are inappropriate
fertilizer application, drought, weeds, waterlogging, soil
erosion, and lack of capital. In irrigated areas of this


region, maize is largely grown by commercial farmers in
favorable environments. Private companies in this agro-
ecosystem are active as providers of agro-input
products and as traders of maize grains. Higher
productivity is expected to increase national production,
especially through better adoption of hybrid technology.
The issue of a lack of capital should be addressed by
changing policies to improve access to credit.

To address the problem of inappropriate fertilizer
application, research should include detailed studies on
fertilizer use efficiency, such as rate and timing, for each
soil type. It is hoped that maize farmers will be able to
reduce the level of fertilizer application, while
maintaining productivity levels. Downy mildew is
considered an important limiting factor in all
ecosystems.



7.2 Recommendations for Future
Action

The public maize institutes should focus their research
and development efforts on the acid soil and drought-
stressed areas of outer islands, because this is where the
majority of poor maize far mers live and where maize is
a major staple food. In addition, the private sector does
not focus on these environments. The geographical area
covered by the national maize research institute is large
and includes a wide variety of agro-ecosystems.
Considering these circumstances, it is recommended
that resources should be allocated in such a way that
they can address the needs of the different agro-
ecologies, maize farmers, and maize consumers. The
major areas that need to be addressed can be divided
into three categories:

Technology development (including varietal
development and research into cropping systems, soil
fertility, and pest control),


* technology dissemination, and

* supply of inputs and marketing of outputs.












Table 17. Research approaches ranked by the likelihood of eliminating constraints to maize production.

Constraints Research approaches Rank Likelihood index
Agro-ecology: Dryland (Outer Islands)
Acid soils Development of tolerant variety 1 0.71
Soil amelioration 2 0.50
Weeds Conventional 1 0.70
Development of herbicide tolerant variety 2 0.60
Appropriate machinery 3 0.24
Drought Use of early maturing variety 1 0.76
Development of tolerant variety 2 0.71
Zero/minimum tillage 3 0.32
Small-scale irrigation 4 0.24
Mulching 5 0.24
Rainwater harvest 6 0.20
Post-harvest Improved drying techniques 1 0.63
Development of good husk cover, 2 0.54
Development of weevil tolerant variety 3 0.54
Improved storage 4 0.12
On time harvest 5 0.12
Low soil fertility Fertilizer application management. 1 0.71
Development of low-N tolerant variety 2 0.45
Organic matter management 3 0.25
Infrastructure Communication by private sector 1 0.24
Public investment on transport facilities 2 0.20
Downy mildew Development of DM resistance varieties. 1 0.81
Fungicide 2 0.57
Cultural practices 3 0.21
Low price of output Post-harvest facilities
a. Collective dryer 1 0.13
b. Collective storage 2 0.13
Import limitation (tariff) 3 0.06
Contract farming 4 0.05
Seed availability Improvement of seed production system 1 0.05
Lack of labor Herbicide 1 0.60
Farm machinery 2 0.20
Minimum tillage 3 0.15
Draft animal 4 0.05
Purchasing power Credit 1 0.36
Farmer cooperative 2 0.16
Farmer association 3 0.10
Corporate farming 4 0.06
Soil erosion Zero tillage/minimum tillage 1 0.54
Conservation systems 2 0.45
Cover crop 3 0.16
Stem borer Integrated pest mgt/early observation 1 0.25
Agro-ecology: Irrigated and dryland in Java and Bali
Inappropriate Improved fertilizer technology
fertilizer application Rate, time 1 0.70
-Utilization of organic matter 2 0.32
Drought Use of early maturing varieties 1 0.30
Development of tolerant varieties 2 0.20
Weeds Conventional weeding 1 0.70
Use of herbicide with minimum tillage 2 0.40
Low nitrogen Development of low N tolerant varieties 1 0.20
Nitrogen fertility management 2 0.70
Lack of capital Increase accessibility to credit 1 0.60
Develop corporate farming, farming 2 0.08
Develop micro finance institution 3 0.06
Develop partnership with private sector 4 0.13
Waterlogging/crop Drainage technique 1 0.27
establishment Surjant system 2 0.09
Tolerant variety 3 0.40
Transplanting technique 4 0.08
Soil erosion Cultural practices (mulching, minimum tillage, slope cropping) 2 0.40
SA specialized tidal swamp maize production system found mainly in newly-opened land outside Java. On this type of land, maize is grown
using the surjan system (raised and sunken beds). Rice is commonly grown in standing water in the sunken beds, and maize and/or other
palawia (secondary crops such as soybean, peanuts, cassava) are grown on the raised beds. Farmers in these production areas grow
maize as one component of the farming system and, depending on the market demand, maize be harvested for grain or as a green crop.










7.2.1 Varietal development
Ideally farmers should grow a few widely adapted
improved varieties. However, because of the diversity
in agro-ecologies, it will be necessary to develop many
improved cultivars adapted to the specific cropping
system conditions faced by farmers in each area. The
three most important traits that should be incorporated
into improved germplasm are earliness, high yield
potential, and tolerance to stressed environments.
These traits may be combined in one variety by
employing recurrent selection schemes in appropriate
testing sites. Early maturing cultivars are particularly
important for the target drought-stressed environments
and for the increasing areas of maize grown on rainfed
and irrigated lowlands. The latest study by Kasryno
(2002) showed that maize was grown during the dry
season, following the rice harvest, in the traditional rice
areas of East and Central Java, Lampung, and North
Sumatra.

The national maize research institute has been working
on improving germplasm targeted to acid soils and
drought-stressed environments. However, the testing
and evaluation of genetic materials associated with
these traits have been limited due to a lack of resources
and appropriate testing sites. Since these abiotic
stresses (acid soils, low fertility, and drought) are
interrelated and will provide important challenges as
maize areas expand in the future, research and
development for this target environment should be
well planned and nationally coordinated to provide a
network of appropriate activities.

The increasing trend has been for the government of
Indonesia to import rice as a staple food for its
population. This has forced the policy makers and
agricultural officials to explore maize-based food as an
alternative, with the aim of reducing dependency on
rice alone. Maize-based food is not new and has been
an important part of peoples' diets in most parts of
Sulawesi, the Islands of Nusa Tenggara, Madura, and
some parts of East and Central Java. In most of these
areas white maize is prevalent, and the common
cultivars are based on local germplasm. However, in
East Nusa Tenggara, where maize is a staple food,
yellow maize is more important. To some extent this is
due to the unavailability of quality seeds of improved
white maize. Unfortunately, research and development
on white maize seems to have lagged behind that for
yellow maize. During the last three decades only two
white maize cultivars were released. In addition, there
has been almost no government program related to
the development and promotion of white maize. Since
food maize is becoming increasingly important,


development of high yielding white maize is needed.
One important trait to be incorporated into improved
ger mplasm is resistance to storage pests, such as
weevils.

Farmers and consumers could benefit from the
availability of nutrient-enriched maize (QPM or quality
protein maize) for food and feed purposes, if national
programs start to significantly utilize this material.
Preliminary evaluations of CIMMYT-introduced QPM
populations started in 2002. As research and
development of QPM is not easy or cheap, its
applications for Indonesia should be undertaken as part
of an integrated approach, on a long-term basis. In the
short ter m, the elite and advanced QPM materials, for
the CIMMYT Asian region, can be further evaluated in
specific target environments, and promotion of QPM
can start with involvement of the national private
sector. In the long term, conventional breeding
approaches could be complemented by molecular-
assisted selection programs for conversion or
improvement of national germplasm for enhanced
protein quality.

As previously stated, maize production in more
favorable areas is dominated by privately bred hybrid
cultivars, for animal feed and commercial farming. The
private sector is not involved in maize breeding
research in Indonesia; their research is done abroad but
they have extensive testing programs in their target
areas. The public research institutes should, therefore,
continue to conduct hybrid-related research, for
example, development of heterotic populations.
Population improvement through the development of
lines, OPVs, and hybrids is a continuous process and
should be well organized. Public research institutions
should not compete with the private sector in
promoting hybrid-related technologies and instead
should work in partnership with them. ICERI could
avoid duplication of efforts by concentrating its
research in areas and environments where technology
is needed and not where the private sector is already
doing a good job. In the past, hybrid breeding has not
been targeted to less favorable environments due to
poor yields of hybrids under such conditions and the
limited business prospect of hybrid seed development
in this area. Seed production systems are usually weak
in the public sector, and without a feasible system it is
difficult for hybrid technology to be efficiently adopted.
Since future maize expansion will very much rely on the
dryland ecologies of outer islands, hybrid-oriented
breeding programs for low-productivity or stressed
environments should be initiated.










Incorporating resistance to downy mildew is another
important breeding goal. Screening for DM resistance
and incorporation of DM resistance genes should be
carried out as standard components of the germplasm
improvement process. Resistance to storage pests, such
as weevils, is also desirable, particularly for food and/or
white maize. Regarding kernel color type, it is
recommended that yellow and white maize get the
same attention. Flint and semi-flint types are both
priorities but work will also be initiated on floury maize,
as demand also exists for this maize type.



7.2.2 Resources and crop management
Until 1995, public sector maize research was carried out
at six locations distributed throughout the major maize
production regions of Indonesia. These were Banjarbaru
(South Kalimantan), Bogor (West Java), Malang (East
Java), Maros (South Sulawesi), Sukamandi (West Java),
and Sukarami (West Sumatra). These Food Crops
Research Institute maize stations covered all maize
growing regions. Considerably greater attention was
given to maize research for favorable environments,
largely located in non-traditional maize areas growing
commercial maize for animal feed. Almost no attention
was given to maize research for marginal environments
and resource poor farmers in traditional maize areas.

Maize improvement and agronomy research in
Indonesia is now mainly carried out by ICERI. The
institute was formerly known as the Research Institute
for Maize and Other Cereals (RIMOC) and although the
name has changed, the mandate remains the same.
ICERI is located in South Sulawesi, which is a traditional
maize area, where maize is largely grown for human
consumption. Resource poor farmers grow maize in this
marginal environment, where little maize improvement
has been done, and where the private sector will
probably have little involvement. As a central maize
research institute, ICERI lacks adequate testing sites for
targeting of improved technology to specific
environments and farmers needs. The main ICERI
stations are all located in South Sulawesi.

One important lesson learned from the RRA/PRA study
was that improved varieties, bred by public research
institutes, make little or no impact in farmers' fields due
to poor, or no, availability of these seeds. The same
findings were noted by a renowned international
scientist who, in 2001, reviewed national maize


research programs and their organization. He also
observed that none of the varieties or hybrids,
developed and released by ICERI after its establishment
in 1994/95, were apparent in the farmers' fields nor in
the production pipeline. In contrast, private sector
hybrids were better known by both extension workers
and farmers. As may be expected, the private sector
does a good job of seed production as well as
providing a network for dissemination of information on
their products.

The ICERI mandate includes a large geographical area
covering a variety of agro-ecological zones. It is unlikely
that ICERI will be successful in development of superior
technology, adaptable and acceptable to farmers,
without an active collaborative program. The
Assessment Institute for Agricultural Technology (AIAT)
provides collaborators in each province. AIAT takes a
proactive role in testing and identifying superior
varieties and hybrids for the region/province served by
them. To some extent, ICERI has been working together
with AIAT's staff despite the absence of a formal
network. Perhaps official assignment of one or two
agronomists from each AIAT is needed, in the
provinces where maize is important, whose
responsibility would be to work on collaborative
projects with ICERI. Last year five of AIAT's staff
undertook maize improvement training at CIMMYT,
Mexico. It would be good in the future if they could
work with ICERI programs involved in maize testing and
development. ICERI has proposed establishment of a
network for collaboration with the AIAT institutions.
Equally important is the training of AIAT agronomists
who are responsible for testing ICERI germplasm and
technology in various environments represented at the
stations, as well as assessing performance in farmers'
fields. In addition ICERI should take advantage of the
existence of the faculties of agriculture in some
Indonesian universities, some of which train students up
to Ph.D. level while others are involved in maize
research. ICERI should establish collaborative maize
research activities with these universities, as it would be
mutually beneficial. Research on post-harvest
technology, including storage facilities and weevil and
aflatoxin infestations, would probably be an area where
ICERI could develop collaborative programs with
universities. Similarly, ICERI should build up links with
NGOs that are actively disseminating improved and
adapted technology to farmers. NGOs can also be a
good source of feedback to public maize institutes.













8. Bibliography


Adnyana, M.O., D. S. Swastika, and R. Kustiari. 2001. Dinamika
dan Antisipasi Pengembangan Komoditas Tanaman Pangan
(The Dynamics and Anticipation of Food Crops Development).
In Rustastra, I.W, P.U.Hadi, A.R. Nurmanaf, E. Jamal, and A.
Syam (eds), Proceedings of the National Seminar on
Perspective of Agricultural and Forestry Development 2001 and
Future. Bogor, 9-10 November 2001.
Amang, B. 1993. Ekonomi Perberasan, Jagung, dan Minyak Sawit
di Indonesia (Economy of Rice, Corn, and Palm Oil in
Indonesia). PT Dharma Karsa Utama. Jakarta.
Aquino, P., F Carrion, R. Calvo, and D. Flores. 2001. Selected
Maize Statistics. In P.L. Pingali (ed), CIMMYT 1999-2000 World
Maize Facts and Trends. Meeting World Maize Needs:
Technological Opportunities and Priorities for the Public Sector.
Mexico, D.F.:CIMMYT.
Baco, D., J. Tandiabang, and W. Wakman. 2000. Pests and Diseases
of Maize in Indonesia: Status and Research Needs. In Vasal et
al. (eds), Proceedings of the Seventh Asian Regional Maize
Workshop. PCARRD, Los Banos, Philippines, February 23-27,
1998.
Bastara, T 1988. The Development Program of Corn in Indonesia.
In Corn. Central Research Institute for Food Crops (CRIFC).
Bogor.
Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS). 1970 1999. Food Balance Sheet.
Jakarta, Indonesia: CBS.
.1971-2001. Indonesian Statistical Year Book. Jakarta,
Indonesia:CBS.
Dahlan, M.M. 1994. Research and Development of MARIE
Proceedings of the Asian Regional Maize Research Planning
and Coordination Meeting. Farm Suwan, Thailand, Oct. 24-27,
1994. A CIMMYT-Asian Regional Maize Program Special
Report.
Dalmacio, S.C. 2000. Importance of and growing concerns for
maize diseases in the Asian Region. In Vasal et al. (eds),
Proceedings of the Seventh Asian Regional Maize Workshop.
PCARRD, Los Banos, Philippines, February 23-27, 1998.
Directorate of Plant Protection. 1996. Data Luas Serangan Hama
dan Penyakit Jagung di Indonesia. (Unpublished data).
Erwidodo and N. Pribadi, 2002. Produksi dan Permintaan Jagung di
Indonesia: Perkembangan dan Proyeksi. (Production and
Demand for Maize in Indonesia: The Progress and Projection).
Presented at the Panel Discussion on "The Potential of Maize for
Alternative Food, held by the Agency for Food Security,
Ministry of Agriculture, 25 April 2002.
Hadi, P., Waluyo, and Sugiarto. 1993. Penelitian Agribisnis.
(Agribusiness Research, Book II: Corn). Technical Report. Center
for Agro-Socio-economic Research. Bogor.
Hairunsyah, 1993. The Research Program of Corn in Banjarbaru
Research Institute for Food Crops (BARIF). In Hairunsyah, I.
Noor, D.I. Saderi, and R. Galib (eds), Proceedings on Corn
Research Seminar. BARIE Banjarbaru.
Hutabarat, B., Y Yusdja, E. Basuno, A. Subekti, I. Sadikin, dan V
Siagian. 1993. The Regional Trade Pattern of Corn Commodity
in Indonesia. Research Report. Center for Agro-Socio Economic
Research (CASER). Bogor.


Kasryno, F. 2002. Perkembangan Produksi dan Konsumsi Jagung
Dunia Selama Empat Dekade Yang Lalu dan Implikasinya Bagi
Indonesia. (The Progress of World Maize Production and
Consumption for the Last Four Decades, and Its Implication to
Indonesia). Pr esented at a one day seminar on Maize
Agribusines. Bogor, 24 June 2002. AARD.
Lafitte, H.R. 2000. Tropical Maize Physiology. In Paliwal et al. (eds),
Tropical Maize Improvement and production. FAO Plant
Production and Protection Series. No. 28.
Maamun, M.Y., O. Suherman, D.J. Baco, M. Dahlan and Subandi.
2001. Impact of Breeding Research on Maize Production and
Distribution in Indonesia. In Gerpacio, R.V (ed), Impact of Public
and Private Sector Maize Breeding Research in Asia, 1966-1997/
98. Mexico, D.F. CIMMYT
Malian, H., and A. Djauhari. 1988. The Farm Budget Analysis of
Corn. In Subandi, M. Syam, and A. Widjono (eds), Corn. Central
Research Institute for Food Crops (CRIFC). Bogor.
Mink, S.D., P.A. Dorosh, and D.H. Perry. 1987. Corn Production
Systems. In C.P. Timmer (ed.), The Corn Economy of Indonesia.
Pp. 62-87.
Nugraha, U.S., and Subandi. 2002. Perkembangan Teknologi
Budidaya dan Industri Benih. (The Progress of Maize Production
Technology and Seeds Industry. Presented at a one day seminar
on Maize Agribusiness. Bogor, 24 June 2002. AARD.
Sayaka, B. 1995. The total factor productivity measurement of corn
in Java, 1972 1992. Journal Agro Ekonomi (Agricultural
Economics Journal) 14(1): 39-49.
Subandi. 1998. Corn Varietal Improvement in Indonesia: Progress
and Future Strategies. IARD Journal, Vol. 20 (1). Agency for
Agricultural Research and Development. Jakarta.
Subandi, Ibraim,M, A. Blumenschein. 1988. National Coordinated
Research Program on Corn. Central Research Institute for Food
Crops. Agency for Agricultural Research and Development.
Subandi, and I. Manwan, 1990. Penelitian dan Teknologi
Peningkatan Produksi Jagung di Indonesia. (The Research and
Technology to Improve Corn Production in Indonesia). Special
Report Pus/04/90. Central Research Institute for Food Crops
(CRIFC). Bogor.
Subandi, I. G. Ismail, and Hermanto. 1998. Corn: The Technology of
Production and Post-harvest. Central Research Institute for Food
Crops (CRIFC). Bogor.
Sudjadi, M.S. 1988. Penyakit Jagung dan Pengendaliannya (Maize
Diseases and their Control). In Subandi et al. (eds.), Jagung
(Maize). Central Research Institute for Food Crops (CRIFC). Bogor.
Suhariyanto, K. 2000. Maize Production and Cost Structure in
Indonesia. Presented at the Third Annual Workshop of the Asian
Maize Socio Economics Working Group, in Ho Chi Minh City,
Vietnam, 26-29 June 2000.
Timmer, C.P. 1987. Corn Marketing. In C.P Timmer (ed.), The Corn
Economy of Indonesia. Cornell University Press. New York.
pp.201 234
Wakman, S. R., dan M.S. Kontong. 1999. Kehilangan hasil 12
varietas jagung unggul akibat penyakit bulai. Technical Report.
Presented at Weekly Intern Seminar, RIMOC/BALITJAS, 29
May1999.












Appendix 1. Maize production centers in Indonesia.


N. Sumatera


Lampung


S= Maize production center

E Shaded area = Study area of RRA


Appendix 2. The location of RRA/PRA maize production sites in Indonesia, 2001.

Provinces Districts Sub-districts Villages Agro-ecosystem
Lampung 1. South 1. Jati Agung 1. Sumber Jaya Dryland
Lampung 2. Rejo Mulyo Dryland
3. Sidoharjo Dryland
4. Karang Rejo Dryland

2. East 2. Marga Tiga 5. Tanjung Harapan Dryland
Lampung 6. Sukadana Baru Dryland
7. Negeri Tua Dryland
8. Negeri Katon Dryland

3. Kediri 3. Plemahan 9. Plemahan Irrigated
10. Mojo Ayu Irrigated
4. Kepung 11. Kebon Rejo Dryland
12. Kampung Baru Dryland

East Java 4. Tuban 5. Kerek 13. Margorejo Dryland & RFLLt
14. Hargoretno Dryland & RFLL
15. Padasan Dryland & RFLL
16. Temayang Dryland & RFLL

NTB 5. Sumbawa 6. Alas Barat 17. Mapin Baru Dryland
18. Sanggrahan Dryland
19. Ajati Dryland
20. Saketong Dryland
6. East Lombok 7. Pringgabaya 21. Suela Dryland & RFLL
22. Suntalangu Dryland & RFLL
23. Selaparang Dryland
24. Labuhan Lombok Dryland

South Sulawesi 7. Jeneponto 8. Klara 25. Rumbia Dryland
26. Tolo Utara Dryland
9. Bangkala 27. Bero Angin Dryland
28. Palantikan Dryland

8. Bone 10. Ulaweng 29. Palawaruka Irrigated
30. Ulaweng Cinong Irrigated
11. Kajuara 31. Gona RFLL
32. Bulu Tanah Dryland
t RFLL = Ranfed lowland.












Appendix 1. Maize production centers in Indonesia.


N. Sumatera


Lampung


S= Maize production center

E Shaded area = Study area of RRA


Appendix 2. The location of RRA/PRA maize production sites in Indonesia, 2001.

Provinces Districts Sub-districts Villages Agro-ecosystem
Lampung 1. South 1. Jati Agung 1. Sumber Jaya Dryland
Lampung 2. Rejo Mulyo Dryland
3. Sidoharjo Dryland
4. Karang Rejo Dryland

2. East 2. Marga Tiga 5. Tanjung Harapan Dryland
Lampung 6. Sukadana Baru Dryland
7. Negeri Tua Dryland
8. Negeri Katon Dryland

3. Kediri 3. Plemahan 9. Plemahan Irrigated
10. Mojo Ayu Irrigated
4. Kepung 11. Kebon Rejo Dryland
12. Kampung Baru Dryland

East Java 4. Tuban 5. Kerek 13. Margorejo Dryland & RFLLt
14. Hargoretno Dryland & RFLL
15. Padasan Dryland & RFLL
16. Temayang Dryland & RFLL

NTB 5. Sumbawa 6. Alas Barat 17. Mapin Baru Dryland
18. Sanggrahan Dryland
19. Ajati Dryland
20. Saketong Dryland
6. East Lombok 7. Pringgabaya 21. Suela Dryland & RFLL
22. Suntalangu Dryland & RFLL
23. Selaparang Dryland
24. Labuhan Lombok Dryland

South Sulawesi 7. Jeneponto 8. Klara 25. Rumbia Dryland
26. Tolo Utara Dryland
9. Bangkala 27. Bero Angin Dryland
28. Palantikan Dryland

8. Bone 10. Ulaweng 29. Palawaruka Irrigated
30. Ulaweng Cinong Irrigated
11. Kajuara 31. Gona RFLL
32. Bulu Tanah Dryland
t RFLL = Ranfed lowland.












Appendix 3. Biophysical environments of maize production systems in Indonesia.

Rainfall Maize based Existing Important Important
Agro- Elevation Soil type/ (mm/ cropping abiotic pests and diseases storage
Province ecozone (masl) Topography description year) system stress Pests Diseases pest

Lampung Dryland 115-195 Plain/ Yellow red 2,455 Maize-maize; Drought None D.mildew None
undulating podsol maize-cassava

East Java Irrigated 100-300 Plain Sandy 1,563 Rice-maize; Drought Stem borer, D.mildew None
alluvial rice-chili rat,
grasshopper
Dryland/ 120-600 Plain/ Volcanic 1,424 Maize-cassava; Drought Stem borer, D.mildew Weevil
RFLLt undulating rice-chili rat

NTB Dryland 10-360 Plain/ Sandy 1,479 Maize-mungbean; Drought None None None
undulating alluvial maize-fallow

S.Sulawesi Dryland 130-500 Hilly Latosol 948 Maize-cotton; Drought None None Weevil
maize-maize
Irrigated/ 20-50 Plain/ Clay soil 2,019 Maize rice Drought Rat None Weevil
RFLL undulating
SRFLL = Rainfed lowland.







Appendix 4. Infrastructure and institutional environment of maize production systems in Indonesia.

Agro- Farmer Input Cash capital Source of farm tech- Nearest Road
Province ecozone organization source source nology information market (km) condition Transportation

Lampung Dryland Good Shop Private company Extension workers and 2.69 A1, B2 Minicab
and own capital seed company

East Java Irrigated Good Shop Own capital and Extension workers and 3 A1,A2 Minicab, Ojeg
farmer group seed company
Dryland/ Fair Shop Own capital and Extension workers and 3 A2, B2 Minicab,
RFLLt private traders other farmers Pickup, Ojeg

NTB Dryland Fair Shop Own capital and Extension workers and 5.38 A1, B2 Minicab,
private traders other farmers Dokar, Ojeg

S.Sulawesi Dryland Good Shop Farmer groups Extension workers and 3 A1, B2 Minicab
and own capital other farmers
Irrigated/ Good Shop Farmer groups Extension workers and 1.5 A1, B2 Minicab
RFLLt and own capital other farmers

SRFLL = Rainfed lowland.
Notes: Al = Good asphalt; A2 = Moderate asphalt; B1 = Good gravel; B2 = Moderate gravel; B3 = Poor gravel.












Appendix 3. Biophysical environments of maize production systems in Indonesia.

Rainfall Maize based Existing Important Important
Agro- Elevation Soil type/ (mm/ cropping abiotic pests and diseases storage
Province ecozone (masl) Topography description year) system stress Pests Diseases pest

Lampung Dryland 115-195 Plain/ Yellow red 2,455 Maize-maize; Drought None D.mildew None
undulating podsol maize-cassava

East Java Irrigated 100-300 Plain Sandy 1,563 Rice-maize; Drought Stem borer, D.mildew None
alluvial rice-chili rat,
grasshopper
Dryland/ 120-600 Plain/ Volcanic 1,424 Maize-cassava; Drought Stem borer, D.mildew Weevil
RFLLt undulating rice-chili rat

NTB Dryland 10-360 Plain/ Sandy 1,479 Maize-mungbean; Drought None None None
undulating alluvial maize-fallow

S.Sulawesi Dryland 130-500 Hilly Latosol 948 Maize-cotton; Drought None None Weevil
maize-maize
Irrigated/ 20-50 Plain/ Clay soil 2,019 Maize rice Drought Rat None Weevil
RFLL undulating
SRFLL = Rainfed lowland.







Appendix 4. Infrastructure and institutional environment of maize production systems in Indonesia.

Agro- Farmer Input Cash capital Source of farm tech- Nearest Road
Province ecozone organization source source nology information market (km) condition Transportation

Lampung Dryland Good Shop Private company Extension workers and 2.69 A1, B2 Minicab
and own capital seed company

East Java Irrigated Good Shop Own capital and Extension workers and 3 A1,A2 Minicab, Ojeg
farmer group seed company
Dryland/ Fair Shop Own capital and Extension workers and 3 A2, B2 Minicab,
RFLLt private traders other farmers Pickup, Ojeg

NTB Dryland Fair Shop Own capital and Extension workers and 5.38 A1, B2 Minicab,
private traders other farmers Dokar, Ojeg

S.Sulawesi Dryland Good Shop Farmer groups Extension workers and 3 A1, B2 Minicab
and own capital other farmers
Irrigated/ Good Shop Farmer groups Extension workers and 1.5 A1, B2 Minicab
RFLLt and own capital other farmers

SRFLL = Rainfed lowland.
Notes: Al = Good asphalt; A2 = Moderate asphalt; B1 = Good gravel; B2 = Moderate gravel; B3 = Poor gravel.












Appendix 5. Characteristics of maize farmers in four provinces of Indonesia.

Agro- Age (years) Education (years) Farm size (ha) Landowner Sharecropper
Province ecozone Min Max Average Min Max Average Min Max Average (%) (%)

Lampung Dryland 27.3 61.5 42.4 2.8 11.1 7.0 0.2 4.7 2.1 95.3 4.7

East Java Irrigated 29.0 70.5 41.6 1.0 9.5 6.0 0.2 0.9 0.4 100 0
Dryland/RFLL 25.7 59.2 39.2 2.8 10.7 6.7 0.2 1.8 0.7 100 0

NTB Dryland 26.3 54.6 39.2 1.0 11.0 6.4 0.4 2.5 1.2 99.3 0.7
S.Sulawesi Dryland 24.3 67.8 45.5 1.3 10.8 5.5 0.3 1.9 0.6 100 0
Irrigated/RFLLt 24.5 63.3 45.0 2.8 10.0 6.5 0.1 1.0 0.4 65 35
t RFLL = Ranfed lowland.







Appendix 6. Characteristics of maize farmers by class, in Indonesia.
Family size
Agro- (number of people) Land ownership (ha) Crop cultivated
Province ecozone Poor Medium Rich Poor Medium Rich Poor Medium Rich

Lampung Dryland 4.8 4.8 4.9 0.2 1.5 4.3 Food crops Food and Food and
horticultural crops horticultural crops,
Perennial crops

East Java Irrigated 4-7 4-5 2-5 <0.5 0.5-1.0 >1 Rice, maize Rice, maize, chili Rice, maize, chili
Dryland/RFLLt 4-6 3-5 2-4 <0.5 0.5-2.0 >2.0 Maize, chili, Maize, chili, Maize, chili
cassava cassava,

NTB Dryland 3-6 3-6 2-6 <0.75 0.75-1.5 >1.5 Food crops Food crops Food crops, tobacco

S.Sulawesi Dryland 5.5 5.0 5.0 0.1 1.1 3.3 Maize, cotton Maize, cotton Maize, cotton, cacao
Irrigated/RFLLt 5.3 5.0 5.0 0.1 0.6 1.6 Rice, maize Rice, maize Rice, maize, cacao

SRFLL = Rainfed lowland.


Appendix 6. Characteristics of maize farmers by class, in Indonesia (continued).

Agro- Farming decisions Number of poultry Number of goats Number of cattle
Province Ecozone Poor Medium Rich Poor Medium Rich Poor Medium Rich Poor Medium Rich

Lampung Dryland Farmer Farmer Farmer 6.0 7.9 8.4 1.9 1.8 2.0 1.8 3.6
and wife and wife and wife

East Java Irrigated Farmer Farmer Farmer 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 3.0
and wife and wife and wife
Dryland/ Farmer Farmer Farmer 4.2 3.5 4.8 2.0 2.2 5.2 0.8 2.0 4.8
RFLLt and wife and wife and wife

NTB Dryland Farmer Farmer Farmer 8.5 9.8 9.8 1.5 1.5 1.5 3.6 3.6 5.0
and wife and wife and wife

S.Sulawesi Dryland Farmer Farmer Farmer 9.5 9.0 7.5 0.8 1.0 1.3 0.0 1.0 3.5
and wife and wife and wife
Irrigated/ Farmer Farmer Farmer 7.0 7.8 8.0 0.3 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 2.3
RFLLt and wife and wife and wife
t RFLL = Rainfed lowland.












Appendix 5. Characteristics of maize farmers in four provinces of Indonesia.

Agro- Age (years) Education (years) Farm size (ha) Landowner Sharecropper
Province ecozone Min Max Average Min Max Average Min Max Average (%) (%)

Lampung Dryland 27.3 61.5 42.4 2.8 11.1 7.0 0.2 4.7 2.1 95.3 4.7

East Java Irrigated 29.0 70.5 41.6 1.0 9.5 6.0 0.2 0.9 0.4 100 0
Dryland/RFLL 25.7 59.2 39.2 2.8 10.7 6.7 0.2 1.8 0.7 100 0

NTB Dryland 26.3 54.6 39.2 1.0 11.0 6.4 0.4 2.5 1.2 99.3 0.7
S.Sulawesi Dryland 24.3 67.8 45.5 1.3 10.8 5.5 0.3 1.9 0.6 100 0
Irrigated/RFLLt 24.5 63.3 45.0 2.8 10.0 6.5 0.1 1.0 0.4 65 35
t RFLL = Ranfed lowland.







Appendix 6. Characteristics of maize farmers by class, in Indonesia.
Family size
Agro- (number of people) Land ownership (ha) Crop cultivated
Province ecozone Poor Medium Rich Poor Medium Rich Poor Medium Rich

Lampung Dryland 4.8 4.8 4.9 0.2 1.5 4.3 Food crops Food and Food and
horticultural crops horticultural crops,
Perennial crops

East Java Irrigated 4-7 4-5 2-5 <0.5 0.5-1.0 >1 Rice, maize Rice, maize, chili Rice, maize, chili
Dryland/RFLLt 4-6 3-5 2-4 <0.5 0.5-2.0 >2.0 Maize, chili, Maize, chili, Maize, chili
cassava cassava,

NTB Dryland 3-6 3-6 2-6 <0.75 0.75-1.5 >1.5 Food crops Food crops Food crops, tobacco

S.Sulawesi Dryland 5.5 5.0 5.0 0.1 1.1 3.3 Maize, cotton Maize, cotton Maize, cotton, cacao
Irrigated/RFLLt 5.3 5.0 5.0 0.1 0.6 1.6 Rice, maize Rice, maize Rice, maize, cacao

SRFLL = Rainfed lowland.


Appendix 6. Characteristics of maize farmers by class, in Indonesia (continued).

Agro- Farming decisions Number of poultry Number of goats Number of cattle
Province Ecozone Poor Medium Rich Poor Medium Rich Poor Medium Rich Poor Medium Rich

Lampung Dryland Farmer Farmer Farmer 6.0 7.9 8.4 1.9 1.8 2.0 1.8 3.6
and wife and wife and wife

East Java Irrigated Farmer Farmer Farmer 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 3.0
and wife and wife and wife
Dryland/ Farmer Farmer Farmer 4.2 3.5 4.8 2.0 2.2 5.2 0.8 2.0 4.8
RFLLt and wife and wife and wife

NTB Dryland Farmer Farmer Farmer 8.5 9.8 9.8 1.5 1.5 1.5 3.6 3.6 5.0
and wife and wife and wife

S.Sulawesi Dryland Farmer Farmer Farmer 9.5 9.0 7.5 0.8 1.0 1.3 0.0 1.0 3.5
and wife and wife and wife
Irrigated/ Farmer Farmer Farmer 7.0 7.8 8.0 0.3 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 2.3
RFLLt and wife and wife and wife
t RFLL = Rainfed lowland.











Appendix 7. Utilization of maize grain and crop residues in Indonesia.

Maize grain used (%) Crop residues used (%)
Province Agro-ecozone Food Feed Sold Seed Compost Mulching Fodder Fuel Not used

Lampung Dryland 0 0 100 0 0 70 5.125 0 27.5
East Java Irrigated 0 0 100 0 0 0 90 25 10
Dryland/RFLL 41.3 0 57.7 1 0 0 80 50 10

NTB Dryland 0 0 99.1 0.9 0 0 56.25 2.5 43.75
S.Sulawesi Dryland 13.6 0 85.4 1 0.00 71.8 20 0 8.2
Irrigated/RFLLt 21.5 0 77.5 1 0.00 56.25 22.50 0.00 18.75
SRFLL = Rainfed lowland.







Appendix 8. Farmers sources of income in four provinces of Indonesia.
Poor Farmers (%) Medium Farmers (%) Rich Farmers (%)
Agro- Maize Other Non Maize Other Non Maize Other Non
Province ecozone sales agric'l agriculture sales agric'l agriculture sales agric'l agriculture

Lampung Dryland 21.9 15.6 62.5 35.6 39.4 25 51.9 45.6 2.5
East Java Irrigated 20 70 10 22.5 66.5 11 15 55 30
Dryland/RFLL 22 56.3 21.7 22.5 52.5 25 24 32.5 43.5
NTB Dryland 48.8 40 11.2 44.4 45.6 10 40.6 50.6 8.8

S.Sulawesi Dryland 27.5 15 57.5 56.2 36.3 7.5 65 35 0
Irrigated/RFLLt 26.2 32.5 41.3 38.7 48.8 12.5 43.8 56.2 0.0
SRFLL = Rainfed lowland.











Appendix 7. Utilization of maize grain and crop residues in Indonesia.

Maize grain used (%) Crop residues used (%)
Province Agro-ecozone Food Feed Sold Seed Compost Mulching Fodder Fuel Not used

Lampung Dryland 0 0 100 0 0 70 5.125 0 27.5
East Java Irrigated 0 0 100 0 0 0 90 25 10
Dryland/RFLL 41.3 0 57.7 1 0 0 80 50 10

NTB Dryland 0 0 99.1 0.9 0 0 56.25 2.5 43.75
S.Sulawesi Dryland 13.6 0 85.4 1 0.00 71.8 20 0 8.2
Irrigated/RFLLt 21.5 0 77.5 1 0.00 56.25 22.50 0.00 18.75
SRFLL = Rainfed lowland.







Appendix 8. Farmers sources of income in four provinces of Indonesia.
Poor Farmers (%) Medium Farmers (%) Rich Farmers (%)
Agro- Maize Other Non Maize Other Non Maize Other Non
Province ecozone sales agric'l agriculture sales agric'l agriculture sales agric'l agriculture

Lampung Dryland 21.9 15.6 62.5 35.6 39.4 25 51.9 45.6 2.5
East Java Irrigated 20 70 10 22.5 66.5 11 15 55 30
Dryland/RFLL 22 56.3 21.7 22.5 52.5 25 24 32.5 43.5
NTB Dryland 48.8 40 11.2 44.4 45.6 10 40.6 50.6 8.8

S.Sulawesi Dryland 27.5 15 57.5 56.2 36.3 7.5 65 35 0
Irrigated/RFLLt 26.2 32.5 41.3 38.7 48.8 12.5 43.8 56.2 0.0
SRFLL = Rainfed lowland.













Appendix 9. Technology options for main constraints affecting maize production systems in Indonesia.

Prob of Prob of
success adoption
Constraints Technology options (%) (%) Rank Suppliers ICERI AIAT CGIAR SRI UNIV HAR PS


Agro-ecology: Outer Islands-Dryland
Acid Soil 1 Tolerant variety
2 Soil ammelloration


75 95 1 CIMMYT NARS
100 50 2 NARS


Weeds




Drought


Post-harvest


1 Variety tolerant to herbicide 100
2 Machinery 60
3 Conventional 100


1 Tolerant variety
2 Early maturity
3 Zero/minimum tillage
4 Mulching
5 Small-scale irrigation
6 Rainwater harvest

1 Appropriate variety/
husk cover, drooping ears


2 Tolerant variety (weevil)
3 Drying
4 Harvest on time
5 Storage (proper)

Low soil fertility 1 Tolerant variety (Low-N)
2 Fertilizer application
3 Organic matter

Infrastructure 1 Public investment in
transportation facilities
2 Communication by
private sector

Downy mildew 1 Tolerant varieties
2 Fungicide
3 Cultural practices


Low price of
output


1 Post harvest facilities
a. Collective dryer
b. Collective storage
2 Import limitation (tariff)
3 Contract farming
Increase efficiency


Seed availability


Lack of labor 1 Minimum tillage
2 Farm machinery
3 Draft animal
4 Herbicide


60 2 Private sector
40 3 NARS, NGO
70 1 NARS, Farmers


75 95 2 CIMMYT, NARS
80 95 1 CIMMYT NARS
40 80 3 NARS
60 40 5 NARS
95 25 4 NARS
80 25 6 NARS, ICRISAT

60 90 2 NARS, CIMMYT,
and private sector
60 90 3 NARS, CIMMYT
90 70 1 NARS, PS
40 30 5 NARS
40 30 4 NARS, PS

50 90 2 NARS, CIMMYT
95 75 1 NARS ..
50 50 3 NARS ..


25 80 1 GOI



40 60 2 Private sector


90 1 NARS, CIMMYT
60 2 NARS
30 3 NARS


50 1 Farmers groups
50 2 Farmers groups
40 3 GOI
25 4 Farmers groups,
private sectorAIAT




25 3 Farmers groups
80 2 Private sector *
30 4 Farmers groups
85 1 Private sector *


1 Corporate farming
2 Famer cooperative
3 Farmer association
4 Credit

1 Zero/minimum tillage
2 Conservation systems
3 Cover crop


30 4 Farmer
45 2 Farmer
20 3 Farmer
60 1 GOI/PS


60 1 NARS, CIMMYT
50 2 NARS, CIMMYT
40 3 NARS


Purchasing
power




Soil erosion


Notes: ICERI: Indonesian Cereal Research Institute; AIAT: Assessment Institute for Agricultural Technology; CGIAR: Consultative Group on International Agricultural
Research; SRI: Soil Research Institute; Univ: Universities; HAR: agencies outside NARS; PS: Private sector; CIMMYT International Maize and Wheat Improvement
Center; NARS: national agricultural research system; NGO: non-governmental organization; ICRISAT: International Crops Research Institute for the SemiArid
Tropics; GOI, GOVT Government of Indonesia.
Low level of involvement; ** medium level of involvement; *** high level of involvement.


** **


** *
** *


***
***

*** **


***













Appendix 9. Technology options for main constraints affecting maize production systems in Indonesia (continued).

Prob of Prob of
success adoption
Constraints Technology options (%) (%) Rank Suppliers ICERI AIAT CGIAR SRI UNIV HAR PS

Agro-ecology: Java Bali- Irrigated


Inapprorlate
fertilizer
application


1 Appropriate fertizer technology


SRate, time
SMethod, kind
2 Utilize organic matter


Lack of capital 1 Increase accessibility to credit



2 Develop partnership with
private sector

3 Develop corporate farming,
farming cooperative

4 Develop micro-finance
Institutions


Water
logging/crop
establishment


1 Drainage technique
2 Surjan system
3 Tolerant variety
4 Transplanting technique


Water shortage 1 Small-scale irrigation 80
2 Cultural practices (Mulching, 100
mm. tillage, time of planting)
3 Early maturity varieties 60
4 Tolerant varieties 40
5 Water harvest 80


100 70 1 NARS, AIAT, UNIV
Private sector
80 40 2 NARS, AIAT, UNIV
Private sector

80 75 1 Bank
Informal credit
Private sector
25 50 4 Bank
Informal credit
Private sector
30 25 2 Bank
Informal credit
Private sector
10 60 3 Bank
Informal credit
Private sector


GOVT AIAT UNIV
GOVT AIAT UNIV
NARS, AIAT, UNIV
AIAT, UNIV


60 1 GOVT AIAT UNIV.
40 2 Key Farmer, AIAT


3 NARS, AIAT
4 NARS, GOVT AIAT ***


Notes: ICERI: Indonesian Cereal Research Institute; AIAT: Assessment Institute for Agricultural Technology; CGIAR: Consultative Group on International Agricultural
Research; SRI: Soil Research Institute; Univ: Universities; HAR: agencies outside NARS; PS: Private sector; CIMMYT International Maize and Wheat Improvement
Center; NARS: national agricultural research system; NGO: non-governmental organization; ICRISAT: International Crops Research Institute for the SemiArid
Tropics; GOI, GOVT Government of Indonesia.
Low level of involvement; ** medium level of involvement; *** high level of involvement.


***
** ***

** ***


**


***
**


* *** *


***






ISBN: 97i 4 1 ,-08-7


11 CIMMYI..
ImFRNmAnON.L NLUZE ,ND %IffE %T IkIPRO% EMEN-T CEN1TR




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs