Landscape Integrated Pest

Management As A Tool To
Determine The Risk Of
Production Of Rice Farming In
Pliken Village
Banyumas Regency
Dinda Dewi Aisyah1
Sugiyarto2
Irham3

Faculty of Agriculture
Universitas Gadjah Mada
I. Introduction

Landscape IPM
 Risk of
LIPM adopters
Production
FAO & UGM Pliken Village
Non LIPM Risk of
adopters Production
• Objectives

Testify if there is any significant difference between the production of LIPM

adopters and non-LIPM adopters.

Compare the level risk of production between LIPM adopters and non-
adopters.

Analyze the determinant factors of risk of production.

II. Methodology

Sample Size
Place • Purposive
sampling
• Purposive
method
Primary Data

Secondary Data
Independent Sample t-Test

Ho: There is no significant difference between the production of landscape IPM farming and non-
LIPM landscape farming
Ha: There is a significant difference between the production of landscape IPM farming and
non-LIPM landscape farming
μ1− μ2
t=
S 12 + S 22
n1 n2
µ1 : LIPM adopters mean of production
µ2 : non LIPM adopters mean of production
S1 : standard deviation of LIPM adopters production
S2 : standard deviation of non LIPM adopters production
N1 : sample size of LIPM adopters
N2 : sample size of LIPM adopters
 Risk of production Analysis

𝜎𝑝
𝐶𝑉𝑝 = 𝛾𝑝

𝐶𝑉𝑝 = production coefficient of variation

σp = production standard of deviation
γp = mean of production

Alternative 1 Alternative 2

CV 1>CV 2
 Factors Affecting the Risk of Production

ln Yp = β0 +β1 ln X1 + β2 ln X2 +β3 ln X3 + β4 ln X4 + δ1 D1 + δ2 D2 + µ p 1

ln µp2 = β0 +β1 ln X1 + β2 ln X2 +β3 ln X3 + β4 ln X4 + δ1 D1 + δ2 D2 + µ 2

Keterangan:
Y = production of rice field (kg)
𝑋1 = land (m2)
2
µ = risk of production
𝑋2 = seed (kg)
µ = residual
𝑋3 = fertilizer (kg)
𝛽0 = intersept
X4 = labour (HKO)
𝛽𝑖 = coefficient of regression (estimated parameter) (i = 1 s/d 4)
𝛿𝑖 = coefficient of regression dummy variable (i =1 s/d 2)
𝐷1 = pest attack
𝐷2 = plantation of refugia flower
III. Result and Discussion
Independent Sample t-Test

Description LIPM Adopters Non LIPM Adopters

Mean of productivity
(ton/ha) 6,44 5,54

t-value 0,339
t-sig 0,736
Conclusion No significant difference

Mean of Indonesian rice farming

productivity in 2015 = 5,34 ton/ha
 Risk of Production

Description Coefficient of Variation (CV)

LIPM adopters 0,57
Non LIPM adopters 0,72

Source: Primary Data Analysis, 2016

Regression of Production Function and Risk of Production
Production Function Risk Function
Variable
coefficient t-sig coefficient t-sig
Constanta 2,409 0,000 -3,341 0,338

Ln Land Size 0,299*** 0,008 -0,356 0,583

Ln Seed 0,603*** 0,000 0,025 0,972
Ln Fertilizer 0,072 0,368 0,389 0,406
Ln Labour 0,112 0,283 0,137 0,823

Refugia 0,030 0,782 -0,518 0,441

Pest Attack 0,101 0,357 2,091*** 0,006
Adjusted R2 0,813 0,173

F-stat 43,842 3,062

F-sig 0,000 0,012

Source: Primary Data Analysis, 2016

IV. Conclusion
Although landscape IPM farming has a smaller risk of production than non-IPM
landscape farming

there is no significant differences between the production of LIPM and non

LIPM farming

The factor that influence the risk of production is the presence of pests in the
rice farming area of Pliken Village.

The implementation of landscape IPM programs has not been able to give a
significant impact on increasing land productivity.

Therefore, it is recommended for farmers who have not adopted landscape IPM to
begun to adopt in order to optimize the results obtained from the implementation of
IPM landscapes.