Governance for Food Security

The Case of Indonesia in Decentralization Era

By: I Made Bram Sarjana I6005256

Supervisor: Dr. Saeed Parto Second reader: Su-Mia Akin, M.Sc Specialization: Sustainable Development Academic Year: 2009-2010

Maastricht University The Netherlands August 2010

Governance for Food Security

The Case of Indonesia in Decentralization Era

By: I Made Bram Sarjana I6005256

Supervisor: Dr. Saeed Parto Second reader: Su-Mia Akin, M.Sc

Specialization: Sustainable Development Academic Year: 2009-2010

Maastricht Graduate School of Governance Maastricht University The Netherlands August 2010

-1-

-1-

Acknowledgement

Om Swastyastu, Praise to Hyang Widhi, the Almighty God I have been dreaming to get an opportunity to continue my study abroad, to learn new insights from amazing minds and people from all over the world, hoping the knowledge may help me to contribute better for my countrys development. I understand the dream is not an easy dream. After a long and tiring process, the opportunity came last year in the cool summer of August 2009, offering me the chance to study for MSc degree in Public Policy and Human Development in Maastricht Graduate School of Governance (MGSoG), Maastricht University. Just as I expected, it was not an easy path to go through. There are times when I felt so confused, lost and depressed trying to understand the new knowledge. However there are also times when I felt excited, inspired, and enlightened. Thanks to enormous supports from my parents, my wife Tuti and my two sweet little angels Nirmala and Laras, family, as well as friends back home in Bali, I am able to reach the final stage of the study program. Writing this thesis is also another challenging intellectual adventure that I should go through. After having round and round of confusions, I finally get a grip on what and how to write the ideas. Thanks to the guidance and patience of my supervisor, Dr. Saeed Parto, lecturer of the Faculty of Social and Art Sciences of Maastricht University, for his encouragement and support in guiding me on the writing process. Therefore I would like to express my highest gratitude to him for his supervising that enables me to keep on track and never stop trying in working on my thesis. My appreciation also goes to Su-Mia Akin, researcher at International Centre for Integrated Assessment and Sustainable Development (ICIS) of Maastricht University for her willingness to become my second reader. I would also like to address my thanks to all lecturers, tutors, and staff of MGSoG and the ICIS, my thesis and Sustainable Development track coordinator Dorcas Mbuvi, for their willingness to share and great assistance during my study time. My appreciation certainly also goes to all the colleagues at school, Demos the student association of MGSoG, for their strong commitment and support to the students. My thanks also goes to my STATA hero, Lina Ladina Montenegro and Silvi Hafianti, as well as Ian Brand-Weiner, Karin Klein and Iva Tasseva for their willingness to spend their precious time for giving me additional tutorial on the amazing Econometrics during the pressing thesis writing period. I should also mention my gratefulness for the beautiful mind and heart of Bli Komang Kardana for spending his time checking the grammar, Kadek Dian Sutrisna and Mr. Makmur at the University of

Groningen as well as Mr. Wayan Widya Arsana at the University of Western Australia for their availability for discussions during my adventure with the challenging Econometrics. My appreciation and gratitude also goes to the Ministry of Education of the Netherlands for giving me the chance to continue my study through Studeren in Nederland (StuNed) scholarship, Mr. Marrik Bellen as the Director of the Netherland Education Support Office (NESO) in Jakarta, Ms. Siska Aprilianti and all staffs of NESO Jakarta for organizing the scholarship from the beginning until the end. I shall also address my thanks to Mr. Anak Agung Gde Agung as the Regent of Badung Regency, Bali, for giving me the permission to leave the office for one year studying in the Netherlands, Mr. Wayan Subawa, Mr. Wayan Suambara, Mr. Anak Agung Ngurah Wirayasa, Mr. Anak Agung Raka Yuda and my colleagues on the Government of Badung Regency, Bali who also support my intention to continue my study. Finally, my special thanks goes to my comrade in arms, Mr. Amazing Il Oeur and Mr. Fantastic Francis Yankey, as well as Bastian Hendra, Maruf Ridwan and all my colleagues in Indonesische Studenten Vereniging Maastricht, for their friendships, encouragement, discussions, advise and many other things we shared during my study time here in Maastricht. What an amazing social capital that we have built here within one year. The thesis writing process would not be able to be enriched without insights from informants who are willing to share their information, expertise and field experience on food security governance in East Nusa Tenggara. Therefore I should also deliver my high appreciation to these informants, as well as other parties who have provided me with the supporting data. At last, study is a never-ending process. I am fully aware that this thesis is away far from perfect. There are still many loop holes needed to be improved. The learning process certainly does not stop here. The process, however, should be stopped at some point, that shall be continued at another point. Constructive critiques, therefore, are highly appreciated for future improvement. Om Shanti, Shanti, Shanti Om. May peace be always in our mind, body, soul and world.

Maastricht, Summer 2010

ii

ii

- ii -

Abstract

This study seeks to understand food security governance in Indonesia in the era of decentralization, with the focus of food security governance in East Nusa Tenggara Province. The study is guided by research questions as follow: Does the shift from centralized to decentralized governance enable improvement of food security? With sub questions: (a) How food security is governed at local level under decentralization? (b) What are the constraints and opportunities that emerge to achieve food security under decentralized governance? The study found that decentralization, even though brings a better chance for democracy and empowerment at local level, does not necessarily improve food security. Food security can only be met through the implementation of good governance principles. As found in the case study, such principles are still very difficult to be implemented. Decentralization therefore creates challenges and opportunities which should be well-recognized and managed to improve food security.

Key words: governance, food security, decentralization

iii

List of Acronyms

ENT FAO FIA FSVA GDRP HDI ICESCR IMF OECD UNDP UNESCAP US WFP

East Nusa Tenggara Food and Agriculture Organization Food Insecurity Atlas Food Security and Vulnerability Atlas Gross Domestic Regional Product Human Development Index International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights International Monetary Fund Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development United Nations Development Programme United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific United States World Food Programme

iv

List of Tables Table 2.1 Comparison between Government and Governance....................................... 11 Table 2.2 The Main Dimensions of Good Governance .................................................. 12 Table 3.1 Paddy Planted Area, Harvested Area and Production in Indonesia................. 21 Table 3.2 Food Security Policy from Global to Local Level.......................................... 25 Table 3.3 Regencies and Municipality in East Nusa Tenggara ...................................... 27 Table 3.4 Harvested Area, Yield Rate and Production of Maize in East Nusa Tenggara 2006-2008..................................................................... 28 Table 3.5 Harvested area, Yield rate and Production of Cassava in East Nusa Tenggara 2006-2008..................................................................... 28 Table 3.6 Harvested Area, Yield Rate and Production of Paddy in East Nusa Tenggara 2006-2008..................................................................... 29 Table 3.7 Progress of Food Crops Production in East Nusa Tenggara 2004-2008..................................................................................................... 34 Table 3.8 Percentage of Population below Poverty Line 2006-2008.............................. 36 Table 3.9 Human Development Index 2004-2008 ......................................................... 37 Table 3.10 The Length of Roads by Condition, 2008 ...................................................... 38 Table 3.11 Percentage of households use clean water in 2007......................................... 38 Table 4.1 Good Governance and Facts in the Field ....................................................... 42 Table 4.2 Decentralized Governance Constraints and Opportunities ............................. 44

List of Figures Figure 2.1 Elements of Analysis in Food Security Assessment ........................................ 16 Figure 2.2 From Centralization to Decentralization.......................................................... 18 Figure 2.3 Framework of Analysis................................................................................... 19 Figure 3.1 East Nusa Tenggara Province ......................................................................... 24

Table of Content

Acknowledgement...........................................................................................................i Abstract...........................................................................................................................iii List of Acronyms.............................................................................................................iv List of Tables ..................................................................................................................v List of Figures .................................................................................................................v Table of Content..............................................................................................................vi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................1 1.1 Background ...............................................................................................................1 1.2 Problem Statement.....................................................................................................3 1.3 Objectives of Study....................................................................................................4 1.4 Methodology .............................................................................................................5 1.5 Limitation of Study....................................................................................................5 1.6 Organization of Study................................................................................................6 CHAPTER II CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK..........................................................7 2.1 Governance................................................................................................................7 2.1.1 Good governance...............................................................................................11 2.1.2 Decentralization ................................................................................................12 2.2 Food Security ............................................................................................................13 CHAPTER III ANALYSIS ..........................................................................................20 3.1 National Food Security Policy ...................................................................................20 3.2 The Case Study: East Nusa Tenggara.........................................................................24 3.2.1 A brief overview of East Nusa Tenggara............................................................24 3.2.2 Mapping out food insecurity..............................................................................29 3.3 Food Security Governance in East Nusa Tenggara .....................................................31 3.3.1 Food policy at local level...................................................................................31 3.3.2 Food availability................................................................................................33 3.3.3 Food access .......................................................................................................36 3.3.4 Food utilization .................................................................................................38 CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS......................................................40 4.1 Findings.....................................................................................................................40 4.2 Conclusions ...............................................................................................................45 CHAPTER V RECOMMENDATION .........................................................................46 5.1 Recommendation for Future Research .......................................................................46 5.2 Policy Recommendation ............................................................................................46 References ......................................................................................................................48 Appendices.....................................................................................................................53

vi

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background Food security has always been an everlasting theme in Indonesias public discourse and public policy agenda. Policy makers, academia, civil society, private sectors and ordinary citizens share a common ground that food security is indispensable for the longevity of the nation. However, all these stakeholders have not arrived on the same pathway on how to achieve a sustainable food security. Food availability, food access, and food utilization are the major pillars of food security which is widely accepted. World Food Summit in 1996 defines food security exists when all people at all times have access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to maintain a healthy and active life that involves four conditions: adequacy of food supply or availability; stability of supply, without fluctuations or shortages from season to season or from year to year; accessibility to food or affordability; and quality and safety of food (Stamoulis & Zezza, 2003; Andersen, 2009). On contrary, food insecurity and vulnerability are a condition which happens when any of those pillars cannot be sustained or met. Concern to food security is based on some major drivers which challenge the path toward it. The first challenge arises from Indonesias demographic profile. From year to year, population of Indonesia continues to grow. In 2009 for instance, the population of Indonesia are more than 230 million people, which place Indonesia as the fourth most densely populated country in the world after the Peoples Republic of China, India, and the United States. With population growth rate of 1.25% per annum, as projected by Statistics Indonesia, the amount of population is estimated to reach 247 million in 2010, which means an increasing demand for food. The second challenge comes from Indonesias geographic profile. Indonesia is the world largest archipelago, which consists of 17.504 islands. The 230 million populations are scattered in thousand of islands, on which the level of physical development in each island is largely varied. Public infrastructures are mainly available in urban areas of Java Island, Sumatera, Kalimantan, Sulawesi and Bali, while others especially the islands on the eastern region of Indonesia are still less developed. This diverse degree of socio-economic development also stimulates several social problems such as poverty, illiteracy and malnourishment. Those challenge is not including the diverse agro-climate profile of the 1

country, where some part have many rainfall, but others as islands on the eastern region have a very rare rainfall. Recently during the National Food Security Conference in 24 May 2010, the Ministry of Agriculture of Republic of Indonesia in cooperation with the World Food Programme (WFP) released the Food Security and Vulnerability Atlas (FSVA) year 2009, which stipulated that 100 regencies in Indonesia are categorized as food insecure and vulnerable regions. The FSVA 2009 is an up dated version of the previous Food Insecurity Atlas released in 2005. Using 13 food security indicators, the FSVA 2009 categorized the 100 regencies into three criteria, namely highly food vulnerable in which 30 regencies fall in this criteria, semi food vulnerable and less food vulnerable, each consists of 30 and 40 regencies.1 The result of this food security assessment is an irony because as an archipelagic country, Indonesia actually has an abundance of agriculture and marine resources from the land and the sea which can provide the population with sufficient quality and quantity of food. Besides that, Indonesia in 2008 has succeeded in achieving food resilience especially in rice production, which provides a base for food security on the following years. This contradictory fact describes that food resilience at national level does not necessarily guarantee food security at the household level. Therefore there is a calling for an improvement on food security governance in Indonesia. Apart from such demographic and geographical challenges, Indonesias mode of governance also plays roles in steering the process toward food security. As food security is about allocation of resources, thus the political setting of Indonesia will affect how food security is governed. This is the third challenge that is the transformation of the nations mode of governance, from highly centralized into decentralization that changes the processes and mechanism on how public policy is made (see Figure 2.2). Since 1 January 2001, the Republic of Indonesia implements a new system of governance which signs a shift from a centralistic toward decentralized governance. Decentralization directs Indonesia to transform her mode of governance from state-centric governance, where policy is formulated centrally by national government through command and control mechanism, into devolution that delivers a considerable authority to local governments and involvement of local stakeholders in policy process. Even though political will for decentralization has a long historical root, signaled by the establishment of Law No 1 year 1945 on local autonomy, which in fact was the
1

http://www.deptan.go.id/news/detail.php?id=656 accessed in 28 May 2010.

governments first legal product after Indonesias independence, the implementation of decentralization in 2001 was also a response to enormous political and economic demands for democratization and economic empowerment at local level during reformation movement in 1998. This political and economic objectives of decentralization is governed by Law 22 year 1999 which later revised by Law 32 year 2004 on local governance and Law 25 year 1999 which later revised by Law 33 year 2004 on fiscal transfer between central and local government. This new mode of governance is intended to make government becomes more responsive, accountable and able to improve development through the implementation of good governance principles. Decentralization enables governmental and developmental activities at local level directly to be executed by local governments with participation of local stakeholders to meet and fulfill the needs of local citizens. Since local governments have diverse economic potential and capabilities, national government assists the implementation of decentralization through financial transfers to support local governments budget. Through decentralization, there is also a share of task and responsibilities between national and local governments in many areas of public services delivery, including food security. National government is responsible for food security at national level and gives intervention to certain regions in the event of transient or chronic food insecurity caused by crops failure, natural disasters, social unrest and other unfortunate circumstances. At local level, food security becomes parts of local governments basic legal responsibilities to ensure food security at household and individual level in accordance with the local resources and cultural preferences on food.

1.2 Problem Statement The share of responsibilities is expected to increase efficiency and effectiveness in achieving food security. However, share of responsibilities and coordination between national and local governments in decentralization era is not straight forward and runs automatically. Decentralization also stimulates a complex policy coordination problem between national and local governments on food security governance which is caused by differences in capabilities, priorities, perceptions and sensitivity. This is a big challenge in countries where paternalist centralism used to be the principle mode of governance (McCarney, 1996 in Olowu, 2003) Decentralization therefore may bring various constraints and opportunities in food security governance in Indonesia. Decentralization is expected to be able to improve public service delivery, in this context, is an enabling environment for achieving food security. As explained by Devas

(1997) that improvement in public service delivery can be done through decentralization. Decentralization may increase responsiveness and accountability, because local governments understand the problems at local level better than the remote national government. Furthermore, decentralization also promotes good governance by enabling citizen participation and democratic elections (Green, 2005). The case of Philippines for instance, shows that decentralized governance has been able to boost the improvement of food security, particularly in Bulacan Province. In the initiate process, the shift from highly centralized to decentralized governance was extremely difficult, since the local government officials were not well prepared to take the new roles. Decentralization eventually able to improve food security in the province since the government closely involved the farmers in the governance processes (Edralin & Collado, 2005). However, there are also studies in developing countries which shown that decentralization does not necessarily improve accountability and public service delivery (Sverisson, 1999 and Mitlin, 2000 in Eckardt, 2008). The contrasting findings of decentralization above describe that the impacts of decentralization on food security may not be straightforward. In certain issues areas, decentralization may result in positive output but on the other areas it may also create negative impact. Using the diverse findings on the effect of decentralization as a point of departure, this study aims to explore how decentralization as new mode governance in Indonesia affects food security, through research questions as follow: Does the shift from centralized to decentralized governance enable improvement of food security? With sub questions: a. How food security is governed at local level under decentralization? b. What are the constraints and opportunities that emerge to achieve food security under decentralized governance?

1.3 Objectives of Study 1. To explain how decentralization has affected the state of food security in Indonesia. 2. To explain how food security is governed under decentralization. 3. To explain the constraints and opportunities for food security under decentralization 4. To contribute on the academic discourse on decentralization and food security as well as to propose policy recommendation in regard with food security improvement under decentralized governance.

1.4 Methodology This study was conducted through literature review, by reviewing previous studies in the area of food security and decentralization through journals, text books, working papers, and policy briefs. Literature review was conducted to construct the conceptual framework on food security and the concept of governance which relates to it. The conceptual framework furthermore is fed into case study analysis, which is food security governance in East Nusa Tenggara Province. To understand the case study better, some document analysis was also conducted by reviewing government publications, reports, documents, and regulations. In addition, some supporting information was also retrieved from online newspapers and governments websites. Supporting data and information for analysis consists of secondary qualitative and quantitative data derived from government reports, working papers, researches, survey reports, and statistics publication. Data collection mostly gathered from related government agencies, international organizations, and relevant institutions website. Furthermore, to gain more updated information and knowledge about food security issue, some interviews through email and long distance call were also conducted to local informants working and having field experience in food security. Interviews are conducted through open and unstructured interviews to avoid rigidity and formality atmosphere. However some key questions have already prepared beforehand as interview guidance.

1.5. Limitation of Study The state of food security in Indonesia is unique and complex due to Indonesias diverse demographic, geographic and cultural setting. Each region in Indonesias archipelago has their distinctive characteristics which make it difficult to deliver a generalization. A specific case study of food security governance in East Nusa Tenggara is then chosen to represent food security governance in Indonesia. Another constraint in this study also comes from limited accessible integrated data on Indonesias recent state of food security at national and local level that may derive from Indonesias government institution. To enrich the lagged of data, some comparative secondary data and information from nongovernmental institution working in food security were also used. Due to time and financial constraints, primary data was not available to verify the secondary data. Under such condition therefore the result of this study will mainly serve as a conceptual framework and preliminary study for further research in the same area of study.

1.6 Organization of Study This study is structured in five chapters. The first part is Chapter I Introduction which is an introductory section that consists of background, problem statement, objective of study, methodology, limitation of study, and organization of study. The second part is represented by Chapter II Conceptual Framework which comprises of literature reviews on governance, good governance, decentralization, and food security as building blocks of the conceptual framework utilized throughout this study. The third part, Chapter III Analysis is the analysis section which is started by a brief overview of Indonesia food security policy, followed by a brief overview of East Nusa Tenggara province as a focus case of study, local food security problems and food security governance in East Nusa Tenggara. Later on, Chapter IV Findings and Conclusions is the discussion of the results of analysis which links them to the research questions. Finally, Chapter V Recommendation will deliver recommendations both for further research and policy recommendations.

CHAPTER II CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

2.1 Governance Started to be used and developed in the area of political science, nowadays the concept of governance has been widely used in multidiscipline and interdisciplinary sciences. The origin of the concept of governance can be traced back from the word kubernn, an old Greek word means to pilot or steer, and used by Plato to describe the process of designing a system of rule. It is associated and used interchangeably with government, with the meaning as the act of governing, to rule or control (Kjaer, 2004). Governing is what governments do, which is allocating resources among social actors based on a set of rules and a set of institutions that determine who gets what, where, when, and how in society (Hewlett et.al, 2009; Wilde et.al, 2009). It includes the establishment of a basic set of relationships between governments and citizens from top down, highly structured and state-controlled hierarchical arrangements to plurilateral, which is mainly driven by society with less governments control (Hewlett et.al, 2009). Therefore governance is about how public policy decisions are made and carried out which may shape the way a service or a set of services is planned, managed and regulated within a set of political, social and economic systems (Wilde et.al, 2009) and the essence of governance is a group decision making which accommodate diverse views (de Lo et.al, 2009). Pierre & Peters (2000) provides another explanation which focuses on the process of steering to solve societal problems by stating that thinking about governance means thinking about how to steer the economy and society, and how to reach collective goals. Another definition comes from Kjaer (2004) who defines governance as the setting, application and enforcement of the rules of the game which emphasis elements of legitimacy, efficiency, democracy, and accountability. In explaining governance, Kjaer mapped out three distinctive domains where the concept of governance develops. The three domains are public administration and public policy, international relations, and comparative politics. From public administration and public policy discipline, Rhodes (in Kjaer, 2004) illustrates governance as a self-organizing and inter-organizational networks characterized by interdependence, resource-exchange, rules of the game, and significant autonomy from the state. Rhodes emphasizes governance as a change in mechanisms and processes. Governance according to Rhodes (in Jordan et.al, 2005) is synonymous with a change in the meaning of

government, a new process of governing, or a changed condition of ordered rule, or the new method by which society is governed. Governance in public administration and public policy refers to the process of reforming public sector conducted through privatization, carrying out private sector management principles to public sector and decentralization (Kjaer, 2004; Kennett, 2008). From international relations discipline, governance refers to processes and interaction between state and non state actors to solve global problems. In the field of comparative politics, governance refers to state-society interaction in developing countries, toward democratization and development. Studies on governance in public administration and public policy mainly focus on the output of policy, which argue that public service delivery can be delivered more effectively and efficiently through networks or markets. Networks in this context involve civil-society as well as governmental networks at global, national and local level. Emphasize on networks come from the fact that societal problems are getting more complex which limits the capacity for state to solve. Besides that, actors in policy arena are also increasing, which infers that government or state have a limited capacity and resources solve unilaterally, through control and hierarchy. Glasbergen (in de Lo et. all, 2009) furthermore explains that governance usually discusses interrelations among separate objects and subjects, for instance government and society, public and private, as well as state and market, an intention to change, redefine the way such object and subject relate one to another, and conceptualizations of the social milieu or context in which the desire to bring about change occurs. In relation with Glasbergens characteristic of governance, Mahbubani (2010) uncover cultural dimension, social milieu of governance. In contrary with Anglo-Saxon conception of governance which tends to minimize the role of government, driven by assumption that government is part of the problem, Asian perspective does not look government as a problem. From Asian perspective, the roles of governments remain essential for public service delivery. Most Asian policy makers still think that it is very important to balance the force of invisible hand of free market mechanism and visible hand of good governance (Mahbubani, 2010). Currently governance has been widely used in different context (Kjaer, 2004) with varieties of focus which ranges from institutions, legitimacy, and power (Rametsteiner, 2009) that reflect different disciplinary perspectives and specific concerns (de Lo, 2009). Concepts such as global governance (Rosenau, 1992), earth system governance (Biermann, 2007), electronic governance (Dawes, 2009), ocean governance (Boesch, 1999) and governance for

sustainable development (Jordan, 2008; Rozema et.al, 2008) are some of the examples which shown the development of the concept of governance. International organizations also play role in disseminating the concept of governance in policy practices. The World Bank for instance, defines governance as the traditions and institutions by which authority in a country is exercised for the common good, which includes (i) the process by which those in authority are selected, monitored and replaced, (ii) the capacity of the government to effectively manage its resources and implement sound policies, and (iii) the respect of citizens and the state for the institutions that govern economic and social interactions among them. As a pioneer in introducing the concept of governance and good governance in international development, World Banks conception of governance, however, also criticized for its utilization as a hegemonic instrument to penetrate developing countries domestic economy and political sovereignty with neo-liberal values, highly market orientated approach, which strongly push the minimization of states role (McCarney, 2000). The imposition of neo-liberal values has been proven to be not succeeded in improving governance in developing countries. The principles of governance as well as good governance in developing countries will effectively reach the target when cultural context and history are taken into account (Nanda, 2006). Putting emphasis on decision making process, the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP) defines governance as the process of decision making and the process by which decisions are implemented (or not implemented). Related with definition given by World Bank and UNESCAP, thus a well-governed country is a country which is led by a regime that implements principles of governance namely rule of law, accountability, transparency and acknowledgement or protection of human and civil rights (Olowu, 2003). Governance also incorporates an element of shared responsibilities and the process of engagement among government, citizen and private sectors to solve societal problems (Rozema et.al, 2008). The inclusion of non-state actors does not mean that the role of states are no longer essential or hollowed, since states remain as a key player in regulating and directing economic and politics (Kennett, 2008). The various actors who involved, the process and mechanism which no longer a top-down process but also networks, draws a discourse of a shift from government to governance not as a diminishment of state capabilities, but as an involvement of non-state actors and new technologies in policy making process (Lemke, 2002 in Kennett, 2008).

A shift from government to governance is also described as a shift from state-centric to society-centric mode of governance (Jordan, 2008), hierarchical to plurilateral (Howlett et.al, 2009), hierarchical to deliberative (Rozema et.al, 2008); as well as hierarchy, market, and networks (Kjaer, 2004) which implies a dispersion of power and a continuum from a highly hierarchical power based relations which are conducted through command and control to a more egalitarian form of partnership and cooperation. The recognition on the importance of involving non-state actors to solve complex problems shows that governance refers to a multi-levels, multi-actors, and multi-sectors problem solving processes (Rozema et.al, 2008). There is no consensus on the best mode of governance to be carried out to solve public policy problems. Choice on mode of governance is very contextual which depends on each countrys social, political, and cultural setting. A lot of the policy instruments which will be used require some states involvement and very few are entirely without states involvement (Jordan et.al, 2005). The concept of pure governance which characterized by minimum or non existence of states involvement or self-organized networks with significant autonomy from state, as suggested by Rhodes (in Kjaer, 2004; de Lo et.al, 2009) is not a substitute of government. Pure governance is a complementary form of government, where in some cases there is also a combination between government and pure type of governance, a concept that associated with a minimum role of government (Jordan et.al, 2005). Regarding the shift from government to governance, Krahmann (2008) furthermore elaborates that governance can be seen as a fragmentation in decision making in seven dimensions that consist of geography, function, distribution of resources, interests, norms, decision-making and implementation as listed in Table 2.1. In regard with comparison between government and governance, Krahmann (2008) explains that geographical fragmentation manifest in three forms: downward to local agencies, upwards to regional or global organizations and sideways to private actors. Functional fragmentation involves multiple and separate authorities, including public and private actors that regulate different issue areas. Resource fragmentation entails the dispersion of policymaking and implementation capabilities between public and private actors who have to coordinate to resolve mutual problems. Interest fragmentation arises from the varieties and sometimes conflicting interests between public and private actors. Normative fragmentation is characterized by the rise of neo-liberalism and the new public management, which favors the reduced state, self-government and the marketization of social relations over centralized public policies. Furthermore, fragmentation in policy making and implementation involves the emergence of horizontal networks between public and private actors.

10

Table 2.1 Comparison between Government and Governance

Dimensions Geographical scope

Government National Sub national

Governance National Sub national Regional Global Transnational Single issue areas Dispersed Differentiated Limited sovereignty Horizontal Negotiation Inequality Fragmented Self-enforced Voluntary

Functional scope Distribution of resources Interest Norms Decision making

Implementation

Several issue areas Centralized Common Sovereignty Hierarchical Consensus Formal equality Centralized Authoritative Coercive

Source: Krahmann (2008)

2.1.1 Good governance Besides theoretical elements, governance also has normative notions which are developed under the concept of good governance. Good governance is used by international organizations such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) as an instrument to steer institutional reform in recipient countries (Nanda, 2006; Jordan, 2008). According to UNESCAP good governance can be achieved through an implementation of eight basic and major principles which consist of participatory, consensus oriented, accountable, transparent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive, and the rule of law. Such principles are directed to minimize corruption, inclusion of views of minorities and taking into account the voices of the most vulnerable in society in decision-making. In decision-making, governance processes also responsive to the needs of society, not only for present but also for future generations. As the case of governance, good governance may also be defined in various ways, because it is a normative concept. Generally, good governance aims to create mutually supportive and cooperative relationships among government, civil society and the private sector (Rametsteiner, 2009). Some of generally accepted main elements of good governance

11

are rule of law, accountability and transparency, participation, and effectiveness and efficiency as listed in Table 2.2. Table 2.2 The Main Dimensions of Good Governance Dimension of good governance Rule of law Main characteristics Rule based policy, including law abiding as well as impartial and equal treatment of similar cases by authorities Accountability of elected representatives, civil servants and those empowered by joint decisions to perform specific functions, public or private. Transparency through information sharing, clear decision-making procedures Participation of organized and individual citizens (or empowered stakeholders) in public-sector decision making (including partnership among all stakeholders); recognition of gender issues, minorities (an equity issue) and related legitimacy of policies and policy making Effectiveness of authorities in achieving their objectives and efficiency and in managing their public resources.

Accountability and transparency

Participation

Effectiveness and efficiency

Source: Rametsteiner (2009)

2.1.2 Decentralization Decentralization is one theme within governance discourse which is considered to be essential to implement good governance principles (Green, 2005; Bevir, 2009). Researchers define decentralization in many ways and it means different thing to different people (Devas, 1997). However there is a consensus that decentralization is about transfer of authority and money from national to sub national. Rondinelli (in Tambulasi & Kayuni, 2007) further explains that decentralization includes the transfer the responsibility since the planning stage, execution, and accumulation of financial resource, which flows from national into lower level. Within Rondinellis framework, decentralization consists of three important dimensions, they are administrative, political, and fiscal (Schneider, 2003). Decentralization also associated with the process of democratization and empowerment in developing countries (Bardhan & Mokherjee, 2006), as an instrument to build trust between central and local government, increase governments accountability, efficiency, and to make government

12

become closer to the people (Crook, 2003), as well as promote a more efficient and democratic politics (Bevir, 2009). Political decentralization for example, is presumed to strengthen accountability between electorate and local politicians (downward) and between democratically elected politicians and local civil servants (horizontal). Besides opening several positive opportunities, the implementation of decentralization also generates problems such as lack of coordination (Fisman & Gatti, 2002). In Sub-Saharan Africa for instance, decentralization have not shown a satisfying story (Francis & James, 2003). According to Johnson (in Francis & James, 2003) the negative performances of decentralization in several countries are caused by a poor condition in capacity, fiscal decentralization, and accountability to citizens. This brings a different view whether decentralization will promote good governance or lead to more efficient government, by questioning under what condition decentralization may generate a better public service delivery. Bevir (2009) noted there are three important conditions which should be fulfilled for decentralization to work effectively in promoting good governance. The first is the functioning of local democracy which will make local government legitimate. Legitimacy is certainly vital for local economic governance. The second condition is that local governments must have fiscal autonomy to meet local needs, and the third condition is that local governments must be filled by competent officials.

2.2 Food Security As with governance concept, the concept of food security also has a various definition. According to Andersen (2009) food security is used to describe whether a country has access to sufficient food to meet citizens dietary energy requirements. Some experts used the term national food security to refer to self-sufficiency, means that the country has the ability to produce the food demanded by its population. A study by Hoddinot (1999, in Renzaho & Mellor, 2010) discovered that currently there are 200 definitions of food security. The concept of food security has evolved and enriched since the first time it was introduced. In 1970s food security is mainly understood as food availability (food availability approach). The 1974 World Food Summit defined food security as availability at all times of adequate world food supplies of basic foodstuffs to sustain a steady expansion of food consumption and to offset fluctuations in production and prices (Renzaho & Mellor, 2010). Food security was mainly perceived as a food problem, that makes concern was mainly focus on ensuring production of adequate food supplier and maximizing the stability in their flow (Overseas Development Institute, 1997)

13

Food availability approach has proven to be insufficient to answer the problem of food security, because food security is not only about food production, but it is also important for how to make food accessible, nutritious, and culturally acceptable to support human wellbeing. Food availability solely does not assure access to food and enough calories do not necessarily guarantee a healthy and nutritional diet (Andersen, 2009). Discourse on food security then developed further. An important contribution to the development of food security concept was delivered by Amartya Sen by introducing the concept of food entitlement, or physical access to food into the core of food security discourse. Since then food security discourse always covers issue of food entitlement or food access (Maxwell, 1996). In relation with that, in 1983 FAO revised its definition by embedding elements of physical and economic access to food to meet dietary needs. Later during World Food Summit in 1996, two other dimensions were again added, which are safe and nutritious food to meet dietary needs and food preferences required for an active and healthy life (Renzaho & Mellor, 2010). World Food Summit in 1996 defined that food security exists when all people at all times have access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to maintain a healthy and active life (Andersen, 2009), that involves four conditions: adequacy of food supply or availability; stability of supply, without fluctuations or shortages from season to season or from year to year; accessibility to food or affordability; and quality and safety of food (Stamoulis & Zezza, 2003). This definition brings forward some important aspects which play crucial role in achieving food security. It recognizes poverty as a major cause of food insecurity, means that food security also comprises of an effort to alleviate poverty. Besides that conflict, terrorism, corruption and environmental degradation also influence food security (Overseas Development Institute, 1997). Based on such development on the definition of food security concept, FAO introduces a twin track approach to achieve food security, that combines resource mobilization for agricultural and rural development to create opportunities for the poor and hungry to improve their livelihoods as well as measure to meet the immediate food and nutrition need of the seriously undernourished so that they can take advantage of such opportunities. Currently there are four dimensions of food security that is widely accepted (Stamoulis & Zezza, 2003): - Food availability: the availability of sufficient quantities of food of appropriate qualities, supplied through domestic production or imports (including food aid).

14

- Food access: access by individuals to adequate resources (entitlements) to acquire appropriate foods for a nutritious diet. Entitlements are defined as the set of all those commodity bundles over which a person can establish command given the legal, political, economic and social arrangements of the community in which she lives (including traditional rights e.g. access to common resources). - Meeting nutritional requirements: utilization of food through adequate diet, clean water, sanitation, and health care, to reach a state of nutritional well-being for which all physiological needs are met. This brings out the importance of non-food inputs in food security. It is not enough that someone is getting what appears to be an adequate quantity of food if that person is unable to make use of the food because he or she is often falling sick. - Stability: to be food secure, a population, household, or individual must have access to adequate food at all times. They should not be at risk of losing access to food as a consequence of a shock (e.g. an economic crisis), or cyclically (e.g. during a particular year seasonal food insecurity). The concept of stability can therefore refer to both the availability and access of food security. Renzaho and Mellor (2010) introduce asset creations as another important element to be included in food security assessment. They explain that food security should be based on four inter-related pillars of food availability, food access, food utilization and asset creation. Asset creation is concerned with putting in place structures and systems that sustain a households or individuals ability to overcome sudden shocks which threaten their access to food including economic and climatic crises. Their conception of food security is not highly different from the general food security concept. They, for instance, explain that food availability is about the amount of food which is available through domestic production or import, including from food aid. In addition, indicators for food availability include crop production or food production index, livestock ownership index. Whereas for food access, they emphasis on the equality of food distribution. Furthermore, Renzaho and Mellor explain that access to food means distribution nutritious food which can be accessed by all household members. Examples for food access indicators are food price monitoring, diversity of household income sources, food handling and storage losses. The distribution of food within household is dictated by varieties of factors such as cultural and ideological norms, level of literacy, family structure and dynamics, political and economic factors, and mass-media. Renzaho and Mellors conception on food security assessment can be seen in Figure 2.1.

15

Figure 2.1 Elements of Analysis in Food Security Assessment

Food Security

Food availability

Food access

Food Utilization

Asset creation

From own production or the market: - FOOD volume: Domestic food stocks or food production, commercial food imports, food aid - Food storage - Irrigation - Climate - Rainfall - Seeds - Drought - Harvest manpower

- Household resource and purchasing power e.g. income level - Physical, social and policy environment e.g. trade infrastructure (e.g. transport), merchants, border regulations, government policies, subsidies, incentives, war zones, battle lines, etc.

Bio-utilization: - Caretaker behavior, knowledge, family structure, hookworms, hygiene, cuisine patterns, micronutrient synergy or antagonism, etc Physical utilization: - Cooking facilities, lack of cooking skills, inadequate housing (e.g. lack of air conditioning in summer), social function e.g. food offering for community cohesion, ritual meals - Culturally inappropriate food resulting in trading or selling the food - Loss through food processing

Maintain/rehabilitate assets people rely on to obtain food: - Stability and sustainable coping strategies e.g. homestead gardening, conservation farming, or water harvesting e.g. small dam construction, roof water harvesting - Resource conservation and land reclamation (e.g. tree seedling establishment and tree planting, etc - Employment generation or income transfer

Internal factors: loss of an income-earner in the family, female-or elderly-headed households, presence of a chronically-ill person in a household, large family, etc. External factors: depletion of natural resources, food price inflation, emergencies/disasters, limited employment opportunities, disease outbreak, etc.

Cultural factors: Cultural beliefs, practices and attitudes, power processes, gender-specific roles and responsibilities, decisionmaking hierarchies, etc. Social organizations: farmers associations, clan-based groups and their food rituals or faith groups and their religious rituals

Source: Renzaho & Mellor (2010)

Following the United States Agency for International Development conception on food utilization, Renzaho and Mellor (2010) explain that food utilization comprises of physical utilization and biological utilization. Physical utilization is concerned with households entitlement on physical means that can be used to utilize food, whereas biological utilization involved the ability of human body to absorb the nutrients from the food effectively. Therefore food security is highly related with public health matters such as access to clean water, housing condition and sanitation. The last pillar, asset creation, according to Renzaho and Mellor is concerned with creating an enabling environment that able to protect individuals from a sudden shock that harms their access to food. It is built through a certain structures and system that comprises of five different capital assets: human, natural, financial, social and physical. Examples of these capital assets for instance roads, water supplies, schools, food production, food processing and packaging, food marketing or market regulation, income transfer, affordable credits, trust, reciprocity, and social networks.

16

In parallel line of thinking with Renzaho and Mellor, Braun (2009) states that ensuring food security does not only require appropriate agricultural management and utilization of natural resources and eco-systems, but good governance and sustainable political system. This is obvious since food secures life and because the mission of national security is to secure society and defend its existence. This implies that food also an essential element of national security (Fullbrook, 2010). In addition Fullbrook states that to secure food supply, it must be universally viewed not only as a commodity but as a security good. Food must be put as a priority above other activities and its positions must be recognized as an inviolable foundation of human existence and security. Contrasted with food security there is also a concept of food insecurity which conveys a condition where all the pre-condition or pillars for food security has not been able to be met. According to FAO in general there are two types of food insecurity, which are chronic and transitory food security. Chronic food insecurity is a shortage or lack access to food that occurs in long-term or persistent, whereas transitory food insecurity occurs in a short-term or temporary. Food security becomes a crucial agenda in governance discourse because food is a very fundamental human right that transcends cultural, political background, and religious belief. In addition, right to food is acknowledged in Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) which bring consequences to the state to ensure right to food which consists of obligation to respect, protect and fulfill (Hadiprayitno, 2010). Decentralization under which food security is governed reflects some elements of Krahmanns (2008) comparison between government and governance. Through

decentralization the distribution of resources is dispersed, which no longer centralized in national government, but dispersed to local governments and stakeholders. In terms of implementation dimension, decentralization also fragmented and self-enforced, since food security also becomes responsibilities of local governments. Decentralization is considered to be one measurement that can be taken to apply good governance principles, since government is brought closer to the citizen. Decision making at local level also make citizen easier to participate, observe, review, and monitor the process. Decentralization which gives more autonomy and authority to local governments should enable innovation and creativity for local food security governance. Governance process certainly important since food security is a matter of allocation of resources for an equality on distribution of nutritious and culturally acceptable food, making them affordable, and creating

17

an enabling environment to ensure citizens have the ability to utilize food and have a sustainable access to food. Figure 2.2 describes the shift from centralization to

decentralization in Indonesia which also reflects the shift from government to governance. Figure 2.2 From Centralization to Decentralization Centralization
- Hierarchical : Government - Top down: o Command and control o Main role by state (national) o Decision by national execution at local (vertical) o rice oriented - Vertical

Decentralization
- Deliberative : Governance - Top down: o Guidance from national o National only intervene in the event of disaster and food insecurity - Bottom up: o Decision and execution by local o Local effort to strengthen national food security o Inclusion of sub national governments, citizen, civil society organization - Vertical and horizontal

National

National

Local

Province

Local

Province

Regencies/ Municipalities

Regencies/ Municipalities

Regencies/ Municipalities

Regencies/ Municipalities

18

Decentralization, however, does not necessarily improve all aspects of public service delivery, because decentralization also opens an opportunity for local governments to become narrow minded, consider only their own short-term interests without considering the importance of coordination and externalities. In order for decentralization to be able to ensure food security, the implementation of good governance principles are essential. State should play role to create an enabling environment and support system where food can be produced and supplied sustainably and citizens have the capacity to access and use it to reach a healthy and productive life. Links and interrelations between these ideas and concepts becomes framework of analysis in this study, and an abstraction of this conceptual thinking is represented in Figure 2.3. Figure 2.3 Framework of Analysis

For Governance
Good Governance

Food security

Decentralization

19

CHAPTER III ANALYSIS

3.1 National Food Security Policy Since the independence in 17 August 1945, food has always been an important political agenda in Indonesia. During the era of the first president, Ir. Soekarno (1945-1966), also called as the old order era by the following regime, food was extremely important. As a newly born state, food was one pillar to create national stability and support for the new national authority. As a part to draw political support, food specifically rice becomes part of monthly income of civil servants (Mears & Moeljono, 1982 in Lassa 2009). In the following era, the Soeharto regime (1966-1998), also called as the new order era, beside serves the function as social commodity and a parameter of development achievement, food mainly rice also treated as political instrument to preserve the regimes rule. The mechanism was conducted by establishing Badan Urusan Logistik (Bulog), the national logistic agency in 1967, which acted as the sole buyer for the farmers rice and national food stock regulator. Following the former regime, Bulogs stock of rice also distributed to 4.6 million civil servants and 0.5 military personnel in Indonesia as part of their monthly income (World Bank, 2005 in Lassa, 2009) to maintain political support from farmers and from civil servants as well. During Soeharto regime, effort to achieve food security was emphasized in food resilience, specifically rice production. After importing a large amount of rice to meet national demand for some years, the green revolution had successfully bring Indonesia to rice resilience for the first time in 1984, that made the FAO awarded Indonesia with a special distinction. However, this food resilience status could not be sustained for long time. In the period of 1987-1993 the rice production declined and by the mid of 1990s Indonesia again have to import a large volume of rice to fulfill domestic demand (Sumaryanto, 2009). Approach taken by the following regimes to achieve food security is food resilience program as well as subsidies in fertilizer and seeds, which resulted in rice resilience in 2008. Another approach which has been taken to strengthen food security is by promoting food diversification to decrease dependency on rice. However, food diversification had not been successful so far. Table 3.1 gives information on national paddy planted and harvested area and production from 1993 to 2008.

20

Table 3.1 Paddy Planted Area, Harvested Area, and Production in Indonesia 1993-2008
Planted Area Harvested Area Production Year (1000 hectares) (1000 hectares) (1000 metric tons) 1993 10,614.296 11,012.800 48,181.000 1994 10,634.121 8,833.000 39,710.000 1995 12,482.615 11,438.800 49,744.000 1996 11,798.984 11,569.000 51,102.000 1997 10,105.741 11,141.000 49,377.000 1998 13,435.647 11,730.000 49,237.000 1999 11,965.539 11,963.000 50,866.000 2000 11,382.775 11,793.000 51,899.000 2001 11,348.427 11,500.000 50,461.000 2002 10,649.658 11,521.000 51,489.000 2003 12,364.653 11,488.034 52,137.604 2004 11,520.000 11,843.570 53,666.470 2005 12,425.800 11,800.901 53,984.590 2006 NA 11,786.430 54,454.937 2007 NA 12,147.637 57,157.435 2008 NA 12,327.435 60,325.925 2009 NA 12,878.039 64,329.329 2010 NA 12,891.749 64,897.700 Source: http://afsis.oae.go.th/x_sources/index.php?country=indonesia Yield (kg/hectares) 4,375 4,496 4,349 4,417 4,432 4,198 4,252 4,401 4,388 4,469 4,538 4,531 4,575 4,62 4,705 4,894 4,995 5,034

The period from the old order to the new order was characterized by full control of national government to achieve food security, through food availability approach that was biased to rice. Rice therefore became a political instrument for the government to maintain control and support from the citizen. The states full control on food production during this period, however, also played role in weakening the traditional communitys food security mechanism. The traditional communities in East Java (Java Island) for instance, traditionally have a food stock mechanism to fulfill their needs during the time of crop failures (Muflich, 2006). Later on, a strong states intervention and control over food production to achieve food security through a top-down approach made the citizen highly rely on states support. Dependency of states direction weakens the citizens coping tactics and the traditional food stock mechanism that at present becomes one cause for food vulnerability. As decentralization gives a much stronger authority to local governments than the previous era, food security also becomes part of the local governments basic legal responsibilities. Article 11 point 3 of Law 32 year 2004 on local governance stipulates that food security is one mandatory obligation conducted by provincial governments and regencies

21

or municipalities that related with basic services to the people. Decentralization therefore becomes responsibilities of both national and local governments. National government is responsible to ensure food security at national level and intervene to local level in the event of food insecurity caused by crops failure or disasters, whereas regencies and municipalities are responsible to ensure food security at local level up to household and individual level. Provincial governments act as a representative of national government at local level in observing and monitoring food security on their region. As a form of national governments political commitment toward food security and in line with World Food Summit in 1996, the government of Indonesia issued Law No 7 year 1996 on food. The law stipulates that food security is the condition in which the fulfillment of food for the households are reflected by the availability of sufficient food both its quantity and quality, safe, evenly distributed and affordable. The law also states that food security is the obligation of both state and citizen. Food security cannot be achieved without supporting policy framework and the executing bodies which interact, share information, and working synergistically at all level to support one another. This is certainly essential for Indonesia, due to her vulnerability on food, driven by the geographic and demographic profile. To maintain the level of security on food stocks, for instance, Indonesia has always been relying on Thailand to import the rice. At regional level, the establishment of ASEAN Food Security Information System (AFSIS), the web based information sharing facility among ASEAN members, is one way to monitor the progress of some important food production in the region, namely rice, maize, and sugar, to avoid food insecurity and vulnerability in the South East Asia region. Currently food security is one of the major development priorities in national middleterm development planning year 2010-2014, as well as the national long-term planning year 2005-2025. While this national policy is expected to become guidance for local governments in designing and setting their food security policies, on the other hand decentralization also gives higher authority to local governments to innovate and decide their local development approaches, which may not fulfill the pre condition needed for food security. Other regulations in agriculture and other related sectors were also being issued by national government to ensure that despite of this diverse and various local development approaches taken by local governments, food security will not be disturbed. The regulations are, for instance, Law 26 year 2007 on Spatial Planning and Law 41 year 2009 on Conservation of Sustainable Agriculture Land. The logic behind this is the fact that food security is a complex system which requires a support system from the existence of proper irrigation system,

22

transportation, spatial planning and land use management, and a clear distribution task and responsibilities between all levels of governance. The policy framework certainly will not be able to be carried out without the existence of the governing bodies. Here, besides government agencies at national and local level, a food security council is established at national and local level to ensure a better coordination. These agencies will monitor food security status in their own areas, by using the food security atlas issued in 2005 and 2009. The policy framework from global to national and local level describes how food security is an interdependent network between all levels of governance. Table 3.2 describes food security governing bodies, the policy, and implications for food security governance in Indonesia. Referring back to Krahmanns (2008) conception on the comparison between government and governance in Chapter II, the food security policy framework described above reflects some elements of governance. From the dimension of geographical scope, food security issues transcends from sub national to global which are interrelated and interdependent on one another. National food security in Indonesia for instance, cannot be solved alone without cooperation with other countries, for example through importation of food from other countries in the event of crops failure. Such imported foods are used to overcome food insecurity situation in the regions. In regard with distribution of resources, it can also be seen that food security governance in decentralization era is dispersed from national to local governance. Food security in fact also becomes one of basic legal obligations of local governments. In implementation dimensions, efforts to achieve food security are also carried out in a fragmented, self-enforced and voluntary way through local governance process. In regard with recent issues on food security in Indonesia, there are nine important issues that influence the state of food security in Indonesia, as stated by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono during the National Food Security Conference in Jakarta in 24 May 2010. The president mentioned nine major issues of current food security in Indonesia, which are (1) the importance of synergy between national and local government, and private sector, (2) the increase of five strategic food commodities, (3) food and distribution system, (4) efficient national logistics and supply chain, (5) the minimum level of food production in several regions and malnutrition, (6) the stability of market price, (7) diversification of food

23

consumption, (8) effective and credible national monitoring system, (9) supply and demand of food commodities which influence food price. 2 There are five commodities which play main role for food security in Indonesia; they are rice, maize, soybean, sugar, and beef. Rice plays role for staple food for more than 90% percent of the population, with level of rice consumption reached 102.2 kg/capita/year in 2009. Apart from this situation, there are populations in some regions which originally consume maize, cassava, and varieties of tubers for their staple food, such as the Mollucas, Papua, and East Nusa Tenggara Province.

3.2 The Case Study: East Nusa Tenggara 3.2.1 A brief overview of East Nusa Tenggara Situated on 8 -12 south latitude and 118 -125 east longitude, East Nusa Tenggara (ENT) comprises of 566 islands, where 42 islands are inhabited and 524 are not inhabited (see Figure 3.1). The four big main islands are Flores, Sumba, Timor, and Alor (Flobamora). In total, the land area of ENT is 48.718,10 km or around 2.49% of Indonesia and the sea area is 200.000 km (not including the Exclusive Economic Zone). Figure 3.1 East Nusa Tenggara Province

Source: East Nusa Tenggara in Figures 2009

2

http://www.presidenri.go.id/index.php/pidato/2010/05/24/1407.html accessed in 26 May 2010.

24

Table 3.2 Food Security Policy from Global to Local Level

The Level of food security governance Global UN FAO WFP

Governing Institutions

Policy guidance - UN Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 - World Food Summit, 1996 - International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights - Laquila Food Security Initiative (AFSI) - UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) 2015 Law 7 year 1996 on food - Government Regulation no 68 year 2002 on food security

Implications - Global acknowledgement of food as fundamental human right - States have obligations to protect right to food - Food security is a vital path to achieve Millennium Development Goals - Acknowledgement of food as basic human needs - Food security is the responsibility of both state and society

25 National National Food Security Council: - President (Head) - Minister of Agriculture - Other relevant ministries

- Law 22 year 1999, later revised with, - Food security becomes joint responsibilities of national and Law 32 year 2004 on local local governments governance - Law 25 year 1999 on later revised - Transfer of money from national to local level with Law 33 year 2004 on balance transfer between national and local government

- Law 25 year 2004 on Development Food security must be achieved in an integrated approach Planning System - Law 26 year 2007 on Spatial through a synchronization of spatial planning and Planning development planning between national and local level - Law 11 year 2005 on Ratification of - Acknowledgement of food as fundamental human right that International Covenant on Economic, should be protected by the Cultural and Social Rights state - Law 41 year 2009 on Conservation of Sustainable Agriculture Land - National long-term development plan 2005-2025 - National mid-term development plan 2010-2014 - President regulation no 22 year 2009 - Food Insecurity Atlas (FIA) 2005 - Food Security and Vulnerability Atlas (FSVA) 2009 Local development programs in food security - Agriculture land must be protected and conserved to achieve food security - Food security is considered as national important agenda - The atlas that supports monitoring process at all regions and basis for policy making - Local governments have the authorities and obligations to ensure food security at local level

26 Local: - Province - Regency/ Municipalities - Villages Local Food Security Council: a. Provincial level: - Governor - Agriculture agency - Other relevant agencies b. Regency/Municipality level: - Regent/Mayor - Agriculture agency - Other relevant agencies
Source: various sources, compiled by author.

Administratively, ENT is divided into 19 regencies and one municipality. The regencies and municipalities of ENT are listed in Table 3.3. Furthermore, in regard with the climate, ENTs geographical location makes it has a longer dry season if compared with other areas of Indonesia. During the year, ENT only has four months of rainy season from

December until March. Based on East Nusa Tenggara Statistics projection, the amount of population in Nusa Tenggara is 4.534.319. With population growth of 1.79% per annum, its population growth is higher than national growth rate (1.25%), with 69.42% of the populations work on agriculture sectors, while the rest work on service, trade sectors and manufacturing industries. Such condition makes agriculture has been the major contributor for the Gross Domestic Regional Product (GDRP), for instance in 2008, where agriculture contributes 40.39% to the GDRP, in which food crops contributed 21.01%. This recent data are highly contrasted with the past, where in 1960s food crops contributed for 53.7% to GDRP (Lassa, 2009). Table 3.3 Regencies and Municipality in East Nusa Tenggara Regency/Municipality 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Sumba Barat Sumba Timur Kupang Timor Tengah Selatan Timor Tengah Utara Belu Alor Lembata Flores Timur Sikka Ende Ngada Manggarai Rote Ndao Manggarai Barat Sumba Barat Daya Sumba Tengah Nagekeo Manggarai Timur Kupang Municipality Total area (km2) 737.42 7000.50 5898.26 3947.00 2669.66 2445.57 2864.60 1266.38 1812.85 1731.92 2046.62 1620.92 1686.66 1280.00 2947.50 1445.32 1869.18 1416.96 2502.24 160.34 Percentage (%) 1.56 14.78 12.46 8.34 5.64 5.16 6.05 2.67 3.83 3.66 4.32 3.42 3.56 2.70 6.22 3.05 3.95 2.99 5.28 0.34

Source: East Nusa Tenggara in Figures, 2009

Socio-economically, ENT is considered to be one poorest province in Indonesia with the average per capita income less than one US dollar per day. Around 85% of the 27

populations live in rural areas, with main staple foods consist of rice, maize, and cassava (Muslimatun & Fanggidae, 2009). Besides those main three staple foods, other important food crops are sweet potato, peanut, soybean, green pea, and sorghum. Maize cultivation in the region was introduced in the region about between 16 and 17 century. 3 Maize plays important role since the regions agro climate and soil condition is suitable for maize cultivation. The maize and cassava production in the period of 2006-2008 are listed in Table 3.4 and Table 3.5. Table 3.4 Harvested Area, Yield Rate and Production of Maize in East Nusa Tenggara 2006-2008 Year Harvested area Production (hectares) (ton) 2008 270 717 673 002 2007 217 478 514 360 2006 252 410 582 964
Source: East Nusa Tenggara in Figures, 2009

Table 3.5 Harvested Area, Yield Rate and Production of Cassava in East Nusa Tenggara 2006-2008 Year Harvested area Production (hectares) (ton) 2008 87 906 928 974 2007 76 247 794 121 2006 89 591 938 010
Source: East Nusa Tenggara in Figures, 2009

Rice, on the other hand, was introduced as staple food just in the following era. The introduction of rice in the last few decades through cultivation, inter-island trade, and food aid has subsequently changed the locals food consumption behavior, where rice actually more suitable to be cultivated in wetlands. Nowadays most of the populations consume rice as their daily diet even though most of ENT consists of dry land with limited rainfalls. High dependency on rice and volatile rice production causes the shortage of rice availability and hunger. Three different type of rice are cultivated in ENT, based on each region soil structure. The figure of rice production in ENT during 2006-2008 is listed in Table 3.6.

http://nttprov.go.id/provntt/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=135&Itemid=149 accessed in 20 July 2010.

28

As had been reported by the press, food insecurity in ENT is dispersed on many enclaves on the regions from main islands to the remote islands. This is confirmed by another informant by adding that ENT has a diverse topography profile and soil structure. Even in one village there is a diverse agro-ecosystem and topography profile which influences the ability of food production. As a result of this, the parameter of food security is at household level. Therefore it is very difficult to define which areas East Nusa Tenggara that is most food vulnerable, the informant says. Table 3.6 Harvested Area, Yield Rate and Production of Paddy in East Nusa Tenggara 2006-2008 Year Paddy: 2008 2007 2006 Wetland paddy: 2008 2007 2006 Dry land paddy: 2008 2007 2006 187 907 166 753 173 208 124 810 114 769 110 469 63 097 51 984 62 739 577 896 505 628 511 910 440 999 399 124 386 385 136 920 106 504 125 525 332 714 319 557 322 503 254 448 252 247 243 423 78 304 67 310 79 081 Harvested area (hectares) Production (ton) Rice (ton)

Source: East Nusa Tenggara in Figures, 2009

3.2.2 Mapping out food insecurity Surveys and assessment on some important assessment of poverty, access to clean water, infrastructure, and electricity in the period of 2005-2009 by the Ministry of Agriculture in cooperation with the WFP, results in two food security atlas, the FIA year 2005 and the FSVA year 2009. The first atlas listed that 100 out of 265 regencies during that time are categorized as food insecure and have chronic malnourished problems (Rachmat et al, 2010). As the number of regencies grew, later the FSVA mapped out that there are 100 from out of 364 regencies in Indonesia are still food vulnerable and insecure. Those criteria are considered to be important factors which undermine citizens access to food. The 100 food insecure regencies are categorized into three categories which consist of urgent, medium and not urgent. Some 30 regencies which fall under urgent categories are scattered on Papua province and ENT Province. Other 30 regencies in medium categories are spread in West

29

Kalimantan Province, Maluku, and ENT, whereas the other 40 regencies which are not urgent are distributed in Sumatera, Kalimantan, Java and West Nusa Tenggara. Discussion will be focused on food security governance in ENT Province in which the people are frequently suffered from hunger caused by crops failure, natural disasters, poverty and lack of public infrastructure such as road and access to clean water. Some of those causes make ENT subsequently be listed as a food insecure region on the food security atlas 2005 and 2009. In 2005 atlas for instance, all regions in ENT were categorized as food insecure except Ngada Regency. The recent food insecurity happened in March 2010, due to crops failure in Sabu Raijua Regency. As reported by Tempo Interactive in 29 March 2010, as many as 91.000 of people in Sabu Raijua were threatened by hunger due to crops failure, which was caused by drought and a very limited rainfall. The national government provided food aid in the form of 200 tons of rice to the people in the region. 4 Food insecurity also spread to other regions, therefore on the same period, food insecurity due to drought happened in 12 out of 19 regencies and one municipality in ENT, namely Nagekeo, Sumba Timur, Rote Ndao, Timor Tengah Selatan, Timor Tengah Utara, Belu, Alor, Manggarai Timur, Ende, Sika, Sabu Raijua and Kupang as reported by Tempo Interactive in 7 April 2010. 5 In addition, local people in other three regencies situated in Timor Island such as Sumba Tengah, Sumba Barat and Sumba Timur as reported by Media Indonesia in 13 April 2010 also suffered from food insecurity. In order to survive, local people consumed banana and tubers they can find in the jungle, which is usually used to feed the cattle.6 A report by the Indonesia News Agency, Antara, in 7 June 2010 stated that at least 1.6 million people scattered in 481 villages in ENT were threatened by famine. The condition was caused by crops failure and planting failure due to very low rainfalls. The total food crops failure is more than 94,395 hectares that consist of 25,205 hectares of paddy fields; 61,171 hectares of maize fields; 5,492 hectares of nuts fileds; some 2,526 hectares of tubers fields. Two regencies were suffered the severe from crops failure were Sumba Timur and Rote Ndao. As many as 9100 tons of rice from the Ministry of Peoples Welfare and 10,000 to 15,000 from Ministry of Social were prepared to be distributed on the region. 7
http://www.tempointeraktif.com/hg/nusa/2010/03/29/brk,20100329-236387,id.html accessed in 9 July 2010. http://www.tempointeraktif.com/hg/nusa/2010/04/07/brk,20100407-238615,id.html accessed in 9 July 2010. 6 http://www.mediaindonesia.com/read/2010/04/04/135764/92/14/Kelaparan-di-NTT-akibat-Gagal-Panen accessed in 9 July 2010. 7 http://www.antaranews.com/berita/1275901837/gagal-panen-1-6-juta-orang-terancam-kelaparan accessed in 26 July 2010.
5 4

30

Besides drought and climate change another trigger for food insecurity that causes hunger in ENT are poverty and natural disaster such as floods, which makes crops failure and village become isolated. An example given by informant is famine disaster in Wolomotong district, Sikka Regency, in 2005. It happened because of the cocoa cultivation, which was the local peoples main source of income were attacked by pest and worsened by the fall of the commoditys price. Some areas in the southern part of Timor Tengah Selatan Regency also considered as areas that are vulnerable to floods and drought. In Timor Island, as explained by local informant, food vulnerability can be categorized into two type of hunger. The first is ordinary hunger and another is extraordinary hunger. Ordinary hunger happens when maize stock is not sufficient until two months before the coming harvesting season. The coping strategy in such situation is by reducing their meal frequency from three times into two times a day. They also sell their small livestock such as chicken to buy food. In the event of extraordinary hunger caused by drought or excessive rains that makes crops failure, their coping strategy is by selling their large livestock or looking for different employment outside their village.

3.3 Food Security Governance in East Nusa Tenggara 3.3.1 Food policy at local level The government of ENT Province realizes that food security in the region is an important issue which is related with other socio-economic issue such as poverty. Dependency on rice is acknowledged as one problem that causes food insecurity problem. Therefore, on the provinces midterm development planning 2009-2013, food diversification is one effort to reduce dependency on rice objected to improve the regions food security. 8 This effort is done by developing a more local based staple food which suitable to local culture, the regions agro climate and soil condition, which is maize cultivation. The objective is to develop ENT as a Maize Province through Gerakan Masyarakat Agribisnis Jagung (the Community Movement for Maize Agribusiness).9 There are several reasons that become a basis for the government to develop maize as the main food crops and agriculture commodity. Maize is acknowledged as a multipurpose commodity, both as food as well as raw materials for industries. Besides that, there is a high demand for maize at national level whereas domestic production has not been able to fulfill
8 9

http://nttprov.go.id/provntt/Download_file/RPJMD_NTT_2009-2013/bab6.pdf accessed in 21July 2010. http://nttprov.go.id/provntt/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=135&Itemid=149 accessed in 24 July 2010.

31

the demand. Domestic demand in ENT for instance, was 190.000 ton which only for consumption during 2007. In addition, the aim of agriculture policy is also to reform the communitys agriculture system from subsistence based, only to provide and prepare households food stock, toward agribusiness based. Through such strategy it is expected that ENT will be able to improve food security, decrease dependency on rice, become one of the major maize producers in Indonesia, as well as alleviating poverty which also play role in the peoples food insecurity. Currently there are 7000 hectares of maize fields scattered in 21 regencies as a focus of attention by provincial government through provincial budget allocation. In addition to that, field officers were also recruited who will be assigned for four months to guide the farmers from land preparation until land harvesting stages. 10 Where the policy seems to be promising to solve food security in the region through the optimization of local based resources, according to Lassa (2009) the governments effort to tackle food security by promoting massive maize cultivation will not be able to change the state of food security in the region. He points out the unclear strategy to achieve the food security through maize cultivation approach; since there is also insufficient funding allocation to turn the program comes into reality. Lassa also emphasized the importance of technology innovation, market mechanism and distribution systems which are important to manifest the policy, while he observed that such vital elements have not been incorporated on the policy. This is in line with the local informants testimony which stresses the inadequacy of the policy since the policy is inefficient in the funding allocation; short term oriented, and tends to be more reactive than anticipative. The informant adds that budget allocation to solve food problem and improve nutrition is quite large, however in the implementation, most of the budget goes to the governments staffs travelling and operational cost. Furthermore, the informant says that the policy should actually give more attention on community empowerment that enables the farmers to be productive and cope with the climate change which often cause crops failure. The short term food aid intervention is important, but only needed in the event of natural disasters such as flood and earth quake. Doubts regarding governments agriculture policy also caused by the policy bias toward wetland agriculture system. As mentions by another informant that the distribution and technical assistance from government in the form of seeds, pesticides,
10

http://nttprov.go.id/provntt/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=252&Itemid=1 accessed in 26 July 2010.

32

fertilizers, and agriculture tools were those that more suitable for wetland agriculture, while actually 94.29% of the land in ENT consist of dry land (NTT Food Summit Report, 2008). As far as I observed there has not been a significant breakthrough to improve dry land agriculture, says an informant. A problem that also hinders food security improvement is the lack of synergy among stakeholders. Governments, civil society organizations, as well as community organizations have not been working in the same direction. Another local informant states, The stakeholders have not been able to fill the gap. The existence of long term international aid has created a false sense of food security. One form of the food aid is the high calorie biscuits which were distributed by international organization to malnourished children. While the food aid was intended to increase nutrition level of the people, it actually created dependency, as emphasized by an informant. The informant furthermore says that the food aid may increase the nutrition status but when the aid stops, then the nutrition status decreases again. Efforts to increase the nutrition level through local foods consumption are still very limited, while improvement of nutrition could be more sustainable if it is done by providing food supplement which is made from local ingredients. According to Fanggidae (2008) food aid from international organization is merely short-term and charity oriented. This approach certainly does not able to empower the communitys ability to improve their food security as well as to anticipate food insecurity in the event of crops failure or natural disaster. A lack of synergy among government bodies also extends the food insecurity. As added by another informant, food is still seen as a specific responsibility of the agriculture agency, whereas actually food security requires a vast enabling environment. When speaking about food, the government still sees it through food production as main indicator, thus the responsibility comes only to agriculture agency. Actually food is a responsibility of all relevant agencies. I see that the executed programs have not been solid and supportive on one another. It is a classic problem of coordination among government agencies which happens from year to year, the informant says.

3.3.2 Food availability One source of problem for food insecurity in ENT is the volatility of food production. The main drivers which cause food production volatility is drought and climate change. The drought and extreme climate, however, as explained by local informants, is not a new thing

33

for the farmers. The farmers have used their traditional knowledge as a way to cope with this condition by cultivating special maize seeds crop able to grow during dry season. The farmers for instance, understand that the dry land is suitable to cultivate maize instead of other crops that require a lot of water. Based on their lay knowledge the farmers decide the right time to start planting the crops. The lay knowledge, however, currently becomes insufficient to deal with current challenges in agriculture activities stimulated by climate change. Climate prediction using traditional knowledge has been proven to be not fully accurate anymore. Ironically, while the drought and climate change plays big role for crops failure, no systematic efforts have been taken to anticipate the impact of climate change, for instance by using seeds which able to grow and survive in the current dry agro climate. Inability to anticipate unpredictable climate change is emphasized by an informant as the cause for repeating crops failure and unstable food production which results in food insecurity even hunger. Such humanity disasters should have not happen repeatedly in ENT, since there are a lot of local crops that can provide the people with food and a source of income as listed in Table 3.7 below. Table 3.7 Progress of Food Crops Production in East Nusa Tenggara 2004-2008 Type of crops 1. Paddy 2. Maize 3. Cassava 4. Sweet potato 5. Peanut 6. Soybean 7. Green pea 8. Sorghum 2004 552 205 622 812 1 041 280 126 406 17 680 2 369 19 896 5 863 2005 461 008 552 439 891 783 99 748 14 518 2 188 16 695 3 449 2006 511 910 582 964 938 010 111 006 17 832 2 786 19 354 6 002 2007 505 628 514 360 794 121 102 375 21 353 1 561 20 802 4 663 (Tons) 2008 577 896 673 112 928 974 107 316 25 678 2 295 23 392 3 236

Source: East Nusa Tenggara in Figure 2009

In regard with this climate issue, an informant says, Farmers highly depend on the rain as source of water. Therefore the farmers have to schedule a correct timing between planting the seeds and rainfalls. However, information about rainfalls goes to the farmers has not run well, while actually there is a meteorology climatology and geophysics agency. This makes the farmers decision to plant crops is based on their customs and lay knowledge where the climate has highly changed and less predictable, not like ten years ago.

34

Besides inability to anticipate the climate change, crops failure is also caused by unsuitable seeds introduced by government. The farmers usually plant certain maizes seed that is productive in a short time span and suitable for dry season. An informant explains that a shift happens when local government intervened to local farmer agriculture activity by introducing the so called outstanding seeds that apparently were not suitable with the climate of ENT. Moreover, the seeds that were distributed had not been consulted to the farmers, to seek whether they are suitable or not. The farmers also were not given information about the proper way and time to plant the seeds. Lack of knowledge about the seeds made the farmers plant them during dry season which finally results in crops failure. This condition worsened the food insecurity while at the same time the farmers did not have access to information about the climate change. As a result, farmers finally decided to come back planting the seeds with their traditional way, adds the informant. Another informant enforces previous testimony by mentioning that anticipation by the government is not well consolidated. The Government is campaigning East Nusa Tenggara as maize province, however the seeds which were distributed to the farmers were hybrid maize type that is not suitable for dry land and cannot be stored for long period. Besides the unsynchronized policy between governments seeds aid program and the farmers real needs and the climate condition, food vulnerability during the crops failure also caused by the weakening of local culture. In the past the local community has a traditional coping mechanism to food insecurity through a community based food stock system. Currently, such activities as stressed by local informant, has weakened in line with the weakening of local culture specifically in food stock mechanism. Actually, in the past such traditional system was beneficial to protect the community during the period of drought and food insecurity. The informant added that at community level, the food stock mechanism which still lasts is households food stock mechanism. This for example can be found in Timor Tengah Selatan, with Ume Bhubu mechanism that stores maize until the coming harvesting season. Household food stock can also be found in Flores, Timor, and Sumba. Community food stock mechanism has eroded, because of the lack of community management. Some communities have tried to develop this community food stock mechanism, but it seems that they prefer to believe and rely on household food stock than the community stock. The household food stock and the governments food stocks are not connected to one another.

35

This shows the inadequacy of food security governance at government and community level as well. While resources all available, they are not well organized and governed, that makes food production becomes volatile and not able to protect the people from food insecurity when long dry season comes.

3.3.3 Food access Food access is another important pillar for food security, which is influenced by some factors, mainly poverty and food distribution. In the context of ENT, besides climate change that often causes crop failures that lead to food insecurity, the high level of poverty also causes the food access problem. East Nusa Tenggara poverty indicator shows that in 2008 about 25.65% of the total populations live below poverty line. In 2009, the number slightly decreases into 23.31%.11 However, the percentage of populations live below poverty line in ENT is still higher than the national figure. A comparison between ENT and the national poverty can be seen in Table 3.8. As indication of poverty, in 2008 more than half of per capita income or 68.94% is spent for food expenditure. Table 3.8 Percentage of Population below Poverty Line 2006-2008 Areas East Nusa Tenggara Indonesia 2006 29.34 17.75 2007 27.51 16.58 2008 25.65 15.42

Source: Trends of the Selected Socio-Economic Indicators of Indonesia, 2009

Information from the informant confirms the statistical data, that poverty is widely distributed in ENT. There are poverty enclaves in each district on the region. Any increases in food prices therefore will certainly put more pressures on poor peoples entitlement on food. There is a gap on economic resources entitlements which hinder the peoples access to good quality food in a sufficient quantity. The informant furthermore explains that as part of poverty alleviation through agriculture economy, the government has tried to promote various commodities to be cultivated by farmers. A breakthrough has been taken by diversifying the crops cultivation, from food crops to commodities crops such as cocoa, hazelnut and cashew.

http://nttprov.go.id/provntt/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=155&Itemid=161 accessed in 24 July 2010.

11

36

The introduction of the new commodities, however, is not followed by significant assistance from government to increase the competitiveness of such commodities as well as the way to process them become economic commodities which have added value. In such condition they are sold as raw materials with low prices. Moreover, the commodities cannot be produced in large scale, except coffee, like the one in Flores. Since then it is difficult to strengthen the bargaining power of the cocoas farmers in East Nusa Tenggara toward buyers, if compared with for example, the farmers in Central Sulawesi. In terms of human development, the East Nusa Tenggaras Human Development Index (HDI) shows an improvement during the period of 2004-2008. However, the indicator shows that East Nusa Tenggara is still a region with lowest HDI in Indonesia, as listed in Table 3.9. Table 3.9 Human Development Index 2004-2008 Areas East Nusa Tenggara Indonesia 2004 62.7 68.7 2005 63.6 69.6 2006 64.8 70.1 2007 68.4 70.59

Source: Trends of the Selected Socio-Economic Indicators of Indonesia, 2009

Besides poverty, poor inter-region accessibility also plays roles in food access problem. The geographic profile of ENT is islands and most of the populations live in rural and remote areas. People living in rural and remote areas are the most vulnerable to food insecurity. While the price of food is expensive due to transportation cost, in the event of natural disaster such as landslides and floods, these areas are often isolated from another region, which make it difficult to distribute food aid immediately. One of the informant stresses this matter by saying that the bad road condition which connects one area to another, between urban and rural areas, makes the price of staple food which is traded from another area becomes very expensive for poor people mostly living in rural areas. A field study by GAPRI (2007) also reveals that road play major role in development backwardness in Amfoang Utara, Kupang Regency and Nununamat district, Timor Tengah Selatan Regency. These areas were quite isolated due to lack of roads quality, which make transportation cost become expensive and the farmers cannot trade their commodities smoothly. During rainy season, road accesses to the rural areas are often disconnected by the flood, which eventually makes the people become isolated. Such lack of road facilities also hinders the farmers access on information regarding agriculture commodities market price.

37

The communities have delivered their aspiration about the improvement of roads facilities to the local government; however the aspiration has not been able to be accommodated due to limited governments budget. In addition, the report states that such situation is worsened by the throwing of responsibilities between Kupang Regency and the provincial government on who should do the job because of the position and the location of the road. This has not included the states roads which belong to the responsibilities of national government; therefore any maintenance of the roads should come from the national governments budget. Table 3.10 gives the impression of the ENTs road condition in 2008. Table 3.10 The Length of Roads by Condition in 2008 Status States road Provincial road Good 842.47 803.95 Fair 241.31 335.77 Damaged 146.66 597.65 Badly damaged 42.55 Total (km) 1 272.11 1 737.37

Source: East Nusa Tenggara in Figure 2009

3.3.4 Food utilization Food utilization is another food security pillar which is related with adequate access to clean water and health care that make the nutrient on the food can be processed and absorbed by the body to create an active and healthy live. At present day access to clean water in ENT are still luxury goods not only for poor people but also for not poor people. Until 2007 only less than 50% of the poor and not poor people in ENT have access to clean water, which is essential to create a healthy livelihood. In total only 27.75% of the populations already had access to clean water, which is lower than Indonesia on average (Table 3.11). Table 3.11 Percentage of Households Use Clean Water in 2007 Areas East Nusa Tenggara Indonesia Poor 14.33 32.98 Not poor 31.64 51.16 Total 27.75 48.72

Source: Trends of the Selected Socio-Economic Indicators of Indonesia, 2009

Low access to clean water certainly makes the people become vulnerable to disease such as diarrhea. This eventually weakens the ability of the body to absorb the nutrients from the food. Related to low access to clean water, the diarrhea becomes the disease with the

38

second highest outbreak in the region. The East Nusa Tenggara Health Profile in 2007 noted that two regencies, namely Timor Tengah Selatan and Timor Tengah Utara suffered from diarrhea big outbreaks. As many as 3798 people on those areas were reported suffered from diarrhea with Case Fatality Rate of 3.14%. Despite the low access to clean water, there is a massive nutrient supplement program in ENT, as conducted by the WFP by distributing fortified biscuit and instant noodle. On the other hand the government also has the community health center. Unfortunately, as stated by the informant, programs and activities done by the community and the government was not connected to each other. When there is a report or complaint from the volunteers, they were not quickly responded by the community health center. There is a different mission in doing their duties. The volunteers tend to measure the nutrient level for a quick response, while the community health center tends to put priority in collecting data for their report. In addition to food utilization, food security cannot be sustained without empowerment of the people, through asset creation, as explained by Renzaho & Mellor (2010). In the ENT, governments efforts to improve food security through asset creation are done by distributing agriculture equipments to the farmers. The amount of agricultural equipments aid, according to an informant, is even abundance, but they are not properly managed to empower the farmers. Agriculture equipments aid in every village is overwhelmed. However, the aid is not followed by sufficient guidance and assistance that makes them cannot be used in optimum way. Aid in the form of tractors for instance, is not followed by assistance and training on how to maintain them. Such lack of governance makes the informants are rather sceptical with food security improvement in the region. They perceive that there is still a lack of political will to really improve the food security governance. There are actually a lot of researches have been done by expert at local university, however, the government has not tried to consult or discuss if the research is possible to be applied to solve the food security problem. Food security issue is seen as persistent problem in ENT. The informants furthermore added that since the previous food insecurity problems were not completely solved, then there is a big probabilities that it will happen again and remain to happen for years to come. In fact, the lack of governance is seen as way of making the time bomb of food insecurity in the region.

39

CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

4.1 Findings Before decentralization, food security governance was an area where the major part of the process was controlled by the national government. An important impact of this strong control was the transformation of diversified food consumption behavior into one major mainstream, which the consumption of rice as staple food. Food security therefore was perceived as the availability and entitlement of rice. The negative impact of this mainstream food security policy by national government is the high dependency on rice. For regions which do not have suitable agro climate and soil structure for rice cultivation, the mainstream policy make them be trapped in food vulnerability, as happens in East Nusa Tenggara (ENT). This chapter explain the findings gained after data analysis. The findings based on the research question are as follow: Does the shift from centralized to decentralized governance enable improvement of food security? As pointed out by Bevir (2009) that decentralization will promote good governance when several essential conditions can be met, such as the functioning of local democracy through legitimate government, fiscal autonomy, and local governments competent officials. The case study shows that formally two out of the three conditions have been able to be fulfilled. Since the enactment of decentralization, the head of local governments and member of local House of Representatives were directly elected by the people. Therefore there is a legitimate government institution. In regard with fiscal autonomy, decentralization also makes local government has the authority to allocate the budget based on local condition, target, and priorities. The competent official is apparently the only element which is still not been able to fully be fulfilled. Based on the information acquired from informants and report from the media, facts in the field, however, give a different impression. The positive side which can be seen is that the local government has identified and acknowledged food security as a vital policy agenda in the region. The local government has shown the political will to improve it, by including food security as one of the development priorities, through maize province program. The provincial government has tried to become responsive to local people and condition then develop a better basis for food security, by focusing on maize cultivation as an instrument to strengthen food security and poverty

40

alleviation. The program reflects an effort to empower local capability through local resources, since the regions soil and agro-climate condition is suitable for maize and dry land agriculture. However, there is still inadequacy of governance, where some good governance principles have not been able to be carried out, in spite the fact that such principles are essential for food security improvement. The information given by local informants shows that there is a lack of information sharing, participation and consultation between government and the people. Because of lack of consultation, the maize seeds distributed by government to the farmers are not suitable with the soil condition and the climate, which eventually results in crops failure. This certainly does not help the farmers to produce maize productively to support their food stocks and income. The policy also still biases toward wetland agriculture, while most of the agriculture land in ENT are only suitable for dry land agriculture. In addition, the uses of governments budget for food security improvement are also still not effective and efficient. Agriculture assistance through distribution of seeds and agriculture equipments such as tractors to villages are overwhelmed, but does not followed by a proper choice, timing, and training on how to use and maintain them. The aid then becomes useless and has not succeeded to empower the people to escape from food insecurity. Another example of lack of information sharing is the non existence of information flows about the weather and climate which is highly important to farmers, while there is a government agency working in the area of meteorology, climatology and geophysics. Food insecurity which happens in ENT from year to year has been mostly caused by crops failure due to drought or sometimes excessive rainfalls. As anticipation to this, farmers should have clear information about the weather and climate prediction provided by the government agency. The inadequacy of governance is also shown by the lack of coordination among government agencies. Food security tends to be seen as the responsibility of agriculture agency, while food security is actually a complex system that requires synergy across agencies. Food security for instance, requires good irrigation system, clean water and roads which mean the role of public works agency; information on market price and food processing, which means the role of cooperative, trade and industry agency; as well as support from education, health, and other agency. This infers that food security can only be achieved through a solid support system. In addition to that, the food aid policy in the event of food insecurity currently still follows the national mainstream, by distributing rice. Such form of food aid may be helpful in the short term, particularly when the aid is needed immediately because of natural disaster. However, in the long term, the food aid in the form of rice also

41

creates another problem; which is the increasing dependency on rice. As the condition at national level, dependency on rice is another cause of food insecurity problem in ENT, since most of the people are too poor to buy rice and the region is not the main producer of rice. Most of the rice which is consumed in the region is gained from subsidized rice for poor people and inter-island trade. One important way to escape from the dependency is by food diversification. The ENT has a potential to strengthen their food security through food diversification by developing maize cultivation. Such effort, however, requires participation and consultation with the farmers. There is also inadequacy of governance on the empowerment efforts from civil society organization, since their activities in ENT are mostly short-term based, and it turns to create dependency rather than empowerment. Example of this is the effort to increase the nutrition status of local community by distributing imported high calorie biscuits. When the food aid stops, as stated by an informant, the nutrition status back to the low level again. Nutrition improvement could have been sustained if the effort uses a local based food that can be easily found in the region. Therefore it can be stated that decentralized governance have not been able to improve food security because the good governance principles have not been properly put in place. The governance inadequacy found in the case study is listed in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1 Good Governance and Facts in the Field Good Governance principles Accountability and transparency Facts in the Field The governments main program related with food security is to develop the region as Maize Province. However, there is no clear strategy on how the program works. Problems that arise in the fields show the programs lack of clarity and strategy. There is inadequacy of peoples participation. Farmers are not consulted and involved in deciding the right type of seeds to be cultivated, the right time for planting them, how to use and maintain the agriculture equipments given by the government. Farmers should have been involved more for the government to gain knowledge on the soil condition, their perception and expectation on agriculture activities. - The program is not effective because it is not suitable with the condition in the field. Example of these are :

Participation

Effectiveness and efficiency

42

- The maize seeds, which are not suitable with the soil condition and climate, - Agriculture equipments aid in the form of tractors, without giving the training on how to use and maintain them properly - Irrigation program which biased toward wetland agriculture, where most of the land are more suitable for dry land agriculture - Food aid in the form of rice, which does not go in line with the regions umbrella policy maize province. This also increases dependency on rice, since the ENT does not have sufficient capacity to produce rice. - There is also inefficiency since most of the budget which is allocated for food security program was spent on operational cost than directly goes to farmers. How food security is governed at local level under decentralization? Food security is governed through a complex network from global, regional, national, to local level. Each of the level has their own governing bodies and institutions. In the context of decentralization, there is a share of responsibilities between central and local government. In addition to relevant government agencies, the governing bodies for food security issues is the food security council which is established from center to local level. They monitor and share information about the state of food security. The central government is responsible to protect and maintain food security at national level and intervene when there is a food security problems in the region, which might caused by natural disasters, crops failure, political riots, etc. When domestic food is not able to restore the food security, then the national government will try to secure the system through network at regional level, by importing food from neighboring countries. At local level, the local government is responsible to protect and maintain food security at household and individual level. Food security in fact becomes one of the local governments basic legal obligations that should be fulfilled. The process happens as a top down and bottom up process, where national government maintaining food security at national level and local government protects food security at local level that will eventually contribute to national food security. Under decentralization, a set of policy framework which is interrelated to one another becomes the guiding policy, to ensure that greater autonomy will be able to improve food security governance. This where the problem usually happens, since decentralization also creates coordination obstacles that hinders food security achievement.

43

What are the constraints and opportunities that emerge to achieve food security under decentralized governance? Currently decentralization has pushes the roles of local governance to achieve food security. It creates an enabling environment where local government and stakeholders can decide the best way to achieve food security based on their local potential and condition, also cultural preferences. Decentralization therefore brings an opportunity to improve food security at national level, since governance process at local level is directed to play active part. Decentralized governance makes government closer to the people, empowers local democracy, and gives a wider room for local stakeholders to participate in governance process. Since food is a basic human need, the legitimate local government would highly respect food security and deliver policy to support it as a way to express their accountability. However, there are also some weaknesses caused by decentralized governance that may harm food security. One of the major constraints is the political euphoria in the young decentralization in Indonesia. Such euphoria makes local government perceives local autonomy as the power to decide any political agenda they think important, which often a short-term agenda that sacrifice the environment, where environment sustainability is related with food security. The constraints and opportunities are listed in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 Decentralized Governance Constraints and Opportunities Constraints a. High dependency of rice as staple food b. Political euphoria (power oriented instead of welfare oriented): the increasing number of new local governments instead of their necessities to be established, as well as low effectiveness and efficiency in public service delivery. c. Lack of coordination among stakeholders, while agriculture as a foundation of food security requires a synergy and strong support system. Opportunities a. Local governments have higher authority to design and execute food security program based on the needs of local citizens. b. Rich of natural resource for supplying food: forest, land, sea area c. Large population: able to work an agriculture area d. Decentralization: head of local government, members of local House of Representatives is directly elected; therefore they supposed to be more accountable to the people.

44

4.2 Conclusions Food security in Indonesias decentralization era is mainly based on rice approach as a proxy for food security, because 90% of the countrys populations consume rice. While demand and rice consumption tend to increase, the production to meet such high demand has hardly to be met. East Nusa Tenggara is an example of the region that is trapped in rice. Maize used to be their main staple food, however currently most of the populations consume rice, where the region has not the suitable condition to produce a sufficient amount of rice. Therefore food security remains a persistent problem in East Nusa Tenggara and Indonesia in general. Governance for food security in Indonesia in decentralization era has a distinctive meaning. It requires public sector reform (Rhodes, 1996 in Kjaer, 2004) toward good governance (Braun, 2009). However, it does not necessarily mean less roles of state toward self-organizing networks with a significant degree of autonomy, as suggested by Rhodes (in Kjaer, 2004; Kennett, 2008). In Indonesia it still requires a significant role of national as well as local government. The role of national government is to create an enabling environment to strengthen policy coordination and harmonization between national and local governments, whereas the role of local government is to strengthen governance processes through involvement of non-governmental stakeholders. In current decentralized governance in Indonesia, local governments view their region as a separated and autonomous politico-administrative jurisdiction. This is an obstacle for food security governance, since food security is a complex and trans-boundary problem. Therefore food security governance requires inter-government cooperation between national and local governments, as well as among local governments. Besides that, food security governance in decentralization era requires participation of civil society and private sectors at local level, to manage and govern local food stock system. This is the essence of decentralization which is participation and initiatives. Local food stock system will help food security in the event of transient of chronic food insecurity. Thus, to ensure food security, local governments ought to perceive their regions as an interdependent socio-environmental sphere where any physical development in one region will bring impact to another region. Food security therefore requires good governance that will drive engagement, cooperation and coordination between governments, private sectors and citizen. The main role of government is needed especially in the region with lack of needed public infrastructure. The governance process requires a strong coordination between national and local governments, where national government brings and creates an enabling environment for local governments to develop their local potential in achieving food security.

45

CHAPTER V RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Recommendation for Future Research This study only viewed food security issues in Indonesia by focusing on one region at provincial level, without going into deeper in investigating relations between regencies and municipalities. In the era of decentralization, some of coordination problems are caused by vertical and horizontal disharmony among the three tier of government, namely national level, provincial level, and regency or municipal level. The problems of coordination may happen among the three, between provincial and regencies, or among regencies, not including non government stakeholders in those three levels of governance. Therefore current decentralized governance in Indonesia creates a very complex system that brings constraint and opportunities. For the next study, there is a lot of area of study which is still opened to be investigated, for example by comparing food security governance between regencies in a province or between regencies in different province in order to see how each of the regency governs food security.

5.2 Policy Recommendation Food security is certainly a big challenge for Indonesia at present as well as in the future due to complexity of geographic and demographic profile, and the decentralized governance. Since food is a basic human need that should be fulfilled and protected by the state, policy makers at all level therefore should have a sense of crisis and urgency in perceiving food security issue. In addition, food security should be seen as important pillar for national security, simply because without food we are dead (Fulbrook, 2010). Current decentralized governance could be used as a means to protect this fundamental human right which requires multi-level, multi-actors and multi-sector governance. This framework of thinking should be adopted since currently Indonesia has a high degree of dependency on imported food for some important commodities such as rice, maize, beef, and sugar which implies that to certain degree the national security is vulnerable. Therefore, every development policy that is taken by national as well as local governments will not endanger food security. In governing food security, national government has a very limited capacity to monitor, cover and ensure food security for all citizens and this is the area where local governments should play their roles. Therefore a harmonious coordination between national-

46

local governments and other stakeholder are essentials. Moreover, local governments have a closer contact to their citizen. They are established by local people through direct election which requires them to be more accountable and responsive to the local needs, including in food security. Partnerships between national-local governments are in the form of capacity buildings, knowledge transfers, which also includes stakeholders at local level. There are some important drivers which should be anticipated and well-governed to ensure food security in decentralization era, such as: a. Controlling population growth by revitalization of National Family Planning Program. b. Increase the intensity and information sharing among relevant stakeholders, whether vertical and horizontally, therefore the measurements which are taken are accurate, effective and efficient to improve food security. c. Protection of agriculture land. This implies spatial planning should be integrated and taking into account the soil condition and agro climate factor. d. Promoting alternative staple foods besides rice that also have a similar or even higher nutrition level. e. Distributing income from non agriculture sector to sectors that support food availability, food access and food utilization, such as maintenance of irrigation system, water management, capacity building to farmers through training, agriculture technology aids, loan/capital aids. f. Reaching food security through comprehensive approach by improving education level, health, and decreasing poverty. g. At last, another important measurement to ensure food security is the practice of good governance principles at national and local level in order to sustain policy synchronization.

47

References Andersen, Per Pinstrup. (2009). Food security: definition and measurement. Food Security (2009) 1:5-7. Anonim. (2008). Rencana Aksi NTT Food Summit 2008 (East Nusa Tenggara Food Summit 2008 Action Plan) retrieved 6 June 2010 from http://www.ntt-

academia.org/files/nttfoodsummit2008.pdf. Bardhan, Pranab and Mookherjee, Dilip. (2006). The Rise of Local Governance: An Overview in Bardhan, Pranab and Dilip Mookherjee (Ed.), Decentralization and Local Governance in Developing Countries: A Comparative Perspective. London: The MIT Press, p. 1-15. Batterbury, Simon P.J.; and Fernando, Jude L. (2006). Rescaling Governance and the

Impacts of Political and Environmental Decentralization: An Introduction. World Development, Vol. 34, No 11, pp.1851-1863. Bevir, Mark. (2009). Key Concepts in Governance. London: Sage Publications Ltd. Bierman, Frank. (2007). Earth system governance as a crosscutting theme of global change research. Global Environmental Change, 17 (2007) 326-337. Boesch, Donald F. (1999). The role of science in ocean governance. Ecological Economics, 31 (1999) 189-198. Booth, Wayne C.; Colomb, Gregory G.; Williams, Joseph M. (2008). The Craft of Research. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. BPS-Statistics Indonesia. (2009). BPS-Statistics Indonesia Strategic Data. Retrieved 2 April 2010 from http://dds.bps.go.id/eng/download_file/data_strategis.pdf. BPS-Statistics Indonesia. (2009). Trends of the Selected Socio-Economic Indicators of Indonesia. Retrieved 26 February 2010 from

http://dds.bps.go.id/eng/download_file/booklet_leaflet/booklet_okt2009.pdf. BPS-Statistics Nusa Tenggara Timur. (2009). Nusa Tenggara Timur in Figures 2009 retrieved 6 June 2010 from

http://ntt.bps.go.id/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=92&Itemid=51. Braun, Joachim von. (2009). Addressing the food crisis: governance, market functioning, and investment in public goods. Food Security (2009) 1:9-15. Crook, Richard C. (2003). Decentralisation and Poverty Reduction in Africa: The Politics of Local-Central Relations, Public Administration and Development, 23: 77-88. Dawes, Sharon S. (2009). Governance in the digital age: A research and action framework for an uncertain future. Government Information Quarterly, 26 (2009): 257-264.

48

de Lo, R.C., Armitage, D., Plummer, R., Davidson, S. and Moraru, L. (2009). From Government to Governance: A State-of-the-Art Review of Environmental Governance. Final Report. Prepared for Alberta Environment, Environmental Stewardship, Environmental Relations. Guelph, ON: Rob de Lo Consulting Services. Retrieved 11 April 2010 from http://environment.gov.ab.ca/info/library/8187.pdf. Devas, Nick. (1997). Indonesia: what do we mean by decentralization? Public Administration and Development, Vol. 17, 351-367 (1997). Eckardt, Sebastian (2008). Political Accountability, Fiscal Conditions and Local Government Performance-Cross Sectional Evidence From Indonesia. Public Administration and Development, 28: 1-17. Edralin, Josefa S.; Collado, Cristino M. (2005). Decentralized Governance and Food Security: Perceptions from Rural Local Governments and Communities in Bulacan Province, the Philippines. Retrieved 7 Pebruary 2010 from

http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UN/UNPAN020696.pdf Fanggidae, Silvia (2008). The Impact of Food Aid in Indonesia on Local Coping Mechanism: Case Studies from NTT Province 1998-2000, working paper 10, Institute of Indonesia Tenggara Timur Studies, retrieved 6 June 2010 from http://ntt-

academia.org/WP/WP10-SF.BantuanPanganNTT.pdf. Fulbrook, David (2010). Food as security. Food Security (2010) 2:5-10. Fisman, Raymond and Gatti, Roberta (2002) Decentralization and Corruption: Evidence Across Countries, Journal of Public Economics, 83: 325-345 Francis, Paul and James, Robert (2003) Balancing Rural Poverty Reduction and Citizen Participation: The Contradictions of Ugandas Decentralization Program, World Development, 31 (2): 325-337. Gerakan Anti Pemiskinan Indonesia-GAPRI. (2007). Sintesis Participatory Poverty Assessment di Nusa Tenggara Timur (Participatory Poverty Assessment Synthesis in East Nusa Tenggara) retrieved 28 June 2010 from

http://www.gapri.org/tfiles/file/PPA/Naskah%20Sintesis%20PPA%20NTT.pdf. Green, Keith (2005) Decentralization and good governance: the case of Indonesia. MPRA Paper No 18097 retrieved 5 March 2010 from http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/18097/. Hadiprayitno, Irene I. (2010). Food security and human rights in Indonesia. Development in Practice, 20: 1, 122-130.

49

Hewlett, Michael; Rayner, Jeremy; Tollefson, Chris. (2009). From government to governance in forest planning? Lessons from the case of the British Columbia Great Bear Rainforest initiative. Forest Policy and Economics 11 (2009) 383-391. Hofman, Bert and Kaiser, Kai. (2006). Decentralization, Democratic Transition, and Local Governance in Indonesia, in Bardhan, Pranab and Dilip Mookherjee (Ed.) Decentralization and Local Governance in Developing Countries: A Comparative Perspective. London: The MIT Press, p. 81-124. Jordan, Andrew. (2008). "The governance of sustainable development: taking stock and looking forwards", in Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 2008, Vol. 26: pp. 1733. Jordan, Andrew; Wurzel, Rdiger K.W.; Zito, Anthony. (2005) The Rise of New Policy Instruments in Comparative Perspective: Has Governance Eclipsed Government?. Political Studies: 2005 Vol. 53, 477-496. Krahmann, Elke. (2008) The rise of non-state actors in security governance in Kennett, Patricia. (ed.), Governance, Globalization and Public Policy, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Kennett, Patricia (2008) Introduction: governance, the state and public policy in a global age in Kennett, Patricia (ed.), Governance, Globalization and Public Policy, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Kjaer, Anne Mette. (2004). Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press. Lassa, Jonatan A. (2009). Memahami Kebijakan Pangan dan Nutrisi Indonesia: Studi Kasus Nusa Tenggara Timur 1958-2008 (Understanding Indonesias Food and Nutrition Policy: Case Study of East Nusa Tenggara Province 1958-2008) in Journal of NTT Studies, 1 (1), pp.28-45. Mahbubani, Kishore. (2010). New Asian Perspective on Governance. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, Vol. 23, No. 2, April 2010 (pp. 205208). Malian, A. Husni; Mardianto, Sudi; Ariani, Mewa (2004). Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhi Produksi, Konsumsi dan Harga Beras serta Inflasi Bahan Makanan (Factors that Influence Rice Production, Consumption, and Price and Food Commodities

Inflation) in Jurnal Agro Ekonomi, Vol. 22, No 2, Oktober 2004, pp.119-146, retrieved 21 July 2010 from http://pse.litbang.deptan.go.id/ind/pdffiles/JAE22-2b.pdf. Maxwell, Simon. (1996). Food security: a post-modern perspective, Food Policy, Vol. 21, No 2, pp. 155-170.

50

McCarney, Patricia L. (2000) Thinking about Governance in Global and Local Perspective: Considerations on Resonance and Dissonance between Two Discourses. Urban Forum 11: 1, 2000. McGrew, Anthony. (2007). Globalization in McGrew, Anthony & Poku, Nana K. (ed.) Globalization, Development and Human Security. Cambridge: Polity Press. Muslimatun, Siti; Fanggidae, Silvia (2009). A Brief Review on The Persistent of Food Insecurity and Malnutrition Problems in East Nusa Tenggara Province Indonesia, Working Paper no 12 for Oxfam UK, retrieved 29 May 2010 from http://nttacademia.org/WP/WP12.Oxfam.Muslimatun.Fanggidae.pdf. Muflich, Ayip (without year) Masalah dan Kebijakan Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Dalam Mendukung Ketahanan Pangan (Problems and Community Empowerment Policy to Support Food Security), Directorate General of Community and Village

Empowerment, Indonesia Ministry of Home Affairs. Retrieved 11 June 2010 from http://pse.litbang.deptan.go.id/ind/pdffiles/Pros_AYIP_06.pdf. Nanda, Ved P. (2006). Good Governance Concept Revisited. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 603, Law, Society and Democracy: Comparative Perspectives, (Jan 2006), pp. 269-283. Olowu, Dele. (2003). Challenge of multi-level governance in developing countries and possible GIS applications. Habitat International, 27 (2003) 501-522. Overseas Development Institute. (1997). Global Hunger and Food Security after the World Food Summit, briefing paper, 1997 (1) February. Retrieved 20 May 2010 http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/download/1964.pdf. Pierre, Jon and Peters, B. Guy. (2000). Governance, Politics and the State. London: Macmillan Press Ltd. Rachmat, Muchjidin; Rahman, Benny; Kustiari, Reni; Supriyati; Budi, Gelar Setya; KS, Wahyuning; Hidayat; Deri (2010). Kajian Sistem Cadangan Pangan Masyarakat Perdesaan untuk Mengurangi 25% Resiko Kerawanan Pangan, Proposal Penelitian (Study in Rural Community Food Stock System to Decrease 25% of Food Vulnerability). Research project proposal, Pusat Analisis Sosial Ekonomi dan Kebijakan Pertanian, Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Departemen Pertanian Republik Indonesia. Rametsteiner, Ewald. (2009). Governance Concepts and their Application in Forest policy Initiatives from Global to Local Levels. Small-scale Forestry (2009) 8:143-158.

51

Renzaho, Andrew MN and Mellor, David. (2010). Food security measurement in cultural pluralism: Missing point or conceptual misunderstanding? Nutrition, 26 (2010) 1-9. Rusastra, I Wayan; Thompson, Geoff; Bottema, J.W. Taco. (2008). Food Security, Poverty and the Complexity of Rural Development in Indonesia Achievement and Policy Directions, in Rusastra, I Wayan; Geoff Thompson, J.W. Taco Bottema and Robert Baldwin (Ed.). Food Security and Poverty in the Era of Decentralization in Indonesia. Bogor: UNESCAP-CAPSA, p.1-2. Retrieved 5 January 2010 from

http://www.cgprt.org/publication/Wp102.pdf. Rosenau, J.N. (1992). Governance, Order, and Change in World Politics. In J.N. Rosenau and E.-O. Czempiel, (eds.), Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rozema, Annemarie van Zeijl; Corvers, Ron; Kemp, Ren; Martens, Pim. (2008). Governance for Sustainable Development: A Framework. Sustainable Development 16, 410-421 (2008). Schneider, Aaron. (2003). Decentralization: Conceptualization and Measurement, Studies in Comparative International Development, 38 (3): 32-56. Stamoulis, Kostas and Zezza, Alberto. (2003). A Conceptual framework for national agricultural, rural development and food security strategies and policies, ESA Working Paper No 03-17, FAO Agricultural and Development Economics Division, retrieved 5 March 2010 from ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/007/ae050e/ae050e00.pdf. Sumaryanto (2009). Diversifikasi Sebagai Salah Satu Pilar Ketahanan Pangan (Diversification as a Pillar for Food Security) working paper in The Republic of Indonesia Ministry of Forestrys World Food Day Seminar in Jakarta, retrieved 12 May 2010 from http://www.dephut.go.id/files/DEPTAN_Makalah_HPS.pdf. Tambulasi, Richard IC and Kayuni, Happy M. (2007). Decentralization Opening a New Window for Corruption: An Accountability Assessment of Malawis Four Years of Democratic Local Governance, Journal of Asian and African Studies, 42: 163-180. Wilde, Alexandra; Narang, Shapiro; Laberge, Marie; Morreto, Luisa. (2009). A Users Guide to Measuring Local Governance. Oslo: UNDP Oslo Governance Centre. Retrieved 8 May 2010 from http://www.undp.org/governance/focus_local_governance.shtml.

52

Appendices

1. List of Informants Name Key informants: Jonatan Lassa - Co-editor, Journal of Nusa Tenggara Timur (East Nusa Tenggara) Studies, Indonesia - Member of Indonesian Association of Disaster Management Oxfam GB Consultant, Executive Director of Pikul Association, East Nusa Tenggara Province, Indonesia Executive Director, Community Association on Disaster Management, East Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia Affiliation(s)

Silvia Fanggidae

Yulius Nakmofa

Supporting informants: Edi Abdurachman Head of Data and Information Center, Ministry of Agriculture, Republic of Indonesia Postdoc researcher human right to food, Law and Governance Group, Wageningen University, the Netherlands - Department of Human Biology, Nutrition and Toxicology Research Institute Maastricht, Maastricht University, The Netherlands - Lab. Food Quality and Nutrition, Dept. of Food and Agricultural Product Technology, Fac. of Agricultural Technology, Brawijaya University, Malang-East Java, Indonesia

Irene Hadiprayitno

Siti N. Wulan

2. Interview Guiding Questions to Informants 1) Nampaknya beberapa daerah di NTT cukup sering mengalami kerawanan pangan, diakibatkan gagal panen yang dipicu kondisi alam. Dari pengamatan Bapak/Ibu, mengapa hal ini sampai terjadi berulang kali? (Several regions in East Nusa Tenggara quite often suffered from food insecurity which is caused by crops failure and climate condition. Based on your observation, why do you think this happens repeatedly?)

53

Apakah petani setempat tidak mengetahui pola cuaca sehingga tidak mampu mengantisipasinya? (Do farmers do not understand the climate pattern so that they are not able to anticipate it?)

Apakah Bapak/Ibu melihat/tidak melihat adanya dukungan pemerintah daerah setempat untuk mengantisipasi kondisi alam ini, seperti apa bentuk dukungan itu? (Do you see any supports from the local government to anticipate the climate problems?)

Di manakah daerah yang paling rawan mengalami kekurangan pangan di NTT? (Where is the most food vulnerable region in East Nusa Tenggara?) Apakah masalah yang menjadi pemicu kerawanan pangan tersebut? (What is the trigger of the food vulnerability?)

2) Gagal panen tersebut mengakibatkan ketersediaan pangan menjadi amat terbatas, bahkan mungkin tidak tersedia sama sekali untuk beberapa waktu. Dari pengalaman yang Bapak/Ibu alami, serta pengamatan langsung dalam organisasi Bapak/Ibu: (Crops failure caused the food stocks become very limited even not available for some times. Based on your experience and observation within the work of your organization :) Bagaimana masyarakat mengatasi hal ini, apakah dengan mengurangi konsumsi, atau beralih ke bahan makanan lain? (How the people cope with this situation, do they decrease their consumption or shifting to other type of food?) Bagaimana pemerintah setempat mengatasi kerawanan pangan ini, apakah respons yang diberikan tepat waktu atau terlambat? (How the government manage the food vulnerability, does the responds come on the right time or too late?) Apakah pemerintah juga menggalang kerja sama dengan kelompok-kelompok masyarakat saat terjadi krisis pangan? (Does the government organize cooperation with the community groups during food crisis?) Saat terjadi krisis pangan, seperti apa mekanisme penyaluran bantuan pangan yang dilakukan, sehingga membuatnya tepat waktu atau terlambat? (In the event of food crisis, how does the food aid is managed, which make it right on time or perhaps too late?) Apakah bentuk bantuan pangan yg diberikan sesuai dengan budaya, kebiasaan masyarakat setempat? (Do the food aids which were given suits to local customs and culture?)

54

Mengingat kerawanan pangan telah terjadi beberapa kali apakah ada upaya bersama antara masyarakat dan pemerintah untuk membentuk sistem cadangan pangan lokal, baik inisiatif dari masyarakat atau dari pemerintah, sehingga bila suatu saat kembali terjadi gagal panen, bantuan pangan dapat tersalurkan dengan cepat dari cadangan ini? (Since food insecurity and vulnerability has happened repeatedly for many times, is there a joint effort between government and the community, whether the initiatives come from the community or the government, to form a local food stock mechanism, therefore when there is a crop failure, food aid can be distributed immediately from the stock?)

3) Apakah Bapak/Ibu melihat pemerintah daerah setempat menaruh perhatian yang cukup besar terhadap masalah ketahanan pangan? (Do you think the local government pays a great attention on food security?) Adakah dukungan yang memadai untuk stabilitas produksi bahan pangan, misalnya: bantuan alat2 pertanian, pupuk, permodalan, penyuluhan? (Are there any sufficient supports to stabilize food production such as agriculture equipments, fertilizers, capital, and training?) Apakah telah ada upaya pemerintah dengan menggalang kerja sama dengan kelompok-kelompok masyarakat untuk meningkatkan ketahanan pangan, misalnya dengan perbaikan dari sisi produksi, distribusi bahan pangan, serta pengentasan kemiskinan (Are there any joint efforts between government and the community to strengthen food security from production sector, distribution and poverty reduction?) Adakah upaya-upaya pemerataan distribusi pangan, agar terjangkau masyarakat hingga ke wilayah pelosok dengan harga yang terjangkau? (Are there any sufficient efforts to equalize food distribution to make the food become affordable and available for people living in rural areas?) Apakah ada program-program khusus dari pemerintah untuk meningkatkan gizi masyarakat, misalnya program makanan tambahan untuk siswa sekolah, bayi, ibu menyusui? (Are there any special programs applied by the government to increase the community nutrition status, for example by providing food supplementary feeding for students, infants, and breast feeding mothers?) Bila dukungan pemerintah belum memadai, menurut Bapak apa yang menjadi penyebabnya? Apakah anggaran yang terbatas? (If the support is not sufficient, what do you think is the cause? Is it limited budget?)

55

4) Dari pengalaman kejadian rawan pangan yang baru saja terjadi, apakah Bapak khawatir hal yang sama akan terulang kembali, mengapa? (Based on the recent food vulnerability, are you worried that the same thing will happen again, why?) 5) Berdasarkan pengalaman dalam melaksanakan kegiatan di lapangan, hal apa yang harus dibenahi agar masalah ketahanan pangan di NTT dapat diatasi? (Based on your field experience, what should be improved to solve food security problem in East Nusa Tenggara?)

56