Promotion of conservation agriculture by development actors in Nusa Tenggara Barat and Nusa Tenggara Timur Provinces, Indonesia : A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master at Lincoln University

Abstract

Understanding farmer uptake of agri-innovations such as conservation agriculture (CA) requires consideration of more than a given farmer’s characteristics, perceptions and immediate environment. While numerous studies have sought to explain the factors that influence uptake of CA among small-scale farmers, particularly in developing countries, these generally have not addressed the roles and interests of the organisations involved in the promotion of CA. This research focuses on how organisations’ goals, interests and views shape their promotion of CA and, through a comparative case study of CA promotion in the provinces of Nusa Tenggara Barat (NTB) and Nusa Tenggara Timur (NTT), Indonesia, examines the extent to which this promotion incorporates water conservation benefits in response to the water availability concerns of local small-scale farmers. Since 2013, the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) has been promoting CA as a form of climate-smart agriculture in NTB and NTT provinces that aligns with its strategy to adapt dryland farming practices to climate change impacts. Despite FAO framing its promotion as climate-smart agriculture, the key development actors working to influence farmer practice in Indonesia mainly emphasise the ability of CA to drive production increases. Very little attention is given to the water conservation benefits of CA practices, which potentially help to counter climate change impacts, such as increased drought. In this research, I combine a case study approach and a political ecology analytical perspective to develop a rich understanding of the influence of organisational interests and views on the promotion of CA in the study area. I conducted semi-structured interviews with 32 respondents, representing the FAO, the Ministry of Agriculture of Indonesia (MoA) and its subordinate entities, international NGO World Neighbors, local not-for-profit organisations, and farmers, all of whom are involved in the promotion of CA in the case study areas. Results show that the interests and objectives of these organisations have guided their development of particular problem and solution logics, which have, in turn, shaped their promotion of CA. Each organisations’ problem-solution framing helps to shape their ideas about the inputs required, other organisations to involve in CA promotion, and what features of CA should be accentuated. Organisations involved in the promotion of CA in NTB and NTT tend to network and cooperate with other organisations with similar interests. Organisations focused on increasing productivity recommended the use of improved seeds and agrichemicals, and emphasised increased production as a benefit in their narrative. Organisations interested in environmental protection and farmer empowerment recommended application of compost and use of local seeds, discouraged the use of agrichemicals, and promoted increased production and environmental benefits in a more balanced way. Overall, the promotion of CA to farmers in NTB tended to be more agribusiness oriented, while promotion in NTT was more environmentally focused. This study finds that that the varying views of participating organisations towards water issues in the case study areas contributed to the side-lining of water conservation benefits in the promotion of CA. Where organisations are in closer proximity to farmers, and where rainfall is more erratic in the area in question, water conservation benefits of CA were promoted more strongly. However, even when water conservation benefits were promoted, the information provided was limited to the ability of CA practices to support soil moisture retention; less information was available on long-term benefits, such as increasing water infiltration and improving water quality. This general lack of focus on water conservation benefits of CA can be explained, at least in part, by: (1) a focus among dominant actors on productivity increases in maize production; and (2) assumptions by dominant actors that small-scale farmers make largely rational decisions aimed at maximising profits.