Strengthening the partnership between industry and farmers

Oct 13, 2025 by magicalceylontours.com 35 views

Comparison Analysis of Partnership Program Revenue PT. Perkebunan Nusantara II with Rakyakan Intensification Cane Farmers (TRI)

Introduction

The agricultural sector plays a vital role in the economy of Indonesia, with sugar cane being one of the most significant crops. The partnership program between PT. Perkebunan Nusantara II (PTPN II) and Rakyakan Intensification Cane Farmers (TRI) aims to improve the productivity and efficiency of sugar cane farming. However, the success of this partnership program depends on various factors, including the production costs and income generated by the farmers. This study aims to analyze the comparison between production costs and income obtained from the partnership program of PTPN II with TRI farmers.

Methodology

The study area was determined using the purposive sampling method, where location selection was based on compliance with the research objectives. In addition, the sampling technique used was proportional random sampling, which allows researchers to take samples randomly by considering the number of groups in the population. In this study, as many as 30 samples were taken to provide adequate representation of the population under study.

Results

The results showed that the total production costs for the PTPN II Partnership Program reached Rp 940,728,333, while the total cost for TRI farmers was recorded at Rp 546,898,833. This shows that the PTPN II partnership program has a higher production cost compared to TRI farmers. On the other hand, the amount of revenue earned from the PTPN II Partnership Program is Rp. 56,771,667, while TRI's farmers' income is Rp. 35,851,167. This shows that although PTPN II has a higher production cost, the revenue generated is also relatively greater than TRI farmers.

Additional Analysis and Explanation

The comparison between production costs and income from these two groups reflects several important aspects in the partnership system implemented by PTPN II compared to TRI farmers. Increased costs in partnership programs are usually accompanied by access to better technology, training, and support in marketing, which can contribute to higher productivity. Conversely, TRI farmers often operate with more limited resources, which create challenges in achieving the same efficiency and productivity.

This cost gap also reflects the potential profit that can be achieved from the partnership model. The application of modern strategies in agriculture can accelerate the adoption of agricultural practices that are more efficient and increase yields. Therefore, it is important for TRI farmers to gain greater access to training and technology that can increase yields and reduce their production costs.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the results of this study show that although the PTPN II partnership program has a high cost, it also succeeded in generating higher income. Increasing cooperation between the two parties can be the key to increasing income and reducing the existing gap. This initiative not only aims to improve agricultural output but also to build economic resilience for farmers in Indonesia.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations are made:

Strengthening the partnership between industry and farmers: The partnership between PTPN II and TRI farmers should be strengthened to increase access to better technology, training, and support in marketing.
Increasing access to training and technology: TRI farmers should gain greater access to training and technology that can increase yields and reduce their production costs.
Improving agricultural practices: The application of modern strategies in agriculture can accelerate the adoption of agricultural practices that are more efficient and increase yields.
Increasing income and reducing the existing gap: Increasing cooperation between the two parties can be the key to increasing income and reducing the existing gap.

Limitations of the Study

This study has several limitations, including:

Small sample size: The sample size of 30 may not be representative of the entire population of sugar cane farmers in Indonesia.
Limited data availability: The data used in this study may not be comprehensive or up-to-date.
Methodological limitations: The study used a purposive sampling method, which may not be representative of the entire population.

Future Research Directions

Future research should focus on:

Evaluating the effectiveness of the partnership program: A more comprehensive evaluation of the partnership program should be conducted to assess its effectiveness in improving agricultural output and building economic resilience for farmers in Indonesia.
Identifying the factors that contribute to the cost gap: Further research should be conducted to identify the factors that contribute to the cost gap between PTPN II and TRI farmers.
Developing strategies to reduce the cost gap: Strategies should be developed to reduce the cost gap between PTPN II and TRI farmers, including increasing access to training and technology and improving agricultural practices.
Q&A: Comparison Analysis of Partnership Program Revenue PT. Perkebunan Nusantara II with Rakyakan Intensification Cane Farmers (TRI)

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: What is the main objective of this study?

A1: The main objective of this study is to analyze the comparison between production costs and income obtained from the partnership program of PT. Perkebunan Nusantara II with Rakyakan Intensification Cane Farmers (TRI).

Q2: What is the study area and sampling technique used in this study?

A2: The study area was determined using the purposive sampling method, where location selection was based on compliance with the research objectives. In addition, the sampling technique used was proportional random sampling, which allows researchers to take samples randomly by considering the number of groups in the population.

Q3: What are the results of this study?

A3: The results showed that the total production costs for the PTPN II Partnership Program reached Rp 940,728,333, while the total cost for TRI farmers was recorded at Rp 546,898,833. This shows that the PTPN II partnership program has a higher production cost compared to TRI farmers. On the other hand, the amount of revenue earned from the PTPN II Partnership Program is Rp. 56,771,667, while TRI's farmers' income is Rp. 35,851,167.

Q4: What are the implications of this study?

A4: The comparison between production costs and income from these two groups reflects several important aspects in the partnership system implemented by PTPN II compared to TRI farmers. Increased costs in partnership programs are usually accompanied by access to better technology, training, and support in marketing, which can contribute to higher productivity. Conversely, TRI farmers often operate with more limited resources, which create challenges in achieving the same efficiency and productivity.

Q5: What are the recommendations of this study?

A5: Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations are made:

Strengthening the partnership between industry and farmers: The partnership between PTPN II and TRI farmers should be strengthened to increase access to better technology, training, and support in marketing.
Increasing access to training and technology: TRI farmers should gain greater access to training and technology that can increase yields and reduce their production costs.
Improving agricultural practices: The application of modern strategies in agriculture can accelerate the adoption of agricultural practices that are more efficient and increase yields.
Increasing income and reducing the existing gap: Increasing cooperation between the two parties can be the key to increasing income and reducing the existing gap.

Q6: What are the limitations of this study?

A6: This study has several limitations, including:

Small sample size: The sample size of 30 may not be representative of the entire population of sugar cane farmers in Indonesia.
Limited data availability: The data used in this study may not be comprehensive or up-to-date.
Methodological limitations: The study used a purposive sampling method, which may not be representative of the entire population.

Q7: What are the future research directions?

A7: Future research should focus on:

Evaluating the effectiveness of the partnership program: A more comprehensive evaluation of the partnership program should be conducted to assess its effectiveness in improving agricultural output and building economic resilience for farmers in Indonesia.
Identifying the factors that contribute to the cost gap: Further research should be conducted to identify the factors that contribute to the cost gap between PTPN II and TRI farmers.
Developing strategies to reduce the cost gap: Strategies should be developed to reduce the cost gap between PTPN II and TRI farmers, including increasing access to training and technology and improving agricultural practices.

Conclusion

This Q&A article provides answers to some of the most frequently asked questions related to the comparison analysis of partnership program revenue PT. Perkebunan Nusantara II with Rakyakan Intensification Cane Farmers (TRI). The study highlights the importance of strengthening the partnership between industry and farmers, increasing access to training and technology, and improving agricultural practices to increase income and reduce the existing gap.