The willingness of farmers to preserve sustainable food agricultural land in Yogyakarta, Indonesia

1 Introduction

One of the important issues of sustainable agriculture is the management of agricultural land which is included in one of the main research lines, namely the analysis of land-use changes, especially those related to population growth, supply needs, and urban land expansion [1]. Under the current scenario of the rapidly increasing human population, achieving efficient and productive use of agricultural land while conserving biodiversity is a global challenge [2]. The mapped land changes and their attribution of drivers reflect the human-dominated Earth system [3]. The results of the study [4] found that land and water grabs are occurring at an alarming rate on all continents, except Antarctica.

The increased demand for infrastructure and agriculture that this rising population necessitates has hastened the rate of land alteration and degradation. Land transformation at the current rate, particularly agricultural land, is unsustainable [5]. Meanwhile, these changes in land-use regimes increase long-standing land tenure inequities, contributing to rural–urban mobility and, as a result, haphazard urban expansion [6]. According to the findings [7,8], global urbanization and the rate of urbanization will result in a global agricultural land loss by 2030, with significant regional differences. An increase in global urban land cover occurs as a result of this circumstance [9].

Around 80% of the world’s agricultural land will be lost due to urbanization in Asia and Africa. Other sustainability concerns and livelihood hazards are anticipated to accompany the loss of agricultural land, with distinct characteristics for different mega-urban locations [7]. Furthermore, migrant workers’ job security has a considerable beneficial impact on their decision to convert their agricultural property to non-agriculture [10].

The description of the condition above indicates that there has been a decline in the size of the agricultural business. Even though the size of the farm is one of the determinants of production and business efficiency, especially the area under irrigation [11]. Another study showed that land is one of the determinants of rice production in Yogyakarta [12]. This finding indicates that the land factor is one of the important factors influencing the production, efficiency, and sustainability of agricultural businesses.

The decline in the agricultural area also occurred in Indonesia, especially the Special Region of Yogyakarta. The latest data show that during the period 2017–2020 there has been a decrease in the area of agriculture at an average rate of about 234 ha/year [13]. Since 2009, the Government of Indonesia has enacted Law No. 41 of 2009 concerning the Protection of Sustainable Food Agricultural Land (SFAL) for controlling the rate of conversion of agricultural land to improve the welfare of farmers and the community. The Yogyakarta Special Region Government has also enacted Law no. 41 of 2009 and Regional Regulation No. 10 of 2011. However, the implementation of these regulations still faces various obstacles in the field. Farmers as land managers are the main key in the realization of the implementation of these regulations. Therefore, this study aims to determine the extent of farmers’ knowledge of SFAL protection regulations and to determine the factors that influence farmers’ willingness to conserve agricultural land with a choice experiment (CE) approach (Hanley et al. [14]). Thus, the results of the study can contribute to the formulation of policies, programs, and activities in detail and clearly so that this can be implemented by all stakeholders to achieve sustainable agriculture.

2 Literature review

Farmers’ willingness to assist in sustainable natural resource management has been the subject of numerous studies. Lienhoop and Brouwer [15] looked at farmers’ willingness to participate in sustainable forest schemes. The majority of farmers are prepared to pay donations to help manage church woodlands effectively because they benefit economically, socially, and environmentally [16]. We may imagine a “tipping point” that would promote the transfer from marginal agricultural land to biomass in the medium term, as the financial case for biomass crops becomes more certain [17]. As a result, ecosystem services derived from forest protection and regeneration, as well as sustainable and creative agricultural practices, are required [18].

Urbanization has had an influence on the region’s traditional horticultural, herbaceous, and arboreal structures, resulting in biodiversity loss and an increased risk of landslides [19]. As a result, Kelemen et al. [19] analyzed farmers’ readiness to engage in biodiversity-friendly agriculture in terms of sustainable agriculture. Farmers’ willingness to participate in reforestation contracts was studied using a CE that included contracts for groundwater preservation, biodiversity conservation, and recreation [20]. Farmers are increasingly being targeted for voluntary conservation initiatives aimed at contributing to biodiversity conservation through specialized on-farm conservation activities, such as investigating herders’ readiness to sign biodiversity conservation contracts [21,22]. In addition, based on prospective program qualities, Greiner et al. [23] rated their willingness to receive remuneration for biodiversity conservation on agricultural property.

The willingness of farmers to sustainable land management with land conservation faces adoption barriers mainly related to water constraints, lack of knowledge, and inability to accept production declines. This shows the lack of underlying information on sustainable land management [24]. The data [25] reveal that socioeconomic, cultural, and infrastructure factors are important predictors of farmers’ readiness to participate in land consolidation for agricultural efficiency in Africa (most 68% are willing). Farmers’ desire to participate, understanding of the Link Policy, living conditions before resettlement, and remuneration for resettlement all have a substantial impact on satisfaction with policy execution, according to another study [26].

Agricultural economics, behavioral, and structural issues all influence farmers’ willingness to supply riparian buffer zones [27]. Furthermore, farmers have experienced soil erosion on their fields and have strong motivations to engage in soil and water conservation efforts. The main indications of soil erosion, according to respondents, are soil erosion causes and lost productivity. The bulk of responders (76%) are involved in land conservation for their own gain [28]. As a result, Song et al. [29] has presented a holistic analysis of changes in cultivated land use in relation to the three cultivation land protection objectives, namely grain security, ecological security, and regional development harmonization, which discusses the development of the three land functions, namely production function, environment function, and regional development harmonization.

In general, research on people’s willingness to manage natural resources for sustainable agriculture has been carried out by previous researchers. However, the results of previous studies have not discussed the factors that influence the willingness of farmers to conserve their farmland. Therefore, this study will discuss the specific opportunities for farmers’ willingness to conserve agricultural land related to the implementation of the law on land protection for sustainable food agriculture in Indonesia. The determining factors are important findings that have not been discussed in previous studies.

3 Research method

This study was carried out in Yogyakarta’s Special Region, specifically in the Sleman and Bantul Regencies, which account for more than 67% of the province’s total paddy fields [30]. Based on this, a sample of farmers was taken by simple random selection from each irrigation area of five farmers, for a total of 125 farmers.

The sustainability of farming is not only suspected based on considerations of market benefits alone. There are considerations of non-market benefits that determine the attitude of farmers to stay or leave their farms. Assessment of non-market benefits can often be revealed with a CE approach [31]. The CE approach is used to reveal a person’s preferences for the specific context of different attribute choices. The CE application has been made by Hanley et al. [32] to estimate the economic value of improved river ecology in England and Central Scotland.

CE is a valuation contingent theoretical framework developed using a dichotomous choice of the Random Utility Model as the basis for empirical research in econometrics with a limited dependent variable [31,32,33]. According to this theory, each respondent’s indirect utility function i(U) can be divided into two parts: a deterministic element (X) that represents the influence that is not observing individual choices, and a stochastic element (e) that represents the influence that is not observing individual choices. This can be seen in the following equation:

Thus, the probability that some respondents prefer g choices over h choices, in a set of choices, can be described as the probability that the utility associated with g choices out of all other choices can be expressed as a logit model.

Logit model or logistic regression is a modeling approach that can be used to describe the relationship between independent variables and binary or dichotomous response variables.

The observational data consists of a number of p independent variables indicated by the vector x = (x ₁, x ₂, x ₃……x _p ) and the response variable is Y, where y has two possibilities, namely 0 and 1. If y = 1 states that the response has a survival criterion for preserving farming (Willing to Preserve – WTPs), and conversely y = 0 states the response has no criteria (leaving the farm), with P(Y = 1) = π (x1) and P(Y = 0) = 1 – π (x1), then the response variable Y (Willing to Preserve = WTPs) will follow Bernoulli s distribution with the probability function:

The cluster of independent variables, which are the socioeconomic factors of farmers, are mapped to the response opportunities that have a region between zero and one using the logistic distribution function with the equation (Hosmer and Lemeshlow [34]):

The linear relationship between the probability of response (x) with a group of independent variables can be achieved by using the logit function, which is a connecting function in logistic regression [35], namely:

with;

In this case, the opportunity function of farmers’ willingness to preserve rice farming can be formulated as follows:

where WTPs = willingness to preserve with a scale: 1 = preserve; 0 = leave of farm, β ₀, β ₁, β ₂, …. β ₇ = parameter coefficient, d ₁–d ₄ = dummy parameter coefficients, X ₁: farmer’s age (years old), X ₂: education level (years), X ₃: farming experience (years), X ₄: family member (person), X ₅: irrigation source distance (meters), X ₆: farm income (IDR), X ₇: non-farm income (IDR), D _Loc: location (dummy) D _LOC = 1 if rural location; D _LOC = 0 if suburban location, D _CR: credit availability. (D _CR = 1, if available; D _CR = 0, if not available), D _OWN: land ownership status. (D _OWN = 1, if the land is own; D _OWN = 0, if it is not owned), D _PART: participation in groups (D _PART = 1 if active; D _PART = 0 if not active).

The determining factors for farmers’ willingness are based on the findings of previous studies as well as the socioeconomic conditions of farmer households related to the use of natural resources such as the distance of irrigation sources, land status, and land location. In addition, institutional factors such as credit availability and participation in farmer groups are determining variables that deserve to be considered in the formulation of this analysis model. The condition of natural resources and institutions is important to consider in the management of natural resources for sustainable agriculture. This model bears a resemblance to the rural land consolidation model in Beijing’s Ping district which aims to provide a reference for the government on how to find the right way to transfer the consolidation of rural housing land with so-called principles oriented toward the rights of the people [36].

The Maximum Likelihood Estimation approach was used to complete the logistic model regression. The following were used to solve this regression: i) the Negelkerke R ² value, which is expressed as the percentage of variation in the WTPs variable that can be explained by the independent variables; ii) the Likelihood Ratio value, which is used to test the effect of the independent variables together; iii) the Wald value (z-statistics), which is used to test the effect of the independent variables individually on the dependent variable. By holding other variables constant, the findings of the logit regression model analysis are interpreted as the influence of changes in the dependent variable on the probability of farmers’ WTPs.

1. Informed consent: Informed consent has been obtained from all individuals included in this study.

2. Ethical approval: The conducted research is not related to either human or animal use.

4 Results

5 Discussion

Based on Table 1, it is known that farmers’ knowledge of Law no. 41 of 2009 and Regional Regulation No. 10 of 2011 is low. Knowledge of the existence of socialization is one of the efforts made by the government in protecting SFAL. Socialization activities are closely related to the activity of farmers in farmer group activities because socialization or agricultural extension carried out by the government is usually carried out in farmer groups. The socialization of Law No. 41 of 2009 and the Regional Regulation of the Special Region of Yogyakarta No. 10 of 2011 concerning the protection of sustainable food agricultural land has not been intensive, but farmers’ knowledge of sustainable agricultural land areas (green lines) and knowledge of the prohibition of drying rice fields or land conversion are quite high. This is because the government in conducting socialization or counseling emphasizes more farmers to find out the area of food agricultural land protected by the government (green route) and the prohibition of drying up paddy fields to reduce the high rate of land conversion.

The SFAL area (green line) is SFAL that is protected and prohibited from being converted, whereas the yellow line is a buffer for the green line and is allowed to be converted on condition that it has a permit to drain rice fields and a building permit. Knowledge of the green and yellow belt areas is very important to minimize the rate of conversion of agricultural land. Based on the results of interviews in the field, the government is considered serious in protecting SFAL with strict permits for draining rice fields and permits for building construction even in the buffer land area (yellow line). The difficulty felt by farmers is about the convoluted bureaucracy when taking care of permits for drying rice fields or permits to construct buildings, so that some farmers are desperate to dry fields and build buildings before applying for permits because they feel that licensing is an easy thing as long as they have a lot of money. The government must oversee each region and become a separate evaluation for the government.

The low level of public understanding, especially farmers, about the protection of SFAL is also due to the absence of regional regulations at the district-city level that in detail regulate agricultural land areas in each district. In addition, it is also unclear which areas and land areas are designated to be protected.

Education is a significant variable to the model with value of Exp (B) or the odds ratio of farmers’ education is 1.273. This means that for every additional level of farmer education, the probability of farmers’ willingness to continue farming rice will increase by 1.273 times. This result is different from the findings [37], which state that education does not affect farmers’ attitudes in maintaining agricultural land. Education, although brief, will increase awareness of controlling natural resources and the environment [38]. Meanwhile, people with higher education are very willing to pay for controlling environmental damage and pollution [39]. This means that the insight and knowledge factor of farmers is very important for sustainable management of natural resources. Therefore, socialization and counseling about it is very necessary in efforts to preserve agricultural land.

The value of Exp (B) or the odds ratio of distance is 1.655 with a positive coefficient value of 0.504, which means that the addition of one category of distance will increase the willingness to continue rice farming by 1.655 times. Agricultural land in Yogyakarta is relatively narrow and vulnerable to the conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural land and the risk of flooding is higher than drought because at the time of the study the rainfall was quite high, this affected the productivity of rice farming along with various irrigation flows. In addition, the location of the land close to irrigation sources have a higher risk of flooding than land locations far from irrigation sources. It is causes rice production far from irrigation sources to be higher than locations close to irrigation. Thus, the farm rice income in locations far from irrigation sources is higher than close irrigation sources. This fact is in line with the results of the analysis that farming income and the distance of irrigation sources both increase the chances of willingness to continue rice farming.

Farming income factor is significant with a value of Exp (B) or the odds ratio of farming income is 1,000 with a positive coefficient value of 0.001, which means that the addition of farming income will increase the probability of willingness to continue rice farming by 1,000 times. High farm income will motivate farmers to continue their rice farming activities. These results are consistent with the findings of Harini et al., which state that agricultural income affects farmers’ attitudes in maintaining agricultural land. Willingness and support for natural resource conservation, including coastal and water resource conservation, increases for those with higher incomes [40,41]. In line with the findings above, Gupta [42] has found that education, income, and age play an important role in asking the community for environmental sustainability.

Efforts to increase farmers’ incomes can be developed through a circular economy approach, for example, the development of agro-circle integrated farming between plants, livestock, fish, and the processing of food products, including waste that generates added value for increasing the income of agricultural communities [43]. An environmentally friendly method has proven to be effective in developing a sustainable economy because there is a reduction in agricultural waste due to the reuse of crop residues for animal husbandry or fisheries and vice versa livestock or fishery waste for crops. [44]. In addition, community economic activities can be developed in service and environmental aspects such as agro-tourism, environmental education, agro-education, culinary tourism, and handicrafts made from agricultural products. This model has evolved based on the concept of creative agriculture complex [45]. Through the organic connection of production, life, ecology, and agriculture, processing industry, and service industry, it generates a harmonic, co-prosperous, and sustainable development between man and nature [46].

The location factor is a dummy variable that has an Exp value (B) or an odds ratio of 11.012, which means that there is a difference in the chances of sustainable rice farming between rural and peri-urban areas. The probability of farmers continuing farming in rural areas is 11.012 times greater than in peri-urban areas. This result is in line with the findings [37], which states that in zone 3, namely rural areas, the attitude of farmers in maintaining agricultural land has the highest score compared to zone 2 (suburban) and zone 1 (urban). The effort to maintain agricultural land is getting further away from the center of economic and government activities [37]. Regeneration for jobs in the agricultural sector in zones 1 and 2 is very little or non-existent because on average the younger generation does not want to work in the agricultural sector. If some work in the agricultural sector, it is usually only as a side job and just helping their parents’ activities.

Credit availability is a significant dummy variable in influencing the willingness to continue farming. The significant credit effect on farmers’ willingness to continue their rice farming business is since capital is very important in farming activities. Therefore, the availability of credit for farmers will help capitalize their farming activities. Based on observations in the field, credit (capital loans) for farming activities will be paid by farmers after harvest or farmers get results from their rice farming activities. The value of Exp (B) or the odds ratio of credit availability is 3.501 and has a positive coefficient of 1.253, which means that the availability of credit for farming will increase the probability of farmers’ willingness to continue rice farming by 3.501 times compared to the unavailability of credit. Based on the results of interviews in the field, most of the loans or credits for rice farming activities were obtained by farmers from farmer groups, besides that farmers’ loans were obtained from the farmers’ own families or relatives.

Another thing to note is that sustainable food land use needs to be supported by the use of fertilization technology and seed technology so that better production is obtained [47]. In addition, the utilization and management of water resources for quality irrigation water is one of the important issues that need to be considered in increasing food crop production [48]. It is important to consider and anticipate social conflict in the natural resources utilization [49]. Finally, technical and economic feasibility studies are also important in maintaining agricultural food land for sustainable development [50].

6 Conclusions and recommendations

Overall, farmers’ knowledge of government regulations in the form of Law no. 41 of 2009 and Regional Regulation No. 10 of 2011 concerning the protection of SFAL in peri-urban areas is still very minimal, but farmers’ knowledge of sustainable food agriculture areas (green line) is quite understanding, or more than 64% of farmers know.

The willingness of farmers to preserve SFAL is positively influenced by education factors, distance to irrigation sources, farm income, location, and access to credit. This means that if there is an increase in education, the distance of irrigation sources, and farm income, it will increase the chances of farmers wanting to continue their farming. The opportunity for farmers’ desire to continue to run their farms in rural areas is greater than in peri-urban areas. Likewise, the opportunity for farmers who get access to credit will be greater than farmers who do not have access to credit, in terms of the desire to continue to run rice farming. This finding can be used as a basis for developing an agricultural business sustainability model in the aspect of preserving land resources.

Clear and detailed implementation guidelines are needed for sustainable food land protection legislation by establishing green belt areas, especially in rural areas as rice production centers, accompanied by incentives that encourage farmers to continue to run natural farming in the form of assistance in accessing credit, decent product prices, and input subsidies so that prosperity is guaranteed for the farmer. In addition, sources of income for the community can be developed based on the concept of circular economy and the concept of creative agriculture complex. However, the study is still limited to aspects of farmers’ willingness to conserve agricultural land. Therefore, future research needs to be developed comprehensively on the use of sustainable agricultural land based on a circular economy and creative agriculture complex.