Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T22:19:01.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variation in Indonesian cocoa farm productivity in relation to management, environmental and edaphic factors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 November 2020

A. J. Daymond Open the ORCID record for A. J. Daymond [Opens in a new window] ,
A. Prawoto ,
S. Abdoellah ,
A.W. Susilo ,
N. C. Cryer ,
F. Lahive  and
P. Hadley
A. J. Daymond*
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, The University of Reading, Whiteknights, ReadingRG6 6AR, UK
A. Prawoto
Affiliation:
Indonesian Coffee and Cocoa Research Institute, Jl. PB Sudirman 90, Jember68118, East Java, Indonesia
S. Abdoellah
Affiliation:
Indonesian Coffee and Cocoa Research Institute, Jl. PB Sudirman 90, Jember68118, East Java, Indonesia
A.W. Susilo
Affiliation:
Indonesian Coffee and Cocoa Research Institute, Jl. PB Sudirman 90, Jember68118, East Java, Indonesia
N. C. Cryer
Affiliation:
Mondelez International, Research, Development and Quality, Chocolate GCT, Linden 4, Bourneville Lane, BirminghamB30 2LU, UK
F. Lahive
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, The University of Reading, Whiteknights, ReadingRG6 6AR, UK
P. Hadley
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, The University of Reading, Whiteknights, ReadingRG6 6AR, UK
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A survey was conducted of Indonesian cocoa farms to assess the extent of yield variation and factors associated with this variation. The survey of 120 farms during the course of 3 years encompassed four provinces in Sulawesi (South, South-East, West and Central), Western Sumatra, Lampung, East Java and West Papua. A high degree of yield variation was observed between farms, the average over 3 years ranged from 39 to 3586 kg ha−1. Overall, yields were greater on farms that were classified as ‘highly managed’, compared to ‘moderately’ and ‘less managed’. Seasonal variability in yields was generally greater in districts with a more pronounced dry season such as South Sulawesi and Lampung. Multiple regression analyses revealed particular husbandry practices that were linked with higher cocoa yields. Specifically, the use of inorganic fertilisers, application of fungicides against blackpod and weeding were all practices that were associated with higher yields. A positive association between rainfall and yield was observed for the years 2014/15 and 2015/16 but not 2016/17, which was a La Niña year (when rainfall totals were higher). Some of the farms surveyed were planted with cocoa at very low densities implying an opportunity for yield improvement through gap filling or replanting at higher densities (although it was noted that some farmers maintained lower planting densities due to the cultivation of companion crops). Given the smallholder status of most cocoa farms in Indonesia (mean area in this study was 0.71 ha) it is important that farmers are able to maximise returns from their land in order to maintain a livelihood. This study illustrated the potential for yield improvement on Indonesian cocoa farms through adoption of best agronomic practice.

Keywords

CocoaIndonesiaYield
Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 56 , Issue 5 , October 2020 , pp. 738 - 751
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Belsky, J.M. and Siebert, S.F. (2003). Cultivating cacao: Implications of sun-grown cacao on local food security and environmental sustainability. Agriculture and Human Values 20, 277–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clough, Y., Putra, D.D., Pitopang, R. and Tscharntke, T. (2009). Local and landscape factors determine functional bird diversity in Indonesian cacao agroforestry. Biological Conservation 142, 1032–1041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daniel, R., Konam, J.K., Saul-Maora, J.Y., Kamuso, A., Namaliu, Y., Vano, J.T., Wanani, R., N’nelau, P., Palimrungi, R. and Guest, D.I. (2011). Knowledge through participation: The triumphs and challenges of transferring Integrated Pest and Disease Management (IPDM) technology to cocoa farmers in Papua New Guinea. Food Security 3, 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinarti, D., Susilo, A.W., Meinhardt, L.W., Kun, J.I., Motilal, L.A., Mischke, S. and Zhang, D. (2015). Genetic diversity and parentage in farmer selections of cacao from Southern Sulawesi, Indonesia revealed by microsatellite markers. Breeding Science 65, 438–446.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Draper, N.R. and Smith, H. (1998). Applied Regression Analysis, 3rd Edn. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.Google Scholar
ICCO (2019). Production of Cocoa Beans. Available at www.icco.org (accessed 1 September 2019).Google Scholar
Juhrbandt, J., Duwe, T., Barkmann, J., Gerold, G. and Marggraf, R. (2010). Structure and management of cocoa agroforestry systems in Central Sulawesi across an intensification gradient. In Tscharntke, T., Leuschner, C., Veldkamp, E., Faust, H., Guhardja, E. and Bidi, A. (eds), Tropical Rainforests and Agroforests under Global Change: Ecological and Socio-economic Valuations. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, pp. 115–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMahon, P., Bin Purung, H., Lambert, S., Mulia, S., Nurlaila, S.A.W., Sulistyowati, E., Sukamto, S., Israel, M., Saftar, A., Amir, A., Purwantara, A., Iswanto, A., Guest, D. and Keane, P. (2015). Testing local selections in three provinces in Sulawesi: (i) Productivity and resistance to cocoa pod borer and Phytophthora pod rot (black pod). Crop Protection 70, 28–39.Google Scholar
McMahon, P. and Purwantara, A. (2016). Vascular streak dieback (Ceratobasidium theobromae): History and biology. In Bailey, B.A. and Meinhardt, L.W. (eds), Cacao Diseases: A History of Old Enemies and New Encounters. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 307–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moser, G., Leuschner, C., Hertel, D., Holscher, D., Kolher, M., Leitner, D., Michalzik, B., Prihastanti, E., Tjitrosemito, S. and Schwendenmann, L. (2010). Response of cocoa trees (Theobroma cacao) to a 13-month desiccation period in Sulawesi, Indonesia. Agroforestry Systems 79, 171–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulia, S., McMahon, P.J., Purwantaeas, A., Bin Purung, H., Djufry, F., Lambert, S., Keane, P.J. and Guest, D.I. (2019). Effect of organic and inorganic amendments on productivity of cocoa on marginal soil in Sulawesi, Indonesia. Experimental Agriculture 55, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, R. (1964). Studies of fruit development of cacao (Theobroma cacao) in relation to cherelle wilt. I. Development of the pericarp. Annals of Botany 28, 619–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panlibuton, H. and Meyer, M. (2004). Value chain assessment: Indonesia cocoa. Accelerated microenterprise advancement project (AMAP) microREPORT No. 2 (June). Prepared by Action for Enterprise and ACDI/VOCA for USAID, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Prawoto, A.A. (2015). Improving cocoa yield and suppress pod rot disease through thinning and pruning modifications. In Roseli ANM et al. (eds), International Conference on Plant Physiology, 26–28 August 2014, Bali, Indonesia: Malaysian Society of Plant Physiology, pp. 280–287.Google Scholar
Ruf, F. and Yoddang, J. (2001). Cocoa farmers from boom to bust. In Gerard, F. and Ruf, F. (eds), Agriculture in Crisis: People, Commodities and Natural Resources in Indonesia, 1996–2000. Richmond: Curzon Press, pp. 97–156.Google Scholar
Ruf, F., Yoddang, J. and Ardhy, W. (1995). The spectacular efficiency of cocoa smallholders in Sulawesi: Why? Until when? In Ruf, F. and Siswoputranto, P.S. (eds), Cocoa Cycles: The Economics of Cocoa Supply. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing Limited, pp. 339–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sefriadi, H., Villano, R., Fleming, E. and Patrick, I. (2013). Production constraints and their causes in the cacao industry in West Sumatra: From the farmers’ perspective. International Journal of Agricultural Management 3, 30–42.Google Scholar
Snoeck, D., Koko, L., Joffre, J., Bastide, P. and Jagoret, P. (2016). Cacao and nutrition. In Lichtfouse, E. (ed), Sustainable Agriculture Reviews. New York: Springer. pp. 155–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Syamsinar, R.M., Rukmana, D., Nursini, and Amal, (2014). Reinvestment acceptance behaviour of cocoa farming (case study of cacao farmer in Luwu Regency). International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research 3, 339–343.Google Scholar
Walkley, A. and Black, I.A. (1934). An examination of the Degtajareff method for soil organic matter determination and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration. Soil Science 37, 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witjaksono, J. and Asmin, . (2016). Cocoa farming system in Indonesia and its sustainability under climate change. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries 5, 170–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar