Tingkat Dukungan Domestik untuk Sektor Pertanian Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21082/akp.v14i1.73-82Keywords:
domestic support, PSE, agriculture, Indonesia, dukungan domestik, pertanianAbstract
There is common perception that domestic support to agriculture in Indonesia is relatively small. Therefore, the level, composition, and trend of support to agriculture require an in-depth analysis. Some types of commonly used indicators on support to agriculture are Producer Support Estimate (PSE), Total Support Estimate (TSE), and General Services Support Estimate (GSSE). These indicators are analyzed for Indonesian agriculture covering the period of 1995−2014, and consist of 15 commodities. The PSE estimate indicates an increasing trend from 3.9% in 1995−1997 to 20.6% in 2012−2014. In 2012−2014 the PSE of Indonesian agriculture was slightly higher than that of China (19.2%) but larger compared to that of OECD average (17.9%). The TSE estimate (% to GDP) significantly increased from 0.8% in 1995−1997 to 3.6% in 2012−2014. In 2012−2014 the TSE of agriculture in Indonesia was the largest. Agricultural support in term of market price support has caused an increased price at the consumer level which ultimately reduces food nutrition intake. In the long run, more effective policy is to promote agricultural production and productivity through innovation, investment on infrastructures, and easing private sector investment. The largest part of government budget is spent on fertilizer subsidy which proportionately benefits large-scale farmers and fertilizer industry. More efficient scheme is to convert this subsidy into direct payment targeted to small-scale farmers.
Abstrak
Selama ini ada anggapan umum bahwa dukungan domestik (domestic supports) terhadap sektor pertanian Indonesia masih relatif rendah. Sehubungan itu, besaran dan komposisi dukungan serta bagaimana perubahannya antarwaktu, perlu dianalisis dengan seksama. Beberapa indikator yang biasa digunakan untuk mengukur tingkat dukungan tersebut adalah Producer Support Estimate (PSE), Total Support Estimate (TSE), dan (General Services Support Estimate (GSSE). Berbagai indikator tersebut telah dianalisis untuk sektor pertanian Indonesia meliputi periode tahun 1995−2014 dan mencakup 15 komoditas. Nilai PSE menunjukkan tren peningkatan dari 3,9% tahun 1995−1997 menjadi 20,6% tahun 2012−2014. Pada tahun 2012−2014 nilai PSE sektor pertanian Indonesia sedikit lebih tinggi dari Tiongkok (19,2%), namun lebih tinggi dari negara-negara OECD (17,9%). Nilai TSE sektor pertanian Indonesia (% terhadap PDB) meningkat secara signifikan dari 0,8% tahun 1995−1997 menjadi 3,6% tahun 2012−2014. Pada tahun 2012−2014 nilai TSE Indonesia adalah yang tertinggi. Hasil analisis ini menolak anggapan umum bahwa perhatian pemerintah terhadap sektor pertanian relatif kurang. Dukungan terhadap sektor pertanian dalam bentuk perlindungan harga akan berdampak pada peningkatan harga pangan di tingkat konsumen yang pada akhirnya menurunkan asupan gizi masyarakat. Dalam jangka panjang, prioritas kebijakan yang lebih efektif adalah peningkatan produksi dan produktivitas melalui sistem inovasi, pembangunan infrastruktur, dan mempermudah investasi swasta. Sebagian besar transfer anggaran pemerintah untuk sektor pertanian adalah subsidi pupuk yang secara kumulatif lebih banyak dinikmati oleh para petani luas dan produsen pupuk. Skema yang lebih efisien adalah mengonversi subsidi tersebut ke dalam sistem transfer pendapatan dan dibatasi hanya untuk petani kecil.
Downloads
References
Anderson K, editor. 2009. Distortion to agricultural incentives: a global perspective, 1955–2007. Washington, DC (US): The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank.
Anderson K. 2010. Policy reforms affecting agricultural incentives: much achieved, much still needed. World Bank Res Obser. 25(1):21-55.
Anderson K, Nelgen S. 2013. Updated national and global estimates of distortions to agricultural incentives, 1955 to 2011. Data spreadsheet [Internet]. Washington, DC (US): The World Bank; [cited 2016 Jan 25]. Available from: http://www.worldbank.org/agdistortions.
[APO] Asian Productivity Organization. 2013. Agricultural policies in selected APO member countries: an overview through transfer analysis. Tokyo (JP): Asian Productivity Organization (APO).
Ball VE, Fanfani R, Gutierrez L, editors. 2010. The economic impact of support to agriculture: an international perspective. Vol. 7, Studies in productivity and efficiency. New York (US): Springer.
Fane G, Warr P. 2007. Distortions to agricultural incentives in Indonesia. Agricultural Distortions Working Paper No. 24. Washington, DC (US): The World Bank.
Gale F. 2013. Growth and evolution in China’s agricultural support policies. Economic Research Report No. 153. Washington, DC (US): US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
[OECD] Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2010. OECD’S producer support estimate and related indicators of agricultural support: concepts, calculations, interpretation and use (The PSE manual). Paris (FR): Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
[OECD] Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2012. OECD review of agricultural policies: Indonesia. Paris (FR): OECD Publishing. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/ 9789264179011-en.
[OECD] Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2015a. Agricultural policy monitoring and evaluation 2015. Paris (FR): OECD Publishing. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1787/agr_pol-2015-en.
[OECD] Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2015b, Producer and Consumer Support Estimates. OECD agriculture statistics (database). Available from: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1787/agr-pcse-data-en.
[OECD] Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2016. Agricultural Policies at Glance. Background note of the OECD Meeting of Agriculture Ministers. Paris (FR): Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Orden D, Cheng F, Nguyen H, Grote U, Thomas M, Mullen K, Sun D. 2007. Agricultural producer support estimates for developing countries: measurement issues and evidence from India, Indonesia, China, and Vietnam. Research Report No. 152. Washington, DC (US): International Food Policy Research Institute.
