No abstract

The seed farming is a promising business that can be a solution to increase farmers’ income. However, limited capital, narrow land, and limited human resources and technology often become obstacles for farmers, especially small farmers, in running their business. Partnership patterns between rice seed farmers and partner companies can be a solution to overcome these problems. This study aims to determine the effect of partnerships on the level of profitability and farmer income. The research was conducted in Subang Regency, Indonesia. Samples were taken as many as 50 rice seed farmers. The analysis carried out includes cost analysis, income and profitability analysis. The results showed that rice seed farmers who have partners are more profitable than farmers who are not partners. This can be seen from the value of the R/C ratio in the farms of partner farmers, which is greater than that of non-partner farmers. Partner farmers have an R/C value of 1,3 while non-partner farmers have an R/C value of 1,14. When viewed from an income perspective, the income of partner farmers is higher than that of non-partner farmers. The income of the partner farmers is IDR 8.803.095, - while the non-partner farmers’ income is Rp. 4.154.691, -.

In 2020, Covid-19 pandemic firstly hit many countries including Indonesia. Since then, the methods on disseminating the agricultural technology have evolved accordingly. This paper assessed nine series of virtual and on-site technical trainings (or the so-called Bimtek in this paper) carried out from February to November 2020 in nine sub-districts from five provinces. Zoom application was used to deliver the materials during virtual Bimtek. Whilst, on-site training applied such methods: meeting in the classroom and field visit to practice the technology. The participants were diverse, among others: farmers and millennial farmers, extension officers, lecturers, college students and community (551 in total). The nature of participants depended on the type of Bimtek. Results showed that both Bimtek had the range of value between 70-85% in term of materials to meet the needs, materials to be applied, motivation and technical assistance from resource person. However, the percentage of knowledge change in virtual was higher than that in on-site Bimtek. Initial assessment showed that participants had good knowledge in remembering the technology, even some had also applied the technology in their farming practice. Thus, both Bimtek could improve farmers’ knowledge, from which the intention to change the farming practice could be persuaded.