Analysis of Domestic Resources Cost Based on Farm Typology of Bali Cattle in Plampang Sumbawa Regency, West Nusa Tenggara

Sudirman Sudirman, B. Hartono, I. Subagiyo, B. A. Nugroho


The objectives of the study were to analyze the use of Domestic Resources Cost based on the most prevalent typology of Bali cattle farm and to analyze the economic efficiency based on the typology of Bali cattle farm in Plampang Sub-district Sumbawa Regency, West Nusa Tenggara (NTB). The study was carried out in Plampang Sub-district, Sumbawa Regency in 2017, with 53 respondents selected randomly and the key respondents were head of farms UPT, extension workers, inter-island traders, agricultural equipment traders, as well as agricultural materials and medicines traders. The respondents were acquired by applying systematic random sampling based on the farm typology with survey method and analyzed by the analysis of Domestic Resource Cost and analysis of Policy Analysis Matrix. There were three most prevalent farm typologies of Bali cattle production system used by the farmers in Plampang Sub-district, Sumbawa Regency, West Nusa Tenggara. The most prevalent production systems were: a typology of 6 months grazed (June-November) and 6 months confined (December-May) which was called with an acronym as 66 typology, typology of tethered throughout the year called as tethered typology, and typology of confined throughout the years called as confined typology. Bali cattle comparative advantage based on the farm typology as shown by Domestic Resource Cost Ratio (DRCR) values were 0.28 in 66 typology, 0.48 in tethered typology, and 0.31 in confined typology. It means that to save Rp. 100 is required the domestic factor cost Rp. 28 of 66 typology; Rp. 48 of tethered typology, and Rp. 31 of confined typology. Thus, it can be concluded that if domestic beef from Bali cattle is produced domestically, it will save the foreign exchange as much as 72% of 66 typology; 54% of tethered typology; and 69% of confined typology based on the import costs that must be spent. The competitive advantage is shown by the PCR values of 0.32 in 66 typology, 0.46 in tethered typology, and 0.35 in confined typology.


competitiveness; comparative advantage; competitive advantage; prevalence

Full Text:



Alves, C. E. S., L. C. Belarmino, & A. D. Padula. 2017. Feedstock diversification for biodiesel production in Brazil: using the policy analysis matrix (PAM) to evaluate the impact of the PNPB and the economic comparative advantage of alternative oilseeds. Energy Policy. 109: 297-309.

Chander, M., B. Subrahmanyeswari, R. Mukherjee, & S. Kumar. 2011. Organic livestock production: an emerging opportunity with new challenges for producers in tropical countries. Rev. Sci. Tech. 30: 969-83.

Colmena-Santos, A., E. Rosales-Asensio, D. Borge-Diez, & E. Collado-Fernandez. 2016. Evaluation of the cost of using power plant reject heat in low-temperature district heating and cooling networks. Appl. Energ. 162: 892-907.

Daioglou, V., E. Stehfest, B. Wicke, A. Faaij, & D.P. van Vuuren. 2015. Projections of the availability and cost of residues from agriculture and forestry. GCB Bioenerg. 8: 2.

de Souza, A. R. L., J. P. P. Revillion, P. D. Waquil, L. C. Belarmino, & B. A. Lanfranco. 2017. Economic and accounting evaluation of rice milled production chains in Rio Grande do Sul (Brazil) and Uruguay with application of the policy analysis matrix. Cienc. Rural. 47: 1-7.

Department of Animal Husbandry & Animal Health Sumbawa Regency. 2017. Data Visualization Animal Husbandry Sumbawa Regency 2016. Sumbawa NTB.

Dwi, R. A. & H. Nuhfil. 2010. Analysis of comparative advantage and competitive farming of Apples in the district ofAnalisis keunggulan komparatif dan kompetitif usahatani apel (Mulus sylvetris Mill) di Kecamatan Poncokusumo, Kabupaten Malang Regency. AGRISEgrise. 10: 62-76.

Elsedig, E. A. A., M. I. Mohd, & M. A. Fatimah. 2015. Assessing the comparative advantage and comparative advantage of broiler production in Johor using policy analysis matrix. Int. Food. Res. J. 22: 116-121.

Emelda, A., L. Asrul, & P. Mappigau. 2014. An analysis of comparative advantage and government policies impact on development of cocoa farming in Indonesia. Asian J. Agric. Rural Dev. 4: 30-35.

Guzek, D., D. Glabska, K. Gutkowska, J. Wierzbieki, A. Wozniak, & A. Wierzbicka. 2015. Influence of cut and thermal treatment on consumer perception of beef in polish trials. Pak. J. Agri. Sci. 52: 521-526.

Harmini, R.W., Asmarantaka, & J. Atmakusuma. 2011. Model dinamis sistem ketersediaan daging sapi nasional. Jurnal Ekonomi Pembangunan. 12: 128-146

Lestari, R. D., L. M. Baga, & R. Nurmalina. 2017. Daya saing usaha penggemukan sapi potong peternakan rakyat di kabupaten Bojonegoro, Jawa Timur. Buletin Peternakan. 41: 101-112.

Lowenstein, C., W. F. Waters, A. Roess, J. H. Leibler, & J. P. Graham. 2016. Animal husbandry practices and perceptions of zoonotic infectious disease risks among livestock keepers in a rural Parish of Quito, Ecuador. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 95: 1450-1458.

Luanmase, C. M., S. Nurtini, & F. T. Haryadi. 2011. Motivation analysis of cattle breeding for local farmers and transmigration and its effect on revenue in district Kairatu of West Seram Regency. Buletin Peternakan. 35: 113-123.

Muller, C. & R. D. Robertson. 2013. Projecting future crop productivity for global economic modelling. Agric. Econom. 45: 37-50.

Musnandar, E., R. A. Muthalib, D. Firmansyah, & E. Musnandar. 2010. Dampak kebijakan pemerintah terhadap daya saing dan efesiensi serta keunggulan kompetitif dan komparatif usaha ternak sapi rakyat di kawasan sentra produksi Propinsi Jambi. Jurnal Penelitian Universitas Jambi: Seri Humaniora. 12: 55-62.

Muthalib, R.A., D. Firmansyah, & E. Musnandar. 2010. Dampak kebijakan pemerintah terhadap daya saing dan efesiensi serta keunggulan kompetitif dan komparatif usaha ternak sapi rakyat di kawasan sentra produksi Propinsi Jambi. Jurnal Penelitian Universitas Jambi: Seri Humaniora. 12: 55-62.

Nalle, A. A., B. Hartono, B. A. Nugroho, & H. D. Utami. 2017. Domestic resources cost analysis of smale-scale beef cattle farming at upstream area of Benain-Noelmina Watershed, West Timur, East Nusa Tenggara. De Gruyter Open, Open Agriculture 2:417-424.

Pan, S-Y., M. A. Du, I-T. Huang, I-H. Liu, E-E. Chang, & P-C. Chiang. 2015. Strategies on implementation of waste-to-energy (WTE) supply chain for circular economy system: a review. J. Clean. Product. 108: 409-421.

Petroman, C., I. Petroman, M. Diana, S. Coman, A. Dumitrescu, C. Statie, & D. Avramescu. 2012. Quality management in ecological beef production. Internasional Journal for Quality Research. 6: 207-212.

Rouf, A. A., A. Daryanto, & A. Fariyanti. 2014. Daya saing usaha sapi potong di Indonesia: Pendekatan Domestic Resources Cost. Wartazoa 24: 97-107.

Sadri, A. M., S. V. Ukkusuri, S. Lee, R. Clawson, D. Aldrich, M.S. Nelson, J. Saipel, & D. Kelly. 2018. The role of social capital, personal networks, and emergency responders in post-disaster recovery and resilience:a study of rural communities in Indiana. Nat. Hazards.90: 1377-1406.

Stalgiene, A., A. Jedik, A-H. Viira, & A. Krievina. 2017. Market power in Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian dairy sectors: the case of raw milk market. Transform. Buss. Econom. 16: 89-105.

Suwiti, N. K., I. N. K. Besung, & G. N. Mahardika, F. Frandy, M. Hartono, & S. Suharyati. 2017. Factors influencing conception rate of the Bali cattle in the district of Pringsewugrowth hormones levels of Bali cattle in Bali, Nusa Penida, and Sumbawa Islands, Indonesia. Scientific Journal of Integrated Animal Husbandry Vet. World. 3: 239-244.

Tandi, I. 2010. Analisa ekonomi pemeliharaan ternak sapi Bali dengan sistem penggembalaan di Kecamatan Pattallassang Kabupaten Gowa Sulawesi Selatan. Jurnal Agrisistem. 6: 13-21.

Thornton, P. K. 2010. Livestock production: recent trends, future prospects. Philosophical Transactions B. 365: 2853-2867.

Toni, H., H. S. Teguh, Q. Nurul, & Oktarina. 2014. Management increasing comparative advantage of local beef for the forest fringe communities. J. Bus. Manag. (IOSR-JBM). 16: 40-43.

Wahyuni, R. 2015. The control structure of land resources and contributions receivable of the beef cattle, against farmers household income beef cattle business resources and land tenure: cattle business performance income farmers contribution. Widyariset. 18: 79-90.

Vavrina, J. & M. Basovnikova. 2015. Comparative advantage of family farms in the Czech Republic in the context of EU Common Agricultural Policy 2014+. Acra Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunesis. 63: 2171-2178.

Yani, A., B. Hartono, B. A. Nugroho, & H. Nugroho. 2017. The cost analysis of domestic resources of the Bali cattle business: the case study in Moyo watershed downstream Sumbawa Regency, West Nusa Tenggara. Asian J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. Environ. Sci. 19: 189-1998.

Yuzaria, D. & D. Suryadi. 2011. Analisis tingkat keuntungan, keunggulan kompetitif, keunggulan komparatif dan dampak kebijakan impor pada usaha peternakan sapi potong di Propinsi Jawa Barat. Jurnal Agripet. 11: 32-38.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2018 Tropical Animal Science Journal

Editorial Office

Tropical Animal Science Journal

Faculty of Animal Science Building, Bogor Agricultural University
Jln Agatis, Kampus IPB Darmaga, Bogor 16680, Indonesia
Phone/Fax.: +62-251-8421692
pISSN: 2615-787X  e-ISSN: 2615-790X
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.