Agricultural Activities In Dungun Terengganu Sociology Essay
Disclaimer: This work has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional academic writers. You can view samples of our professional work here.
Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of UK Essays.
Published: Mon, 5 Dec 2016
This chapter provides the background of the study in particular will focus on social capital in relation to agricultural activities in Dungun Terengganu.
Agriculture play important role in economics of a country especially in developing country. This is because this field become large financial resource of national income (Ayob, 1994). Various policies were enacted to ensure intact permanent agriculture field as one of the national income main source. Among them were National Agriculture Policy, Policy Of Agricultural Development (Ayob, 1994) and Program “1 Azam” (. Government Transformation Programme: The Roadmap. 2010). All this policy drafted to ensure country earned food source that is sufficient (food security) in long time and can eradicate national poverty. This is because most poverty area was in agricultural area. Hence, the areas of agriculture are very important to the country in ensuring food continuity and economic development of the country.
Nevertheless, agriculture in Malaysia still was in weak level as this field not so adored by youth. Hence, government needs come out with alternative that is good and need promote the productivity so that it can enhance agricultural activity productivity. According to Liverpool-Tasie, Nail, & Ajibola,(2011), the improvement of agricultural productivity is very important to the government policy goal and development agency.
In line with nation’s modernization, areas of agriculture also experienced the revolution. Nomination method no longer limited to those having land, even people who has no land also can garden. It refers to innovation where change occurs within practices (Westendorp, & Biggs). Hydroponic and Fertigation System is innovation for agriculture system in Malaysia. It used to provide opportunity to farmers to increase their income revenue as this field often associated with poverty (Ayob, 1994).
There are various elements to ensure areas of agriculture success. There are trust, interaction, networking, knowledge sharing and cooperation. However, element that is most important of success in agricultural field is social capital. Social capital is public resources. It needs to be managed and being shared nicely through cooperation by group or people in long period to ensure sustainable social development (Yamaoka, 2007). However, if people fail for recognise the benefit of social capital, it will cause failure on something. Hence, social capital is very important to ensure innovation agricultural project can walk successfully.
This study looks into how the social capital fit in the context of agricultural activities.
1.1 Background of study
Modernity of a country not only base on the technology but it involves with innovation in agricultural field. In recent years, there are various types of new agriculture in the worldwide. These show that area of agriculture also experienced comparable revolution with others field. According to Heemskerk, & Wennink, (2004); D.Parthasarathy, & V.K.Chopde and Westendorp, & Biggs, they focus to agriculture innovation as it needed for stabilizing production and areas of agriculture productivity by can enhance community development.
There is various innovation that have been done in every country to stabilize sector agriculture such as implementation of small water reservoirs in Ghana by Kinderen, (2006), crop without using any poison in Indonesia by Westendorp, & Biggs, agricultural technologies for dryland, arid and semiarid
Areas by D.Parthasarathy, & V.K.Chopde in India and Soil Management Option in Southern Africa by Njuki, Mapila, Zingore, & Delve, (2008). All this agriculture innovation affects that positive impact on social capital. However, Malaysia also has the agriculture innovation and it had known as fertigation project.
Fertigation is soilless culture production system. Fertigation crop system can avoid crop from root disease infection soil-borne. Among type of crop that suitable to be used for crop fertigation is like red chilli, cucumber, melon, zucchini, brinjal, okra, capsicum and strawberry. Usually, the farmers will build greenhouse known as “Struktur Perlindung Tanaman” (STP) to protect crop from infection in leaves and fruit and ensure fertilizer concentration at level that correct. Apart from that, crop medium that commonly used in this system is coconut coir dust known as coconut powder or coco peat. It applies as able to absorb and stores fertilizers solution beside used by root as place to believe. Moreover, it cheap and easy to find in the market. This system also uses arranging device time to ensure every crop get fertilizers solution in time was prescribed. Frequency and period every drop depend on type of crop and crop age. (Sources: Teknologi Penanaman Secara Fertigation (MARDI)).
Organization from areas of agriculture now had opened the eye of farmers by introducing new crop system namely fertigation crop. It has become latest trend in agricultural field of Malaysia where all organization support using the fertigation crop. This crop promising returns back investment capital within short time if those use this method properly. There are various successes of the farmers by using this system fertigation (sources: By Cultivation Technology Fertigation (MARDI)).
In this research, the researcher focuses on how social capital can contribute to the success of fertigation project in Dungun Terengganu. The researcher want see the connection between social capital and the agriculture. According to Liverpool-Tasie, Kuku, & Ajibola, (2011), social network will affect nomination method (farming practices) by adaptation technological information or network. This indirectly will affect agricultural productivity as the farmers have acquired information that is useful to develop their crop system.
Apart from that, social capital can improve the agricultural technology. This is because social capital has ability for developed and it also can use various types of social network to create understanding between farming household and farming community (D.Parthasarathy, & V.K.Chopde).
Social capital in agriculture has given benefit on farmers and also nonfarmers. Social capital will increase awareness and appreciation to the stakeholder interests where it will increase trust and confident on action of community member. When social capital has existed, nonfarmers will support and respect on local agriculture while farmers will respect nonfarmers’s concerns and need. Hence, the establishment of social capital will contribute mutual respect among each other and they will share sense of community which will support individual interest and locality (Wilkinson (1991) cited in Sharp, & Smith).
According to Aleksiev, & Penov, (2006), social capital will make people change to be better because everyone have the opportunity to change position and can modify the network where they work.
Putman (1993) cited in BRUEGEL, (2006) tell difference between societies with social capital and societies with no social capital. He found that the high level of distrust shows the low level of social capital. People with low level of social capital have a tendency not to follow the rule. Hence, any punishment sentenced will take long time as offences committed heavy.
Apart from that, the researcher also focuses on two types of social capital such as bonding and bridging. According to Putnam cited in Yamaoka (2007), bonding social capital are also known as exclusive type where this group have members that is more-or-less and had equation between one same other in term of nature and internally oriented while bridging on the other hand known as inclusive type which include few groups in cross- sectoral and it externally oriented manner.
This aim of this study is to explore on how social capital can contribute to the success of fertigation project of Malaysia especially case of Dungun Terengganu. Malaysia has not yet has research on improvement of fertigation on social capital.
1.2 Problem Statement
Social capital is the main issue of this research. Social capital is one of the most crucial agricultural activities that are proven to offer advantages to not only for organization but also for individual in meeting certain objectives. The role of social capital for instance is indeed critical especially dealing with networking between the people. With regard to social capital, learning, communication and trust are among the significant attributes that can help to measure the successful fertigation project in Dungun Terengganu.
Fertigation project in Malaysia are growing the usage. However, there are some of the issues that are link in this project. The issue which occurred are trust, cooperation, interaction, networking and knowledge sharing. Nevertheless, all this problem can be overcame with social capital.
Trust is another thing which is highly associated with social capital. Trust will be influenced by a lot of factors which need to be explored by the researcher.
Besides trust, according to officer in Dungun Agriculture Office, they cannot measure the level cooperation between farmers and organization. It is because not all farmers involve in all activities carried out by organization.
Other than that, interaction also play very important role to expedite the social capital. Hence, the effective communication needs to use to make sure they understand the information and terms used in fertigation project. Note that effective interaction can influence social capital should they choose the right tools.
Networking play role that is important in ensuring continuity social capital in this study. The researcher will study factor which influenced networking in this project of fertigation.
Apart from that, the researcher also focuses to knowledge sharing to know as far as it influences social capital.
There are a lot of studies pertaining on the social capital. However, the researcher only focus on social capital and agriculture where there will be many research carried out showing that social capital can help agricultural project. For Heemskerk, & Wennink, (2004); D.Parthasarathy, & V.K.Chopde and Westendorp, & their Biggs focus on social capital and agriculture innovation while Yamaoka, (2007); Sharp, & Smith; Kinderen, (2006); Liu, & Besser,(2003) on the other hand focus on social capital and agricultural and rural development. Apart from that, Hong, & Sporleder on the other hand focus on social capital and agricultural cooperative and Liverpool-Tasie, Kuku, & Ajibola, (2011) on the other hand focus on social capital and agriculture productivity. However, projects carried out above not venture in the nature on fertigation project.
1.3 Research Question
With regard to the problems highlighted in problems statement, the following research questions were posed for this study:
How bonding contribute to successful of fertigation project
How bridging contribute to successful of fertigation project
1.4 Research Objective
In general, the main research objective is to examine the social capital for fertigation project in Dungun Terengganu. Besides that, this research also explore on the factors that influence social capital which include trust, cooperation, interaction, networking and knowledge sharing
Thus, the study is carrying out to achieve the following objective:
To examine the relationship of social capital towards successful fertigation project
1.5 Scope of the Study
The scope of this study is the organization that related to agriculture sector in Dungun Terengganu. There are the Department of Agriculture and Farmers’ Organization Authority of Malaysia and the farmers involved in Fertigation Project in Dungun. The selection is based on trust, cooperation, interaction, networking and knowledge sharing that are assumed to contribute towards social capital.
There are several limitations of this study. There are:
This research is made in Dungun district where it focuses on farmers in Dungun district. It only focus to one place only and it may be cannot represent actual situation.
The scope of this study is the fertigation project. This project was conducted in two organizations that have been selected by the researcher. The researcher only concern about this project on the area of Dungun, Terengganu only. If the same study implemented in another scope, the result may be different.
In this study, the researcher only focus on trust, cooperation, interaction, networking and knowledge sharing as the variables.
1.6 Significance of the Study
The importance of this study will see whether the trust, cooperation, interaction, networking and knowledge sharing to the stakeholder will gain the social capital in agricultural product development in Dungun Terengganu.
Social capital is critical to realize the development community in the social agriculture. This is because by having a good networking, it will create the positive impact to the society and also will increase capacity building in the area. In addition, it also will foster innovative community where they can understand the new knowledge and be involved with a new mission and decision.
The other significant of the study is to gather new knowledge on this area. It will give academicians and organizations new knowledge on social capital, how it can be done between the farmers and organization in an agriculture context. Besides that, it can serve as a platform for future research. The data obtained can be used for other researchers to study the social capital globally.
Besides that, the researcher also will come out with the theoretical contribution which can use by the others scholar particularly on social capital in agricultural activities.
Last significance of this study is to provide recommendations to improve the present situation. With that, the organizations can prevent, reduce and overcome some cases by taking appropriate prevention and action to solve the problems. It is to ensure that any problems that occur have the solution and make sure that the organization did not make the same mistake in the future.
1.7 Definition of Terms
Fertigation is soilless culture production system (Teknologi Penanaman Secara Fertigation (MARDI)).
For Cohen (2007), social capital is network of informal trust relationships that provide an essential social infrastructure for knowledge sharing and knowledge creation sparked by new combination of existing knowledge.
Besides that, according to Woolcook & Narayan, 2000 (cited in Kilpatrick & Falk, 2003) social capital is norms and networks that enable people to act correctly (pp. 501).
According to World Bank Cited in Liverpool-Tasie, Kuku, & Ajibola, (2011), “social capital refers to the institutions, relations and norms that shape the quality and quantity of a society’s interactionsâ€¦ Social Capital is not just the sum of the institutions which underpin a society-it is the glue that holds them together.”
1.7.3 Bonding social Capital
Bonding social capital describes the links between individuals or groups with similar goals within the network (Hong, G., & Sporleder)
1.7.4 Bridging Social Capital
Bridging social capital describes the capacity of individuals or groups to make links with others outside their organization, particularly across social networks (Hong, G., & Sporleder)
Measurement of social capital
Social capital has a variety of dimensions. While in many developing countries, it is often captured via some measure of membership in community based organizations, as well as engagement in the community (Okunmadewa et al. 2007; Balogun and Yusuf 2011a; Yusuf 2008), there are a number of other aspects of social capital that have been identified as important for a comprehensive understanding of the concept. Some aspects of social capital that have been identified in the literature as very important (Roslan et al. 2010a, 2010b; Balogun and Yusuf 2011) include:
1) Groups and networks, measured by
a) Membership in formal or informal organization or association.
b) Ability to get support from those, other than family members and relatives, in case of hardship.
d) Ability to learn from one’s network or group, particularly the impact on technology adoption.
e) Access to various markets (labor, input, or output) via the group.
2) Trust and solidarity, measured by
a) Perceptions about whether most people in the community can be trusted.
b) Perceptions about social support/help provided by group members for each other in times of hardship.
3) Collective action and cooperation, measured by
a) More than half of the community contributing time or money towards common development goals.
b) A high likelihood that people, in the community, cooperate to solve common problems.
4) Information and communication, measured by
a) Frequency of reading or listening to news sources such as radio, newspapers, and television.
5) Social cohesion and inclusion, measured by
a) Strong feeling of togetherness within the community.
b) Feeling safe from crime and violence when alone at home.
6) Empowerment and political action, measured by
a) Having control in making decisions that affect everyday activities
b) Political participation such as voting and being voted for in local elections
(Liverpool-Tasie, Kuku & Ajibola (2011))
To measure socialcapital, two indicators are utilized. The first item is a social network measure reflecting the extent to which residents interact with farmerss. The second socialcapital item represents trust, and is an attitudinal measure of resident trust or confidence in local farmerss. The network question asked respondents to indicate how often he or she saw or met a farmers during the course of a year, with response categories including never, a few times a year, once or a few times a month, and once a week or more (Sharp & Smith)
This paper uses an innovations systems framework to analyse the ways social capital in the overall agricultural and natural resources innovation system in Nepal has increased far beyond what was originally expected in the project proposal (Westendorp & Biggs)
In the previous chapter, the researcher provides the basic information of social capital. Under this chapter, it will explore more on the elements of social capital which relevance to the research.
This chapter describes the theoretical foundation for social capital in agricultural sector in Dungun Terengganu. In the section, the researcher gives an overview of the how social capital can contribute to the success of fertigation project in Dungun Terengganu. This section will culminate issue related to theoretical considerations to empirical study. The researcher will also present a conceptual framework. An outline of this chapter is given in the figure as below:
Figure 2.0: Outline of Chapter 2
2.1 Problems in Agriculture
Every project carried out doubtless has problem and the challenge. In this study, the researcher focus on problems which occurred in sector agriculture so that the researcher knows what problem that is real occurs within field of agriculture.
Heemskerk, & Wennink, (2004) discuss on group size. There is conflict on group size that should use in this areas of agriculture whether small size or big size. According To Pretty (2003), every agriculture project need membership within 20 and 50 persons but if membership less than 20, farmer can still functioning well. In this study, they discuss on advantages of small size group and big size group. Small size group will influence social capital with much better as fewer members beside it have been administered easily and particularly dynamic. However, large size will gain the huge experience as it involving many memberships. Hence, the group size become issue to many project agriculture in ensuring social capital happen.
Apart from that, difference parties doubled up problem in areas of agriculture (Enserink (2004) cited in Kinderen (2006)). According to this study, farmer with parties that have different tendency to resolve their own problem without discuss with responsible party. This is because they have their own perspective and they rather solve problems according to their own way. It also supported by Wilber (1981) cited in Kinderen (2006) where when this situation happened, farmer no longer want to solve problems but they prefer to live in imbalance and inequalities.
In addition, low skilled and low educational background doubled up problems for areas of agriculture (Ogunanya 2009; Ekunwe, Orewa and Emokaro 2008 cited in Liverpool-Tasie, Kuku & Ajibola 2011; Ayob (1994). These problems happen due to poverty which hit most farmers. This is because most impoverished area located in agricultural area. When farmer has no educational, it will give impact on agricultural productivity as they cannot accept new skill and has no knowledge to develop areas of agriculture.
Apart of that, low income in the agriculture as the farmers have low educational and low skilled. Hence, they had to make other jobs to accommodate their income (Fasoranti 2006; Okafor 2004; Adewuyi and Okunmadewa 2001; Yusuf et al. 2009; Peke 2008; Adewuyi 2006; Adejoh 2009 cited in Liverpool-Tasie, Kuku & Ajibola 2011).
Problems in this agriculture have encouraged innovation in agriculture to help farmers and in Malaysia, fertigation project is agricultural innovation and it also establishes to help farmers in country.
2.2 Social Capital
Social capital is defining an asset. It will give the benefit such as productive on process more efficient, effective, innovative, and developed. Social capital did not exist in one person, however it inhering relationship between one and other individual and with socioeconomic institutions where the individual operate (Coleman 1988 cited in Liverpool-Tasie, Kuku & Ajibola, 2011).
The study of social capital have been intrigued various scholar. Social capital is a set process by which individuals will be built and developed the relationship with other people to provide goods or services (Keyes, 2006). At this time, people will identify their strengths in their working relationship and had been feeling the benefits resulting from effective team. Social capital cannot be seen by the naked eye, but it certainly exists in the real world and its existence can be felt by the interaction. According to Woolcock (1999) cited in Boström (2002), social capital can be found at club, association and societies and communities where people can meet and work together.
According to Huotari & livonen, social capital associated with the actor in a relationship. If the actor in a relationship trusts each other, it does not only increase the social capital but also can create the knowledge for innovation. This also supported Ji et al (2010) that social capital has relationship with trust and had the connection in empirical study.
Before going with more much further, we need to know how social capital can happen. According to Morrice (2207), everyone has owned different amount of social capital. Only they uncertain whether it many or a little. However, when something has occurred and it involves people interest, they will be united and will develop bond among them. When they already united, this bond will become double- edge. All problems faced would be resolved jointly. It will be giving advantages to group because network has become stronger.
Interaction and learning is between one of the element in social capital (Maskell (2000) cited in Chou (2006)). It can exist in society with the existence of process of interaction and learning. This is because people interact with colleague compared to own family and also friends. Hence, social capital will emerge at workplaces and it will help cooperation in job.
Social capital will note happen if individuals only used a little ability or note use it direct for society interest (Díaz Andrade & Urquhart, 2009). According to them, social capital provides structure to understand configuration and intensity of interaction between individuals in network. Apart from that, social capital can make innovation. According to Westendorp & Biggs, it not only changing productivity agriculture and reduce cost but it also enhance institutional linkage and social capital development.
Besides that, storytelling will reinforces further social capital between people because it would be firmed further norm and trust people on organization (Hope Cheong, 2006).
Networks have four characteristic such as pluriformity, interdependency, closedness and dynamic (de Bruijn and heuvelhof, 2000 cited in Kinderen, 2006). According to them, pluriformity is variety in the network. This is because everyone have characteristic, knowledge, power, financial resources and own objective. When people do something policy that new, pluriformity need to establish because there will have conflict in the network. This is because people have various characteristic and they will act based on their characteristic. In this study, there is part of society in Africa agreeing with implementation of small reservations and some of them do not want to take part. Closedness of the network is a characteristics that is easily been recognised in the societies. In African villages, often rivalry between different ethnic groups exists and kinship is a crucial factor of being part of the group or not. ‘The closedness of an organisation (read: village/community) is the result of its frame of reference which is formed by core values deeply rooted in the organisation and which determine its action to a large degree. Organisations are usually sensitive to interventions that fit their own frame of reference’ (de Bruijn and Heuvelhof, 2000: 27). So being able to determine that frame of reference will, partly, determine the successfulness of the intervention. Apart from that, interdependency exists within group or society between actors. It depends on the amount of connection in group. When it have strong bonding, network will become interdependency. However, it difficult for predict. Hence, actors need to be careful so that no one takes advantage towards them. Last network is dynamic. Dynamic of network have the large power. It can affect the people in the network. This is because network that is dynamic will inconvenience inteference from outside. Apart from that, Maertens (2010) cited in Liverpool-Tasie, Kuku & Ajibola (2011) said that dynamic network will affect people to engage in new activity as their network strong.
Figure 2.2: Modelling a Theory of Social Capital (Lin, 1999) (pp.41)
Based on from this model, it has three blocks variable namely a blocks represent pre- conditional and precursors of social capital – factor in social structure and every position individual in social structure which can constrains or facilitate social capital. Second block representing social capital element and last block representing return probability for social capital. In first block to second, it explained on formation of inequality of social capital namely what structural element which will affect the opportunities for construct and maintain social capital. In second block on the other hand, it explained on two element of social capital namely access to social capital and use of social capital. Both elements explain process of social capital mobilization. Third Block also explained on three ingredients has inter- connected namely better accessible embedded resources, better embedded resources that could be utilised by individual. In process second block (social capital) until third block (outcome), it represents the process which social capital produce returns. It explains on what we get outcome from social capital.
2.3 Important of Social Capital
According to Grooteart, 2004 cited in Kinderen, 2006, social capital can expect certain aspect in society such as crime, health, poverty and unemployment. It can leverage on the efficiency of production, happiness, life satisfaction and wellbeing of the community (Helliwell and Putnam, 2004 cited in Kinderen, 2006). Apart from that, social capital now also is looked as important asset that is equivalent with natural, physical capital, finance, human, and political capital (Dll Meinzen-Dick, 2004 cited in Kinderen, 2006).
Social capital afford consolidate democracy in society and it can enhance efficiency towards work (Safr and Sediackova, 2006 cited in POSPÄšCH & SPÄšÅ NÁ (2011). When networking in strong society, all activity carried out will happen nicely because the existence of bonding in community.
Apart from that, social capital also influenced the sustainable livelihood (Pretty, 2003). This is because it got involved with social bond where actor which have high social bond will success in activity carried out and it will also influence living stability.
At the same time, social capital also gave impact on knowledge sharing. Knowledge sharing is one element in social capital. According To Putnam (1993) cited in D.Parthasarathy, & V.K.Chopde, uniqueness social capital rests with willingness of people to share. All activity carried out will succeed because people know what they need to do by can increase knowledge.
Social capital has a few key features. First feature was social capital can accumulate stock where it will give various benefits. According to Westendorp & Biggs, social capital comprises more than a social organisation or social capital values. Social can improve output with improve productivity activity.
Apart from that, social capital could reduce cost if work together. People will be having confidence to invest in collective activities (Pretty, 2003). Pretty and Ward 2001; Pretty, 2002 cited in Pretty, 2003 stress four aspects that can be ensured in social capital. Among them was the relationship of trust, reciprocity and exchanges, common rules, norms and sanction and connectedness, network and group.
2.4 Impact of Social Capital to Agriculture
According to Bourdieu (1983) cited in Wolz, Fritzsch, & Reinsberg (2004), people can change social capital to other types of capital like physical capital when obtain social capital through purposeful action. However, it takes a long time to see the result of investment on social capital.
Social capital also able generates profit in economic (POSPÄšCH & SPÄšÅ NÁ, 2011). This is because actors have various networks of personal ties. When actor has many networks, it can help them market their productivity agriculture.
Apart from that, social capital also produced innovation on agriculture. According to Westendorp & Biggs, the natural resources innovation system in Nepal increased and it exceeded over their expectation.
In the development of agriculture sector and urban and rural area, social capital perceived as readiness and capacity to work together. In this study, it covers case such as watersheds, irrigation management, and integrated pest management strategies. This concept has become solution of problems faced by modern society, socioeconomic and political development. (D.Parthasarathy, & V.K.Chopde).
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below: