Article Sidebar

Submitted
December 26, 2024
Accepted
August 20, 2025
Published
September 24, 2025
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 7 Download : 0

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

One of the key challenges faced by the peasant movement after occupying disputed land is optimizing its utilization to support sustainable livelihoods. This study investigates land utilization practices following the occupation of abandoned plantation concession in Nanggung District, Bogor Regency. Of the 37 occupied land blocks across three villages in the district, this study focuses on a single block located in Cisarua Village. Employing a mixed-method approach, quantitative data were collected through a census survey of 47 farming households managing land in the selected block, complemented by qualitative data from in-depth interviews and field observations. The findings reveal diverse land utilization orientations—ranging from commercial and subsistence farming to non-agricultural activities—and substantial variations in commodity production and farm income. This diversity is primarily shaped by two factors: (1) individual respondent characteristics, notably farming experience, and (2) household characteristics, particularly landholding size. These findings underscore the importance of improving post-occupation support systems to ensure that land reform leads to long-term socio-economic benefits for peasant households.

Keywords

Farming experience Landholding Land utilization Peasant movement

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Ai Siti Nur Assiyah, Mohamad Shohibuddin

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree with the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a  Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
  4. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
Assiyah, A. S. N., & Shohibuddin, M. (2025). Land Utilization After Land Occupation: A Case of Peasant Movement in Nanggung District, Bogor Regency, Indonesia. Jurnal AGRISEP: Kajian Masalah Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian Dan Agribisnis, 24(02), 887–906. https://doi.org/10.31186/jagrisep.24.02.887-906
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Adamopoulos, T., & Restuccia, D. (2019). Land Reform and Productivity: A Quantitative Analysis. Working Paper 25780. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research
  2. Anigbogu, T. U., Agbasi, O. E., Okoli, I. M. (2015). Socioeconomic Factors Influencing Agricultural Production Among Cooperative Farmers in Anambra State, Nigeria. International Journal of Academic Research in Economics And Management Sciences, 4(3), 40-53. doi: 10.6007/IJAREMS/v4-i3/1876
  3. Bernstein, H. (2010). Class Dynamics Of Agrarian Change. Colorado: Kumarian Press
  4. Borras, S. M. Jr. (2007). Pro-Poor Land Reform: A Critique. Ottawa: University Of Ottawa Press
  5. Bryceson, D. F. (2002). The Scramble in Africa: Reorienting Rural Livelihoods. World Development, 30(5), 725-739. doi: 10.1016/S0305-750X(02)00006-2
  6. Cousins, B. (2013). Smallholder Irrigation Schemes, Agrarian Reform And ‘Accumulation from Above and from Below’ In South Africa. Journal Of Agrarian Change, 13(1), 116-139. doi: 10.1111/joac.12000
  7. Deininger, K., & Feder, G. (2001). Land Institutions and Land Markets. Handbook Of Agricultural Economics, 1(1), 287–331. doi: 10.1016/S1574-0072(01)10009-5
  8. Fabusoro, E. (2009), Use of Collective Action For Land Accessibility Among Settled Fulani Agro-Pastoralists in Southwest Nigeria. Sustainability Science, 4(1), 199–213. doi: 10.1007/s11625-009-0082-4
  9. Franco, J. C. (2008). Making Land Rights Accessible: Social Movements and Political-Legal Innovation in the Rural Philippines. The Journal of Development Studies, 44(7), 991–1022. doi: 10.1080/00220380802150763
  10. Hall, R. (2011). Land Grabbing in Southern Africa: The Many Faces of the Investor Rush. Review Of African Political Economy, 38(128), 193–214. doi: 10.1080/03056244.2011.582753
  11. Hall, D., Hirsch, P. & Li, T. M. (2011). Powers Of Exclusion: Land Dilemmas In Southeast Asia. Singapore: NUS Press
  12. Hall, R., Scoones, I., & Tsikata, D. (2017). Plantations, Outgrowers and Commercial Farming In Africa: Agricultural Commercialisation and Implications for Agrarian Change. The Journal Of Peasant Studies, 44(3), 515-537. doi: 10.1080/03066150.2016.1263187
  13. Hapsari, H., et al. (2019). Karakteristik Petani dan Profil Usahatani Ubi Jalar di Kecamatan Arjasari, Kabupaten Bandung. Sosiohumaniora: Jurnal Ilmu-Ilmu Sosial Dan Humaniora, 21(3), 247–255. doi: 10.24198/sosiohumaniora.v21i3.21288
  14. Home, R. (2022). New Directions in Land Reform: An Editorial Overview. Land, 11(2), 160-173. doi: 10.3390/land11020160
  15. Konsorsium Pembaruan Agraria. (2024). Laporan Tahunan Agraria 2023 Konsorsium Pembaruan Agraria. Dekade Krisis Agraria: Warisan Nawacita Dan Masa Depan Reforma Agraria Pasca Perubahan Politik 2024. Jakarta: Konsorsium Pembaruan Agraria
  16. Jayne, T. S., Chamberlin, J., Headey, D. D. (2014). Land Pressures, The Evolution of Farming Systems, And Development Strategies in Africa: A Synthesis. Food Policy, 48(1), 1-17. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2014.05.014
  17. Li, T. M. (2010). Indigeneity, Capitalism, and the Management of Dispossession. Current Anthropology, 51(3), 385-414. doi: 10.1086/651942
  18. Maulana, I. R., & Shohibuddin, M. (2022). Zona Interaksi Politik Dan Respons Aktor Pemerintah: Kasus Perjuangan Agraria di Nanggung, Kabupaten Bogor. Politika: Jurnal Ilmu Politik, 13(1), 75–100. doi: 10.14710/politika.13.1.2022.75-100
  19. Maulana, I. R., & Shohibuddin, M. (2024). Pengaruh Gerakan Petani Terhadap Trajectory Perjuangan Reforma Agraria (Kasus Desa Cisarua, Kecamatan Nanggung, Kabupaten Bogor). Jurnal Sains Komunikasi Dan Pengembangan Masyarakat, 8(2), 49-61. doi: 10.29244/jskpm.v8i02.1504
  20. Mezmir, E.A. (2020). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Overview Of Data Reduction, Data Display and Interpretation. Research On Humanities and Social Sciences, 10(21), 15-27. doi: 10.7176/RHSS/10-21-02
  21. Moyo, S. (2011). Land Concentration And Accumulation After Redistributive Reform in Post-Settler Zimbabwe. Review Of African Political Economy, 38(128), 257–276. doi: 10.1080/03056244.2011.582763
  22. Moyo, S., & Yeros, P. (2005). Reclaiming The Land: The Resurgence Of Rural Movements In Africa, Asia, And Latin America. London: Zed Books
  23. Passel, S. V., Lauwers, L., & Huylenbroeck, G. V. (2006). Factors Oof Farm Performance: An Empirical Analysis of Structural and Managerial Characteristics. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Guido-Van-Huylenbroeck/publication/228904074_Factors_of_farm_performance_an_empirical_analysis_of_structural_and_managerial_characteristics/links/09e4150654a0ea13bf000000/Factors-of-farm-performance-an-empirical-analysis-of-structural-and-managerial-characteristics.pdf
  24. Restuccia, D. (2020). The Impact of Land Institutions and Misallocation on Agricultural Productivity. NBER (National Bureau Of Economic Research) Reporter, 1(3), 11-14. doi: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/234001/1/2020number1-3.pdf
  25. Ribot, J. C. & Peluso, N. L. (2003). A Theory of Access. Rural Sociology, 68(2): 153-181. doi: 10.1111/j.1549-0831.2003.tb00133.x
  26. Rigg, J. (2006). Land, Farming, Livelihoods, And Poverty: Rethinking The Links in The Rural South. World Development, 34(1), 180-202. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.07.015
  27. Scoones, I. (2009). Livelihoods Perspectives and Rural Development. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(1), 171–196. doi: 10.1080/03066150902820503
  28. Setiawan, T., et al. (2022). Reclaiming The Land: Conflict And Resistance in Contemporary Peasant Social Movement. International Journal Of Current Science Research and Review, 5(1): 4054-4061. doi: 10.47191/ijcsrr/V5-i10-31
  29. Shinta, A. (2011). Ilmu Usahatani. Malang: Universitas Brawijaya Press
  30. Shohibuddin, M. & Luthfi, A. N. (2010). Landreform Lokal A La Ngandagan: Inovasi Sistem Tenurial Adat di Sebuah Desa Jawa, 1947-1964. Yogyakarta: STPN Press
  31. Shohibuddin, M. (2010). Managing Land Re/Dis-Possession from Below: History of Biopolitics Countermovement In Two Javanese Rural Communities. Paramita: Historical Studies Journal, 24(2), 137-154. doi: 10.15294/par.v24i2.3119
  32. Shohibuddin, M. (2017). Redistribusi Tanah dalam Pertarungan Akses Dan Eksklusi in Martua Sirait. Inklusi, Eksklusi dan Perubahan Agraria: Redistribusi Tanah Kawasan Hutan di Indonesia. Yogyakarta: STPN Press
  33. Shohibuddin, M. (2020). Artikulasi Islam Nusantara dalam Perjuangan Agraria. Islam Nusantara: Journal for the Study of Islamic History and Culture, 1(1), 41–88. doi: 10.47776/islamnusantara.v1i1.21
  34. Shohibuddin, M. & Bahri, A. D. (2019). Perjuangan Keadilan Agraria: Inspirasi Gunawan Wiradi. Bogor: Insist Press, Sajogyo Institute, Bina Desa, Akatiga
  35. Sirait, M. (2017). Inklusi, Eksklusi Dan Perubahan Agraria: Redistribusi Tanah Kawasan Hutan di Indonesia. Yogyakarta: STPN Press
  36. Soekartawi. (2006). Analisis Usahatani. Jakarta: UI Press
  37. Supadi. (2008). Pengusahaan dan Kelembagaan Lahan Pertanian di Berbagai Agroekosistem (Kasus Desa-Desa Patanas). Jurnal Agrisep: Kajian Masalah Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian dan Agribisnis, 7(1), 19–40. doi: 10.31186/jagrisep.7.2.19-40
  38. Suratiyah, K. (2015). Ilmu Usaha Tani. Jakarta: Penebar Swadaya
  39. Susanto, N.H. (2015). Gerakan Sosial Petani Desa Banjaranyar dalam Memperjuangkan Lahan Pertanian. Jurnal Penelitian, 12(2): 295–314. Retrieved from http://ejournal.iainpekalongan.ac.id/
  40. Susilowati, S. H., & Maulana, M. (2012). Luas Lahan Usaha Tani Dan Kesejateraan Petani: Eksistensi Petani Gurem Dan Urgensi Kebijakan Reforma Agraria. Analisis Kebijakan Pertanian, 10(1): 17-30. Retrieved from https://epublikasi.pertanian.go.id/berkala/akp/article/view/1056
  41. Van, der Ploeg, J. D. (2018). The New Peasantries: Rural Development in Times of Globalization. Routledge: British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
  42. Wiradi, G. (2019). Metodologi Studi Agraria: Karya Terpilih Gunawan Wiradi. Bogor: Sajogyo Institute, Departemen Sains Komunikasi dan Pengembangan Masyarakat IPB dan Pusat Kajian Agraria IPB
  43. Wolford, W. (2010). This Land Is Ours Now: Social Mobilization and the Meanings of Land in Brazil. Durham, NC: Duke University Press