Article Sidebar

Submitted
September 14, 2015
Accepted
September 14, 2015
Published
April 1, 2011
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 95 Download : 163

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

The course of peasant’s history in Indonesia was colored by superlocal power domination in the form of which vary from time to time depending on the political interest and economical regime of the ruling class. The agrarian politics which oriented betting on the strong had complex impact towards rural community that caused productivity of agricultural, forestry and economic growth. But  the agrarian politic capitalist that caused disparity of land of property, disparity of agrarian structure and peasant marginalization.  The capitalization of agrarian resouces was due to depesanitation  process systematically occurred over level system ( rule of laws and policy of regulation), level organization and caused the ruling government had failed to create the objective of institutional for prosperity at large and people’s welfare. The agrarian politics was failured to peasant empowerment economic aspects and conducive agrarian resources for sustainability development.

Keywords

Capitalization of agrarian resources political agrarian and depeasanitation proceses

Article Details

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
Hidayat, H. (2011). PERUBAHAN STRUKTUR AGRARIA DI HULU DAS CIDANAU KABUPATEN SERANG PROVINSI BANTEN. Jurnal AGRISEP: Kajian Masalah Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian Dan Agribisnis, 10(1), 97–115. https://doi.org/10.31186/jagrisep.10.1.97-115
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Abdullah, Irwan. 1999. ”Dari Bounded System ke Bordless Society: Krisis Metode Antropologi Dalam Memahami Masa Kini”, Antropologi Indonesia. No. 60 Tahun XXIII.
  2. Agger, Ben. 2003. Teori Sosial Kritis: Kritik, Penerapan dan Implikasinya. Yogyakarta: Kreasi Wacana.
  3. Brinkerhoff, Derick W, and Arthur A. Goldsmith. 1992. “Promoting the Sustainability of Development Institutions: A Framework for Strategy”, World Development, Vol. 20. Bryceson, Deborah;
  4. Cristóbal Kay, and Jos Mooij. 2000, Disappearing Peasantries? Rural Labour in Africa, Asia and Latin America, London: Intermediate Technology Publications.
  5. Eric Wolf. 1985. Petani: Suatu Tinjauan Antropologis. Jakarta CV Rajawali. Ellen, Roy, “Pengetahuan tentang Hutan, Transformasi Hutan: Ketidakpastian Politik, Sejarah Ekologi dan Renegosiasi Terhadap Alam di Seram Tengah,” dalam Tania Murray Li (peny.), 2002. Proses Transformasi Daerah Pedalaman di Indonesia. Jakarta: Yayasan Obor Indonesia.
  6. Escobar, Arturo. 1999. “After Nature: Steps to an Antiessentialist Political Ecology” in Current Anthropology Volume 40 Number 1 Februari.
  7. Geertz, Clifford. 1983. Involusi Pertanian. Jakarta: Bhratara. Hobsbawm, Eric. 1985, Age of Extremes: The Short Twentieth Century 1914-1991, London: Abacus Books, Little, Brown and Co. Kaplan David dan Albert A Manners. 1999. Teori Budaya. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar
  8. Kenneth Young & R Tanter. Politik Kelas Menengah Indonesia. Jakarta: LP3ES.
  9. Loekman Soetrisno. 1995. Menuju Masyarakat Partisipatif. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.
  10. Landsberger, Henry. 1984. Pergolakan Petani dan Perubahan Sosial. Jakarta: Rajawali Press
  11. Lubis, Akhyar. 2004. Metode Hermeneutika dan Penerapannya pada Ilmu Sosial, Budaya dan Humaniora. PPS UI, Jakarta.
  12. Lubis, Akhyar. 2004. Paradigma Baru dan Persoalan Metodologi Ilmu SosialHumaniora dan Budaya Pada Era Postmodern. Jakarta: PPS UI.
  13. Matew, Miles dan Michael, Hubermne. 1992. Analisis Data Kualitatif. Jakarta: UI Press.
  14. Nasikun, ”Reformasi, Jalan Berliku Menuju Transisi Demokrasi” dalam Mahfud, MD. 1999. Kritik Sosial Dalam Wacana Pembangunan. Yogyakarta: UII Press.
  15. Scott, James. 1989. Moral Ekonomi Petani: Pergolakan dan Subsistensi di Asia Tenggara. Jakarta: LP3ES.
  16. mith, T Lyn and Zopf, Paul. 1970. Principles of Inductive Rural Sociology, Philadelphia: Davis Company.
  17. Soetrisno, Loekman. 1995. Menuju Masyarakat Partisipatif. Yogyakarta: Kanisius. Weber, Max. 1968. Economy and Society on Outline of Interpretative Sociology. New York: Bedminster Press.