Main Article Content

Abstract

Buffalo Moa is Indonesia's local livestock which is potentially maintained by the community on Moa Island as a source of family income and nutrition. This study aims to examine the marketing system, selling prices and factors that influence the price of buffalo at the farmer level. The results of the study found that the maintenance system was still traditionally carried out with two systems, namely semi-intensive during the rainy season and extensive during the dry season. The main motivation for raising livestock as a source of income, others as a means of payment for customary sanctions, family and religious events, marriage dowries. Buffalo cattle are marketed in the form of live animals and use intermediary traders. Weak market information so traders are more dominant in selling prices. Determination of the value of buffalo as a medium of exchange based on horn length and sex, the value of buffalo to be traded based on its performance, not defective, male sex at a higher price and the age range of 5–10 years, normal skin (not albino) is preferred Factors that influence the selling price at the breeder level are buffalo age, gender, skin color and climate.

Keywords

Bufallo Moa Marketing Price

Article Details

How to Cite
Tatipikalawan, J. M., Haryadi, F. T., Sulastri, E., & Widi, T. (2022). Marketing of Moa buffalo at farm level in Maluku Province, Indonesia. Jurnal Sain Peternakan Indonesia, 17(3), 175–181. https://doi.org/10.31186/jspi.id.17.3.175-181

References

  1. Bijman J., G. Ton and G. Meijerink. 2007. Empowering Small holder Farmers in Markets: National and International Policy Initiatives. WUR: Wageningen.
  2. [BPS] Badan Pusat Statistik 2022 Southwest Maluku Regency in Figures. BPS. Maluku.
  3. Chinchilla V., J.M.J. Woodward-Greene , C. Van-Tassell , C.W. Masiga and M. F. Rothschild. 2018. Predicting live weight of rural African goats using body measurements. Livestock Research for Rural Development. Volume 30, Article #123. Retrieved Juli 27, 2022, from http://www.lrrd.org/ lrrd30/7/ josue 30123.html.
  4. Dorward, A., J. Kydd, J. Morrison and C. Poulton. 2005. Institutions, markets and economic development: Linking development policy to theory and praxis. Development and Change, 361: 1–25
  5. Gujarati, D. N. 1978. Basic Econometrics. Mc Grow Hill, Singapura.
  6. Guntoro B., Rochijan, B.P. Widyobroto, Indratiningsih, N. Umami, S. Nurtini and A. Pertiwiningrum. 2015. Constraints of Value Chain in Dairy Industry in Central Java. Prociding The 6th International Seminar on Tropical Animal Production Integrated Approach in Developing Sustainable Tropical Animal Production October 20-22, 2015, Yogyakarta, Indonesia : 619-623.
  7. Kebede, D. 2016. Impact of climate change on livestock productive and reproductive performance. Livestock Research for Rural Development. Volume 28, Article #227.Retrieved Mei 28, 2022, from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd28/12/ kebe28227. htm.
  8. Kydd, J. and A. Dorward. 2004. Implications of market and coordination failures for rural development in least developed countries. Journal of International Development, Vol 16: 951–970.
  9. Luqman, M., M.Yaseen, S.A. Ashraf S, M.U. Mehmod, M. Karim. 2019. Factors Influencing Use of Information and Communication Technologies among Farmers in Rural Punjab, Pakistan. Journal of Agricultural Extension.Vol 23 (2):101-112.
  10. Muhakka., Riswandi, and M.A. Indra. 2013. Morphological characteristics and reproduction of buffalo in the Province of South Sumatra. Jurnal Sain Peternakan Indonesia Vol. 8 (2):111-120.
  11. Olabimisi, A.D., I.O. Ajuwon, O.I. Sulaimon, A.A. Awolola and A.M. Taiwo. 2019. Journal of Sustainable Development Vol. 17, Nos. 1 & 2 September, 2019 (Special Edition): 55-62.
  12. Pipiana J, E., I.G.S. Baliatri, and Budisatria. 2010. Kinerja kerbau betina di pulau moa, maluku. Buletin Peternakan Vol. 34(1):47-54.
  13. Salau, E. S., N.D. Saingbe and M.N. Garba. 2013. Agricultural Information Needs of Small Holder Farmers in Central Agricultural Zone of Nasarawa State. Journal of Agricultural Extension (JAE). Volume.17 (2):113-121.
  14. Sari E M. , M.A.N. Mohd and Sulaiman. 2015. Study on the technical aspect management of local buffalo in Gayo Lues District. 2015 Agripet : Vol 15 (1): 57-60.
  15. Singh J., O. Erenstei, W. Thorpe and A. Varma. 2007. Crop–livestock interactions and livelihoods in the Gangetic Plains of Uttar Pradesh, India. Crop–livestock interactions scoping study - Report 2. Research Report 11. ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute), Nairobi, Kenya. 88 pp.
  16. Smith, E. 2022. The Role Of Livestock Marketing In Improving The Livelihoods Of Pastoralists. International. Journal of Livestock Policy. Vol.1 (1): 63-79.
  17. Steinfeld, H., H. A. Mooney, F. Schneider, and L.E. Neville (Eds.). 2013. Livestock in a changing landscape, volume 1: drivers, consequences, and responses. Island Press.
  18. Togarepi, C., B. Thomas and M. Kankono. 2016. Cattle marketing constraints and opportunities in north-central communal areas of Namibia, Ohangwena Region. Livestock Research for Rural Development. Volume 28, Article #132. Retrieved March 14, 2021, from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd28/7/ toga28132. html.
  19. World Bank, 2002. World Development Report 2002: Building institutions for markets. New York: Oxford University Press.

Most read articles by the same author(s)