![](bg4.png)
limited opportunities to increase income if they did
not diversify the business. One way to increase
farmers' income with narrow land in the village was
to implement RLIFS.
The number of cattle had a significant effect on
the decision to apply RLIFS. The number of cows
provided a substantial opportunity of 1.35 for
farmers in applying RLIFS. Increasing the number
of cow cattle could increase the amount of manure
that is the raw material for manure.
The decrease of income due to the decrease of
rice production has enabled farmers to have 1.0
times chance in implementing Rice-Livestock
Integrated Farming System (RLIFS). The Manure
that produced in RLIFS could improve soil fertility.
The improvement of soil fertility by processing
manure was expected to increase the production and
income of farmers. The use of manure in study site
could increase farmers income. This was due to
higher selling prices due to the use of organic
fertilizer. In addition, the use of manure could
reduce the use of chemical fertilizers in stages.
Interviews with the head of the farmer group
revealed that the use of chemical fertilizers was
small enough where the use of urea, KCl and
Phonska ranges from 5 to 10 kg per 1400 m2. The
use of chemical fertilizers was small enough to raise
the bargaining position of farmers so that the price
of Harvest Dry Grain (Gabah Kering panen/GKP) in
this District was quite high (Rp 5300 - Rp 5500) per
kg. The increase in the price of GKP was able to
ultimately increase the income of farmers. However,
the income variable did not significantly influence
the farmer's decision in applying RLIFS. Likewise,
the decline in cow cattle farming income could
motivate farmers to conduct RLIFS activities. The
animal waste processing was expected to increase
the income of livestock farming.
Outpouring of male family labour for cow cattle
farming had significant effect on 1% level, while the
female labour force empowerment for cow cattle
farming had significant effect on <20% real level.
The outpouring of male and female labour force in
cow cattle farming had an opportunity to apply
RLIFS. This indicated that farmers understand that
the activities of rice and cow cattle farming had a
beneficial relationship with each other where the
straw could be the input of cattle feed and cattle
waste could be input for rice crops, so that the
outpouring of labour for cattle was a factor that
supports RLIFS adoption/implementation. In this
research, the outpouring of male and female family
labour was a factor which was quite good
opportunity in RLIFS implementation. This was
understandable because in the farm household, two
interconnected farms are also cultivated with labour
in the same family in each farm. By this the
limitations of the workforce can be overcome by
complementing and fulfilling the two farms.
However Lightfoot (1997) stated that the
implementation of IFS had constraints on aspects of
time, labour, government policies that were less
conducive. The introduction should consider the
ability of the farmers to absorb in terms of the
quantity of introduced components and their
consequences for the additional costs, labor and time
spent. (Sariubang and Qomariah 2008; Panjaitan et
al. 2009). So this research only agrees on only
several aspects that were time and government
policy that were not conducive to implement RLIFS.
Estimation results in the information technology
group showed that the participation of family
members in agricultural organizations as well as the
frequency of contact with agricultural extensions did
not significantly affect farmers in applying RLIFS.
However, the frequency of contact with the
agricultural extensions provided a great opportunity
that was equal to 1.32 times for farmers to apply
Rice-Livestock Integrated Farming System (RLIFS).
Meeting with field extension officers (PPL) was able
to motivate farmers in applying RLIFS technology.
Extension ability by directly demonstrating the
processing of organic fertilizer containing many
nutrients and explaining the benefits of organic
fertilizer would attract farmers in implementing
integrated farming system. Panjaitan et al. 2009 said
the institutional introduction needed to consider the
existing institutional system and ran on the local
community. So this study did not fully agree that the
existing institutions were one of the factors that must
be considered when implementing RLIFS, but this
study agreed that the frequency of following the
counselling had the opportunity to farmers in
applying RLIFS
4 CONCLUSION
1. The implementation process of Integrated
Farming of Rice-Livestock in West Java
Province ran quite well. This was demonstrated
by the findings of farmers who did not conduct
RLIFS than those who conducted RLIFS. Of all
the farmers of the respondents, it was found
only ± 32.67 percent of farmers who did not
implement integrated farming, the rest did the
implementation of RLIFS. Some farmers were
motivated to implement RLIFS mainly because
ICMR 2018 - International Conference on Multidisciplinary Research
180