Urea fertilizer debacle<\/p>\n
The furor over the shortage of urea fertilizer over the last
\nfew months, reportedly caused in part by farmers' opposition to
\nusing urea in tablet form, is strange for two reasons.<\/p>\n
Firstly, Indonesia's urea manufacturing capacity is almost 60
\npercent larger than its domestic needs. Secondly, Indonesia has
\ngained more than 25 years of experiences in disseminating new
\ntechnology to crop farmers, as demonstrated by its successes in
\nachieving self-sufficiency in rice in 1984 and in developing an
\ninternationally recognized model of integrated pest management.<\/p>\n
Some analysts blame the shortage on the much lower domestic
\nprices of urea, compared to prices overseas, which prompted
\nexports. But the inference is hard to understand because urea
\nfertilizer is produced only by state-owned companies and the
\nmarketing and distribution of the agrochemical has always been
\nmonopolized by state-owned PT Pusri, which itself is the largest
\nurea producer in the country. Moreover, urea export has always
\nbeen controlled under a quota system which is set annually after
\ntaking into account the latest estimate of national demand.<\/p>\n
It is also puzzling to note that the hearing between the urea
\nproducing companies and the House of Representatives last week
\nfailed to straighten out the issue of the questionable urea
\nshortage. Why did the hearing stop short of questioning the
\nmanner in which the urea tablet technology was introduced?<\/p>\n
The main cause of the problem more likely lies in the
\ninadequate propagation of the new technology -- urea in tablet
\nform -- among farmers who have used prilled urea over the past
\ntwo decades.<\/p>\n
We should, though, highly commend the agriculture ministry for
\nits persistence in developing new technology such as high-
\nyielding rice strains and the urea tablet.<\/p>\n
Indeed, as easy gains from modern rice technology have been
\nachieved and irrigated rice fields have steadily been encroached
\nby industrial and housing development, there is now a smaller
\nchance of raising output and farmers' incomes through
\nintensification programs in Java, which accounts for over 80
\npercent of the national rice output.<\/p>\n
The rice economy no longer provides the same dynamism to
\nagricultural growth and rural earnings as in the 1970s and 1980s
\nbecause gains in rice yields, generated by technical and
\nmanagement changes, have reached a plateau.<\/p>\n
However, research conducted jointly by the agriculture
\nministry and two agencies of the Manila-based International Rice
\nResearch Institute, proves that the application of urea tablets
\nenables farmers to economize on the use of fertilizer and at the
\nsame time raise the yield of their rice crops.<\/p>\n
Pilot projects show that urea tablets are capable of raising
\nthe rice yield by as much as 16.50 percent and reducing the
\nvolume of urea usage by up to 30 percent. Translated into income,
\nthe double gains were estimated at almost Rp 400,000 (US$200) per
\nhectare in 1994. If that is the case, what then is the snag?<\/p>\n
The problem, as stated above, is inadequate propagation by
\nagricultural extension workers. Even though the substance is the
\nsame -- urea-- the replacement of prilled urea with urea tablets
\nrequires massive extension service because urea tablets are 13.40
\npercent costlier than prilled urea and application requires a
\nchange in farmers' habits.<\/p>\n
The application of urea tablets requires more labor as the
\ntablets have to be planted between seedlings, instead of thrown
\nover fields as is done with prilled urea. Urea tablets also
\nrequire a tighter scheduling -- they must be applied within seven
\nto 12 days after the planting of seedlings. Moreover, even though
\nthe production of urea tablets requires only a simple technology
\n-- they can be made by machines similar to those used for making
\npills -- the process requires new logistical arrangements.<\/p>\n
Why then was the government in such a rush to force farmers in
\nJava to use urea tablets without giving them an option, at least
\nduring the transition period, to choose between urea tablets and
\nprilled urea? A longer transition period should have been
\nprovided, especially because the urea tablet production,
\nmonopolized by PT Ariyo Seto -- a private company which has never
\nbefore had any experience in handling agrochemicals -- adds new
\nchains in the production and distribution processes.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/urea-fertilizer-debacle-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}