The development strategy of subsistent or semi commercial maize farming system

Subsistent/semi commercial farmers were very slow to adopt the new technology of maize cultivation, although the new introduction technology could be done by farmers, economies and compatible with farmer’s socio-culture. Generally, that was caused introduction technology need high inputs (i.e. superior seed maize varieties, fertilizer, and pesticides), and other sides orientation of maize cultivation by subsistent/semi commercial farmers for food security, farmers limited money to bought inputs, and inputs shop in sub district/village levels was nothing. The consequence was introduction of new technology could not extend and farmers back to existing technology after character building had finished. The research was conducted on 3 (three) farmer’s group and planted area 15 hectares of maize in South Timor Tengah district, East Nusa Tenggara province in 2017-2018. The research showed the problems could be overcome by guiding of new technology to farmers/farmer’s group among 1-2 times planting and building of new institutional i.e. clinic of technology on village level. Extension workers and group of farmer’s group (GAPOKTAN) manage clinic of technology. The clinic function was to inform new agricultural information to farmers/farmer’s group and be responsibility to supplying of inputs. To guarantee the continuity maize farming system, farmers need loan assistance with semi grand system. Farmers/farmers group borrow inputs from the clinic of technology and it refund by maize product after harvesting. The clinic of technology did maize processing and sold maize in early rainy season. The clinic of technology built maize seed industry unit in village level and bought inputs (fertilizer and pesticides Farmer’s household lack of food, although improving of technology cultivation in ENT province had done) from agricultural shop on district/province level. This strategy could guarantee sustainability maize farming system and potential to develop in other village.


Introduction
Maize was main food for commonly East Nusa Tenggara (ENT) province people, mainly peoples who staying in rural areas.ENT province statistic showed 70% people stay in rural areas and generally people consumed maize as main food [1].Unfortunate, farmer's maize product was very little.. Maize productivity at farmers level were 2.5 -3.0 t/ha.It could increased to 4.3 -5.3 t/ha [2].
External intervention to increase maize productivity had done, but maize technology cultivation adopt by farmers in ENT was very slow.It's caused farmer's planting maize oriented for food security and they had satisfied with their maize productivity [3].
Extensions of the new technology to the farmers had done, but the new technology introductions slowly adopt by farmers and they reuse their technology after character building had finished [4].External intervention (Indonesian government call helping farmers program) such as seed, fertilizer, pesticide and others increased farmer's agricultural product as long as farmer's character building, but farmer's product added used to consumed themselves.
Farmers in dry land ENT province occupied subsistent facultative and semi commercial level [2].They were difficult to applied agribusiness because their orientation for food security [5].So technology information and new innovation must be adapted in this condition.It's needed institutional building for sustainability technology introduction.
Farmer's maize technology very simple and using production inputs such as fertilizer and pesticide by farmers was very limited.Energy cycles for sustainability natural resources were limited and land fertility were gradually decrease because energy get out from land [6].It's not advantage for sustainability agricultural development in this area.
Generally, poverty on subsistent/semi commercial farmers were formed from low natural resources, uncertainty climate mainly rainy season, simple technology cultivation by farmers, and limiting capital owner.So, farmers need technology cultivation information and capital access.It could get through strengthening farmers group.This research purposed to find maize agribusiness model for subsistent/semi commercial farmers in ENT.

Field design and measurements
This research conducted on 3 (three) farmer's group in Tobu village, Mollo Utara sub district, South Timor Tengah district, ENT as long as two years (2017-2088).The innovations were new maize cultivation technique and new farmer's institutional.The improving traditional maize cultivation techniques were new varieties, space planting, fertilizing, and seed production technique.The improving farmers institutional were strengthening farmer's group capital, management of input supplying and management of seed production (Table 1) Supplying inputs by clinic technology, which farmers lend inputs from clinic and farmers refund inputs value through get out maize product equal than inputs prize after harvesting.The clinic gets benefit from processing of maize.The clinics bought some inputs (fertilizer and pesticide) from agricultural inputs shop on sub district or district level, and maize seed from farmer's group seed production unit.

Figure 1. Design improving farmers institutional for energy cycle
Production data were collected by measurement and others data were collected by observation and Rapid Rural Appraisal (Table 2)

Guiding of maize cultivation
This research showed maize high plants and trees diameter of local OPV's and Srikandi OPV's not significant at t-test for equality of mean 5%, but significant at amount of plant and productivities.Amount of plant in technology existing was 13.25 holes/10m 2 and technology introduction 17.56 holes/10m 2 .Other result showed introduction technology of maize could increase maize farmers productivity from 1,753 kg/ha to 3,438 kg/ha (Table 3).
Long life of Srikandi OPV's 105 days and local varieties 120 days.Shorter long life of maize has advantage for Timorese farmers because rain period in this area only 3-4 months, so farmers could planting other commodities after maize harvested.Other advantage of Srikandi OPV's had high protein contain i.e. lysine 0,410% and thryptophane 0.087% [7].It's needed to tackling of bad nutrient problems in this area.Technology intervention increased farmer's maize storage 173.2% per household.Average maize storage before intervention (last year) was 80.2 kg/ household and after intervention 219.1 kg/household (Table 4).This product was net production after farmers get out maize product equal than inputs prize to clinic of technology.It's surprise for farmers and increased farmer's motivation to adopt maize cultivation in this area [8].

Guiding seed production
Maize seed production in this research was conducted on farmer's group level.It's conducted on 0.15 ha and used to white Srikandi OPV's seed foundation.The production seed was 315 kg (productivity 2.100 kg seed/ha).Those seed were sale cheap prize for farmers on farmer's group and others.
Before seed production maize introduction, farmers obtain seed of maize from local OPV's of maize themselves.Generally, farmers selected their big maize as prospective seed.One of weakness of local OPV's maize was low production potentially.So, it needed introduction of new OPV's maize.[9] To guarantee new varieties adopt was needed maize seed industry near farmers.Unfortunate maize seed industry was nothing in this area.Maize seed must be come from province capital city, where it was about 150 kilometers from location.It caused high cost to maize seed supplying.Seed production on farmer's level purposed to supplying seed for farmer's consumed themselves, but procedures to maize seed production must be followed [10].
The main problem for seed production in this area was water irrigation.It's caused seed production must be done on dry season, while farmers lack of water in this area.So, seed production must be done near river by watered technique.The consequence was seed production on rural level need much labor, mainly labor to watering.

Institutional innovation
Generally, subsistent/semi commercial farmers lived far from city and had bad road infrastructure.This condition caused farmers mobility and communication access were very limited.Nearest organization were government organization and church organization.Both had opportunities to help dissemination agricultural in this area.
Week traditional market had on Saturday.Agricultural technology information could disperse at there because farmers met others.It had opportunities to agricultural i.e. building agricultural clinic near traditional market.

Extension worker
Weakness of farmer's capital access had consequences weakness of farmer's bargaining position.Selling agricultural commodities before maturity showed weakness of farmer's capital.
Strengthening farmer's group on subsistent/semi commercial farmers was difficult.Farmer's group easy to broken and not to developed.It's caused farmer's group foundation building very weak and hadn't consider farmer's needed.Generally, farmer's groups were built by extension workers for new government project and not farmer's initiative.For independence farmer's group building need to strengthened farmer's group capital by production unit building.Production unit, which built by farmer's group need labor.The labor was supplied from farmer's group member.It advantage for farmer's group and their members.
Farmer's maize product could increased through new technology cultivation.The consequence was farmers need technology inputs (new varieties, fertilizer, pesticides and others).Farmers need capital to buy inputs production, while capital owns subsistent farmers very limited.So, farmers need capital helping.Loan assistance with semi grand system was offered on this research.This concept was choosen, because stagnation credit on grand system loan assistance was very common.Generally, if farmers push away the installment payment, government officials could not collect a debt.On semi grand system, loan assistance was given to farmer's group.The loan assistance was used to buy production inputs.The risk stagnation credit on this concept very limited because farmers afraid social punishment.This model was easier to develop on the better households economic.
Strengthening farmer's group capital strategies could be done by two ways.The first strategy is increasing maize production for consumption and second strategy is increasing maize production for consumption and home industry combination.
On the first strategy, service provider give natural inputs production semi grand assistance loan i.e. maize seed, fertilizer, and pesticides for farmer's group.Members of farmer's group get out maize product equal than inputs prize after harvested to farmer's group organization.Farmer's group organization sold maize and bought inputs production for members on next season.This model guaranteed to supply inputs production.To guarantee inputs supplying need to partnership with input supplier.Input suppliers are agricultural inputs distributor or agricultural inputs shop.While maize seed supplying from farmer's group seed production unit on village level.
On second strategy, service provider give natural inputs production semi grand assistance loan i.e. maize seed, fertilizer, and pesticides for farmer's group.Besides it, service provider give assistance loan for farmer's group to processing maize product or others.Objectives on this strategy to strengthening farmer's group capital and give labor payment to farmer's group members.

Management of input supplying
Clinic of agricultural technology on village level supplies inputs production for rural area.The clinic was built because agricultural inputs shop nothing near village area.Nearest agricultural inputs shop was located in district capital city about 50 km from this location and second alternative was located in province capital city about 200 km.This condition caused high cost for subsistent farmers.
The combinations of high cost inputs supplying, limited farmer's agricultural knowledge, and low farmer's capital caused agricultural technology adopt by farmers very slow.The clinic of technology built help to solve this problem.Selling agricultural inputs on the clinic of technology was not to profit oriented, but to invite farmers visited to the clinic and farmers could interacted with extension workers and reading any agricultural information in the clinic.One of policy on management clinic was farmers must be came themselves if they need agricultural inputs.Extension workers and clinic organization workers informed the clinic of technology content, but might not bring to the farmers.This strategy was expected farmers could visited clinic of technology content and get sufficient technology information.
The clinic management had members from vices of farmer's groups.The management had three divisions.The first division is supplying inputs division which connected farmer's groups' members needed and input supplier, the second division is marketing division which connected to buyers, and the clinic of technology content division is rural development planning which connected to service provider.[11]

Conclusions
Extension workers and group of farmer's group (GAPOKTAN) manage clinic of technology on village level.Farmers/farmer's group borrows inputs from the clinic and refund by maize product after harvesting.Maize were processed in the clinic and sold them in early rainy season.The clinic build maize seed industry unit in village level and bought inputs (fertilizer and pesticides) from agricultural shop on district/province level.This strategy could guarantee sustainability maize farming system and potential to develop in other village.

Farmer
human resources in this area were very low.Farmers long education range were 0-12 years and average 4.2 years.It's influence acceptance technology information.So, to increase maize cultivation technology adopt, farmers need guiding among 2-3 times planting.

Figure 2 .
Figure 2. Venn diagram: relationship many institutional on rural area

Table 1 .
Improving cultivation technique & farmers institutional

Table 2 .
Innovation, data collection and data analysis method

Table 3 .
Maize high plant, diameter, amount of plant per 10m 2 and productivity

Table 4 .
Farmer's maize production before and after intervention