Page 30 - Ranah Studi Agraria: Penguasaan Tanah dan Hubungan Agraris

Kata Pengantar

forces), which together made it possible for landowners both
to invest cheaply in ‘green revolution’ production and at the
same time to reduce costs and control labour through exclu-
sionary labour arrangements, in exchange for the political

support of the rural elites who benefited from these arrange-
ments (Hart 1986b and 1989).
The SAE sample villages in Subang were the site of further
studies by Jonathan Pincus (in 1989-90) and Jan Breman
(1990, with Gunawan Wiradi—see Breman and Wiradi 1992
16
and 1995). Pincus—like Hayami and Hart, an agricultural
economist—directed his critique at the neoclassical theory of
“induced innovation” and particularly Hayami et al.’s version
of it, and included the two villages studied by Hayami in his
three-village sample. He pointed to four weakness of the “in-
duced institutional innovation” approach. It assumes wrongly
that “population pressure” is responsible for agrarian inequali-
ties; it ignores specific local agrarian histories, assuming that
Javanese villages share a common past as “homogeneous villa-
ge communities”; it assumes a “closed” village community in
which migrant labour plays no importanrt role, and it fails to
specify the mechanisms through which population growth is
held to result in greater inequalities, or how the labour market

“disequilibria” induced by this process determine changes in
real wages, assuming that these links are automatic or me-
chanical and ignoring the complex power relations involved

16 This collaboration has continued beyond the period described
in this chapter, with a further re-study visit by Breman and Wiradi
to the same village in the early post-krismon period (Breman and
Wiradi 2002).

xxix