CC BY
29
DOI 10.18551/rjoas.2019-09.19
CULTURAL MANAGEMENT OF ECONOMIC RESISTANCE IN BALI AGA COMMUNITY VILLAGE OF KECAMATAN BANJAR DISTRICT BULELENG
Dharma Hartawan I Gusti Made*
Faculty of Management, Satya Dharma College of Economics, Singaraja, Bali, Indonesia
Bendesa I Komang Gde, Suyana Utama Made, Murjana Yasa I Gusti Wayan
Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Udayana, Denpasar, Bali, Indonesia
*E-mail: tirtayaniayu@gmail.com
Abstract
The concept of this study is to harmonize a development that is moral and material-oriented where catur dresta as a regulator idea as well as a cultural mechanism of culture-oriented economic resilience between 58 landowners and 52 penelon farmers (sharecropper farmers) by applying concurrent embedded strategy method. Quantitative analysis is the main method by using multigroup SEM-PLS equipped with qualitative analysis using an ethnomethodology approach. The result shows that catur dresta has the potential to strengthen and do not differentiate the natural value resource in encouraging the economic innovation and strengthening the economic resilience between landowners and penelon farmers which is oriented on the production function and social system. The economic innovation does not mediate and does not significantly distinguish the natural resource value in strengthening economic resilience because the economic innovation is initiated by landowners, not penelon farmers. However, there is a significant difference in the natural resource value in strengthening the economic resilience for the differences ownership status of agricultural land.
KEY WORDS
Value of natural resources, economic innovation, economic resilience, catur dresta.
Bali's geography and topography mentioned that there are people who live in the mountains called Bali Aga. In maintaining their life and existence, the Bali Aga people utilize local resources and potential that is not free from limitations (Marx, 1867; Ardika et al., 2015).
This study focuses on the village of Pedawa with the livelihoods of its inhabitants as farmers and producers of palm sugar. For that reason, the availability of resources is regulated by pinning Catur Dresta as a manner in economics. Catur dresta includes Karma Yoga (Hindu religious values called literary dresta) which are attached to the Saba Malunin ceremony (cultural values called kuna dresta) and are united by a shared view of life as a Bali Aga entity (loka dresta) by obeying the governance of adat (adat custom of agricultural land (Dresta village). This is done because strong economic resilience is resilience that adheres to a prudent culture economic structure (Sudiana et al., 2016; Boediono, 2016).
The implementation of Catur in economics implies harmony of values, norms and social networking between family institutions as a unit of household production with village and customary institutions. This phenomenon illustrates the agricultural sector absorbs labor which leads farmers to increase the commercial and social value of resources through economic innovation (Sztompka, 1994; Londhe, 2011; Mudakir, 2011; Bendesa, 2016; Malik et al., 2018).
Aligning material and moral oriented development with Catur Dresta as a regulatory idea as well as a cultural patterned economic defense mechanism presented by analyzing dresta Catur strengthens and does not differentiate the value of natural resources in encouraging economic innovation and strengthening economic resilience between farmer owners and penelon farmers. Identifying owner farmers and prospective farmers increases
the value of natural resources in encouraging economic innovation and strengthening economic resilience based on Catur Dresta.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Theory of production patterns is complemented by social systems theory emphasizing work as a basic activity in economics covering the ways and relations of production. The mode of production is oriented to work agreements in producing goods and services while the production relationship is related to the distribution of income and consumption. Both interact to create capital flows that are always adapted to change so that the necessities of life are maintained and integrated as a social system (Marx, 1867; Parson, 1951).
The value of natural resources is a dynamic concept that is reflected by relative prices, real costs and real prices of natural resources in situ that are impermeable to limitations. Limitations are reflected by prices and costs that have an impact on production (Barnett and Morse, 1967; Nordhaus, 1973; Rees, 1990 cited Fauzi, 2004; Sugiyanto and Fikri, 2016).
The progression of economic value reveals an increase in the commercial and social value of resources beginning with the agrarian economy and goods towards service economy and experience. Economic innovation in the context of cultural resilience has a cultural pattern related to tradition involving ritual as a defense strategy (Chambers, 1966; Pine and Gilmore 1998).
Rose (2004) views economic resilience as being static and dynamic. Static emphasizes the ability of the economic system to use resources. While dynamic refers to Pimm (1984) which focuses on resource efficiency in recovering production, distribution and consumption.
Catur dresta as social capital refers to institutional theory (Williamson, 2000) defined by Coleman (1986) according to its function as a plural entity that facilitates society in social structures. There are four indicators that make up Catur dresta. First, Karma Yoga as a foothold in work (Dresta literature). Second, the Saba Malunin ceremony gives a sense of security in the economy (kuna dresta). Third, the view of living together as a Bali Aga entity (loka dresta). Fourth, obey the proper procedure for agricultural land (Dresta village).
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND HYPOTHESIS
Figure 1 explains the value of natural resources driving economic innovation with implications for economic resilience moderated by Catur dresta (Yuminarti et al., 2018). Based on Figure 1, seven hypotheses can be formulated:
1) There is no difference in the value of natural resources in driving economic innovation between owner farmers and penelon farmers.
2) There is no difference in the value of natural resources in strengthening economic resilience between the owner farmers and penelon farmers.
3) There is no difference in economic innovation in strengthening economic resilience between owner farmers and penelon farmers.
4) Chesta Dresta strengthens and does not differentiate the value of natural resources in encouraging economic innovation between owner farmers and penelon farmers.
5) Catur Dresta strengthens and does not differentiate the value of natural resources in strengthening economic resilience between the owner farmers and the penelon farmers.
6) Catur Dresta strengthens and does not differentiate economic innovation in strengthening economic resilience between owner farmers and penelon farmers.
7) Farmers who own and penelon farmers increase the value of natural resources in encouraging economic innovation and strengthen economic resilience based on Catur dresta.
METHODS OF RESEARCH
Pedawa Village as a research location because in economics the community embed patinggon pelinggih (place of worship) as a symbol of natural prosperity in this case palm sugar which is united by the view of life together as a Bali Aga entity. 910 family heads owned agricultural land and 815 did not have agricultural land as a population reflecting the patrilennial system in the Hindu community. The sample is determined by the number of indicators multiplied by 10 so that 110 are obtained (Hair, 2011). With proportional stratified random sampling (Nueman, 2015) the distribution of the sample into 58 owner farmers and 52 breeder farmers was supplemented by Wayan Sukrata as key informants with purposeful snowball sampling (Indrawan and Yaniawati, 2017).
The value of natural resources as an exogenous variable, economic innovation as an intervening variable, economic resilience as an endogenous variable and dresta Catur as a moderating variable are complemented by the status of agricultural land ownership as a dummy variable defined as follows.
1) The value of natural resources is a response to the selling price and the cost of land which has an effect on the choice of whether to better protect and maintain clove or palm trees.
2) Economic innovation is the spirit of adding commercial and social value to cloves and palm sugar.
3) Economic resilience is the ability to make work agreements related to the use of agricultural land for survival and existence.
4) Catur Dresta is an understanding of Karma Yoga that is attached to the Saba Malunin ceremony and united by the view of life together as a Bali Aga entity by obeying the rules of agricultural land.
5) The status of ownership of agricultural land is the right to obtain capital flow related to the utilization of agricultural land.
Reducing bias and subjectivity, quantitative data supplemented with qualitative data were tested for validity by triangulation of methods through Focus Group Discussion (Bryman, 2004; Neuman, 2015). Using a mixed strategy integrated strategy together (Creswell, 2014) where quantitative data analysis as the main method is processed with Multigroup Strutural Equation Modeling-Partial Least Squares (SEM-PLS) equipped with qualitative analysis with ethnometodology approach.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Evaluation of measurement models is divided into reflective and formative indicator measurements.
Table 1 - Profile of Farmer Owners and Penelon Farmers
Demographic Characteristics Number of Respondents (N=110) %
Ownership of agricultural land
Petan Owner 58 53
Penelon Farmers 52 47
Annual income (Rp. Thousand)
Farmer Owner 300.000,- 82,87
Penelon Farmers 62.000,- 17,13
Level of education
Farmer Owner
Elementary school 32 29,09
Middle School 11 10
High school 4 3,64
Diploma 11 10
Penelon Farmers
Elementary school 23 20,90
Middle School 21 19,10
High school 8 7,27
Reflective indicators reflected by selling prices and land costs are presented as follows.
Table 2 - Reflective Indicator Measurement Model between Farmer Owners and Penelon Farmers
Differences Price Of Selling Land Cost Information
Outer Loading F Owner vs F. Penelon 0,145 0,124 No different
T-value F. Owner vs F. Penelon 0,350 0,286 Not significant
P-value F. Owner vs F. Penelon 0,728 0,776 Not significant
Table 2 explains the difference in the value of outer loadings indicator of selling prices and land costs of 0.145 and 0.124 with T-statistics of 0.350 and 0.286 <1.96 and P-values of 0.728 and 0.776> 0.05 explaining that there is no difference in selling price and land costs in interpreting the value of natural resources. Furthermore, the validity and reliability test refers to the value of Average variance Extracted (AVE) and Composite Reliability (CR) are presented as follows.
Table 3 - Validity and Reliability of Reflective Indicators between Farmer Owners and Penelon
Farmers
Differences AVE Info. CR Info.
Outer Loading F Owner vs F. Penelon 0,000 No different 0,005 No different
T-value F. Owner vs F. Penelon 0,004 Not significant 0,030 Not significant
P-value F. Owner vs F. Penelon 0,997 Not significant 0,976 Not significant
Table 3 informs the difference in AVE and CR values of owner farmers and smallholder farmers 0,000 and 0.005 with T-statistics 0.004 and 0.030 <1.96 and P-values 0.997 and 0.976> 0.05, which translates into accuracy, consistency and ability of the selling price and land costs no different in explaining the value of natural resources.
Formative indicators formed by commodities, goods, production, distribution, consumption, literary dresta, ancient dresta, loka dresta and dresta village are presented as in Table 4.
Table 4 explains the commodity indicators and, goods do not differ explaining economic innovation. The indicators of production, distribution and consumption do not differ explaining economic resilience and the literary indicators of dresta, kuna dresta, dra loca and dresta villages do not differ explaining dresta Catur shown by all VIF values <5.
Table 4 - Formative Indicator Measurement Model between Farmer Owners and Penelon Farmers
Indicator
Difference in value Significance
Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) Farmers Owner Farmers Penelon
Information
Comodity 0,667 1,050 1,007 Not significant
Goods 0,631 1,050 1,007 Not significant
Production 0,265 1,075 1,002 Not significant
Distribution 0,024 1,149 1,611 Significant
Consume 0,191 1,075 1,613 Not significant
Sastra dresta 0,874 1,077 1,070 Not significant
Kuna dresta 0,882 1,310 1,101 Not significant
Loka dresta 0,645 1,071 1,288 Not significant
Desa dresta 0,793 1,222 1,184 Not significant
Table 5 - R-Square Value between Farmers Owners and Penelon Farmers
Differences Economic Innovation Economic Resilience
R-Square Farmers Owner vs Farmers Penelon 0,145 0,063
T-value Farmers Owner vs Farmers Penelon 0,981 0,468
P-value Farmers Owner vs Farmers Penelon 0,331 0,642
Table 5 explains that there is no real difference in the value of resources in driving economic innovation that is moderated by Catur dresta, which is indicated by an R-square difference of 0.145 with a T-statistic of 0.981 <T-table of 1.96 and a P-value of 0.331> 0.05. Likewise, there is no real difference in the value of natural resources in strengthening economic resilience through economic innovation that is moderated by Catur dresta, showing an R-square difference of 0.063 with a T-statistic of 0.468 <T-table of 1.96 and a P-value of 0.642> 0.05.
Hypothesis testing rests on the difference in significance values that are presented as follows.
Table 6 - Presence of Difference in Value of Natural Resources in Encouraging Economic Innovation and Strengthening Economic Resilience Moderated by Chesta's Catur
Difference in Path coefficient
T-value
P-value
Information
Farmers Owner vs Farmers Penelon
Farmers Owner vs Farmers Penelon
Farmers Owner vs Farmers Penelon
Information
The value of natural resources in driving economic innovation. The value of natural resources in strengthening economic security.
Economic innovation in strengthening economic resilience.
Economic innovation mediates natural resources in strengthening economic resilience.
Catur Dresta strengthens the value of natural resources in driving economic innovation. Catur Dresta strengthens the value of natural resources in strengthening economic security.
Catur Dresta strengthens economic innovation in strengthening economic resilience.
0,274
0,738
0,006
0,014
0,415
0,179
0,102
1,184 2,249
0,021 0,111 1,678 0,780
0,449
0,242 0,029
0,984 0,912 0,099 0,439
0,655
No difference
There is a difference
No difference
Economic innovation does not mediate and does not markedly
distinguish Catur Dresta as a potential moderation and not markedly distinguish
Catur Dresta as a potential moderation and not markedly distinguish.
Catur Dresta as a potential moderation and not markedly distinguish
Identification of the behavior of smallholders and echelon farmers in economics with social system theory (Parson, 1951) is described as follows.
Figure 2 - Agricultural Economic Relations Based on Chesta's Catur
There are four explanations in Figure 2. First, the commercial and social value of natural resources protect and maintain cloves and palm as a function of adaptation. Second, the work agreement as a function of purpose that guarantees survival and existence. Third, the nelon and wage patterns as a function of integration in distributing income. Fourth, atypical behavior as maintenance of latent patterns tied to Catur dresta. Judging from the institutional level theory (Williamson, 2000) Dresta's Catur description as a rule of the game is described as follows.
Tiers
Informal level: Karma Yoga, Saba Malunin, Bali Aga entity, agricultural land management It is believed and trusted that Dresta's Catur carries a harmonious scale
▲
i ----------1 ' i
Formal level: Synergy between A good economic institutional environment in the economy
village and adat government
▲
i ' i
Level of Governance: Production patterns lead to farm stratification The mode of production enhances production relations
4
i ' i
The level of resource allocation encourages economic innovation and strengthens economic resilience The positive use value, exchange value, added
s value, surplus value and economic value
Figure 3 - Catur Dresta as a Rules in the Agricultural Economy
Figure 3 is presented as follows:
1) The level of informal institutions, understanding and implementation of Karma Yoga, a shared view of life as an entity as Bali Aga and agricultural land management are believed to bring harmony to the scale involving the Saba Malunin ceremony as a defense strategy (Chamber, 1983 cited Atmadja, 2010; Giddens, 2003, 2003a).
2) The level of formal institutions, economic activity is embedded in the village and customary government that always strives to create good economic institutions.
3) The level of governance, economic activity appears in the pattern of nelon and wages in obtaining a flow of profits that is reflected in work agreements that impact on the distribution of income and consumption.
4) The level of resource allocation is indicated by the positive value added, more, and economic value for the owner's farmers as well as the positive use value and the exchange value for the penelon farmers.
The four levels of Catur dresta describe work for offerings as a mechanism of economic defense that is culturally patterned and has the principle of helping one another (Kiffi et al., 2017).
Catur Dresta has the potential to strengthen and not really distinguish the value of natural resources in driving economic innovation and strengthening economic resilience that is oriented to the production function and social system. For economic innovation does not mediate and does not significantly distinguish the value of natural resources in strengthening economic resilience because economic innovation is initiated by the owner farmers rather than by the prospective farmers. However, there are real differences in the value of natural resources in strengthening economic resilience due to differences in ownership status of agricultural land.
The agrarian economic activity is attached to a series of Saba ceremonies that have a cycle of five years with the concept of holding a paileh find a bracelet (a circular bracelet) as a regulatory idea as well as a cultural patterned economic defense mechanism.
Chesta Dresta guides the production pattern of nelon and wage, which prioritizes work (Karma Yoga) for offerings (Saba Malunin) as a defense strategy in utilizing the value of natural resources that encourages economic innovation and strengthens economic resilience with a cultural pattern.
The mixed method gives a complete picture related to the importance of dresta Catur as a social security that is not real (niskala) with tenget as the concept of protection and preservation of natural resources which until now has been able to maintain the life and existence of the real Bali Aga community (scale).
Gender relations as social relations between men (husband) as the head of the family and women (housewives) as regulators of household finances implied in ordering palm sugar or trading on the terrace or on the home page have not been constructed in this study.
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
There is no real difference in the value of natural resources in driving economic innovation between owner farmers and penelon farmers. The positive value of natural resources leads to a relatively equal form of economic innovation towards the direction of farm stratification.
There is a real difference in the value of natural resources in strengthening economic resilience between owner farmers and penelon farmers. Ownership status distinguishes the distribution of the results of agricultural land use which has an effect on the income of the owner's farmers is greater than the penelon farmers.
There is no real difference in economic innovation in strengthening economic resilience between the owner farmers and penelon farmers. The owner farmers are very dependent on the penelon farmers who are implied in a mutually beneficial work agreement.
Economic innovation does not mediate and does not significantly distinguish the value of natural resources in strengthening economic resilience because economic innovation is initiated by the owner farmers rather than the prospective farmers.
Catur Dresta has the potential to strengthen and not significantly differentiate the value of natural resources in encouraging economic innovation between owner farmers and prospective farmers. Catur Dresta provides equal opportunities in economic innovation due to the positive value of natural resources.
Catur Dresta has the potential to strengthen and not significantly differentiate the value of natural resources in strengthening economic resilience between the owner farmers and penelon farmers. Catur Dresta gives the same guidance in economics that is implied in the Saba Malunin ceremony, which is the throwing of botor seeds into patakon pelinggih which is implemented into palm sugar production patterns.
Catur Dresta has the potential to strengthen and not significantly differentiate economic innovation in strengthening economic resilience between the owner farmers and the penelon farmers. Catur Dresta leads to a relatively equal form of economic innovation as a strategy for sustaining life and existence.
In economics, owner farmers and penelon farmers are oriented to the production function and social system. The orientation of the production function focuses on the combination of palm and clove balanced by the growth of the industrial and commercial sectors. The orientation of the social system focuses on economic activities united by a shared view of life as a Bali Aga entity by obeying the proper management of agricultural land and embedding Karma Yoga into the Saba Malunin ceremony. Suggestions:
Document and apply Dresta Catur as an economic instrument in conserving the value of natural resources that encourages economic innovation and strengthens economic resilience with a cultural pattern towards the stratification of farming.
Chesta Dresta as a regulatory idea in economics that is not real (niskala) as a basic foothold for policy makers in strengthening economic resilience that is real (scale).
Researchers are further advised to develop the concept of economic resilience as a cultural model as a model of social security by making room for gender (women) in the economy.
REFERENCES
1. Adelman, Irma. 1975. Development Economics-A Reassessment of Goals. The American Economic Review, Vol: 65, pp. 302-309.
2. Andriyani, Anak Agung Istri. Martono, Edhi. Muhamad. 2017. Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Melalui Pengembangan Desa Wisata and Implikasinya terhadap Ketahanan Sosial Budaya Wilayah (Studi Di Desa Wisata Penglipuran Bali). Jurnal Ketahanan Nasional. Vol: 23. No. 1, 27 April 2017. Hal. 1-16.
3. Antonietti, Roberto. Boschma, Ron. 2018. Social Capital, Resilience and Regional Diversification in Italy. Utrecht Universty, Urban and Regional Research Centre Utrecht. JEL: R11, O14, D02.
4. Ardika, I Wayan. Parimartha, I Gde. Wirawan, Bagus A.A. 2015. Sejarah Bali. Dari Prasejarah Hingga Modern. Udayana University Press.
5. Atmadja, Bawa Nengah. 2010. Ajeg Bali: Gerakan, Identitas Kultural, and Globalisasi. Bantul, Yogyakarta: LKiS Printing Cemerlang.
6. Barnett, Harold J. Morse, Chandler. 1967. Resources for the Future, John Hopkin Press, Baltimore, Business and Economic.
7. Bendesa, Gde, I Komang. 2016. Innovation in Tourism: Implementing Experience Economy. The Tourism, Economic, Accounting, and Management Seminar. Undiksha.
8. Boediono. 2016. Ekonomi Indonesia. Dalam Lintasan Sejarah. Bandung: Mizan Media Utama.
9. Bryam, A. 2004. Triangulation, in M.S.L. Beck, et al. (eds.). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science research Methods. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
10. Chamber, D.J. Mingay, G.E. 1966. The Agricultural Revolution 1750-1880. London: Batsford.
11. Coleman, James S. 1986. Social Theory, Social Research, and a Theory of Action, The American Journal of Sociology. Vol: 91. No. 6. Pp 1309-1335.
12. Creswell, John W. 2014. Research Design. Pendekatan Kualitatif, Kuantitatif and Mixed. Edisi Ketiga. Jakarta: Percetakan Pustaka Pelajar.
13. Fauzi, Akhmad. 2004. Can Commercialization Really Solve Externalities in the Forested Area? Lesson learned from payment for environmental services schemes in Indonesia, Indiana University Press.
14. Giddens, Anthony. 1986. Kapitalisme and Teori Sosial Modern. Suatu Analisis Karya-Karya Marx, Durkheim, Max Weber. Jakarta: UI Press. (Terjemahan: Soeheba Kramadibrata). Jakarta: UI Press.
15. 2003. Masyarakat Post-Tradisional. Terjemahan Ali Noer Zaman. Yogyakarta, IRCiSoD.
16. 2003a. Beyond Left and Right (Tarian "Ideologi Alternatif di Atas Pusaran Sosialisme and Kapitalisme). (Imam Khoiri, terj.). Yogyakarta, IRCiSoD.
17. Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M., and Sarstedt, M. 2011. PLS-SEM: Indeed a Silver Bullet Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, pp. 139-150.
18. Hamersma, Harry. 1992. Tokoh-Tokoh Filsafat Barat Modern. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
19. Indrawan, Rully. Yaniawati, Poppy. 2017. Metodologi Penelitian. Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, and Campuran. Bandung: Refika Aditama.
20. Issac, S. Michael, W.B. 1984. Research and Evaluation. San Diego: Edits.
21. Kiffi, Fahmi W. Mulyo, Jangkung H. Darwanto, Dwidjono Hadi. Hartono, Slamet. 2017. Pengaruh Modal Sosial Terhadap Permintaan Pangan Rumahtangga Tani Di Provinsi Riau. Jurnal Manajemen and Agribisnis, Vlo: 14 No. 3, November 2017.
22. Kung, Hans. 2002. Etika Ekonomi Politik Global. Yogyakarta: Qalam.
23. Londhe, Sushama. 2011. A Tribute to Hinduism. Penghormatan Kepada Agama Hindu. Media Hindu.
24. Malik, Mochammad Kamil. Wahyuni, Sri. Widodo, Joko. 2018. Sistem Bagi Hasil Petani Penyakap Di Desa Krai Kecamatan Yosowilangun Kabupaten Lumajang. Jurnal Pendidikan Ekonomi: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan, Ilmu Ekonomi and Ilmu Sosial. Vol: 12, No. 1 (2018).
25. Marx, Karl, Engels, Friedrick. 1867. Das Kapital. Der Produktionsprozess.
26. Mudakir, Bagio. 2011. Produktivitas Lahan and Distribusi Pendapatan Berdasarkan Status Penguasaan Lahan Pada Usahatani Padi (Kasus Di Kabupaten Kendal Propinsi Jawa Tengah). Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan, Juni 2011, Vol: 1, No. 1.
27. Neuman, W. Lawrence. 2015. Metodologi Penelitian Sosial: Pendekatan Kualitatif and Kuntitatif. Edisi Ketujuh. Jakarta: Indeks.
28. Nordhaus, William D. 1973. The Allocation of Energy Resources. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 3:529570.
29. NRC. 2011. National Earthquake Resilience: Research, Implementation and Outreach.
30. 2013. Disaster Resilience: A National Imperative.
31. Parson, T. 1951. The Social System. New York: Free press.
32. Pimm, S.L. 1984. The Complexity and Stability of Ecosystems, Nature 307 (26): 321-326.
33. Pine, B. Joseph. Gilmore, James H. 1998. The Experience Economy. Article. Harvard business review.
34. Recker, Nicholas Lee. 2009. "Resilience In Small Town: An Analysis of Economic Shock, Social Capital, and Quality of Life" (dissertation). Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa.
35. Rose, Adam. 2004. Defining and Measuring Economics Resilience to Disasters, Disaster Prevention and Management 13 (4): 307-314.
36. Sabatino, Michele. 2017. Economic Resilience and Social Capital (conference paper). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319398884.
37. Skousen, Mark. 2005. Sang Maestro Teori-Teori Ekonomi Modern. Jakarta: Prenada Media Group.
38. Sudiana, I Gusti Ngurah. Windia, Wayan P. Relin, D.E. 2016. Prajuru Desa Pakraman Rohaniawan Hindu and Hukum. Bali: Swasta Nulus.
39. Sugiyanto, Catur. Fikri, Saiful, Hafidh, Ahmad, Aula. 2016. Ekonomi Sumber Daya Alam. Yogyakarta: UPP STIM YKPN.
40. Sztompka, P. 1994. The Sociology of Social Change. UK: Blacwell Publishers.
41. Williamson, Oliver E. 2000. The New Institutional Economics. Jurnal of Economic Literature. Vol: 38. No.3.pp 595-613.
42. Yuminarti, Umi. Darwanto, Dwidjono Hadi. Jamhari. Subejo. 2018. Studi Komparasi Praktik Perladangan Berpindan and Pertanian Menetap Untuk mendukung Ketahanan Pangan Masyarakat (Studi Pada Usahatani Kentang Di Kabupaten Pegunungan Arfak, Provinsi Papua Barat). Jurnal Ketahanan Nasional. Vol: 24, No. 2, Agustus 2018. Hal 215-238.
43. Yustika, Ahmad Erani. 2007. Ekonomi Kelembagaan. Available from: URL: www.prasetya.ub.ac.id>berita>ahmad-erani-yustika.
