analysis of productivity efficiency of food plant...

24
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 420 [email protected] International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET) Volume 10, Issue 1, January 2019, pp.420443, Article ID: IJCIET_10_01_040 Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=1 ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316 ©IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE IN EAST JAVA BASED ON DEA INDEX Abid Muhtarom Islamic University of Lamongan, Faculty of Economics, Indonesia; Airlangga University, Department of Economics, Indonesia Tri Haryanto, Nurul Istifadah Airlangga University,Department of Economics, Indonesia ABSTRACT The efficiency of food crop agriculture is a fairly common and used performance parameter, efficiency measurement is widely used to answer the challenges of calculating the size of agricultural crops. This research uses a method called Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to measure technical efficiency. DEA method from one company is a non-parametric analysis method which aims to measure the level of efficiency relative to the productivity unit that has the same goal. The productivity unit is here in the form of a decision-making unit (DMU) where the DMU in this study is the food crop agriculture sub-sector 29 districts in East Java. The results of this study can be studied as many as 93. Keywords: DEA, Land, Labor, and productivity. Cite this Article: Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah, Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index, International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), 10 (1), 2019, pp. 420443. http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=1 1. INTRODUCTION East Java Province is one of the provinces in Indonesia that relies on the agricultural sector of food crops as a driving force for the economy. East Java Province is known as a province that has great attention to the progress of food crop agriculture . Large crop agricultural productivity can increase regional GDP in aggregate in Bhattarai & Narayanamoorthy, (2003) and Majid, (2004).The second largest East Java GRDP after the industrial sector is the agricultural sector, where the Food Crop sub-sector provides a large contribution compared to the agricultural and hunting services sub-sector, the Plantation sub-sector, the Livestock sub- sector, and the Holtukultur Crop sub-sector.

Upload: others

Post on 27-Jun-2020

3 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 420 [email protected]

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)

Volume 10, Issue 1, January 2019, pp.420–443, Article ID: IJCIET_10_01_040

Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=1

ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316

©IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY

OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE IN EAST

JAVA BASED ON DEA INDEX

Abid Muhtarom

Islamic University of Lamongan, Faculty of Economics, Indonesia;

Airlangga University, Department of Economics, Indonesia

Tri Haryanto, Nurul Istifadah

Airlangga University,Department of Economics, Indonesia

ABSTRACT

The efficiency of food crop agriculture is a fairly common and used performance

parameter, efficiency measurement is widely used to answer the challenges of

calculating the size of agricultural crops. This research uses a method called Data

Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to measure technical efficiency. DEA method from one

company is a non-parametric analysis method which aims to measure the level of

efficiency relative to the productivity unit that has the same goal. The productivity unit

is here in the form of a decision-making unit (DMU) where the DMU in this study is

the food crop agriculture sub-sector 29 districts in East Java. The results of this study

can be studied as many as 93.

Keywords: DEA, Land, Labor, and productivity.

Cite this Article: Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah, Analysis of

Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index,

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), 10 (1), 2019, pp.

420–443.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=1

1. INTRODUCTION

East Java Province is one of the provinces in Indonesia that relies on the agricultural sector of

food crops as a driving force for the economy. East Java Province is known as a province that

has great attention to the progress of food crop agriculture . Large crop agricultural

productivity can increase regional GDP in aggregate in Bhattarai & Narayanamoorthy,

(2003) and Majid, (2004).The second largest East Java GRDP after the industrial sector is the

agricultural sector, where the Food Crop sub-sector provides a large contribution compared to

the agricultural and hunting services sub-sector, the Plantation sub-sector, the Livestock sub-

sector, and the Holtukultur Crop sub-sector.

Page 2: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 421 [email protected]

Agricultural land is needed in increasing the productivity of agricultural crops according

to Irz, Lin, Thirtle, & Wiggins, (2001). East Java Province has agricultural land which

continues to decline throughout the year because it is caused by experts in the function of land

to be residential and industrial. According to Bayyurt & Yılmaz, (2012) even though the

government carried out agricultural land regulation had a negative impact or continued to

decline. However, if the government does not provide a regulation to ban functional experts, it

can be ascertained that the productivity of agricultural crops will decline according toKheir-

El-Din & Heba El-Laithy, (2008).

In addition to agricultural land, the productivity of food crops is urgently needed, and also

requires labor to carry out their production according toTravers & Ma, (1994). Labor also has

a good and bad impact on increasing productivity in the agricultural sector. Because the

higher the number of workers with a little land area will have an impact on decreasing

agricultural productivity in Kheir-El-Din & Heba El-Laithy,(2008). East Java Province must

be aware of this phenomenon, because we know that more and more people cannot work in

the industrial sector and their services will enter the agricultural sector. The agricultural sector

is a sector that does not require high skills(Yutanto, Shonhadj, Ilham, & Ekaningtias, 2018).

Efficiency of food crop agriculture is a performance parameter that is quite often and

commonly used, efficiency measurement is widely used to answer the challenges of

difficulties in calculating measures of food crop agriculture performance. Calculation of the

level of land area, labor, irrigation and rainfall is usually used to show good performance

results, but this calculation is sometimes not included in the criteria of good food crop

agriculture that can answer the problems of food crop agriculture. Measurement of efficiency

of food crop agriculture can be done using nonparametric methods, in this case using an

approach to calculate the efficiency of food crop agriculture, namely Data Envelopment

Analysis (DEA) to analyze the level of efficiency of food crop agriculture from Districts in

East Java according toCooper, Seiford, & Zhu, (2011).

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

According toTravers & Ma, (1994) results of analysis of technological improvements,

prices, fertilizer and irrigation can increase agricultural productivity food crops and reduce

poverty .According to Irz et al., (2001)results of analysis of agricultural growth as well food

crops can be done by adding agricultural land, along with supporting tools.Agricultural

technology should be used to get more and more satisfying results.

According to(Bayyurt & Yılmaz, 2012) the results of the analysis of increasing irrigation

rates and literacy rates in rural areas are two factors, the most important of all is that they

know, the knowledge of agriculture and growing food crops so that it can reduce

poverty.According to Majid, (2004)the results of the analysis of factors in farmer income,

food prices, GINI ratio, labor, total population and inflation can reduce poverty.

According to Kheir-El-Din & Heba El-Laithy, (2008) TFP analysis results reduce

poverty by 0.241 percent , higher productivity of agricultural food crops will result in lower

poverty rates, -1,377 ,increase in yields do not benefit the poor, increase in land results in a

decrease in poverty by 1.464, increase THIS one percent G index will increase poverty by

1.62 percent.According to Bayyurt & Yılmaz, (2012) the results of government

regulation analysis havea positive effect on agricultural efficiency.

Education has a negative influence on agricultural efficiency food crops . The result can

be interpreted that the higher the level of education the more farmers leave the work of

farmers.According toDhrifi, (2014) analysis results of poverty reduction per capital income

of 0.25%, a decrease in household consumption expenditure by 0.21 points, which

Page 3: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 422 [email protected]

decreases poverty level,growth of foodcrop agriculture can reduce poverty by

32% , technology innovation reduces poverty by 18%.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This research uses a method namely Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to measure technical

efficiency. DEA method is a non-parametric analysis method that aims to measure the level of

technical efficiency relative to other production units that have the same objectives. The

production unit is here in the form of a decision making unit (DMU) where the DMU in this

study is a food crop agricultural sub-sector 29 districts in East Java.

This study focuses for 8 years ie in 2010 until 2017. The input variables used in this

research is the area of land and labor (labor), while Productivity become the output

variable. The Linear Programming (LP) function that is carried out in this approach uses the

assumption of output oriented , so the objective function that is applied is the maximizing

function of output with the input level that isceteris paribus. DEA analysis of this one

stage uses MaxDEA 7 Basic software .

In this measurement of technical efficiency, it will use output oriented measurement

with one measurement scale assumption, namely Variable Return to Scale (VRS) with a

DEA one stage approach . A sum is needed to be able to produce technical efficiency values

for each Regency in East Java based on VRS assumptions, but it is also intended to estimate

the value of the efficiency scores of each Regency in East Java from year 20 10 to 2017 .

3.1. Dea Model

The following is a model of technical efficiency analysis assuming VRS with the DEA one

stage approach : VRS Model Measurement of Technical Efficiency Oriented to Output

( Output Oriented )

Max Ф, λФ,

st-Фyi + Qλ ≥ 0

xi - Xλ ≥ 0

I1'λ = 1

λ ≥ 0 ………………… (3.1)

Where : Ф = efficiency score; λ = Ix1 vector constant or obstacle vector; yi = output

vector i; xi = input vector i; Q = Matrix ouput i keselu Ruhan; X = input matrix i overall

The model above is a VRS model with an output-oriented approach where the variable

ukkan shows the calculation of technical efficiency (Coelli, Prasada Rao, O’Donnell, &

Battese, 2005)with a value of Ф between 1 to ∞ (infinity), and Ф - 1 representing proportional

increase in output that can be achieved by DMU with a constant input quantity. λ is I x1

vector of constants and I1'λ = 1 is convexity constraint, with I 1 being I x1 vector of

one. Convexity constraints show that variable return to scale (VRS) which ensures that

companies are inefficient will only be compared with companies that have the same

scale. There is a note that 1 / Ф indicates the value of technical efficiency which assumes

values at interval levels 0 to 1.

Page 4: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 423 [email protected]

4. RESULT AND ANALYSIS

4.1 Results of Estimates on the efficiency of food crop agriculture in East Java

Province

The results of the estimation of technical efficiency describing food crop agriculture using

the DEA method one stage can be seen in graph I. The technical efficiency score ranges from

0 to 1. An assessment of score 1 shows that food crop agriculture reaches an efficient

condition. While food crop agriculture in an ineffective condition has a technical efficiency

score of less than 1.

Graph 1. Productivity of food

Based on Graph I, it can be seen that as many as 93.1 percent (29 districts) in East Java

Province in the period 2010-2017 have an average score of efficiency of less than 0 , 69,

while the rest have achieved an average technical efficiency of more than 0.31.

So that it can be said that food crop agriculture in 2010-2017 estimates inefficiency by 31

percent and has the potential to increase output by 69 percent so that the conditions are

efficient.

Graph I above shows the DEA one stage technical efficiency score in 2010-2017. On the

other hand, Sidoarjo Regency is the most inefficient DMU with the acquisition of an

efficiency score of 0.20-0.25 in 2010-2017. But there is also one Kabupaten Gresik that also

has an ineffective DMU from 29 Regencies in East Java with the acquisition of an efficiency

score of 0.28-0.35 in 2010-2017.

These two districts have a tendency to improve the efficiency of food crops throughout the

year according to Hanaa Kheir-El-Din and Heba El-Laithy (2008) . This is due to the

development of the center of the provincial capital of East Java to the area of Sidoarjo

Regency and Gersik Regency, making it an expert in the function of agricultural land which

used to be an agricultural area and a residential area. Sidoarjo regency has extensive

agricultural land, but because small-scale ownership (subsitaries) by the community makes a

choice to use agricultural land or sell at high prices to the owners of capital to be used as

settlements or industries. If food crops are implemented, the landowners will also be burdened

by high labor costs, rejecting (Irz et al., 2001; Travers & Ma, 1994).

Third, Gresik Regency is an area with almost the majority of its area being

industrial. Agricultural problems there are due to the large size of Litosol land where this type

of soil is very difficult for agriculture. High labor costs compared to agricultural products

make it an obstacle to agricultural productivity according to(Bayyurt & Yılmaz, 2012; Kheir-

El-Din & Heba El-Laithy, 2008),rejected Dhrifi, (2014).

Page 5: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 424 [email protected]

The technical estimation of food crop agriculture in East Java can be seen in Figure 1.

There are 8 efficient districts but in different years. First, Trenggalek District has an efficient

area since 2010-2012 and 2016, where inefficiency occurred in 2013-2015 and 2017. The

problem of food crop farming was broken down that year so that inefficiencies occurred were

experts in the function of land and labor in the high agricultural sector, although this area

contributed the largest regional income (Qi et al., 2018).

Figure 1. Agriculture east java food crops efficiency

Secondly, based on figure 1 efficiency occurred in 2010, 2012, 2014 and 2016, while in

2011, 2013 and 2015 there was inefficiency. The problem of food crop farming in Pacitan is

the area of small agricultural land and the small number of workers in the agricultural sector,

plus people who live a lot in subsitant agriculture for personal needs. Third, efficiency occurs

in Malang Regency in 2015, while in 2010-2017 except 2015 agricultural inefficiencies

occur. This problem occurs because the occurrence of expert land functions into settlements is

also due to the large workforce. Fourth, Magetan Regency in 2010 was an agricultural area,

but because experts in land functions were large enough to influence the productivity of

agricultural crops since 2011-2017 and mapping the lack of regional governance that had an

impact on agricultural areas where fertile land became settlements and tourism. Fifth,

Lumajang Regency in 2010 was an area similar to magetan but different types of soil and soil

fertility.

Sixth, Regency Jember in 2010 was East Java's rice barn, but the food crop sector, but the

existence of development made a good area for agriculture to turn into settlements and

industries, so that 2010-2017 continued to decline in productivity. Seventh, Blitar Regency in

2010 happened agricultural efficiency the same problem with Magetan Regency. Eighth,

Banyuwangi Regency in 2010,2013 and 2015 is one of the East Java Province rice barns

because in that year agricultural productivity increased with government regulations that

prohibited the construction of the (Agovino, Cerciello, & Gatto, 2018; Kaim, Cord, & Volk,

2018).

Page 6: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 425 [email protected]

5. CONCLUSION

This is due firstly, because of the development of the center of the provincial capital of East

Java to the area of Sidoarjo Regency and Gersik Regency, it has become an expert in the

function of agricultural land which used to be an agricultural area and a residential

area(Ilham, 2018).

Second, Sidoarjo Regency has extensive agricultural land, but because small-scale

ownership (subsiten) by the community makes a choice to use agricultural land or sell at high

prices to the owners of capital to be used as settlements or industries. If food crops are

implemented, the landowners will also be burdened by high labor costs, rejecting Irz et al.,

(2001); Travers & Ma, (1994).

Third, Gresik Regency is an area with almost the majority of its area

beingindustrial. Agricultural problems there are due to the large size of Litosol land where

this type of soil is very difficult for agriculture. High labor costs compared to agricultural

products make it an obstacle to agricultural productivity according to (Bayyurt & Yılmaz,

2012; Dhrifi, 2014; Kheir-El-Din & Heba El-Laithy, 2008).

ACKNOWLEDGE

Thank you to both parents and extended family, colleagues and siblings, Lamongan Islamic

University and Trunojoyo Madura University, Airlangga University Surabaya Partner and

staff. The Chair of the Doctoral Program in Economics, the Promoter who always supports

and assists in the joys and sorrows. BUDI-DN scholarships that provide financial assistance

REFERENCES

[1] Agovino, M., Cerciello, M., & Gatto, A. (2018). Policy efficiency in the field of food

sustainability. The adjusted food agriculture and nutrition index. Journal of Environmental

Management, 218, 220–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.04.058

[2] Bayyurt, N., & Yılmaz, S. (2012). The Impacts of Governance and Education on

Agricultural Efficiency: An International Analysis. Procedia - Social and Behavioral

Sciences, 58, 1158–1165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.1097

[3] Bhattarai, M., & Narayanamoorthy, A. (2003). Impact of Irrigation on Agricultural

Growth and Poverty Alleviation: Macro Level Analyses in India. Water Policy Research,

8.

[4] Coelli, T. J., Prasada Rao, D. S., O’Donnell, C. J., & Battese, G. E. (2005). An

introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis. An Introduction to Efficiency and

Productivity Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1007/b136381

[5] Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Zhu, J. (2011). Data Envelopment Analysis: History,

Models, and Interpretations. Handbook on Data Envelopment Analysis - International

Series in Operations Research & Management Science (Vol. 164). Springer

Science+Business Media, LLC 2011.

[6] Dhrifi, A. (2014). Agricultural Productivity and Poverty Alleviation: What Role for

Technological Innovation. Journal of Economic and Social Studies, 4(1), 131–151.

https://doi.org/10.14706/JECOSS11418

[7] Ilham, R. (2018). Improve Quality Of E-Loyalty In Online Food Delivery Services : A

CASE OF INDONESIA. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology,

96(15), 4760–4769.

[8] Irz, X., Lin, L., Thirtle, C., & Wiggins, S. (2001). Agricultural Productivity Growth and

Poverty Alleviation Theoretical expectations of the effects of agricultural growth on

poverty. Development Policy Review, 19(4), 449–466.

Page 7: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 426 [email protected]

[9] Kaim, A., Cord, A. F., & Volk, M. (2018). A review of multi-criteria optimization

techniques for agricultural land use allocation. Environmental Modelling and Software,

105(April), 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.03.031

[10] Kheir-El-Din, H., & Heba El-Laithy, H. (2008). Agricultural productivity growth

employment and poverty in Egypt. Working Paper Series, 129(129), 34.

[11] Majid, N. (2004). Reaching Millennium Goals: How Well Does Agricultural Productivity

Growth Reduce Poverty? Employment Strategy Papers, 38.

[12] Qi, X., Fu, Y., Wang, R. Y., Ng, C. N., Dang, H., & He, Y. (2018). Improving the

sustainability of agricultural land use: An integrated framework for the conflict between

food security and environmental deterioration. Applied Geography, 90(November 2017),

214–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2017.12.009

[13] Travers, L., & Ma, J. (1994). Agricultural productivity and rural poverty in China. China

Economic Review, 5(1), 141–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/1043-951X(94)90019-1

[14] Yutanto, H., Shonhadj, N., Ilham, R., & Ekaningtias, D. (2018). Development Of Parking

Accounting Information Systems Based. International Journal of Civil Engineering and

Technology, 9(8), 1013–1022.

Data source:

[15] https://jatim.bps.go.id/subject/162/produk-domestik-regional-bruto--kabupaten-kota-

.html#subjekViewTab3

[16] http://prasarana.pertanian.go.id/lahanmy/

[17] http://prasarana.pertanian.go.id/tenagakerjamy/?page=home

Table I Review of Previous Research

NO Researcher Country Method used Analysis Results

1 Lee Travers and Jun

Ma (1994)

China -DEA, Dependent variable

(Y): Food

cropproductivity and poverty

Independent variable

(X): technology, labor,

fertilizer and irrigation

-R 2 of 0.833

- food crop agricultural products (+)

-poverty (-)

-technology (-)

workforce (+)

-fertilizer (+)

- irrigation (-)

2 Xavier Irz, Lin Lin,

Colin Thirtle and Steve

Wiggins (2001)

South

Africa

-DEA

-Production: the number of

poor people, the level of

poverty, labor and land

-Poverty: value added / labor

and value added / land

-Proconductivity(+): the number of

poor (-), poverty (-), labor (+) and

land (+)

-Poverty (-): value added / labor (-)

and value added / land (-), R 2 =

0.088

3 Madhusudan Bhattarai

and A.

Narayanamoorthy, ( 200

3 )

India -DEA

-TFP

-Variable variable (Y):

Agricultural cropproductivity a

nd poverty

-Independent variable

(X): Irrigation, selling price,

land area and fertilizer

-costanta (+)

-R 2 = 0.53

- food crop agricultural products (+)

-poverty (-)

- irrigation (-)

-selling price (-)

-fertilizer (+)

- Extensive land area (+)

4 Majid, Nomaan (2004) Sub-

Saharan

Africa

-DEA

-TFP

Dependent variable (Y): Food

cropproductivity and poverty

Independent variable

- R 2 = 0.33

-costanta (+)

- food crop agricultural products (+)

-poverty (-)

- farmer's income (+)

Page 8: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 427 [email protected]

NO Researcher Country Method used Analysis Results

(X): farmer income, food

price, GINI ratio, labor, total

population, irrigation,

technology,

fertilizer,government

policyand inflation

- food prices (-)

-GINI ratio (-)

-labor (-)

-total population (-)

- technology (+)

- Irrigation (+)

-fertilizer (-)

-government policies (+)

-inflation(-)

5 Hanaa Kheir-El-Din and

Heba El-Laithy (2008)

Egypt -DEA

-TFP

Dependent variable (Y):

Productivity, poverty and

technical efficiency.

Independent variable (X):

Land, GINI labor, and capital

(capital input and livestock)

Study: all of Egypt

Productivity (-), poverty (-) and

technical efficiency (-).

Land (-), Labor (-), GINI (+) and

capital (capital input and livestock)

(-)

6 Nizamettin Bayyurta and

Senem Yilmaz (2012)

64 world

bank

countries

-DEA-CRS

-OLS fixed effect

dependent variable (Y) =

government regulation and

education

Independent variable (X):

Land area, fertility / fertilizer,

tractor, labor.

- R-sq: within = 0.0133

- government regulation (+)

-education(-)

-Surface area (-)

- fertility / fertilizer (+)

- tractor (-)

-labor(-).

7 Abdelhafidh

Dhrifi (2013)

Sub

Saharan

Afrika32

Countries

- Simultaneous Equation

Model, SSA, Data Panel

-Poverty:

agricultural cropproduction ,

capital per capita,

technological innovation,

farmer income, farmer

population, and infrastructure

-Agricultural growth:

agricultural production,

technological innovation,

inflation, export-import trade,

education, government

investment.

-Agricultural production:

economic growth,

technological innovation,

irrigation and agricultural

labor.

-Poverty (+): the productivity

offood crops (+), GDP perkapital

(+), Innovations in technology (+),

farmers' income (+), the population

of farmers (+), and infrastructure

(+), R 2 = 0.431, constants 0.213

-Growth in agriculture

(+):agriculturalproductivity (+),

technological innovation (+),

inflation (-), import-export trade

(+), education (+), government

investment (+), R 2= 0.383, -0.041

constants

-agricultural productivity(+):

economic growth (+), technological

innovation (-), irrigation (+) and

farm labor (+), R2 = 0.294, 0.022

constants.

Page 9: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 428 [email protected]

Page 10: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 429 [email protected]

Tabel II DEA Results Envelopment Model (score,Benchmark)

NO DMU Score Benchmark

(Lambda)

Proportion

ate

Movement

(land)

Slack

Movemen

t (land)

Projecti

on

(land)

Propo

rtiona

te

Move

ment

(labor

)

Slack

Movement

(labor)

Projection

(labor)

Proportio

nate

Movemen

t

(producti

vity)

Slack

Movement

(productivity)

Projection

(productivity)

1 SIDOARJO_2011 0,201571

MALANG_2015(

0,404989); TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,595011)

0 0 22692 0 -421678,632 977849,368 3160,117

99 0 3957,91799

2 SIDOARJO_2010 0,204003

MALANG_2015(

0,405323);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,594677)

0 0 22701 0 -394192,224 978277,776 3151,911

39 0 3959,70139

3 SIDOARJO_2012 0,210651

MALANG_2015(

0,360667); TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,639333)

0 0 21498 0 -505991,167 921013,833 2937,421

26 0 3721,32126

4 SIDOARJO_2013 0,213571

MALANG_2015(

0,345521);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,654479)

0 0 21090 0 -551714,355 901592,645 2862,974

13 0 3640,47413

5 SIDOARJO_2017 0,220411

MALANG_2015(

0,321589); TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,678411)

0 0 20445,28

571 0 -582846,082 870903,633

2738,47953

0 3512,72095

6 SIDOARJO_2014 0,22089

MALANG_2015(

0,311816);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,688184)

0 0 20182 0 -623065,018 858370,982 2696,149

65 0 3460,54965

7 SIDOARJO_2016 0,250839

MALANG_2015(0,209919);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,790081)

0 0 17437 0 -806747,626 727706,374 2185,014

94 0 2916,61494

8 SIDOARJO_2015 0,258042

MALANG_2015(

0,212888);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,787112)

0 0 17517 0 -776533,55 731514,45 2175,767

32 0 2932,46732

9 GRESIK_2016 0,28825

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,060424);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,772879);

MALANG_2015(

0,166697)

0 0 36541 0 0 890124 4221,532

73 0 5931,20273

10 GRESIK_2015 0,317403

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,063682);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,782051); MALANG_2015(

0,154267)

0 0 36558 0 0 878367 4040,665

81 0 5919,54581

11 GRESIK_2014 0,320888

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,082423);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,781876);

MALANG_2015(

0,135701)

0 0 36875 0 0 866295 4033,351

5 0 5939,1515

12 GRESIK_2017 0,328159

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,084416);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,786941);

MALANG_2015(

0,128644)

0 0 36887,66

667 0 0 859676,167

3985,97371

0 5932,91538

13 GRESIK_2013 0,332775

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,087471);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,790376); MALANG_2015(

0,122154)

0 0 36925 0 0 854073 3956,941

19 0 5930,44119

14 GRESIK_2012 0,351362

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,101782);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,793882);

MALANG_2015(

0,104336)

0 0 37152 0 0 841034 3852,553

84 0 5939,45384

15 GRESIK_2011 0,358203

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,110713);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,800580);

MALANG_2015(

0,088707)

0 0 37275 0 0 828164 3810,797

19 0 5937,69719

16 BANGKALAN_201

6 0,359842

BLITAR_2010(0,

058751);

LUMAJANG_2010(0,665604);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,275645)

0 0 28089 0 0 629891 2851,272

24 0 4454,01224

17 GRESIK_2010 0,373751

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,118774);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,807835);

MALANG_2015(

0,073391)

0 0 37381 0 0 815278 3716,240

27 0 5934,13027

18 BANGKALAN_201

5 0,39906

LUMAJANG_2010(0,729429);

PACITAN_2010(

0,053856);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,216715)

0 0 28480 0 0 622926 2693,133

63 0 4481,53363

19 BANGKALAN_201

4 0,424207

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,728268); PACITAN_2010(

0,122598);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,149134)

0 0 28540 0 0 615818 2567,540

38 0 4459,14038

20 BANGKALAN_201

7 0,427032

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,736566);

PACITAN_2010(

0 0 28855,71

429 0 0 607746

2557,374

61 0 4463,38175

Page 11: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 430 [email protected]

NO DMU Score Benchmark

(Lambda)

Proportion

ate

Movement

(land)

Slack

Movemen

t (land)

Projecti

on

(land)

Propo

rtiona

te

Move

ment

(labor

)

Slack

Movement

(labor)

Projection

(labor)

Proportio

nate

Movemen

t

(producti

vity)

Slack

Movement

(productivity)

Projection

(productivity)

0,223165); TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,040268)

21 BANGKALAN_201

3 0,432337

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,741975);

PACITAN_2010(

0,227909);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,030116)

0 0 28985 0 0 608533 2544,351

96 0 4482,15196

22 SITUBONDO_2016 0,437081

LUMAJANG_2010(0,244848);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,755152)

0

-4183,7998

2

25963,20018

0 0 481853 1947,455

2 0 3459,5652

23 BANGKALAN_201

2 0,443012

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,714864);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,069316);

PACITAN_2010(

0,215819)

0 0 29141 0 0 600337 2481,111

38 0 4454,51138

24 BANGKALAN_201

1 0,46083

LUMAJANG_2010(0,671773);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,184059);

PACITAN_2010(

0,144168)

0 0 29375 0 0 592322 2387,961

1 0 4428,9611

25 PONOROGO_2016 0,465615

LUMAJANG_2010(0,648731);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,351269)

0

-3917,6761

8

30572,32383

0 0 593848 2431,090

83 0 4549,32083

26 LAMONGAN_2016 0,466212

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,379738);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,620262)

0

-

36097,831

9

45043,16

806 0 0 827036

3549,456

17 0 6649,56617

27 PONOROGO_2015 0,474164

LUMAJANG_2010(0,642734);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,357266)

0

-4085,1164

9

30503,88351

0 0 592185 2383,689

19 0 4533,13919

28 LAMONGAN_2015 0,477055

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,375104);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,624896)

0

-

36806,504

9

44915,49

514 0 0 825379

3470,002

41 0 6635,50241

29 BANGKALAN_201

0 0,480786

LUMAJANG_2010(0,634853);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,263071);

PACITAN_2010(

0,102077)

0 0 29380 0 0 584395 2275,523

16 0 4382,63316

30 SITUBONDO_2015 0,480934

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,232886);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,767114)

0

-

4431,3100

5

25826,68

996 0 0 478536

1778,989

48 0 3427,28948

31 LAMONGAN_2013 0,517185

BANYUWANGI_2010(0,361862);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,638138)

0 -

37686,339

7

44550,66032

0 0 820644 3184,314

17 0 6595,31417

32 LAMONGAN_2017 0,527432

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,358394);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,641606)

0

-

37752,311

1

44455,11

752 0 0 819404

3111,762

54 0 6584,78969

33 LAMONGAN_2012 0,529607

BANYUWANGI_2010(0,351582);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,648418)

0 -

38628,577

9

44267,42214

0 0 816968 3087,714

17 0 6564,11417

34 TUBAN_2016 0,529828

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,346822);

LUMAJANG_2010(0,653178)

0

-

10121,718

1

44136,28

194 0 0 815266

3079,468

47 0 6549,66847

35 JOMBANG_2016 0,539477

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,342112);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,633209);

MALANG_2015(

0,024679)

0 0 41873 0 0 852516 2970,477

88 0 6450,22788

36 JOMBANG_2014 0,542393

BANYUWANGI_2010(0,003111);

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,374823);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,622066)

0 0 42544 0 0 840668 2977,439

02 0 6506,53902

37 TUBAN_2015 0,542684

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,332673);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,667327)

0

-

10895,517

3

43746,48

271 0 0 810207

2975,630

29 0 6506,73029

38 JOMBANG_2015 0,543054

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,348624);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,634634);

MALANG_2015(

0,016742)

0 0 41977 0 0 846762 2949,408

47 0 6454,60847

39 BOJONEGORO_201

6 0,543522

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,487110); LUMAJANG_201

0(0,512890)

0

-

29377,6264

48001,37357

0 0 865429 3184,126

18 0 6975,42618

40 JOMBANG_2013 0,545882

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,045427);

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,325106);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,629466)

0 0 42665 0 0 836128 2952,823

69 0 6502,32369

41 LAMONGAN_2011 0,546479

BANYUWANGI_2010(0,341058);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,658942)

0

-38808,519

4

43977,48056

0 0 813205 2962,475

77 0 6532,17577

Page 12: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 431 [email protected]

NO DMU Score Benchmark

(Lambda)

Proportion

ate

Movement

(land)

Slack

Movemen

t (land)

Projecti

on

(land)

Propo

rtiona

te

Move

ment

(labor

)

Slack

Movement

(labor)

Projection

(labor)

Proportio

nate

Movemen

t

(producti

vity)

Slack

Movement

(productivity)

Projection

(productivity)

42 SITUBONDO_2014 0,552446

LUMAJANG_2010(0,220145);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,779855)

0 -

5687,7097

25681,29

031 0 0 475003

1518,511

99 0 3392,91199

43 JOMBANG_2017 0,553479

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,056735);

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,307835);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,635430)

0 0 42613,57

143 0 0 833337,857

2898,17543

0 6490,564

44 BOJONEGORO_201

5 0,553782

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,476301);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,523699)

0

-

29677,427

2

47703,57

281 0 0 861564

3097,922

05 0 6942,62205

45 PONOROGO_2017 0,554678

LUMAJANG_2010(0,622860);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,377140)

0

-4408,7832

1

30277,07394

0 0 586673,857 1994,825

02 0 4479,51359

46 LAMONGAN_2010 0,555375

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,330313);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,669687)

0 -

39144,548

43681,45

197 0 0 809363

2889,866

85 0 6499,56685

47 TUBAN_2014 0,557353

BANYUWANGI_2010(0,317216);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,682784)

0

-11474,376

2

43320,62379

0 0 804680 2859,419

96 0 6459,81996

48 JOMBANG_2012 0,562619

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,106916);

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,245544);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,647540)

0 0 42687 0 0 826635 2832,771

18 0 6476,67118

49 MOJOKERTO_2014 0,563083

BLITAR_2010(0,943567);

MALANG_2015(

0,019608);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,036824)

0 0 30489 0 0 748054 2195,435

35 0 5024,83535

50 MOJOKERTO_2013 0,563089

BLITAR_2010(0,

968468); MALANG_2015(

0,005883);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,025648)

0 0 30599 0 0 737431 2199,415

2 0 5034,0152

51 BOJONEGORO_201

4 0,564857

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,463881);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,536119)

0

-

30130,609

1

47361,39

089 0 0 857123

3004,629

13 0 6904,92913

52 MOJOKERTO_2012 0,565384

BLITAR_2010(0,920390);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,058019);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,021591)

0 0 30837 0 0 729918 2198,354

76 0 5058,15476

53 JOMBANG_2011 0,56647

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,204247);

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,138504);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,657249)

0 0 43119 0 0 819086 2812,085

6 0 6486,4856

54 PONOROGO_2014 0,567273

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,635352);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,364648)

0

-

4258,3602

1

30419,63

979 0 0 590138

1952,991

07 0 4513,22107

55 MOJOKERTO_2011 0,570558

BLITAR_2010(0,746053);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,227490);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,026457)

0 0 31342 0 0 720510 2193,655

44 0 5108,15544

56 MOJOKERTO_2016 0,57098

BLITAR_2010(0,

836381);

MALANG_2015(

0,055877); TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,107741)

0 0 29401 0 0 764529 2086,563

06 0 4863,55306

57 NGAWI_2016 0,571747

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,571229);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,428771)

0

-

17417,132

4

29687,86

759 0 0 572357

1858,704

91 0 4340,20491

58 MOJOKERTO_2017 0,571964

BLITAR_2010(0,

961115); MALANG_2015(

0,008168);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,030718)

0 0 30518,85

714 0 0 738299,714

2149,53783

0 5021,86068

59 TUBAN_2017 0,574383

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,297928);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,702072)

0

-

11962,651

7

42789,20

547 0 0 797783

2724,497

49 0 6401,28177

60 MOJOKERTO_2015 0,575066

BLITAR_2010(0,857307);

MALANG_2015(

0,044995);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,097698)

0 0 29511 0 0 756438 2071,447

32 0 4874,74732

61 PONOROGO_2013 0,576134

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,625824);

MAGETAN_2010(0,374176)

0 -4378,091 30310,90

9 0 0 587496

1902,103

36 0 4487,51336

62 TUBAN_2013 0,576678

BANYUWANGI_2010(0,301141);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,698859)

0

-

11978,263

3

42877,73

666 0 0 798932

2713,933

89 0 6411,03389

Page 13: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 432 [email protected]

NO DMU Score Benchmark

(Lambda)

Proportion

ate

Movement

(land)

Slack

Movemen

t (land)

Projecti

on

(land)

Propo

rtiona

te

Move

ment

(labor

)

Slack

Movement

(labor)

Projection

(labor)

Proportio

nate

Movemen

t

(producti

vity)

Slack

Movement

(productivity)

Projection

(productivity)

63 BOJONEGORO_201

3 0,577841

BANYUWANGI_2010(0,449311);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,550689)

0 -

30541,043

46959,95

702 0 0 851913

2896,309

34 0 6860,70934

64 SITUBONDO_2017 0,578803

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,203570);

MAGETAN_2010(0,796430)

0

-

5934,5711

1

25492,14

318 0 0 470407

1410,248

23 0 3348,19109

65 JOMBANG_2010 0,58032

BANYUWANGI_2010(0,287234);

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,044510);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,668256)

0 0 43430 0 0 811570 2722,704

94 0 6487,57494

66 PONOROGO_2012 0,581497

LUMAJANG_2010(0,614840);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,385160)

0 -

4590,4483 30185,55

17 0 0 584450

1865,63458

0 4457,87458

67 BOJONEGORO_201

7 0,585981

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,373402);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,626598)

0

-

29174,122

3

44868,60

982 0 0 824770,5

2745,089

02 0 6630,33777

68 BOJONEGORO_201

2 0,586682

BANYUWANGI_2010(0,433946);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,566054)

0

-30985,359

2

46536,64076

0 0 846419 2816,379

09 0 6814,07909

69 SITUBONDO_2013 0,588155

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,202463);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,797537)

0

-

5891,4913

2

25479,50

868 0 0 470100

1377,703

86 0 3345,20386

70 PONOROGO_2011 0,59212

LUMAJANG_2010(0,602456);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,397544)

0

-4734,7736

3

30044,22637

0 0 581016 1804,650

4 0 4424,4604

71 BOJONEGORO_201

1 0,592984

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,416976);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,583024)

0

-

31566,902

6

46069,09

743 0 0 840351

2752,477

03 0 6762,57703

72 TUBAN_2012 0,593139

BANYUWANGI_2010(0,281735);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,718265)

0

-12554,917

8

42343,08222

0 0 791993 2584,439

24 0 6352,13924

73 NGAWI_2015 0,596576

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,566408);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,433592)

0

-

17573,156

3

29632,84

372 0 0 571020

1745,695

37 0 4327,19537

74 BONDOWOSO_201

6 0,597211

LUMAJANG_2010(0,425009);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,574991)

0

-5523,7919

7

28019,20803

0 0 531811 1589,276

29 0 3945,67629

75 LAMONGAN_2014 0,60127

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,369103);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,630897)

0

-

37093,855

6

44750,14

445 0 0 823233

2638,508

27 0 6617,28827

76 MOJOKERTO_2010 0,605036

BLITAR_2010(0,621251);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,337820);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,040928)

0 0 31453 0 0 711218 2015,612

64 0 5103,28264

77 TUBAN_2011 0,605183

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,262567); LUMAJANG_201

0(0,737433)

0

-

13087,0229

41814,97708

0 0 785139 2484,966

01 0 6293,96601

78 BOJONEGORO_201

0 0,610654

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,400084);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,599916)

0

-

33079,288

5

45603,71

152 0 0 834311

2613,022

63 0 6711,31263

79 SUMENEP_2016 0,618947

BLITAR_2010(0,

362937); MALANG_2015(

0,163802);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,473261)

0 0 23187 0 0 770264 1475,478

3 0 3872,1083

80 TUBAN_2010 0,619344

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,243340);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,756660)

0

-

13626,746

1

41285,25

388 0 0 778264

2373,624

56 0 6235,61456

81 NGAWI_2014 0,619652

LUMAJANG_2010(0,560154);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,439846)

0

-18045,518

6

29561,48142

0 0 569286 1639,422

86 0 4310,32286

82 TULUNGAGUNG_2

016 0,62034

BLITAR_2010(0,

667319);

MALANG_2015(

0,037545);

TRENGGALEK_2010(0,295136)

0 0 25650 0 0 693650 1596,826

37 0 4205,93637

83 PONOROGO_2010 0,630246

LUMAJANG_2010(0,590079);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,409921)

0 -

4897,0166

5

29902,98

335 0 0 577584

1623,615

68 0 4391,06568

84 PASURUAN_2016 0,634418

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,154783);

LUMAJANG_2010(0,486502);

MALANG_2015(

0,358715)

0 0 39319 0 0 1128999 2375,291

46 0 6497,28146

85 BONDOWOSO_201

5 0,634726

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,412326);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,587674)

0

-

5779,5331

4

27874,46

686 0 0 528294

1428,754

49 0 3911,45449

Page 14: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 433 [email protected]

NO DMU Score Benchmark

(Lambda)

Proportion

ate

Movement

(land)

Slack

Movemen

t (land)

Projecti

on

(land)

Propo

rtiona

te

Move

ment

(labor

)

Slack

Movement

(labor)

Projection

(labor)

Proportio

nate

Movemen

t

(producti

vity)

Slack

Movement

(productivity)

Projection

(productivity)

86 SITUBONDO_2012 0,637501

LUMAJANG_2010(0,190620);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,809380)

0 -

6886,6434

5

25344,35

656 0 0 466816

1201,049

24 0 3313,24924

87 PASURUAN_2015 0,639333

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,162203);

LUMAJANG_2010(0,491871);

MALANG_2015(

0,345925)

0 0 39422 0 0 1118511 2342,941

4 0 6496,1414

88 KEDIRI_2016 0,642276

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,204498);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,525387);

MALANG_2015(

0,270116)

0 0 39997 0 0 1055676 2319,794

78 0 6484,87478

89 PASURUAN_2014 0,642409

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,170228);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,497286);

MALANG_2015(

0,332486)

0 0 39535 0 0 1107580 2322,748

68 0 6495,54868

90 NGAWI_2013 0,643671

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,546952); MAGETAN_2010

(0,453048)

0 -

18290,186 29410,81

397 0 0 565625

1523,19988

0 4274,69988

91 BONDOWOSO_201

4 0,651993

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,398262);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,601738)

0

-

6051,0365

8

27713,96

342 0 0 524394

1348,005

95 0 3873,50595

92 SITUBONDO_2011 0,653067

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,174973); MAGETAN_2010

(0,825027)

0

-7135,2138

1

25165,7862

0 0 462477 1134,829

06 0 3271,02906

93 NGAWI_2012 0,656869

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,535938);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,464062)

0

-

18516,872

6

29285,12

743 0 0 562571

1456,583

26 0 4244,98326

94 PASURUAN_2017 0,658154

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,180929); LUMAJANG_201

0(0,502604);

MALANG_2015(

0,316467)

0 0 39693,57

143 0 0 1095000,29

2221,26939

0 6497,87367

95 KEDIRI_2015 0,659015

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,210976);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,527881);

MALANG_2015(0,261144)

0 0 40096 0 0 1048822 2212,130

03 0 6487,47003

96 PASURUAN_2013 0,659916

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,172909);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,506767);

MALANG_2015(

0,320324)

0 0 39541 0 0 1095876 2204,692

88 0 6482,79288

97 PASURUAN_2012 0,671789

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,180761);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,513412);

MALANG_2015(

0,305826)

0 0 39646 0 0 1083766 2126,808

22 0 6480,00822

98 BONDOWOSO_201

3 0,672101

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,383292);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,616708)

0

-

6332,8698

5

27543,13

015 0 0 520243

1256,875

08 0 3833,11508

99 PASURUAN_2011 0,672327

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,211193);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,506303);

MALANG_2015(

0,282503)

0 0 40189 0 0 1071327 2137,416

72 0 6523,01672

100 KEDIRI_2014 0,673757

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,212640); LUMAJANG_201

0(0,533941);

MALANG_2015(

0,253418)

0 0 40099 0 0 1041372 2113,814

16 0 6479,26416

101 KEDIRI_2017 0,673794

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,246768);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,521609);

MALANG_2015(0,231623)

0 0 40726 0 0 1031998,86 2131,634

13 0 6534,63413

102 BONDOWOSO_201

7 0,675048

LUMAJANG_2010(0,380925);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,619075)

0 -

6344,3076

8

27516,12

089 0 0 519586,714

1243,502

02 0 3826,72916

103 KEDIRI_2013 0,680232

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,271835);

LUMAJANG_2010(0,504947);

MALANG_2015(

0,223218)

0 0 41218 0 0 1033095 2106,549

64 0 6587,74964

104 NGANJUK_2013 0,681707

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,026238);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,973762)

0

-

6074,1108

3

35303,88

917 0 0 700635

1775,039

58 0 5576,73958

105 NGANJUK_2016 0,682974

BANYUWANGI_2010(0,060111);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,939889)

0

-3807,8733

8

36237,12662

0 0 712747 1800,56 0 5679,54

Page 15: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 434 [email protected]

NO DMU Score Benchmark

(Lambda)

Proportion

ate

Movement

(land)

Slack

Movemen

t (land)

Projecti

on

(land)

Propo

rtiona

te

Move

ment

(labor

)

Slack

Movement

(labor)

Projection

(labor)

Proportio

nate

Movemen

t

(producti

vity)

Slack

Movement

(productivity)

Projection

(productivity)

106 KEDIRI_2012 0,683286

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,273716);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,512134);

MALANG_2015(

0,214149)

0 0 41220 0 0 1024321 2083,323

84 0 6577,92384

107 NGAWI_2011 0,684893

LUMAJANG_2010(0,525246);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,474754)

0

-19053,896

3

29163,10367

0 0 559606 1328,532

63 0 4216,13263

108 TULUNGAGUNG_2

015 0,685051

BLITAR_2010(0,

676306);

MALANG_2015(

0,032195);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,291499)

0 0 25679 0 0 689307 1325,029

42 0 4207,12942

109 TULUNGAGUNG_2

014 0,685319

BLITAR_2010(0,690457);

MALANG_2015(

0,025378);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,284165)

0 0 25768 0 0 684531 1327,195

05 0 4217,59505

110 SAMPANG_2016 0,685972

BLITAR_2010(0,

333264); MALANG_2015(

0,059851);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,606885)

0 0 19815 0 0 628652 1010,845

75 0 3218,96575

111 PASURUAN_2010 0,686807

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,214424);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,516090);

MALANG_2015(

0,269487)

0 0 40203 0 0 1058943 2038,986

34 0 6510,32634

112 KEDIRI_2011 0,687485

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,275763);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,519753);

MALANG_2015(

0,204484)

0 0 41223 0 0 1014986 2052,461

72 0 6567,56172

113 KEDIRI_2010 0,689922

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,277950);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,527219);

MALANG_2015(

0,194831)

0 0 41229 0 0 1005720 2033,364

76 0 6557,59476

114 TULUNGAGUNG_2

013 0,691581

BLITAR_2010(0,

700777);

MALANG_2015(

0,018406);

TRENGGALEK_2010(0,280817)

0 0 25779 0 0 678482 1299,845

73 0 4214,54573

115 NGANJUK_2012 0,692323

BANYUWANGI_2010(0,011816);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,988184)

0

-

6574,4610

2

34906,53

899 0 0 695478

1702,369

62 0 5532,96962

116 SAMPANG_2015 0,693454

BLITAR_2010(0,

359627);

MALANG_2015(0,047308);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,593065)

0 0 19985 0 0 619954 992,9941

62 0 3239,29416

117 NGAWI_2017 0,693839

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,818969);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,181031)

0

-

16232,783

3

32515,07

386 0 0 641054

1533,453

88 0 5008,65388

118 NGANJUK_2015 0,696319

BANYUWANGI_2010(0,050094);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,949906)

0 -

4194,8688 35961,13

12 0 0 709165

1715,53783

0 5649,13783

119 NGANJUK_2017 0,697922

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,023711);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,976289)

0

-

5878,4568

8

35234,25

74 0 0 699731,286

1682,290

75 0 5569,06932

120 BONDOWOSO_201

2 0,700774

LUMAJANG_2010(0,366476);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,633524)

0

-6678,7743

4

27351,22566

0 0 515580 1133,392

24 0 3787,74224

121 NGANJUK_2011 0,706653

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,996040);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,003960)

0

-

7323,1878

9

34535,81

211 0 0 690155

1609,426

03 0 5486,42603

122 NGAWI_2010 0,709762

LUMAJANG_2010(0,514452);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,485548)

0

-19251,072

4

29039,92757

0 0 556613 1215,229

56 0 4187,00956

123 NGANJUK_2014 0,711369

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,038829);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,961171)

0

-

4616,2288

1

35650,77

119 0 0 705137

1620,650

24 0 5614,95024

124 TULUNGAGUNG_2

017 0,715204

BLITAR_2010(0,610926);

MALANG_2015(

0,017357);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,371717)

0 0 24019,67

857 0 0 651960,75

1113,96596

0 3911,45417

125 NGANJUK_2010 0,716052

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,976736);

MAGETAN_2010(0,023264)

0

-

8287,48914

34315,51

086 0 0 684802

1543,069

22 0 5434,33922

126 SITUBONDO_2010 0,717109

LUMAJANG_2010(0,159058);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,840942)

0

-

7325,8296

2

24984,17

039 0 0 458064

913,1988

21 0 3228,08882

Page 16: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 435 [email protected]

NO DMU Score Benchmark

(Lambda)

Proportion

ate

Movement

(land)

Slack

Movemen

t (land)

Projecti

on

(land)

Propo

rtiona

te

Move

ment

(labor

)

Slack

Movement

(labor)

Projection

(labor)

Proportio

nate

Movemen

t

(producti

vity)

Slack

Movement

(productivity)

Projection

(productivity)

127 SAMPANG_2014 0,718519

BLITAR_2010(0,381098);

MALANG_2015(

0,035739);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,583163)

0 0 20087 0 0 611135 914,4269

66 0 3248,62697

128 BONDOWOSO_201

1 0,718633

LUMAJANG_2010(0,349253);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,650747)

0

-6898,3293

2

27154,67068

0 0 510804 1052,669

88 0 3741,26988

129 TULUNGAGUNG_2

012 0,729167

BLITAR_2010(0,

708890);

MALANG_2015(

0,012678);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,278432)

0 0 25781 0 0 673410 1140,431

12 0 4210,83112

130 SAMPANG_2017 0,731096

BLITAR_2010(0,402867);

MALANG_2015(

0,023458);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,573675)

0 0 20175,57

143 0 0 601486,429

875,323103

0 3255,14739

131 SAMPANG_2013 0,732701

BLITAR_2010(0,

398975); MALANG_2015(

0,023993);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,577032)

0 0 20115 0 0 601082 867,4169

78 0 3245,11698

132 SAMPANG_2012 0,737474

BLITAR_2010(0,

421379);

MALANG_2015(

0,012462);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,566159)

0 0 20236 0 0 592573 855,2418

14 0 3257,74181

133 MADIUN_2016 0,73754

LUMAJANG_2010(0,176422);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,823578)

0 -

5293,6696

1

25182,3304

0 0 462879 859,5406

75 0 3274,94068

134 TULUNGAGUNG_2

011 0,748748

BLITAR_2010(0,

724865);

MALANG_2015(0,004482);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,270652)

0 0 25868 0 0 667377 1060,276

14 0 4219,97614

135 TULUNGAGUNG_2

010 0,754612

BLITAR_2010(0,

704549);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,022684);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,272768)

0 0 25873 0 0 661216 1033,756

13 0 4212,73613

136 BONDOWOSO_201

0 0,757591

LUMAJANG_2010(0,331860);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,668140)

0

-7145,8185

7

26956,18144

0 0 505981 895,5401

78 0 3694,34018

137 MADIUN_2015 0,758799

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,169329);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,830671)

0

-

5485,6209

5

25101,37

905 0 0 460912

785,3009

87 0 3255,80099

138 SAMPANG_2011 0,760489

BLITAR_2010(0,428745);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,019422);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,551833)

0 0 20485 0 0 583177 787,3890

59 0 3287,48906

139 MADIUN_2017 0,771211

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,259168); MAGETAN_2010

(0,740832)

0

-

5966,34236

26126,62193

0 0 485823,911 800,3514

08 0 3498,20373

140 PAMEKASAN_2016 0,772928

MALANG_2015(

0,044434);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,955566)

0 0 12979 0 -76031,6625 515501,338 461,6912 0 2033,2412

141 MADIUN_2014 0,772997

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,161070); MAGETAN_2010

(0,838930)

0

-5690,8652

8

25007,13472

0 0 458622 734,0183

81 0 3233,51838

142 PROBOLINGGO_20

16 0,783125

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,001238);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,899489);

MALANG_2015(

0,099273)

0 0 35018 0 0 795939 1228,144

91 0 5662,92491

143 MADIUN_2013 0,789254

LUMAJANG_2010(0,151788);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,848212)

0

-5839,7975

4

24901,20246

0 0 456048 676,1723

44 0 3208,47234

144 SAMPANG_2010 0,792026

BLITAR_2010(0,

314308);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,117047);

TRENGGALEK_2010(0,568646)

0 0 20506 0 0 573832 680,0571

41 0 3269,90714

145 PAMEKASAN_2013 0,794465

MALANG_2015(0,072980);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,927020)

0 0 13748 0 -17196,5317 552106,468 449,2221

79 0 2185,62218

146 PAMEKASAN_2015 0,795773

MALANG_2015(

0,055310);

TRENGGALEK_2010(0,944690)

0 0 13272 0 -54853,5841 529448,416 427,1005

33 0 2091,30053

147 PAMEKASAN_2014 0,800701

MALANG_2015(0,062140);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,937860)

0 0 13456 0 -38623,0092 538206,991 424,0610

01 0 2127,761

Page 17: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 436 [email protected]

NO DMU Score Benchmark

(Lambda)

Proportion

ate

Movement

(land)

Slack

Movemen

t (land)

Projecti

on

(land)

Propo

rtiona

te

Move

ment

(labor

)

Slack

Movement

(labor)

Projection

(labor)

Proportio

nate

Movemen

t

(producti

vity)

Slack

Movement

(productivity)

Projection

(productivity)

148 PAMEKASAN_2017 0,800779

MALANG_2015(0,070026);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,929974)

0 0 13668,42

857 0 -20358,2073 548318,793

432,2804

4 0 2169,85473

149 PAMEKASAN_2011 0,80685

BLITAR_2010(0,

025747);

MALANG_2015(0,067930);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,906323)

0 0 14108 0 0 552845 433,4121

31 0 2243,91213

150 PAMEKASAN_2012 0,808409

BLITAR_2010(0,

004696);

MALANG_2015(

0,078902);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,916403)

0 0 13998 0 0 561016 427,7815

18 0 2232,78152

151 PROBOLINGGO_20

15 0,814367

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,003210);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,904631);

MALANG_2015(

0,092160)

0 0 35030 0 0 789253 1050,041

68 0 5656,54168

152 MADIUN_2012 0,814448

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,140031); MAGETAN_2010

(0,859969)

0

-

6162,96195

24767,03805

0 0 452788 589,4512

54 0 3176,75125

153 MADIUN_2011 0,824092

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,128008);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,871992)

0

-

6372,1718

1

24629,82

819 0 0 449454

553,1101

16 0 3144,31012

154 PROBOLINGGO_20

13 0,831918

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,063323); LUMAJANG_201

0(0,882037);

MALANG_2015(

0,054640)

0 0 36138 0 0 773657 967,3954

12 0 5755,49541

155 MADIUN_2010 0,835363

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,116118);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,883882)

0

-

6702,8589

5

24494,14

105 0 0 446157

512,3890

02 0 3112,229

156 PAMEKASAN_2010 0,835865

BLITAR_2010(0,038954);

MALANG_2015(

0,058856);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,902190)

0 0 14118 0 0 544910 367,5320

59 0 2239,20206

157 PROBOLINGGO_20

14 0,839379

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,005614);

LUMAJANG_2010(0,909842);

MALANG_2015(

0,084544)

0 0 35049 0 0 782211 907,5890

89 0 5650,48909

158 SUMENEP_2015 0,840561

BLITAR_2010(0,

380694);

MALANG_2015(

0,156411);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,462895)

0 0 23330 0 0 765762 620,4472

8 0 3891,44728

159 PROBOLINGGO_20

17 0,841011

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,043084);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,894499);

MALANG_2015(

0,062417)

0 0 35744,85

714 0 0 773812

908,501603

0 5714,2316

160 SUMENEP_2017 0,84641

BLITAR_2010(0,

437585); MALANG_2015(

0,135223);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,427192)

0 0 23855,28

571 0 0 754533,429

609,246328

0 3966,70919

161 PROBOLINGGO_20

12 0,855425

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,067817);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,885864);

MALANG_2015(

0,046320)

0 0 36198 0 0 766702 831,8641

43 0 5753,86414

162 PROBOLINGGO_20

11 0,871475

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,078614);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,886880);

MALANG_2015(

0,034507)

0 0 36376 0 0 758575 740,7305

75 0 5763,33058

163 SUMENEP_2014 0,872803

BLITAR_2010(0,425997);

MALANG_2015(

0,142720);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,431283)

0 0 23834 0 0 760900 504,7625

25 0 3968,36253

164 MAGETAN_2016 0,886072

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,066370);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,790633);

PACITAN_2010(0,142997)

0 0 22478 0 0 424511 318,6507

96 0 2796,9508

165 SUMENEP_2012 0,886323

BLITAR_2010(0,464175);

MALANG_2015(

0,125476);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,410349)

0 0 24105 0 0 749485 455,0180

74 0 4002,71807

166 SUMENEP_2013 0,887744

BLITAR_2010(0,446109);

MALANG_2015(

0,133645);

TRENGGALEK_

0 0 23977 0 0 754898 447,5081

35 0 3986,50814

Page 18: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 437 [email protected]

NO DMU Score Benchmark

(Lambda)

Proportion

ate

Movement

(land)

Slack

Movemen

t (land)

Projecti

on

(land)

Propo

rtiona

te

Move

ment

(labor

)

Slack

Movement

(labor)

Projection

(labor)

Proportio

nate

Movemen

t

(producti

vity)

Slack

Movement

(productivity)

Projection

(productivity)

2010(0,420246)

167 PROBOLINGGO_20

10 0,889917

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,081772);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,892751);

MALANG_2015(

0,025477)

0 0 36405 0 0 750347 633,7454

1 0 5756,97541

168 SUMENEP_2011 0,891988

BLITAR_2010(0,

484073);

MALANG_2015(0,116331);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,399596)

0 0 24242 0 0 743334 434,1834

35 0 4019,78344

169 BLITAR_2016 0,89375

BLITAR_2010(0,

945656);

MALANG_2015(

0,036675);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,017669)

0 0 30989 0 0 770524 544,3042

1 0 5122,85421

170 MAGETAN_2015 0,898076

LUMAJANG_2010(0,059335);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,816553);

PACITAN_2010(

0,124112)

0 0 22589 0 0 423597 285,5785

31 0 2801,87853

171 JEMBER_2016 0,904621

JEMBER_2010(0,

896065); MALANG_2015(

0,103935)

0 0 76862 0 -64153,2623 1595490,74 933,5673

21 0 9787,99732

172 JEMBER_2011 0,905622

JEMBER_2010(0,

999953);

MALANG_2015(

0,000047)

0 0 81284 0 -14887,3781 1578638,62 952,8108

4 0 10095,6808

173 BLITAR_2015 0,909708

BLITAR_2010(0,

952383); MALANG_2015(

0,032050);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,015567)

0 0 30994 0 0 766478 462,3367

21 0 5120,43672

174 JEMBER_2014 0,916111

JEMBER_2010(0,

931986);

MALANG_2015(

0,068014)

0 0 78391 0 -46542,2376 1589663,76 830,0254

03 0 9894,3854

175 JEMBER_2015 0,916441

JEMBER_2010(0,898438);

MALANG_2015(

0,101562)

0 0 76963 0 -53246,1704 1595105,83 818,4649

19 0 9795,02492

176 JEMBER_2012 0,917525

JEMBER_2010(0,

952567);

MALANG_2015(

0,047433)

0 0 79267 0 -22070,6486 1586325,35 821,0676

34 0 9955,33763

177 JEMBER_2013 0,918008

JEMBER_2010(0,933537);

MALANG_2015(

0,066463)

0 0 78457 0 -33394,7618 1589412,24 811,6376

95 0 9898,9777

178 SUMENEP_2010 0,918698

BLITAR_2010(0,

499107);

MALANG_2015(

0,108178);

TRENGGALEK_2010(0,392715)

0 0 24312 0 0 737091 327,3265

47 0 4026,03655

179 JEMBER_2017 0,925671

JEMBER_2010(0,944649);

MALANG_2015(

0,055351)

0 0 78930 0 -33470,637 1587609,65 738,2248

3 0 9931,88912

180 BLITAR_2014 0,930122

BLITAR_2010(0,

962691); MALANG_2015(

0,026274);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,011035)

0 0 31037 0 0 761960 358,0345

27 0 5123,73453

181 MAGETAN_2014 0,933804

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,053211);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,830563);

PACITAN_2010(

0,116225)

0 0 22599 0 0 422332 185,0412

63 0 2795,34126

182 MAGETAN_2013 0,934046

LUMAJANG_2010(0,040630);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,877164);

PACITAN_2010(

0,082206)

0 0 22800 0 0 420711 184,9656

39 0 2804,46564

183 LUMAJANG_2015 0,938608

BLITAR_2010(0,184789);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,800028);

MALANG_2015(

0,015183)

0 0 33991 0 0 715961 334,5793

92 0 5449,87939

184 LUMAJANG_2016 0,93861

BLITAR_2010(0,

220990);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,761919);

MALANG_2015(0,017091)

0 0 33871 0 0 719682 333,8906

62 0 5438,88066

185 MAGETAN_2017 0,939044

LUMAJANG_2010(0,038028);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,879975);

PACITAN_2010(

0,081997)

0 0 22772,42

857 0 0 420001

170,5360

77 0 2797,71036

Page 19: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 438 [email protected]

NO DMU Score Benchmark

(Lambda)

Proportion

ate

Movement

(land)

Slack

Movemen

t (land)

Projecti

on

(land)

Propo

rtiona

te

Move

ment

(labor

)

Slack

Movement

(labor)

Projection

(labor)

Proportio

nate

Movemen

t

(producti

vity)

Slack

Movement

(productivity)

Projection

(productivity)

186 MAGETAN_2012 0,942177

LUMAJANG_2010(0,030113);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,902295);

PACITAN_2010(

0,067593)

0 0 22828 0 0 418597 161,5907

49 0 2794,59075

187 BLITAR_2013 0,948622

BLITAR_2010(0,970099);

MALANG_2015(

0,021050);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,008851)

0 0 31039 0 0 757337 263,0771

36 0 5120,37714

188 BLITAR_2017 0,948883

BLITAR_2010(0,

971651);

MALANG_2015(

0,019532);

TRENGGALEK_2010(0,008817)

0 0 31028 0 0 755824,857 261,5881

22 0 5117,41098

189 LUMAJANG_2014 0,954935

BLITAR_2010(0,066167);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,917223);

MALANG_2015(

0,016610)

0 0 34416 0 0 711828 247,7900

7 0 5498,49007

190 TRENGGALEK_201

4 0,956329

TRENGGALEK_2012(0,736842);

TRENGGALEK_

2016(0,263158)

0 0 11755 0 -3090,52631 468003,474 73,9 0 1692,2

191 LUMAJANG_2013 0,960151

BLITAR_2010(0,

042691);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,943099);

MALANG_2015(

0,014210)

0 0 34489 0 0 708194 219,3179

61 0 5503,71796

192 TRENGGALEK_201

7 0,960736

TRENGGALEK_2012(0,969925);

TRENGGALEK_

2016(0,030075)

0 0 11759,42

857 0 -2104,91729 465608,083

68,435714

0 1742,95143

193 MALANG_2011 0,963545

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,079859);

JEMBER_2010(0,086815);

MALANG_2015(

0,833326)

0 0 43764 0 0 1674540 272,4530

32 0 7473,58303

194 MALANG_2010 0,964877

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,109914);

JEMBER_2010(0,

077037);

MALANG_2015(

0,813049)

0 0 43855 0 0 1656472 262,5656

36 0 7475,60564

195 LUMAJANG_2017 0,965226

BLITAR_2010(0,079461);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,909595);

MALANG_2015(

0,010944)

0 0 34345,57

143 0 0 706511,571

190,699118

0 5484,02769

196 TRENGGALEK_201

3 0,965666

TRENGGALEK_

2012(0,894737);

TRENGGALEK_2016(0,105263)

0 0 11758 0 -1611,21053 466380,789 59,28 0 1726,58

197 TRENGGALEK_201

5 0,969977

TRENGGALEK_2012(0,421053);

TRENGGALEK_

2016(0,578947)

0 0 11749 0 -2285,1579 471248,842 48,74 0 1623,44

198 LUMAJANG_2012 0,972417

BLITAR_2010(0,

035563); LUMAJANG_201

0(0,955827);

MALANG_2015(

0,008610)

0 0 34491 0 0 701978 151,6314

01 0 5497,3314

199 BLITAR_2012 0,976501

BLITAR_2010(0,

980461);

MALANG_2015(

0,013788);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,005751)

0 0 31043 0 0 750928 120,2194

11 0 5115,91941

200 MAGETAN_2011 0,979252

LUMAJANG_2010(0,016537);

MAGETAN_2010

(0,942619);

PACITAN_2010(

0,040845)

0 0 22944 0 0 416301 57,92556

4 0 2791,82556

201 BANYUWANGI_20

17 0,981441

BANYUWANGI_2013(0,812049);

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,041531);

JEMBER_2010(0,

146420)

0 0 62786,85

714 0 0 1148621,76

160,81414

0 8665,17761

202 BLITAR_2011 0,983734

BLITAR_2010(0,

990268);

MALANG_2015(

0,006886);

TRENGGALEK_2010(0,002846)

0 0 31046 0 0 744825 83,14484

7 0 5111,54485

203 PACITAN_2013 0,985807

PACITAN_2010(0,100016);

PACITAN_2012(

0,869970);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,030015)

0 0 12763 0 0 366258 21,66182

8 0 1526,26183

204 MALANG_2017 0,986226

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,043289);

JEMBER_2010(0,

029821);

MALANG_2015(

0 0 40720,85

714 0 0 1707699,57

100,096688

0 7267,08383

Page 20: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 439 [email protected]

NO DMU Score Benchmark

(Lambda)

Proportion

ate

Movement

(land)

Slack

Movemen

t (land)

Projecti

on

(land)

Propo

rtiona

te

Move

ment

(labor

)

Slack

Movement

(labor)

Projection

(labor)

Proportio

nate

Movemen

t

(producti

vity)

Slack

Movement

(productivity)

Projection

(productivity)

0,926890)

205 PACITAN_2017 0,988093

PACITAN_2010(0,177972);

PACITAN_2012(

0,794474);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,027554)

0 0 12786,85

714 0 0 365647,143

18,180235

0 1526,86881

206 PACITAN_2015 0,988964

PACITAN_2012(

0,182732);

PACITAN_2014(0,791235);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,026033)

0 0 12650 0 0 369710 16,65958

5 0 1509,55959

207 BANYUWANGI_20

16 0,989691

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,988620);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,001678);

MALANG_2015(

0,009703)

0 0 55398 0 0 1092594 84,02197

1 0 8150,52197

208 BANYUWANGI_20

12 0,990979

BANYUWANGI_2010(0,759120);

BANYUWANGI_

2013(0,219724);

JEMBER_2010(0,

021156)

0 0 62029 0 0 1065617 77,07234

8 0 8543,27235

209 PACITAN_2011 0,991028

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,001156); PACITAN_2010(

0,978255);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,020589)

0 0 13039 0 0 361486 13,84235

4 0 1542,82235

210 LUMAJANG_2011 0,991335

BLITAR_2010(0,

006028);

LUMAJANG_201

0(0,989069);

MALANG_2015(

0,004903)

0 0 34580 0 0 696685 47,68433

6 0 5502,78434

211 BANYUWANGI_20

14 0,99251

BANYUWANGI_2013(0,777558);

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,215040);

JEMBER_2010(0,

007402)

0 0 59070 0 0 1080701 62,82195

2 0 8387,52195

212 MALANG_2014 0,992807

BANYUWANGI_2015(0,018938);

JEMBER_2010(0,

016408);

MALANG_2015(

0,964654)

0 0 39739 0 0 1725799 51,80732 0 7202,25732

213 MALANG_2012 0,992825

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,070648);

JEMBER_2010(0,

014654);

MALANG_2015(0,914698)

0 0 40537 0 0 1692269 52,01845

1 0 7250,36845

214 MALANG_2016 0,996415

MALANG_2015(0,995880);

TRENGGALEK_

2010(0,004120)

0 0 38610 0 -19284,7055 1735561,29 25,49482

6 0 7112,14483

215 BANYUWANGI_20

11 0,996994

BANYUWANGI_

2010(0,893213);

BANYUWANGI_2013(0,095374);

JEMBER_2010(0,

011413)

0 0 62130 0 0 1057294 25,66856

2 0 8540,36856

216 MALANG_2013 0,997395

BANYUWANGI_

2015(0,046693);

JEMBER_2010(0,

007307);

MALANG_2015(

0,946001)

0 0 39820 0 0 1709126 18,76407

2 0 7203,91407

217 BANYUWANGI_20

10 1

BANYUWANGI_2010(1,000000)

0 0 62132 0 0 1048823 0 0 8531,98

218 BANYUWANGI_20

13 1

BANYUWANGI_

2013(1,000000) 0 0 59819 0 0 1074243 0 0 8432,8

219 BANYUWANGI_20

15 1

BANYUWANGI_

2015(1,000000) 0 0 55597 0 0 1086913 0 0 8165

220 BLITAR_2010 1 BLITAR_2010(1,

000000) 0 0 31048 0 0 738722 0 0 5107,01

221 JEMBER_2010 1 JEMBER_2010(1,

000000) 0 0 81286 0 0 1578631 0 0 10095,82

222 LUMAJANG_2010 1 LUMAJANG_201

0(1,000000) 0 0 34581 0 0 691253 0 0 5497,11

223 MAGETAN_2010 1 MAGETAN_2010

(1,000000) 0 0 23169 0 0 413958 0 0 2798,92

224 MALANG_2015 1 MALANG_2015(

1,000000) 0 0 38721 0 0 1740845 0 0 7134,14

225 PACITAN_2010 1 PACITAN_2010(

1,000000) 0 0 13040 0 0 359054 0 0 1532,82

226 PACITAN_2012 1 PACITAN_2012(

1,000000) 0 0 12765 0 0 363903 0 0 1516,2

227 PACITAN_2014 1 PACITAN_2014(

1,000000) 0 0 12652 0 0 368129 0 0 1498,6

228 PACITAN_2016 1 PACITAN_2016(

1,000000) 0 0 12599 0 0 370990 0 0 1486,72

229 TRENGGALEK_201

0 1

TRENGGALEK_2010(1,000000)

0 0 11782 0 0 458523 0 0 1796,05

Page 21: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 440 [email protected]

NO DMU Score Benchmark

(Lambda)

Proportion

ate

Movement

(land)

Slack

Movemen

t (land)

Projecti

on

(land)

Propo

rtiona

te

Move

ment

(labor

)

Slack

Movement

(labor)

Projection

(labor)

Proportio

nate

Movemen

t

(producti

vity)

Slack

Movement

(productivity)

Projection

(productivity)

230 TRENGGALEK_201

1 1

TRENGGALEK_2011(1,000000)

0 0 11771 0 0 461973 0 0 1784

231 TRENGGALEK_201

2 1

TRENGGALEK_

2012(1,000000) 0 0 11760 0 0 465299 0 0 1749,5

232 TRENGGALEK_201

6 1

TRENGGALEK_

2016(1,000000) 0 0 11741 0 0 475576 0 0 1531,76

Tabel III DEA Results Envelopment Model (weights, Dual Values)

NO DMU Score Dual Price (land) Dual Price (labor) Dual Price

(productivity) v*

1 SIDOARJO_2011 0,201571 -5,00654E-05 0 0,000252658 0,136084

2 SIDOARJO_2010 0,204003 -5,00428E-05 0 0,000252544 0,136023

3 SIDOARJO_2012 0,210651 -5,32485E-05 0 0,000268722 0,144736

4 SIDOARJO_2013 0,213571 -5,4431E-05 0 0,00027469 0,14795

5 SIDOARJO_2017 0,220411 -5,64106E-05 0 0,00028468 0,153331

6 SIDOARJO_2014 0,22089 -5,72611E-05 0 0,000288971 0,155643

7 SIDOARJO_2016 0,250839 -6,794E-05 0 0,000342863 0,184669

8 SIDOARJO_2015 0,258042 -6,75727E-05 0 0,00034101 0,183671

9 GRESIK_2016 0,28825 -1,77721E-05 -1,92862E-07 0,0001686 -0,178919

10 GRESIK_2015 0,317403 -1,78071E-05 -1,93242E-07 0,000168932 -0,179271

11 GRESIK_2014 0,320888 -1,77483E-05 -1,92604E-07 0,000168374 -0,17868

12 GRESIK_2017 0,328159 -1,7767E-05 -1,92807E-07 0,000168551 -0,178867

13 GRESIK_2013 0,332775 -1,77744E-05 -1,92887E-07 0,000168622 -0,178942

14 GRESIK_2012 0,351362 -1,77474E-05 -1,92594E-07 0,000168366 -0,178671

15 GRESIK_2011 0,358203 -1,77526E-05 -1,92651E-07 0,000168416 -0,178723

16 BANGKALAN_2016 0,359842 -3,14142E-05 -4,93005E-07 0,000224517 0,192933

17 GRESIK_2010 0,373751 -1,77633E-05 -1,92767E-07 0,000168517 -0,178831

18 BANGKALAN_2015 0,39906 -2,67427E-05 -9,2872E-07 0,000223138 0,340155

19 BANGKALAN_2014 0,424207 -2,6877E-05 -9,33384E-07 0,000224259 0,341863

20 BANGKALAN_2017 0,427032 -2,68514E-05 -9,32497E-07 0,000224045 0,341538

21 BANGKALAN_2013 0,432337 -2,6739E-05 -9,28592E-07 0,000223107 0,340108

22 SITUBONDO_2016 0,437081 0 -2,81261E-06 0,000289054 0,355263

23 BANGKALAN_2012 0,443012 -2,08778E-05 -1,32517E-06 0,000224492 0,403949

24 BANGKALAN_2011 0,46083 -2,09983E-05 -1,33281E-06 0,000225787 0,40628

25 PONOROGO_2016 0,465615 0 -2,13887E-06 0,000219813 0,270162

26 LAMONGAN_2016 0,466212 0 -1,2764E-06 0,000150386 0,055626

27 PONOROGO_2015 0,474164 0 -2,1465E-06 0,000220598 0,271127

28 LAMONGAN_2015 0,477055 0 -1,2791E-06 0,000150705 0,055744

29 BANGKALAN_2010 0,480786 -2,12203E-05 -1,3469E-06 0,000228173 0,410574

30 SITUBONDO_2015 0,480934 0 -2,83909E-06 0,000291776 0,358608

31 LAMONGAN_2013 0,517185 0 -1,2869E-06 0,000151623 0,056084

32 LAMONGAN_2017 0,527432 0 -1,28895E-06 0,000151865 0,056173

33 LAMONGAN_2012 0,529607 0 -1,29301E-06 0,000152344 0,05635

34 TUBAN_2016 0,529828 0 -1,29587E-06 0,00015268 0,056475

35 JOMBANG_2016 0,539477 -1,6342E-05 -1,77343E-07 0,000155033 -0,164522

36 JOMBANG_2014 0,542393 -1,12027E-05 -4,41276E-07 0,000153692 -0,152424

37 TUBAN_2015 0,542684 0 -1,30442E-06 0,000153687 0,056847

38 JOMBANG_2015 0,543054 -1,63309E-05 -1,77223E-07 0,000154928 -0,164411

39 BOJONEGORO_2016 0,543522 0 -1,21677E-06 0,00014336 0,053028

40 JOMBANG_2013 0,545882 -1,121E-05 -4,41562E-07 0,000153791 -0,152523

41 LAMONGAN_2011 0,546479 0 -1,29934E-06 0,000153088 0,056626

42 SITUBONDO_2014 0,552446 0 -2,86786E-06 0,000294732 0,362242

43 JOMBANG_2017 0,553479 -1,12303E-05 -4,42362E-07 0,00015407 -0,152799

44 BOJONEGORO_2015 0,553782 0 -1,22252E-06 0,000144038 0,053278

45 PONOROGO_2017 0,554678 0 -2,1722E-06 0,000223239 0,274372

46 LAMONGAN_2010 0,555375 0 -1,30585E-06 0,000153856 0,05691

47 TUBAN_2014 0,557353 0 -1,31389E-06 0,000154803 0,05726

48 JOMBANG_2012 0,562619 -1,12544E-05 -4,43311E-07 0,0001544 -0,153127

49 MOJOKERTO_2014 0,563083 -3,18984E-05 -1,58329E-07 0,000199012 0,09099

50 MOJOKERTO_2013 0,563089 -3,18403E-05 -1,58041E-07 0,000198649 0,090825

51 BOJONEGORO_2014 0,564857 0 -1,22919E-06 0,000144824 0,053569

52 MOJOKERTO_2012 0,565384 -2,76621E-05 -4,34121E-07 0,000197701 0,169889

53 JOMBANG_2011 0,56647 -1,12374E-05 -4,4264E-07 0,000154167 -0,152895

54 PONOROGO_2014 0,567273 0 -2,15598E-06 0,000221571 0,272323

55 MOJOKERTO_2011 0,570558 -2,73914E-05 -4,29872E-07 0,000195765 0,168226

56 MOJOKERTO_2016 0,57098 -3,29562E-05 -1,6358E-07 0,000205611 0,094008

57 NGAWI_2016 0,571747 0 -2,24192E-06 0,000230404 0,283179

58 MOJOKERTO_2017 0,571964 -3,19173E-05 -1,58423E-07 0,000199129 0,091044

59 TUBAN_2017 0,574383 0 -1,3259E-06 0,000156219 0,057784

Page 22: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 441 [email protected]

NO DMU Score Dual Price (land) Dual Price (labor) Dual Price

(productivity) v*

60 MOJOKERTO_2015 0,575066 -3,28806E-05 -1,63204E-07 0,000205139 0,093792

61 PONOROGO_2013 0,576134 0 -2,16833E-06 0,000222841 0,273883

62 TUBAN_2013 0,576678 0 -1,32389E-06 0,000155981 0,057696

63 BOJONEGORO_2013 0,577841 0 -1,23712E-06 0,000145758 0,053914

64 SITUBONDO_2017 0,578803 0 -2,90617E-06 0,000298669 0,36708

65 JOMBANG_2010 0,58032 -1,12355E-05 -4,42566E-07 0,000154141 -0,152869

66 PONOROGO_2012 0,581497 0 -2,18274E-06 0,000224322 0,275704

67 BOJONEGORO_2017 0,585981 0 -1,2801E-06 0,000150822 0,055787

68 BOJONEGORO_2012 0,586682 0 -1,24558E-06 0,000146755 0,054283

69 SITUBONDO_2013 0,588155 0 -2,90876E-06 0,000298935 0,367408

70 PONOROGO_2011 0,59212 0 -2,19923E-06 0,000226016 0,277786

71 BOJONEGORO_2011 0,592984 0 -1,25507E-06 0,000147873 0,054697

72 TUBAN_2012 0,593139 0 -1,33616E-06 0,000157427 0,058231

73 NGAWI_2015 0,596576 0 -2,24866E-06 0,000231097 0,28403

74 BONDOWOSO_2016 0,597211 0 -2,46609E-06 0,000253442 0,311494

75 LAMONGAN_2014 0,60127 0 -1,28262E-06 0,000151119 0,055897

76 MOJOKERTO_2010 0,605036 -2,74175E-05 -4,30282E-07 0,000195952 0,168387

77 TUBAN_2011 0,605183 0 -1,34851E-06 0,000158882 0,058769

78 BOJONEGORO_2010 0,610654 0 -1,26465E-06 0,000149002 0,055114

79 SUMENEP_2016 0,618947 -4,13946E-05 -2,05464E-07 0,000258257 0,118078

80 TUBAN_2010 0,619344 0 -1,36113E-06 0,000160369 0,059319

81 NGAWI_2014 0,619652 0 -2,25746E-06 0,000232001 0,285142

82 TULUNGAGUNG_2016 0,62034 -3,81091E-05 -1,89156E-07 0,000237759 0,108706

83 PONOROGO_2010 0,630246 0 -2,21595E-06 0,000227735 0,279899

84 PASURUAN_2016 0,634418 -1,62237E-05 -1,76059E-07 0,000153911 -0,163331

85 BONDOWOSO_2015 0,634726 0 -2,48767E-06 0,000255659 0,314219

86 SITUBONDO_2012 0,637501 0 -2,93681E-06 0,000301819 0,370952

87 PASURUAN_2015 0,639333 -1,62265E-05 -1,7609E-07 0,000153938 -0,163359

88 KEDIRI_2016 0,642276 -1,62547E-05 -1,76396E-07 0,000154205 -0,163643

89 PASURUAN_2014 0,642409 -1,6228E-05 -1,76106E-07 0,000153952 -0,163374

90 NGAWI_2013 0,643671 0 -2,27628E-06 0,000233935 0,287518

91 BONDOWOSO_2014 0,651993 0 -2,51204E-06 0,000258164 0,317298

92 SITUBONDO_2011 0,653067 0 -2,97472E-06 0,000305714 0,37574

93 NGAWI_2012 0,656869 0 -2,29221E-06 0,000235572 0,289531

94 PASURUAN_2017 0,658154 -1,62222E-05 -1,76043E-07 0,000153897 -0,163316

95 KEDIRI_2015 0,659015 -1,62482E-05 -1,76325E-07 0,000154143 -0,163578

96 PASURUAN_2013 0,659916 -1,62599E-05 -1,76453E-07 0,000154255 -0,163696

97 PASURUAN_2012 0,671789 -1,62669E-05 -1,76528E-07 0,000154321 -0,163766

98 BONDOWOSO_2013 0,672101 0 -2,53851E-06 0,000260884 0,320641

99 PASURUAN_2011 0,672327 -1,61597E-05 -1,75364E-07 0,000153303 -0,162686

100 KEDIRI_2014 0,673757 -1,62688E-05 -1,76549E-07 0,000154339 -0,163785

101 KEDIRI_2017 0,673794 -1,61309E-05 -1,75053E-07 0,000153031 -0,162397

102 BONDOWOSO_2017 0,675048 0 -2,54275E-06 0,00026132 0,321176

103 KEDIRI_2013 0,680232 -1,60009E-05 -1,73641E-07 0,000151797 -0,161088

104 NGANJUK_2013 0,681707 0 -1,52194E-06 0,000179316 0,066327

105 NGANJUK_2016 0,682974 0 -1,4944E-06 0,000176071 0,065127

106 KEDIRI_2012 0,683286 -1,60248E-05 -1,73901E-07 0,000152024 -0,161328

107 NGAWI_2011 0,684893 0 -2,3079E-06 0,000237184 0,291512

108 TULUNGAGUNG_2015 0,685051 -3,80983E-05 -1,89103E-07 0,000237692 0,108676

109 TULUNGAGUNG_2014 0,685319 -3,80038E-05 -1,88633E-07 0,000237102 0,108406

110 SAMPANG_2016 0,685972 -4,97938E-05 -2,47154E-07 0,000310659 0,142037

111 PASURUAN_2010 0,686807 -1,61912E-05 -1,75706E-07 0,000153602 -0,163003

112 KEDIRI_2011 0,687485 -1,60501E-05 -1,74175E-07 0,000152264 -0,161583

113 KEDIRI_2010 0,689922 -1,60745E-05 -1,7444E-07 0,000152495 -0,161828

114 TULUNGAGUNG_2013 0,691581 -3,80313E-05 -1,8877E-07 0,000237274 0,108484

115 NGANJUK_2012 0,692323 0 -1,53398E-06 0,000180735 0,066852

116 SAMPANG_2015 0,693454 -4,94813E-05 -2,45603E-07 0,000308709 0,141146

117 NGAWI_2017 0,693839 0 -1,94272E-06 0,000199654 0,245386

118 NGANJUK_2015 0,696319 0 -1,50244E-06 0,000177018 0,065477

119 NGANJUK_2017 0,697922 0 -1,52404E-06 0,000179563 0,066419

120 BONDOWOSO_2012 0,700774 0 -2,56892E-06 0,00026401 0,324482

121 NGANJUK_2011 0,706653 0 -1,77354E-06 0,000182268 0,224017

122 NGAWI_2010 0,709762 0 -2,32395E-06 0,000238834 0,29354

123 NGANJUK_2014 0,711369 0 -1,51159E-06 0,000178096 0,065876

124 TULUNGAGUNG_2017 0,715204 -4,09782E-05 -2,03397E-07 0,000255659 0,116891

125 NGANJUK_2010 0,716052 0 -1,79054E-06 0,000184015 0,226165

126 SITUBONDO_2010 0,717109 0 -3,01429E-06 0,000309781 0,380738

127 SAMPANG_2014 0,718519 -4,93391E-05 -2,44897E-07 0,000307822 0,14074

128 BONDOWOSO_2011 0,718633 0 -2,60083E-06 0,000267289 0,328513

129 TULUNGAGUNG_2012 0,729167 -3,80648E-05 -1,88936E-07 0,000237483 0,10858

130 SAMPANG_2017 0,731096 -4,92403E-05 -2,44406E-07 0,000307206 0,140458

131 SAMPANG_2013 0,732701 -4,93925E-05 -2,45162E-07 0,000308155 0,140892

Page 23: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Abid Muhtarom, Tri Haryanto and Nurul Istifadah

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 442 [email protected]

NO DMU Score Dual Price (land) Dual Price (labor) Dual Price

(productivity) v*

132 SAMPANG_2012 0,737474 -4,92011E-05 -2,44212E-07 0,000306961 0,140346

133 MADIUN_2016 0,73754 0 -2,97117E-06 0,000305349 0,375291

134 TULUNGAGUNG_2011 0,748748 -3,79823E-05 -1,88527E-07 0,000236968 0,108345

135 TULUNGAGUNG_2010 0,754612 -3,32134E-05 -5,21241E-07 0,000237375 0,203983

136 BONDOWOSO_2010 0,757591 0 -2,63387E-06 0,000270684 0,332686

137 MADIUN_2015 0,758799 0 -2,98863E-06 0,000307144 0,377497

138 SAMPANG_2011 0,760489 -4,25611E-05 -6,67942E-07 0,000304184 0,261393

139 MADIUN_2017 0,771211 0 -2,78154E-06 0,000285861 0,351339

140 PAMEKASAN_2016 0,772928 -9,74576E-05 0 0,000491826 0,264902

141 MADIUN_2014 0,772997 0 -3,00923E-06 0,000309261 0,380098

142 PROBOLINGGO_2016 0,783125 -1,8614E-05 -2,01999E-07 0,000176587 -0,187395

143 MADIUN_2013 0,789254 0 -3,03272E-06 0,000311675 0,383065

144 SAMPANG_2010 0,792026 -4,279E-05 -6,71533E-07 0,000305819 0,262799

145 PAMEKASAN_2013 0,794465 -9,06628E-05 0 0,000457536 0,246433

146 PAMEKASAN_2015 0,795773 -9,47519E-05 0 0,000478171 0,257547

147 PAMEKASAN_2014 0,800701 -9,31283E-05 0 0,000469978 0,253134

148 PAMEKASAN_2017 0,800779 -9,13217E-05 0 0,00046086 0,248223

149 PAMEKASAN_2011 0,80685 -7,14308E-05 -3,5455E-07 0,00044565 0,203757

150 PAMEKASAN_2012 0,808409 -7,17869E-05 -3,56317E-07 0,000447872 0,204772

151 PROBOLINGGO_2015 0,814367 -1,8635E-05 -2,02227E-07 0,000176787 -0,187607

152 MADIUN_2012 0,814448 0 -3,063E-06 0,000314787 0,386891

153 MADIUN_2011 0,824092 0 -3,0946E-06 0,000318035 0,390882

154 PROBOLINGGO_2013 0,831918 -1,83146E-05 -1,9875E-07 0,000173747 -0,184381

155 MADIUN_2010 0,835363 0 -3,1265E-06 0,000321313 0,394912

156 PAMEKASAN_2010 0,835865 -7,1581E-05 -3,55296E-07 0,000446588 0,204185

157 PROBOLINGGO_2014 0,839379 -1,8655E-05 -2,02444E-07 0,000176976 -0,187808

158 SUMENEP_2015 0,840561 -4,11889E-05 -2,04443E-07 0,000256974 0,117492

159 PROBOLINGGO_2017 0,841011 -1,84469E-05 -2,00185E-07 0,000175002 -0,185713

160 SUMENEP_2017 0,84641 -4,04074E-05 -2,00564E-07 0,000252098 0,115262

161 PROBOLINGGO_2012 0,855425 -1,83198E-05 -1,98806E-07 0,000173796 -0,184434

162 PROBOLINGGO_2011 0,871475 -1,82897E-05 -1,9848E-07 0,000173511 -0,184131

163 SUMENEP_2014 0,872803 -4,03906E-05 -2,0048E-07 0,000251993 0,115214

164 MAGETAN_2016 0,886072 -3,32507E-05 -2,11051E-06 0,000357532 0,643342

165 SUMENEP_2012 0,886323 -4,00439E-05 -1,9876E-07 0,00024983 0,114225

166 SUMENEP_2013 0,887744 -4,02067E-05 -1,99568E-07 0,000250846 0,11469

167 PROBOLINGGO_2010 0,889917 -1,83099E-05 -1,98699E-07 0,000173702 -0,184334

168 SUMENEP_2011 0,891988 -3,98739E-05 -1,97916E-07 0,00024877 0,11374

169 BLITAR_2016 0,89375 -3,12881E-05 -1,553E-07 0,000195204 0,089249

170 MAGETAN_2015 0,898076 -3,31922E-05 -2,1068E-06 0,000356903 0,642211

171 JEMBER_2016 0,904621 -7,10872E-06 0 0,000102166 -0,453609

172 JEMBER_2011 0,905622 -6,89207E-06 0 9,90523E-05 -0,439785

173 BLITAR_2015 0,909708 -3,13029E-05 -1,55373E-07 0,000195296 0,089292

174 JEMBER_2014 0,916111 -7,03229E-06 0 0,000101067 -0,448732

175 JEMBER_2015 0,916441 -7,10362E-06 0 0,000102093 -0,453284

176 JEMBER_2012 0,917525 -6,98923E-06 0 0,000100449 -0,445984

177 JEMBER_2013 0,918008 -7,02903E-06 0 0,000101021 -0,448524

178 SUMENEP_2010 0,918698 -3,9812E-05 -1,97608E-07 0,000248383 0,113564

179 JEMBER_2017 0,925671 -7,00573E-06 0 0,000100686 -0,447037

180 BLITAR_2014 0,930122 -3,12827E-05 -1,55273E-07 0,00019517 0,089234

181 MAGETAN_2014 0,933804 -3,32698E-05 -2,11172E-06 0,000357738 0,643713

182 MAGETAN_2013 0,934046 -3,31616E-05 -2,10485E-06 0,000356574 0,641618

183 LUMAJANG_2015 0,938608 -2,28922E-05 -1,95891E-07 0,00018349 -0,08162

184 LUMAJANG_2016 0,93861 -2,29385E-05 -1,96287E-07 0,000183861 -0,081785

185 MAGETAN_2017 0,939044 -3,32417E-05 -2,10993E-06 0,000357435 0,643168

186 MAGETAN_2012 0,942177 -3,32788E-05 -2,11229E-06 0,000357834 0,643886

187 BLITAR_2013 0,948622 -3,13033E-05 -1,55375E-07 0,000195298 0,089293

188 BLITAR_2017 0,948883 -3,13214E-05 -1,55465E-07 0,000195411 0,089344

189 LUMAJANG_2014 0,954935 -2,26899E-05 -1,94159E-07 0,000181868 -0,080898

190 TRENGGALEK_2014 0,956329 -0,006772249 0 0,000590947 78,607789

191 LUMAJANG_2013 0,960151 -2,26683E-05 -1,93974E-07 0,000181695 -0,080821

192 TRENGGALEK_2017 0,960736 -0,006575054 0 0,00057374 76,31888

193 MALANG_2011 0,963545 -9,43415E-06 -3,25367E-08 0,000133805 -0,53264

194 MALANG_2010 0,964877 -9,43159E-06 -3,25279E-08 0,000133768 -0,532496

195 LUMAJANG_2017 0,965226 -2,27497E-05 -1,94671E-07 0,000182348 -0,081111

196 TRENGGALEK_2013 0,965666 -0,006637399 0 0,00057918 77,042535

197 TRENGGALEK_2015 0,969977 -0,007059084 0 0,000615976 81,937183

198 LUMAJANG_2012 0,972417 -2,26946E-05 -1,942E-07 0,000181906 -0,080915

199 BLITAR_2012 0,976501 -3,13305E-05 -1,5551E-07 0,000195468 0,08937

200 MAGETAN_2011 0,979252 -3,33117E-05 -2,11438E-06 0,000358189 0,644523

201 BANYUWANGI_2017 0,981441 -7,50356E-06 -6,11454E-08 0,000115404 -0,458642

202 BLITAR_2011 0,983734 -3,13573E-05 -1,55644E-07 0,000195636 0,089447

203 PACITAN_2013 0,985807 -9,03102E-05 -2,87605E-06 0,000655196 1,206003

Page 24: ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT ...iaeme.com/MasterAdmin/uploadfolder/IJCIET_10_01_040/IJCIET_10_01_040.pdfANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY EFFICIENCY OF FOOD PLANT AGRICULTURE

Analysis of Productivity Efficiency of Food Plant Agriculture In East Java Based On Dea Index

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 443 [email protected]

NO DMU Score Dual Price (land) Dual Price (labor) Dual Price

(productivity) v*

204 MALANG_2017 0,986226 -9,70222E-06 -3,34613E-08 0,000137607 -0,547775

205 PACITAN_2017 0,988093 -9,02743E-05 -2,8749E-06 0,000654935 1,205523

206 PACITAN_2015 0,988964 -0,000288566 -4,95715E-06 0,000662445 4,483065

207 BANYUWANGI_2016 0,989691 -1,29329E-05 -1,40347E-07 0,000122692 -0,130201

208 BANYUWANGI_2012 0,990979 -6,30933E-06 -1,17402E-07 0,000117051 -0,483533

209 PACITAN_2011 0,991028 -7,76811E-05 -2,69771E-06 0,000648163 0,988069

210 LUMAJANG_2011 0,991335 -2,26722E-05 -1,94007E-07 0,000181726 -0,080835

211 BANYUWANGI_2014 0,99251 -7,75195E-06 -6,31695E-08 0,000119225 -0,473825

212 MALANG_2014 0,992807 -9,78955E-06 -3,37625E-08 0,000138845 -0,552706

213 MALANG_2012 0,992825 -9,72459E-06 -3,35384E-08 0,000137924 -0,549038

214 MALANG_2016 0,996415 -2,78615E-05 0 0,000140605 0,075731

215 BANYUWANGI_2011 0,996994 -6,31148E-06 -1,17442E-07 0,000117091 -0,483698

216 MALANG_2013 0,997395 -9,7873E-06 -3,37547E-08 0,000138813 -0,552579

217 BANYUWANGI_2010 1 -8,54328E-06 -3,3652E-07 0,000117206 -0,116239

218 BANYUWANGI_2013 1 -8,43717E-06 -3,05034E-07 0,000118585 -0,167617

219 BANYUWANGI_2015 1 -1,291E-05 -1,40099E-07 0,000122474 -0,12997

220 BLITAR_2010 1 -2,44292E-05 -2,09042E-07 0,000195809 -0,087099

221 JEMBER_2010 1 -6,98377E-06 -2,40858E-08 9,90509E-05 -0,394295

222 LUMAJANG_2010 1 -1,91755E-05 -2,08092E-07 0,000181914 -0,193048

223 MAGETAN_2010 1 -3,32273E-05 -2,10902E-06 0,000357281 0,64289

224 MALANG_2015 1 -1,47754E-05 -1,60342E-07 0,000140171 -0,14875

225 PACITAN_2010 1 -7,8188E-05 -2,71532E-06 0,000652392 0,994516

226 PACITAN_2012 1 -9,09095E-05 -2,89513E-06 0,000659544 1,214006

227 PACITAN_2014 1 -0,000290676 -4,9934E-06 0,00066729 4,515851

228 PACITAN_2016 1 -0,000562478 -7,62692E-06 0,000672622 8,916174

229 TRENGGALEK_2010 1 -8,92427E-05 -4,4296E-07 0,000556777 0,254565

230 TRENGGALEK_2011 1 -0,000614044 0 0,000560538 6,227912

231 TRENGGALEK_2012 1 -0,00179272 0 0,000571592 20,082387

232 TRENGGALEK_2016 1 -0,00748159 0 0,000652844 86,841346