1. SPATIAL MODEL FOR PADDY LAND PROTECTION IN INDONESIA: A CASE STUDY IN THREE DISTRICTS IN WEST JAVA PROVINCE B Barus 1,2, K Munibah 1, DR Panuju 1,2, LS Iman 2, D Shiddiq 2, R Kusumo 1 Department of Soil Science and Land Resource, Bogor Agricultural University (IPB) 2. Center for Spatial Planning and Development, IPB, Bogor, Indonesia email : bababarus@yahoo.com; bababarus61@gmail.combababarus@yahoo.com THE 5th INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE AND FIELD STUDY MALAYSIA 2014 “MANAGING RURAL CHANGE IN A TURBULENT WORLD: TOWARDS A RESILIENT AND SUSTAINABLE RURAL SOCIETY Bangi, Malaysia, 26-28 August 2014

2. I. INTRODUCTION Gov of Indonesia is facing food security problem due to rapid paddy land conversion to other utilizations : settlement, commercial crops. In 2009, The Indonesian Government launch Act No 41 for protection of food agricultural land.  Factors : land suitability and productivity, planting index, irrigation infrastr, social acceptability, economic and other local characteristics. Until 2014, some districts have committed to protect their prime agricultural lands, but they have not implemented into spatial district plan.  stated into tabular format; difficult to convert into spatial format. Several districts/cities in Java are in the progress of selecting paddy land to be protected.  District Bogor, District Garut and City of Sukabumi are examples of local government that have been trying to protect their paddy lands.

3. II. METHODOLOGY 2.1. Research location Researches area : Bogor District, Sukabumi City and Garut District, a neighbourhood of Jakarta where many of its residence work in Jakarta, is a tourist destination for Jakarta People. Bogor area is about 300,000 Ha, with conversion rate of agricultural land 200 Ha/year. Garut District has area about 307,909 ha is a famous destination tourist area but it still has less rapid land conversion. Sukabumi city, as a city with size only 4,800 Ha, has no obligation to protect paddy land, but the local government has initiated to protect particular agricultural land.

4. 2.2. Material and tools Ikonos (2010 for Bogor and Garut, 2012 for Sukabumi), spatial planning map, paddy field map, irrigation, productivity map, planting index map, land tenure / social map, and land balance map. Field observation during 2011-2013. Remote sensing and GIS software, Laboratory of Remote Sensing and Spatial Information, Departement of Soil Science, Faculty of Agriculture, and Studio of Center for Spatial and Development Studies of IPB.

5. 3.3. Method Consist of 4 steps : 1.Generating paddy map and some other thematic data. Ikonos was interpreted visually and field data; while other spatial data such as irrigation data, productivity data, land balance map, and other are digitized and or converted from tabular into spatial format. Statistical methods to generate data of land balance format. 2.Generating paddy land for protection, spatial multiple criteria method was implemented utilizing overlaid method in GIS. Parameters: are land capability, land productivity, planting index, and irrigation status. There are 3 level of priority (1,2,3). The higher level indicates the more prioritize paddy land to be protection. Each parameter has equal weight. 3.Conformity analysis using overlay between land protection map and District Spatial Planning 4.Description and Synthesis. The priority protected land and or paddy land incorporated with socio-economic data and/or land balance map.

6. Spatial model Ikonos image Paddy land map Planting index productivity Land capability Irrigation infra Land balance Land Priority for protection Spatial MCE - Statistical data - Field survey Socio perception District /City Spatial planning Overlay & Conformity Priority Paddy land in spatial planning

7. III. RESULTS 3.1. Protection Paddy Land in Bogor District Deficit status for food productvy is vary Large area paddy to be Converted into settlement some paddy in protected area  No-conformity of paddy land protection to spatial planning  Difficult to revise

8. NoType of spatial zonation Priority protection (ha) Total paddy Spatial area (ha) % area paddy 1st2 nd 3 rd 1Conservation forest area100 1481,2061,45443,158.83.4 2Protected forest area26052788,672.0 0.9 3Limited forest production area1692549451,36714,391.4 9.5 4Forest production area1126171,3542,08419,977.8 10.4 5Perennial crop area80 58 717 856 9,823.0 8.7 6Annual crop area5636752,2863,523 26,681.6 13.2 7Wetland area3,9511,5965,78511,33240,044.5 28.3 8Dry land area1,045 7152,3994,159 23,993.2 17.3 9Industrial area80 12279371 2,007.7 18.5 10Industrial zonation7325 94 192 2,904.8 6.6 11Urban Settlement dense area1,573 301428 2,302 37,446.1 6.1 12Urban Settlement medium area2,0727122,9605,74427,345.1 21.0 13Urban Settlement low area1,311721,0452,42811,018.6 22.0 14Rural Settlement low area9611,2942,7455,00019,982.925.0 15Rural Settlement very low area310701,2691,6497,655.621.5 16Dam planning area20205294703.5 41.8 17Water bodies1,0072546561,917 2,712.870.7 13,4336,89124,83545,159298,519.015.1 Table 1. Paddy field area in Spatial Plan Zonation in Bogor District

9. 3.2. Protection of Paddy Land in Sukabumi City Paddy land status is deficit Productivity is high By definition as a city, no obligation to protect paddy land Paddy land to be protected has small number compare to actual paddy land Many choices for land protection Spatial model provides alternative land to protected Easy to revise existing spatial planning

10. No Spatial land use planning Priority for protection (ha) Total paddy spatial plan (ha) per cent 1 st 2 nd 3 rd 1 City forest* 0.331.56.718.55 222.5 3.84 2 Exercise field 000.04 14.8 0.27 3 Industry 05.0124.1129.12 102.1 28.52 4 Defense area 001.32 63.1 2.09 5 Research area 000.53 15 3.53 6 Health complex 06.253.59.75 13 75.00 7 Tourist area* 000.79 5 15.80 8 Burial area 00.070.920.98 49.4 1.98 9 Government office 00.597.267.85 17.4 45.11 10 Education area 032.441.734.14 25.4 134.41 11 Business and trade area 9.0647.44131.24187.75 636.1 29.52 12 Storage / garbage area 006.55 9.8 66.84 13 Settlement low density* 173.59175.85146.38495.82 784.4 63.21 14 Settlement medium density* 8.19182.94170.61361.74 988.9 36.58 15 Settlement high density* 019.3105.48124.78 1099.6 11.35 16 Agriculture 274.7500.2``0274.96 391.1 70.30 17 River buffer 2.465.6910.6318.77 179.3 10.47 18 City park* 05.66.0911.69 31.8 36.76 10 City tourist* 0.12011.12 82 1.37 20 Park of settlement* 0.040.771.472.29 96 2.39 Total 468.55483.44626.541,578.54 4826.7 100 Tabel 2. Paddy land in the City Sukabumi Spatial Planning

11. 3.3. Protection Paddy Land in Garut District Paddy land status is surplus Productivity is vary Many paddy land in hazardous area of spatial plan Spatial model criteria is not line with paddy protection Some paddy areas in protection area Difficult to implement operationally Some paddy belong to settlement area Need a redefinition of some hazardous area

12. NoSpatial Zonation Paddy land (ha)Spatial use (ha)% to spatial 1Conservation forest area 5015,3880.32 2Protected forest area1,75675,0572.34 3Volcanoes Hazard Area2,0204,53844.51 4High hazard Landslide area4,68020,10323.28 5Medium Hazard Landslide area18,44583,66422.05 6High Hazard Tsunami area7982,49132.04 7Medium Hazard Tsunami Area2061,24216.59 8Karsts Protected area15 57 26.32 9Water catchment area 3,12911,20027.94 10Beach buffer area15701 2.14 11River buffer area1,0905,95618.30 12Limited Forest Production area1747,5432.31 13Forest Production area673,9701.69 14Community forest3,39823,25714.61 15Perennial crop38612,142 3.18 16Dry land area99013,7747.19 17Wetland area4,5948,58153.54 18Urban area9406,30214.92 19Rural area1,43310,46713.69 20Enclave4653,170 14.67 total44,651309,603 Table 3. Paddy field area in the Spatial Plan Zonation of Garut District

13. IV. DISCUSSION The paddy field in the three research areas distribute in almost all sub-districts that indicate the dependent of community to paddy lands. The vast area of paddy locate in flat area and valley floor All paddy areas relate to availability of water and land suitability.  indicated by irrigation, plantation index and high productivity.  the productivity of paddy in Garut and Bogor is vary, from low to high, compare to Sukabumi city that is generally high The spatial model reveal spatial data that may help to prioritize paddy land protection  the decision boundary of parameters in each areas is different  At Sukabumi city the productivity of paddy is relatively high and water is sufficient, then these parameters are not included. The result of analysis shows that there are 3 level of land priority,  decision at Sukabumi is easer as it has to protect only small number of paddy land, compare to availability of paddy land.

14. Discussion -- continue  The situation in Bogor and Garut is relatively different.  In Bogor, status land balance is deficit; without any paddy land conversion, the district has already imported rice from other areas.  paddy conversion is accelerated and legitimated by spatial plan,  paddy land in the protected forest and other concession area  At Garut, status land balance is surplus  many paddy areas locate in hazardous areas and protected land.  Paddy lands allocated in spatial planning are relative small compare to the current actual paddy lands.  the need of redefinition of hazardous zone  The existence of actual paddy lands and its different level of prioritization may help to redefine of some district spatial zone in three districts, beside new definition of some zones, in order to save some paddy lands

15. V. CONCLUSION Spatial model has produced several alternatives paddy land for protection There are slightly different characters of paddy land in Bogor, Sukabumi and Garut, that may contribute to prioritize of paddy lands. These different categories of prioritazition have been produced that may help to allocate protected paddy land, and can be converted into the existing spatial plan. Some modification of spatial plan region, either from redefine of region or reconstruction method of delineation of region, have to be delivered due the current actual/draft spatial do no have full concerning to save paddy land. To make more comprehensive consideration in saving of paddy, some socio economic aspects are urgent to incorporate it in prioritizing and delivering it into spatial plan.