KETAHANAN PANGAN RUMAH TANGGA PETANI SAWAH DI WILAYAH ENCLAVE TAMAN NASIONAL BUKIT BARISAN SELATAN
Authors: Amirian Amirian , Baliwati Yayuk Farida , Kustiyah Lilik 
Published: December 2017

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 12.65pt 6pt 14.2pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: 1cm;"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">The aim of this research was to know the food security of farmer household, </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">based on </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">the availibility of staple food, access to food and  utilization of food of farmer h</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">o</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">usehold. The research design was cross-sectional study. The samples were consisted of 35 owner farmer, 12 yeoman, and 13 farmworker.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">P</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">rimary and secondary data </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">was</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us"> analyzed </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">by Micr</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">o</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">soft Excel and SPSS version 13 for windows. The result showed that </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">48</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">33%</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> of </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">husband </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">and</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us"> 78</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">33% of</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> wife were <span style="text-decoration: underline;">&lt;</span>40 years</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us"> old</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">. As many as </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">66</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">67% of</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">husband</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">education</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">and</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">70</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">00% of wife education were elementary school</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">.  </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">Most</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">of</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">the</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">sample</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">w</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">ere </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">farmer</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">s</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">, 26</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">67% husband and 18</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">.</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">33% wife </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">had additional work. </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">The result showed,</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">based on the </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">availability of staple food, 70.00% of household catagorized as food secured</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">. Based on the</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> access to food, 65.00% of household catagorized as food secured, and </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">based on the</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> utilization of food, 56.70% of household catagorized as food secured. </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us">The conclusion of this research,</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> 63.30% of household catagorized as food secured</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;" lang="en-us" xml:lang="en-us"> based on combination of three component of food security</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">. </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">There was a significant positive correlation (p&lt;0.01) betwen income per household per month, family size, access to clean water, total of rice production, and the rice </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">production distributed to household</span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"> with the availability of energy per capita per day.</span></p>