IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i24p16706-d1002155.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder Analysis and Prioritization of Sustainable Organic Farming Management: A Case Study of Bogor, Indonesia

Author

Listed:
  • Adityawarman Adil

    (Graduate Program of Natural Resources and Environmental Management, IPB University (Bogor Agricultural University), Bogor 16114, Indonesia)

  • Rizal Syarief

    (School of Business, IPB University (Bogor Agricultural University), Bogor 16114, Indonesia)

  • Widiatmaka

    (Department of Soil Science and Land Resource, IPB University (Bogor Agricultural University), Bogor 16114, Indonesia)

  • Mukhamad Najib

    (Department of Management, IPB University (Bogor Agricultural University), Bogor 16114, Indonesia)

Abstract

The world’s population continues to increase, which causes food demand to increase. The increasing food demand is followed by increasing public awareness of healthy living. One way to overcome these problems is the application of organic farming. Developing organic farming must not be distinct from the role of stakeholders. The study aimed to describe and understand the stakeholders’ role in organic farming management. The research was conducted using interviews, field observations, and literature studies. The analysis was carried out quantitatively and qualitatively. Stakeholder analysis is carried out to identify, classify, map, and analyze relationships between stakeholders. The result showed all stakeholders involved in the management of organic agriculture in Bogor, West Java, are classified into four groups, namely key player (Agriculture Department and the Indonesian Organic Alliance (AOI), subject (farmers and community groups), context setter (Organic Certification Institute, Agriculture and Technology Park (ATP)-IPB University, and Organic Entrepreneurs), and the crowd (Bappeda and Universities). All stakeholders should support the government in developing policies and strategies for developing organic farming. In addition, key players, especially the Indonesian Organic Alliance, should proactively negotiate with local governments and communities regarding the sustainability of organic farming development. The policy implication of this research is to determine the contribution of stakeholders in making a strategy for the development of organic farming.

Suggested Citation

  • Adityawarman Adil & Rizal Syarief & Widiatmaka & Mukhamad Najib, 2022. "Stakeholder Analysis and Prioritization of Sustainable Organic Farming Management: A Case Study of Bogor, Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-16, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:24:p:16706-:d:1002155
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/24/16706/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/24/16706/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zagata, Lukas & Uhnak, Tomas & Hrabák, Jiří, 2021. "Moderately radical? Stakeholders' perspectives on societal roles and transformative potential of organic agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    2. Joanna Węgrzyn & Anna Wojewnik-Filipkowska, 2022. "Stakeholder Analysis and Their Attitude towards PPP Success," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, January.
    3. Li Guo & Shuya Hao & Udara Ranasinghe & Maggie Liyaning Tang & Mary Hardie, 2021. "Stakeholder Collaboration Mechanism in Elderly Community Retrofit Projects: Case Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-15, September.
    4. Nicola Dal Ferro & Carlo Camarotto & Ilaria Piccoli & Antonio Berti & Jane Mills & Francesco Morari, 2020. "Stakeholder Perspectives to Prevent Soil Organic Matter Decline in Northeastern Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-18, January.
    5. Jie Cai & Xianli Xia & Haibin Chen & Ting Wang & Huili Zhang, 2018. "Decomposition of Fertilizer Use Intensity and Its Environmental Risk in China’s Grain Production Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-15, February.
    6. Haiying Luan & Long Li & Shengxi Zhang, 2022. "Exploring the Impact Mechanism of Interface Management Performance of Sustainable Prefabricated Construction: The Perspective of Stakeholder Engagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-18, August.
    7. Andy Felix Jităreanu & Mioara Mihăilă & Alexandru-Dragoș Robu & Florin-Daniel Lipșa & Carmen Luiza Costuleanu, 2022. "Dynamic of Ecological Agriculture Certification in Romania Facing the EU Organic Action Plan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-17, September.
    8. Colleen M. Eidt & Laxmi P. Pant & Gordon M. Hickey, 2020. "Platform, Participation, and Power: How Dominant and Minority Stakeholders Shape Agricultural Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, January.
    9. Maguire, Bernadine & Potts, Jonathan & Fletcher, Stephen, 2012. "The role of stakeholders in the marine planning process--Stakeholder analysis within the Solent, United Kingdom," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 246-257, January.
    10. Camilo Venegas & Andrea C. Sánchez-Alfonso & Crispín Celis & Fidson-Juarismy Vesga & Mauricio González Mendez, 2021. "Management Strategies and Stakeholders Analysis to Strengthen the Management and Use of Biosolids in a Colombian Municipality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-25, November.
    11. Tiffany L. Fess & Vagner A. Benedito, 2018. "Organic versus Conventional Cropping Sustainability: A Comparative System Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-42, January.
    12. Walther Zeug & Alberto Bezama & Urs Moesenfechtel & Anne Jähkel & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Stakeholders’ Interests and Perceptions of Bioeconomy Monitoring Using a Sustainable Development Goal Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, March.
    13. Nuccio Ludovico & Federica Dessi & Marino Bonaiuto, 2020. "Stakeholders Mapping for Sustainable Biofuels: An Innovative Procedure Based on Computational Text Analysis and Social Network Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.
    14. Lixiang Wang & Weian Li & Lujun Qi, 2020. "Stakeholder Pressures and Corporate Environmental Strategies: A Meta-Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-16, February.
    15. Lu Zhang & Chengxi Yan & Qing Guo & Junbiao Zhang & Jorge Ruiz-Menjivar, 2018. "The impact of agricultural chemical inputs on environment: global evidence from informetrics analysis and visualization," International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 338-352.
    16. John M Bryson, 2004. "What to do when Stakeholders matter," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 21-53, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wenqi Xie & Gang Zhou & Haijuan Yang & Xin Chen & Chao Wang & Jieying Ji, 2023. "Response of Food Production and Trade to the Global Socio-Ecological System Network," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-21, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Evangelos Bellos & Georgios Chatzistelios & Angeliki Deligianni & Vrassidas Leopoulos, 2021. "Stakeholders and Risks in Liquified Natural Gas Bunkering Projects: The Hidden Link," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Jorge Andres Garcia & Angelos Alamanos, 2022. "Integrated Modelling Approaches for Sustainable Agri-Economic Growth and Environmental Improvement: Examples from Greece, Canada and Ireland," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-19, September.
    3. Bert George, 2017. "Does strategic planning ‘work’ in public organizations? Insights from Flemish municipalities," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(7), pages 527-530, November.
    4. Martin Luštický & Martin Musil, 2016. "Stakeholder-Based Evaluation of Tourism Policy Priorities: The Case of the South Bohemian Region," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2016(3), pages 3-23.
    5. Jolanta MAJ, 2015. "Diversity Management’S Stakeholders And Stakeholders Management," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 9(1), pages 780-793, November.
    6. Franco-Trigo, L. & Fernandez-Llimos, F. & Martínez-Martínez, F. & Benrimoj, S.I. & Sabater-Hernández, D., 2020. "Stakeholder analysis in health innovation planning processes: A systematic scoping review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(10), pages 1083-1099.
    7. Atanu Mukherjee & Emmanuel C. Omondi & Paul R. Hepperly & Rita Seidel & Wade P. Heller, 2020. "Impacts of Organic and Conventional Management on the Nutritional Level of Vegetables," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-25, October.
    8. Kik, M.C. & Claassen, G.D.H. & Meuwissen, M.P.M. & Smit, A.B. & Saatkamp, H.W., 2021. "Actor analysis for sustainable soil management – A case study from the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    9. Jorge A. Garcia & Angelos Alamanos, 2022. "Integrated modelling approaches for sustainable agri-economic growth and environmental improvement: Examples from Canada, Greece, and Ireland," Papers 2208.09087, arXiv.org.
    10. Mark K. McBeth & Donna L. Lybecker & James W. Stoutenborough, 2016. "Do stakeholders analyze their audience? The communication switch and stakeholder personal versus public communication choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 421-444, December.
    11. Nesar Ahmed & Shirley Thompson & Giovanni M. Turchini, 2020. "Organic aquaculture productivity, environmental sustainability, and food security: insights from organic agriculture," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(6), pages 1253-1267, December.
    12. Christophe Favoreu & David Carassus & Christophe Maurel, 2015. "Strategic management in the public sector: a rational, political or collaborative approach? [Le management stratégique en milieu public : approche rationnelle, politique ou collaborative ?]," Post-Print hal-02152509, HAL.
    13. Sandra Ricart & Antonio M. Rico-Amorós, 2022. "Can agriculture and conservation be compatible in a coastal wetland? Balancing stakeholders’ narratives and interactions in the management of El Hondo Natural Park, Spain," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 589-604, June.
    14. Ashton W. Merck & Khara D. Grieger & Alison Deviney & Anna-Maria Marshall, 2023. "Using a Phosphorus Flow Diagram as a Boundary Object to Inform Stakeholder Engagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-10, July.
    15. Ana Ursu & Ionut Laurentiu Petre, 2022. "Forecasting the Optimal Sustainable Development of the Romanian Ecological Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-23, October.
    16. Ogunlowo, Olufemi O. & Bristow, Abigail L. & Sohail, M., 2017. "A stakeholder analysis of the automotive industry's use of compressed natural gas in Nigeria," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 58-69.
    17. Austen Agata, 2012. "Stakeholders management in public hospitals in the context of resources," Management, Sciendo, vol. 16(2), pages 217-230, December.
    18. Zhongju Liao & Xiang Zhu, 2022. "A configurational analysis of firms' environmental innovation: Evidence from China's key pollutant‐discharge listed companies," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 1511-1522, December.
    19. Sandra Ricart & Anna Ribas & David Pavón, 2016. "Qualifying irrigation system sustainability by means of stakeholder perceptions and concerns: lessons from the Segarra‐Garrigues Canal, Spain," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 40(1-2), pages 77-90, February.
    20. Debuschewitz, Emil & Sanders, Jürn, 2021. "Bewertung der Umweltwirkungen des ökologischen Landbaus im Kontext der kontroversen wissenschaftlichen Diskurse," 61st Annual Conference, Berlin, Germany, September 22-24, 2021 317076, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:24:p:16706-:d:1002155. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.