Structural Equation Model (SEM) of Social Capital with Landowner Intention
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Data Collection
2.2. Structural Equation Modeling Analysis
2.3. Pandaan District Overview
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Respondent Characteristics
3.2. Intention to Change SFAL Based on Social Capital
3.3. Social Capital of SFAL Landowners’ Intentions
- The influence of norms on trust: Testing of the norm variable’s relationships to trust showed a critical ratio (CR) of 1.210 (≥1.96), with an estimate value of 0.135 and a probability value of 0.222 (p < 0.05). This proves that there is an insignificant positive relationship between norms and trust. Trust is the basis for creating social relationships and networks. In a society that has a high level of trust, there tends to be positive social rules and interpersonal relationships that support cooperation.
- The influence of norms on the network: The norm variable’s relationship with networks showed a critical ratio (CR) value of −0.363 (≥1.96), with an estimate value of −0.25 and a probability value of 0.717 (p < 0.05). This proves that there is a negative relationship and an insignificant influence between norms and networks, evidenced by negative values in the critical ratio and probability values that are above the standard criteria.
- The influence of trust on networks: The influence of trust variables on networks was shown to have a CR value of 3.361 with a p-value of 0.000 (very small and below 0.05). This proves that there is a significant positive relationship between trust and networks. With strong community trust, there is the strongest network of SFAL owners in Pandaan Subdistrict.
Social Capital of SFAL Owners Who Are Not Willing to Sell Their Land
- The influence of norms on trust: Testing the relationship between norm variables and trust showed a critical ratio (CR) value of 3.625 (≥1.96), with an estimated value of 0.249 and a probability value of 0.000 (very small and below 0.05). This proves that there is a significant positive relationship between norms and trust. This way, the stronger the community norms, the stronger the trust of the community who owns SFAL in Pandaan District will be.
- The influence of norms on the network: The correlation between norms and networks can be seen with a CR value of 2.156 and a p-value of 0.000 (very small and below 0.05). This shows that there is a significant positive relationship between norms and networks.
- The influence of trust on networks: The influence of the trust variable on networks can be seen with a CR value of 6.654 with a p-value of 0.000 (very small and below 0.05). This proves that there is a significant positive relationship between trust and networks. This way, the stronger the trust, the stronger the community network of SFAL owners in Pandaan District will be.
3.4. Research Implication
- Implement policy changes and innovations to encourage SFAL owners to defend their property. Increase trust and community networks in communities with low social capital, provide a variety of information related to cooperation among community members, exchange information in land management, assist each other in the implementation of plant maintenance, and assist in the provision of seed water, among other on-farm activities.
- Governments could give detailed and realistic directions about the boundaries of SFAL land changes to landowners who have a proclivity to make SFAL land-use changes, as well as contribute to the community’s social capital.
- Implement policy changes and innovations to encourage SFAL owners to keep their land property. Increase trust and community networks in communities with low social capital, provide a variety of information related to cooperation among community members, and exchange information on land.
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Al Azizi, Faizah Arifiyah, Nindya Sari, and Gunawan Prayitno. 2022. Intensi perubahan lahan petani pemilik lahan LP2B di kecamatan pandaan, kabupaten pasuruan. Planning for Urban Region and Environment Journal (PURE) 11: 161–68. [Google Scholar]
- Auer, Alejandra, Jonathan Von Below, Laura Nahuelhual, Matías Enrique Mastrangelo, Andrew Gonzalez, Mariana Gluch, María Vallejos, Luciana Staiano, Pedro Laterra, and José Maria Paruelo. 2020. The role of social capital and collective actions in natural capital conservation and management. Environmental Science & Policy 107: 168–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Auliah, Aidha, Gunawan Prayitno, Ismu Rini Dwi Ari, Lusyana Eka Wardani, and Christia Meidiana. 2022. The Role of Social Capital Facing Pandemic COVID-19 in Tourism Village to Support Sustainable Agriculture (Empirical Evidence from Two Tourism Villages in Indonesia). Economies 10: 320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bappeda Kabupaten Pasuruan. 2010. Rencana Tata Ruang Wilayah Kabupaten Pasuruan 2009–29. Available online: https://jdih.pasuruankab.go.id/ (accessed on 1 February 2023).
- Boni, Yohanes. 2022. Agricultural Development’s Influence on Rural Poverty Alleviation in the North Buton Regency, Indonesia—The Mediating Role of Farmer Performance. Economies 10: 240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- BPS Pasuruan. 2020. Pasuruan in Figure 2020; Bangil: Pasuruan Regency. Available online: https://pasuruankab.bps.go.id (accessed on 1 February 2023).
- Castillo, Gracia Maria Lanza, Alejandra Engler, and Meike Wollni. 2021. Planned behavior and social capital: Understanding farmers’ behavior toward pressurized irrigation technologies. Agricultural Water Management 243: 106524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Central Bureau of Statistics. 2020. Statistik Indonesia 2020 [Statistic of Indonesia 2020]; Jakarta: Central Bureau of Statistics. Available online: https://www.bps.go.id (accessed on 1 February 2023).
- Cheevapattananuwong, Pornsiri, Claudia Baldwin, Athena Lathouras, and Nnenna Ike. 2020. Social capital in community organizing for land protection and food security. Land 9: 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cox, Eva Maria. 1995. A Trully Civil Society. Sydney: ABC Book. [Google Scholar]
- Deng, Xin, Miao Zeng, Dingde Xu, and Yanbin Qi. 2020. Does social capital help to reduce farmland abandonment? Evidence from big survey data in rural china. Land 9: 360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eko, Trigus, and Sri Rahayu. 2012. Perubahan penggunaan lahan dan kesesuaiannya terhadap RDTR di wilayah peri-urban studi kasus: Kecamatan Mlati. Jurnal Perencanaan Wilayah dan Kota 8: 330–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- FAO. 2017. The Future of Food and Agriculture—Trends and Challenges. Rome: FAO. [Google Scholar]
- Farisa, Baiq Maulida Riska, Gunawan Prayitno, and Dian Dinanti. 2019. Social Capital and Community Participation on Infrastructure Development in Pajaran Village, Malang Regency Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 239: 012046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fathy, Rusydan. 2019. Modal Sosial: Konsep, Inklusivitas dan Pemberdayaan Masyarakat. Journal Pemikiran Sosiologi 6: 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Field, John. 2003. Social Capital. Landon: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
- Fukuyama, Francis. 2001. Social Capital and Development: The Coming Agenda. The SAIS Review of International Affairs 22: 23–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fukuyama, Francis. 1995. Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. New York: New York Free Press. [Google Scholar]
- Ghozali, Imam. 2008. Structural Equation Modeling, Metode Alternatif dengan Partial Least Square. Semarang: Badan Penerbit University Diponegoro. [Google Scholar]
- Haryono, Siswoyo. 2014. Structural Equation Modelling untuk Penelitian Manajemen Menggunakan AMOS. Journal Ekonomi dan Bisnis 7: 23–34. [Google Scholar]
- Hidayat, AR Rohman Taufiq, Abdul Wahid Hasyim, Gunawan Prayitno, and Januar Dwi Harisandy. 2021. Farm Owners’ Perception toward Farmland Conversion: An Empirical Study from Indonesian Municipality. Environmental Research, Engineering and Management 77: 109–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hunecke, Claudia, Alejandra Engler, Roberto Jara-Rojas, and Marijn Poortvliet. 2017. Understanding the role of social capital in adoption decisions: An application to irrigation technology. Agricultural Systems 153: 221–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hwang, Doohyun, and William P. Stewart. 2017. Social Capital and Collective Action in Rural Tourism. Journal of Travel Research 56: 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ilham, Nyak, Yusman Syaukat, and Supena Friyatno. 2005. Perkembangan Dan Faktor-Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi Konversi Lahan Sawah Serta Dampak Ekonominya. SOCA: Jurnal Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian 5: 2. [Google Scholar]
- Irawati, Hedyan, Agus Dwi Wicaksono, and Gunawan Prayitno. 2021. Modal sosial dan partisipasi masyarakat dalam kaitan tingkat kemajuan desa. Geography: Jurnal Kajian, Penelitian Dan Pengembangan Pendidikan 9: 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Kizos, Thanasis, Tobias Plieninger, Theodoros Iosifides, María García-Martín, Geneviève Girod, Krista Karro, Hannes Palang, Anu Printsmann, Brian Shaw, Julianna Nagy, and et al. 2018. Responding to landscape change: Stakeholder participation and social capital in five european landscapes. Land 7: 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lenzi, Michela, Alessio Vieno, Douglas Perkins, Massimiliano Pastore, Massimo Santinello, and Sonia Mazzardis. 2012. Perceived Neighborhood Social Resources as Determinants of Prosocial Behavior in Early Adolescence. American Journal of Community Psychology 50: 37–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nugraha, Tjachja Achmad, Gunawan Prayitno, Abdul Wahid Hasyim, and Fauzan Roziqin. 2021. Social capital, collective action, and the development of agritourism for sustainable agriculture in rural Indonesia. Evergreen 8: 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nugraha, Tjachja Achmad, Gunawan Prayitno, Rahmawati, and Aidha Auliah. 2022. Farmers’ Social Capital in Supporting Sustainable Agriculture: The Case of Pujon Kidul Tourism Village, Indonesia. Journal of Civil Engineering and Environmental Sciences A 5: 235–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- OECD/FAO. 2018. OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2018–2027. Paris: OECD Publishing. Rome: FAO. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prayitno, Gunawan, Ainul Hayat, Achmad Efendi, Hagus Tarno, Fikriyah, and Septia Hana Fauziah. 2022a. Structural Model of Social Capital and Quality of Life of Farmers in Supporting Sustainable Agriculture (Evidence: Sedayulawas Village, Lamongan Regency—Indonesia). Sustainability 14: 12487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prayitno, Gunawan, Aris Subagiyo, Dian Dinanti, Rahmawati, and Aidha Auliah. 2021a. Place Attachment & Alih Fungsi Lahan Pertanian: Pentingnya Lahan Pertanian di Perdesaan. Malang: UB Media. [Google Scholar]
- Prayitno, Gunawan, Dian Dinanti, Achmad Efendi, Ainul Hayat, and Pradnya Paramitha Dewi. 2022b. Social Capital of Pujon Kidul Communities in Supporting the Development of the COVID-19 Resilience Village. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning 17: 251–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prayitno, Gunawan, Dian Dinanti, Izzatul Ihsansi Hidayana, and Tjachja Achmad Nugraha. 2021b. Place attachment and agricultural land conversion for sustainable agriculture in Indonesia. Heliyon 7: e07546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Prayitno, Gunawan, Dian Dinanti, Safira Aulia Rusmi, Surjono, and Zakiyah Dwi Maulidatuz. 2019a. Place Attachment Index of Landowners in Pandaan Sub-District; Bangil: Pasuruan Regency. [CrossRef]
- Prayitno, Gunawan, Nindya Sari, Abdul Wahid Hasyim, and Nyoman Suluh Wijaya. 2020. Land-use prediction in Pandaan District pasuruan regency. International Journal of GEOMATE 18: 64–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prayitno, Gunawan, Nindya Sari, Rohman Taufiq Hidayat, Nyoman Suluh Wijaya, and Zakiyah Dwi Maulidatuz. 2019b. Soil/land use changes and urban sprawl identification in Pandaan District, Indonesia. International Journal of GEOMATE 16: 148–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prayitno, Gunawan, Surjono, Rohman Taufiq Hidayat, Aris Subagiyo, and Nindya Kinanti Paramasasi. 2018. Factors that effect to land use change in Pandaan District. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 202: 012006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Putnam, Robert. 1993a. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Putnam, Robert. 1993b. Social Capital and Public Life. The American Prospect 4: 35–42. [Google Scholar]
- Putnam, Robert. 1993c. The Prosperous Community. The American Prospect 19: 475–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Putnam, Robert. 2001. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Touchstone Books by Simon & Schuster. [Google Scholar]
- Rahayu, Sri. 2009. Kajian Konversi Lahan Pertanian di Daerah Pinggiran Kota Yogyakarta Bagian Selatan (Studi Kasus di Sebagian Daerah Kecamatan Umbulharjo). Jurnal Pembangunan Wilayah dan Kota 5: 365–37. [Google Scholar]
- Rajpar, Habibullah, Anlu Zhang, Amar Razzaq, Khalid Mehmood, Maula Bux Pirzado, and Weiyan Hu. 2019. Agricultural land abandonment and farmers’ perceptions of land use change in the indus plains of Pakistan: A case study of Sindh province. Sustainability 11: 4663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rondhi, Mohammad, Pravitasari Anjar Pratiwi, Vivi Trisna Handini, Aryo Fajar Sunartomo, and Subhan Arif Budiman. 2018. Agricultural land conversion, land economic value, and sustainable agriculture: A case study in East Java, Indonesia. Land 7: 148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosyidie, Arief. 2013. Banjir: Fakta dan Dampaknya. Serta Pengaruh dari Perubahan Guna Lahan. Journal of Regional and City Planning. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sawatsky, Tara Anne. 2008. The influence of social capital on the development of nature tourism: A case study from Bahia Magdalena. Mexico 2008: 1–147. [Google Scholar]
- Setiawan, Trio Pendi, Elok Ebrilyani, and Erina Nur Azilla. 2020. Modal Sosial Dalam Keberlanjutan Pertanian Di Tengah Alih Fungsi Lahan Di Kelurahan Bintoro Kecamatan Patrang Kabupaten Jember. Agricore: Jurnal Agribisnis dan Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian Unpad 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sobels, Jonathan, Allan Curtis, and Stewart Lockie. 2001. The role of Landcare group networks in rural Australia: Exploring the contribution of social capital. Journal of Rural Studies 17: 265–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Surya, Batara, Despry Nur Annisa Ahmad, Harry Hardian Sakti, and Hernita Sahban. 2020. Land use change, spatial interaction, and sustainable development in the metropolitan urban areas, south Sulawesi province, Indonesia. Land 9: 95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Jing, Yifan Lin, Anthony Glendinning, and Yueqing Xu. 2018. Land-use changes and land policies evolution in China’s urbanization processes. Land Use Policy 75: 375–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variable | Indicators | Symbol | Source |
---|---|---|---|
Trust (X1) | Over the past 5 years, the level of trust in the village has been getting better | X1.1 | (Farisa et al. 2019; Irawati et al. 2021; Nugraha et al. 2022; Prayitno et al. 2022b) |
Many people in my village help each other | X1.2 | ||
If a community project is not profitable for me but has benefits for many other people in the village, I will donate time or money to the project | X1.3 | ||
Trust in local community leaders | X1.4 | ||
Trust in local religious leaders | X1.5 | ||
Trust in the village apparatus or government | X1.6 | ||
Trust in fellow villagers | X1.7 | ||
Trust in the community in lending and borrowing goods (Ex. agricultural equipment) | X1.8 | ||
Social Network (X2) | I like to work individually with fellow villagers | X2.1 | (Prayitno et al. 2022b) |
I enjoy working in groups with the village community | X2.2 | ||
I have many close friends who are comfortable, can talk about personal matters, and ask for help in this village | X2.3 | ||
If I suddenly had to be out of town for a day or two, I would rely on the neighbors to look after what I had. (Example: house, land, children, etc.) | X2.4 | ||
If I need some money for capital and farming costs, many people in the village (especially in the farmer group) are willing to help finance me | X2.5 | ||
If I suddenly face a long-term emergency such as crop failure, many villagers (especially people in farmer groups) are willing to help me | X2.6 | ||
I am very active in participating in farmer groups | X2.7 | ||
People in farmer groups help each other in marketing agricultural products | X2.8 | ||
People in farmer groups help each other in farming tools and agricultural infrastructure | X2.9 | ||
People in farmer groups help each other in terms of agricultural needs (fertilizers, pesticides, etc.) | X2.10 | ||
The people in the farmer group and I have a good relationship | X2.11 | ||
Norms (X3) | I obey the written rules in the community | X3.1 | (Farisa et al. 2019; Irawati et al. 2021; Nugraha et al. 2022; Prayitno et al. 2022b) |
I get a written sanction if I violate written rules in the community | X3.2 | ||
I obey the unwritten rules in the community | X3.3 | ||
I get unwritten sanctions if I violate written rules in the community | X3.4 |
Variable | Indicator | (Score) Statement |
---|---|---|
Trust | Trust in local religious leaders |
|
| ||
| ||
| ||
|
No | Villages | SFAL Area (Ha) |
---|---|---|
1 | Jogosari | 19.95 |
2 | Kutorejo | 31.63 |
3 | Petungasri | 16.73 |
4 | Banjarkejen | 82.45 |
5 | Banjarsari | 76.24 |
6 | Durensewu | 49.17 |
7 | Karangjati | 25.57 |
8 | Kebonwaris | 84.39 |
9 | Kemirisewu | 117.89 |
10 | Nogosari | 37.48 |
11 | Plintahan | 59.09 |
12 | Sebani | 115.08 |
13 | Sumberejo | 88.54 |
14 | Sumbergedang | 84.08 |
15 | Tawangrejo | 31.14 |
16 | Tunggulwulung | 101.96 |
17 | Wedoro | 87.57 |
Total Area | 1108.96 |
The Goodness of Fit Index | Cut-Off Value | First-Stage CFA | Second-Stage CFA | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Result | Information | Result | Information | ||
SRMR | >0.10 | 0.135 | Good Fit | 0.12 | Good Fit |
d_ULS | >0.05 | 6.37 | Good Fit | 1.96 | Good Fit |
d_G | - | 3.17 | Good Fit | 1.19 | Good Fit |
Chi-Square | >0.05 | 5.29 | Good Fit | 2.11 | Good Fit |
NFI | <0.9 | 0.45 | Good Fit | 0.58 | Good Fit |
Variable | R Square | Strength |
---|---|---|
Social network | 0.510 | Good Enough |
Social capital | 0.006 | Low |
SAFL landowners’ intentions | 1.000 | Very Good |
Variable | Original Sample | Standard Error | T-Statistic | Information |
---|---|---|---|---|
Social Network -> Social Capital | 0.442 | 0.009 | 48,079 | Significant |
Trust -> Social Capital | 0.432 | 0.011 | 38,011 | Significant |
Social Capital -> SFAL Landowners’ Intentions | −0.078 | 0.047 | 1649 | Significant |
Norm -> Social Network | 0.714 | 0.028 | 25,433 | Significant |
Norm -> Social Capital | 0.236 | 0.008 | 29,958 | Significant |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Nugraha, A.T.; Prayitno, G.; Azizi, F.A.; Sari, N.; Hidayana, I.I.; Auliah, A.; Siankwilimba, E. Structural Equation Model (SEM) of Social Capital with Landowner Intention. Economies 2023, 11, 127. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies11040127
Nugraha AT, Prayitno G, Azizi FA, Sari N, Hidayana II, Auliah A, Siankwilimba E. Structural Equation Model (SEM) of Social Capital with Landowner Intention. Economies. 2023; 11(4):127. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies11040127
Chicago/Turabian StyleNugraha, Achmad T., Gunawan Prayitno, Faizah A. Azizi, Nindya Sari, Izatul Ihsansi Hidayana, Aidha Auliah, and Enock Siankwilimba. 2023. "Structural Equation Model (SEM) of Social Capital with Landowner Intention" Economies 11, no. 4: 127. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies11040127
APA StyleNugraha, A. T., Prayitno, G., Azizi, F. A., Sari, N., Hidayana, I. I., Auliah, A., & Siankwilimba, E. (2023). Structural Equation Model (SEM) of Social Capital with Landowner Intention. Economies, 11(4), 127. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies11040127