Household Food Security Analysis Case Study on Sustainable Food House Area Program (KRPL) in Bandungrejosari Village, Sukun District, Malang
Tartila Fitri1*, Iid Mufaidah2, Nuhfil Hanani3, Hery Toiba3
1,2Agribusiness Study Program, Institute of Technology and Business Muhammadiyah Banyuwangi Diponegoro Street, No. 60, Genteng, Banyuwangi, Indonesia 68465
3Department of Socio-Economic, Faculty of Agriculture, Brawijaya University, Veteran Street, Malang 65145, East Java, Indonesia
Received: 2 January 2019; Revised: 6 June 2022; Accepted: 28 July 2022 ABSTRACT
The population of Indonesia increases every year, so there is an increase in demand for food, both commodities of grain, vegetables, fruit and others. If the demand for food continues to increase and is not supported by increasing food production there will also be food insecurity at certain times. The government's policy to overcome this problem is the Acceleration of Food Consumption Diversification (P2KP) and its program namely Sustainable Food House Area (KRPL). The purpose of this study is to analyze household food security using a quantitative aspect approach (TKE and TKP) and quality aspects (PPH score) The results of the study PPH scores achieved by KRPL participating households and not KRPL participants were 86.6 and 75.9, respectively. This value shows the pattern of food consumption that has not varied. However, it can be seen that participating households of KRPL have more food consumption than households not participating in KRPL While the energy consumption and non- participant household protein of KRPL still have not reached the consumption recommendations set by the government, amounting to 1883.5 kcal / capita / day and 49.7 gram / capita / day.
Keywords: food security; KRPL program; PPH Score How to cite :
Fitri, T., Mufaidah, I., Hanani, N., & Toiba, H. (2022). Household Food Security Analysis Case Study on Sustainable Food House Area Program ( KRPL ) in Bandungrejosari Village , Sukun District , Malang. HABITAT, 33(2), 177–185. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.habitat.2022.033.2.18
1. Introductions
Food is a basic human need where the fulfillment of food needs is a human right. This is guaranteed in Law No. 18 of 2012 concerning food. In addition, in Article 60 of Law no. 18 of 2012 states that the central government and local governments are obliged to realize the diversification of food consumption to meet the nutritional needs of the community in accordance with the potential and local wisdom in order to realize a healthy, active, and productive life. The rights possessed by each individual are food availability, food affordability, and the fulfillment of safe, quality and nutritionally balanced food. As the years go by, the demand for food is increasing, this is because the population of Indonesia is increasing every year.
According to data (Bappenas 2014) in 2020 the population of Indonesia is predicted to reach 27.1 million people, and in 2014-2019 it is predicted that per capita rice consumption will decrease by an average of 0.87%/year, but the total national rice consumption will increase by an average of 0 ,35 years old. Likewise, the demand for other food ingredients such as fruits, vegetables, animal protein, and processed food has also increased. So if viewed from the consumption side, food insecurity will occur at certain times. Therefore, the government has prepared several strategies to overcome the problem of food insecurity, by increasing domestic production capacity in order to strengthen food security so that food sovereignty can be achieved.
Food security is one of the main priorities in the National Medium-Term Development Plan (RPJMN) for the 2015-2019 period, where the government focuses more on increasing food availability, strengthening food distribution,
---
*Correspondence Author.
E-mail : tartilafitri@gmail.com Tel : +62-856-499-539-16
Available online at HABITAT website: http://www.habitat.ub.ac.id accelerating food diversification and supervising
the safety of fresh food. According to(Iskandar 2015)Food security is the availability of food in a household so that it can avoid a decrease in the quality of life of the community, hunger, and also malnutrition. According to law number 18 of 2012, food security is a condition of meeting the food needs of the people in a country, which can be seen from the availability of sufficient food, both quality and quantity, safe, diverse, nutritious, evenly distributed, and affordable.
From this understanding, it can be seen that national food security will be achieved if: (1) household and individual food needs are met and in conditions of sufficient food availability (2) food security, namely food consumed by households and individuals is free from chemical residues (3) equitable distribution of food.
Ironically, the food needs of households and individuals still cannot be fully met, because the rate of growth of Indonesian food production is slower than the rate of population growth in Indonesia. This causes the demand for food to be greater than the supply. To overcome this, according to (Perdagangan 2013)The government has an obligation to utilize both agricultural and food resources efficiently and optimally by looking at the potential of the land, the level of land fertility and the pattern of food demand.
This is done so that the fulfillment of food needs can be met through own production or domestic production.
According to (Bappenas 2014) the number of poor people is still quite large. In March 2014, the number of poor people reached 10.51 million (8.34%) in villages, and 17.78 million (14.17%) in cities, or 28.28 million (11.25%) overall. This community group is the most vulnerable group in meeting their food needs, due to their low purchasing power. An increase in food prices that is quite high will shock them. This group often experiences lack of food and nutrition (malnutrition), so that the children born can be said to be the "lost" generation with low intelligence levels.
The Food Security Service has launched several programs to deal with food security problems, including priority activities, namely;
Development of Community Food Business (UPM) / Indonesian Farmer Shops (TTI), Strengthening of Food Distribution Institutions (LDPM), Development of Community Food Barns (LPM), Development of Food Independent Areas (KMP), Strengthening of Food and
Nutrition Awareness Systems (SKPG), Analysis Map of Food Security and Food Vulnerability (FSVA Map), Optimization of Yard Utilization (KRPL) and Supervision of Food Safety and Quality. The above programs have been implemented in various regions in Indonesia, such as the Program for Optimizing the Utilization of Yards or Sustainable Food Houses (KRPL).
The KRPL program has been implemented since 2010, where this program has spread to various districts/cities throughout Indonesia and every year the location of the KRPL program continues to be applied to other districts/cities.
Reporting from the website of the Food Security Agency (BKP), the KRPL program in 2012 has been implemented in 5700 villages in 363 districts/cities in 33 provinces with the target group being women farmers groups and for 2017 it has been running in 4824 villages throughout Indonesia.
Optimization of Yard Utilization was initiated by the Ministry of Agriculture with the concept of Sustainable Food Houses (KRPL).
According to(BPTP JATIM 2012) The Sustainable Food House Area (KRPL) is a food diversification concept by utilizing the home yard to meet the nutritional and family food needs based on local resources, environmentally friendly, and sustainable in one area. The objectives of the KRPL program are to meet the nutritional and food needs of families, reduce household expenses, increase family income, and improve welfare. According to(Ngurah et al.
2016) the basic principles of KRPL are (a) optimizing the use of environmentally friendly house yards with the aim of achieving food security and food independence, (b) diversification of food based on local resources (c) conservation of food resources (plants, livestock, and fish) , and (d) can increase people's income and welfare.
The success of the KRPL program can already be seen, in one village in Yogyakarta.
After one year of implementing KRPL, this program has had a positive impact on the village community. The benefits obtained by the community include reducing spending on vegetables for daily needs and being able to meet the nutritional needs of the family, and the profit from selling KRPL results is Rp. 500,000 for a month (BPTP JATIM 2012).
So far, there have been many studies on food security, both the impact of a food security
program and looking at the condition of food security in a region. Among them, such as research conducted by (Purwantini and Suharyono 2012) has conducted research on the sustainable food housing area program (KRPL) in Pacitan Regency which has been implemented since 2011. The purpose of this study is to analyze the impact of the KRPL program on household food expenditure patterns, food consumption patterns, consumption levels and adequacy of energy and protein. households and the Hope Food Pattern (PPH). The method used is comparative analysis. (Ilham and Siregar 2006) conducting research on the Effectiveness of Food Price Policy on Food Security. This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of the government's food price policy on national food security so that it can be taken into consideration for revitalizing agriculture.
(Wossen et al. 2018) Regarding the effect of climate change and prices on household income and food security in Ethiopia and Ghana, the results of the study stated that climate change and prices have a negative impact on household income and food security. So that policy interventions are needed to reduce the impact of climate change and prices in these two countries.
(Abebaw, Fentie, and Kassa 2010) has conducted research on “The Impact Of Food Security Program On Household Food Consumption In Northwest Ethiopia: A Matching Estimator Approach. This study uses the Propensity Score Matching method.
From the discussion above, it is known that research on the KRPL program that has been running for five years is still rarely carried out, such as the research conducted by Purwantini where the research was conducted in 2012 where the initial implementation of the KRPL program in the area began in 2011. assist related parties in making policies to develop the KRPL program.
2. Theoritical Underpining
The Sustainable Food House Area Program is a government program that has been running since 2012, this program is one of the programs to build household food security in an area. (Rachmat et al. 2016) stated in his research that there are several challenges in realizing independent and sovereign food security, these challenges are in increasing production, management of food development.
The Sustainable Food House Area Program in Surakarta City is declared effective in
increasing the level of household welfare. The program is able to help reduce food consumption expenditures and help meet nutritional needs, as well as become a means of productive non-rice food economic activities (Kurniawan et al. 2018).
In the research on "Analysis of the Added Value of the Sustainable Food House Area Program (KRPL) on the Household Economy" by (Syam, Saputri, and Widyastuti 2018), it can be seen that the implementation of the KRPL program has economic value added, the added economic value of the program can be seen from the activity of selling harvested goods by group members.
3. Research Methods
This research was conducted in Bandungrejosari Village, Sukun District, Malang City. The location selection was done purposively, because the area is one of the areas that has implemented the Sustainable Food House Area (KRPL) since 2012 until now. The population studied were households that participated in the KRPL program in Bandungrejosari Village, Sukun District, Malang City. The research sample was determined by the Slovin formula, from 60 KRPL program households, 52 KRPL households were obtained and the technique used was simple random sampling or a simple random sample using lottery. The analysis used is the calculation of the Hope Food Pattern (PPH) score, the following are the steps:
a. Food Consumption Classification
The grouping of food consumption in this study is based on the commodity:
1) Grains : rice, corn, wheat, and their processed ingredients
2) Tubers : cassava, sago, and other tubers
3) Animal Protein : chicken, beef, eggs, milk, fish.
4) Oil and fat : coconut oil, palm oil 5) Oily fruit/seeds : coconut, candlenut 6) Nuts : soybeans, red beans,
long beans
7) Sugar : sugar, brown sugar 8) Vegetables and fruit: vegetables, fruit
9) Etc : drinks and spices
b. Calculation of the actual energy and protein content of each food group
To analyze the expected food pattern, it is necessary to value the actual energy and protein
Available online at HABITAT website: http://www.habitat.ub.ac.id content. To calculate the actual energy and
protein content can use the formula;
Ei = [ Bi * Kei/100 * (BDDi/100)] / JRT Pi = [ Bi * KPi/100 * (BDDi/100)] / JRT Information :
Ei = actual energy consumed from food ingredient i (kcal/cap/day)
Pi = actual protein consumed from food ingredient i (grams/cap/day)
Bi = weight of food i (g)
Kei = energy content of food ingredients i KPi = protein content of food ingredients i BBDi = percentage of food consumed (% BBD) food ingredients i
JR = number of household members (org) After calculating the Ei and Pi values, then add up the Ei and Pi values to obtain the actual total energy and protein values in the food group.
In the formula;
Ep =∑ Pp =∑ Information :
Ep : total Ei in food group p (kcal/cap/day) Pp : total Pi in the imaginary group p (grams/cap/day)
Then the total Ep and Pp will produce the actual total energy and protein from 9 foodstuffs.
TE =∑ TP =∑
c. Calculation of Actual AKE and PPA To calculate the AKE and PPA values, the formula is used:
= %
= %
Information :
TKEp : percentage of actual energy from each food group to AKE
crime scene : percentage of actual protein from each food group to PPA
AKE : 2150 kcal/cap/day AKP : 57 grams/cap/day d. Hope Food Pattern Score
The analysis of expected food patterns in this study reflects the quality of food consumption patterns in the research area. To calculate the PPH Sor, the formula is used;
PPH Score = TKEp * Bp Information :
Bp : Weight of food group
4. Results And Discussion
Analysis of Food Consumption Patterns Based on Hopeful Food Patterns
The household consumption food pattern has two aspects, namely the quantity aspect using the AKE and PPA approaches, then the quality aspect using the PPH score approach. These approaches do not only assess staple foods, but also use 8 food groups (grains, tubers, animal foods, oils and fats, oily fruit/seeds, nuts, sugar, vegetables and fruit, and so on). other groups).
Calculation of household food consumption patterns is indicated by the Energy Adequacy Rate (AKE) and Protein Adequacy Rate (AKP).
The explanation of the results of the analysis of food consumption patterns will be explained in the next sub-chapter.
4.1. Food Consumption Pattern Based on Quantity Aspect
The calculation of household food consumption patterns is known from the amount of nutritional intake of each household. To determine the amount of nutritional intake for each household, the 2 x 24 hous dietary recall method was used, in accordance with the opinion stated in(Amelia Annisahaq, Nuhfil Hanani 2014)The 2 x 24 hours dietary recall method is a method which interviews someone about what they have consumed in the past 2 x 24 hours. The results of the calculation of food consumption patterns can be seen from the calculation of the Nutrition Adequacy Rate (RDA), which consists of the Energy Adequacy Ratio (AKE) and Protein Adequacy Rate (AKP).
The standard for the Nutrition Adequacy Rate (RDA) uses the standard from the National Food and Nutrition Research Institute (WNPG).
In WNPG VIII in 2004 and WNPG IX in 2008 the standard RDA for food consumption was 2,000 kcal/capita/day and 52 g/capita/day. In 2012 the RDA standard underwent changes/adjustments in the 2012 WNPG X, which was 2,150 kcal/capita/day and 57 grams/capita/day. The RDA standard has also been stipulated in the Minister of Health Regulation No. 75 of 2013.
4.2. Energy Adequacy Rate (AKE)
Approach to Energy Adequacy Rate (AKE) is a value that shows the level of energy consumption from food consumed daily. This approach is measured using kilocalories (kcal) per capita per day. The results of the analysis of
the household energy consumption level approach to the sustainable food house area program for the white jasmine group can reflect the status of food security.
Based on table 5 it can be seen that the actual energy consumption of households participating in KRPL has met the standards recommended by the government, in accordance with the Regulation of the Minister of Health of the Republic of Indonesia Number 75 of 2013 concerning the Recommended Nutritional Adequacy Rate for the Indonesian Nation article 4 which reads, Average adequacy Energy and protein for the Indonesian population are respectively 2150 kilocalories and 57 grams per person per day at the level of consumption.
Meanwhile, household energy consumption of non KRPL participants did not meet the recommended standards.
According to the data in table 5.1, it can be seen that the grain food group consumed the most by participating and non-participating households
of KRPL, namely 1216.2 kcal/capita/day or 56.6% of the total consumption of 2196.7 kcal/capita/day. and 1087.5 kcal/capita/day or 50.6% of the total consumption of 1883.5 kcal/capita/day. According to research conducted (Purwantini and Suharyono 2012) The consumption of whole grains in the household of participants and non-participants of the program is still high, it can be seen from the average annual consumption of rice which is still higher than the average consumption of national aggregated rice. In addition, there are several food consumptions in the households of KRPL participants that have met the recommended AKE standards, among others, the animal food group has an energy consumption level of 324.8 kcal/capita/day and an AKE contribution of 15.1% while in the AKE level the recommended one is 258 kcal/capita/day and a contribution of 12% to the amount of energy consumed every day.
Table 1. Average Energy Adequacy Level (TKE) in the White Jasmine Group for Sustainable Food House Area Program
Foodstuffs Group
Normative TKE (kcal)
Actual TKE
(Kcal) %
Normative TKE
% of Actual TKE KRPL
participants
Non KRPL Participant
KRPL participants
Non KRPL Participant
Rice 1075.0 1216.2 1087.5 50 56.6 50.6
Tubers 129.0 39.8 62.5 6 1.8 1.3
Animal Food 258.0 324.8 179.8 12.0 15.1 8.4
Oil and fat 215.0 114.4 144.3 10.0 5.3 6.7
Oily Seed Fruit 64.5 32.8 31.2 3.0 1.5 1.3
Nuts 107.5 193.4 177.9 5.0 9.0 8.3
Sugar 107.5 90.1 85.8 5.5 4.2 4.0
Vegetable and
fruit 129.0 169.2 108.9 6.0 7.9 5.1
Etc 64.5 15.9 5.6 30 0.7 0.1
Amount 2150.0 2196.7 1883.5 100.0 102.2 85.6
Then the legume food group consumed by households participating in the KRPL program had an energy consumption level of 193.4 and a contribution of 9.0% and non-KRPL households had a consumption level of 177.9 kcal/capita/day with an energy adequacy level of 8.3%. This value has met the standard recommended level of AKE consumption, which is 107.5 kcal/capita/day and contributes 5% to the amount of energy consumed every day. Tempe and tau are foods that are included in the group of nuts, and these foods are very popular with Indonesian people from various circles. According to
(Purwantini and Suharyono 2012) Tempe and tofu are one type of food source for the people of Indonesia. Traditionally, tempeh and tofu have been entrenched and consumed by all circles of society, both in rural and urban areas.
In addition, the vegetable and fruit food group also has a consumption level that is in accordance with the recommended AKE standard with a consumption level of 169.2 kcal/capita/day and a contribution of 7.9% to the total daily energy consumption level, and the recommended consumption level for the ingredients group.
vegetable and fruit food, which is 129
Available online at HABITAT website: http://www.habitat.ub.ac.id kcal/capita/day and 6% of the total daily food
consumption level. One of the food commodities that are often consumed by households participating in the KRPL program is bananas.
According to (Purwantini and Suharyono 2012) The level of consumption of bananas in the community is relatively large, this is because bananas do not depend on the season and are relatively available in each region. In addition, bananas also contain carbohydrates and various vitamins.
Table 5 data can also identify the level of household food security by using the energy adequacy level method analysis approach.
According to (Rumahtangga, Pedesaan, and Jawa 2010) said that to identify food security, the household energy adequacy level approach can be used, which is to compare the amount of energy from food consumed with the energy adequacy recommended by the National Widyakarya on Food and Nutrition. The condition of household food security can be identified based on the following criteria:
a. less resistant if the energy adequacy level is below 100%.
b. food security if the level of energy sufficiency is between 75-100%.
c. very resistant if the level of energy sufficiency is above 100%.
From the data in table 5.9 it can be seen that the average level of energy adequacy in households participating in the Sustainable Food House Area (KRPL) program is 102.2 %. From the value of the analysis of the energy adequacy
level, it can be said that the household has a level of food security that is very food secure because the value of the analysis of the energy adequacy level shows a number above 100%. Meanwhile, households that are not participating in KRPL are included in the criteria for food security because the value of the energy adequacy level (TKE) is between 75% -100%, which is 85.6%.
4.3. Protein Adequacy Rate (AKP)
The level of protein consumption is the total protein level of the food group. The level of protein consumption is reflected in the Protein Adequacy Rate (AKP). In accordance with the Minister of Health Regulation Number 75 of 2013 concerning the Recommended Nutritional Adequacy Rate for the Indonesian Nation, article 4 which reads, The average adequacy of energy and protein for the Indonesian population is 2150 kilocalories and 57 grams per person per day, respectively, at the level of consumption.
From the data in table 5.10 it is known that the total level of protein consumption by households of KRPL participants in the white jasmine group is 69.9 grams/capita/day, this value is in accordance with the recommendation for protein consumption for Indonesian people by the Ministry of Health, which is 57 grams/capita/day. Meanwhile, household protein consumption of non KRPL participants was 48.7 grams/capita/day, this value was still not in accordance with the standards recommended by the government.
Table 2. Protein Adequacy Levels (TKP) of participants and non-participants of the KRPL program
Foodstuffs Group
Actual Crime Scene (Kcal) Actual Crime Scene (%) KRPL participants Non KRPL Participant KRPL
participants
Non KRPL Participant
Rice 22.3 15.6 39.1 27.4
Tubers 0.7 1.3 1.2 2.2
Animal Food 31.0 13.6 54.4 23.8
Oil and fat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Oily Seed Fruit 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.5
Nuts 11.5 15.8 20.1 27.7
Sugar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Vegetable and fruit 4.1 2.1 7.2 3.8
Etc 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Amount 69.9 48.7 122.6 85.4
Consumption of animal protein by households participating in KRPL is the largest protein consumption in the food group, which is 31.0 grams/capita/day with a contribution of
54.4%. consumption of animal protein in the white jasmine group has exceeded the proportion recommended by the WNPG for animal protein, which is 25% (Hardiansyah 2013) Meanwhile,
the consumption of animal protein for non KRPL participants did not meet the recommendation because the level of protein adequacy in animal food was 23.8% or 13.6 grams/capita/day.
The highest level of vegetable protein consumption in the KRPL program households in the white jasmine group came from nuts, namely 11.5 grams/capita/day or 20.1%, as well as households participating in the KRPL, the largest protein consumption came from beans with a value of 15.8 grams/capita/day (27.7%).
Meanwhile, consumption of vegetable protein derived from vegetables and tubers is relatively small, both for households participating in KRPL and non-participating in KRPL. Each has consumption levels of 4.1 grams/capita/day (7.2%) and 0.7 grams/capita/ day (1.2%) for households participating in KRPL and households not participating in KRPL were 2.1 grams/capita/day (3.8%) and 1.3 grams/capita/day (2.2%). Although the total protein consumption level of the white jasmine KRPL program households exceeds the recommended protein consumption level
standard, this does not make the white jasmine group KRPL households have different levels of consumption, due to the uneven level of protein consumption in the existing food groups.
according to (Ariningsih 2008) stated that it is not only the amount of energy and protein consumption levels that must be sufficient, but the diversity of food sources of energy and protein consumed is also important.
4.4. Food Consumption Patterns Based on Quality Aspects
One of the parameters used to determine household food security in an area is the Hope Food Pattern score. The Hope Food Pattern Score can assess the level of food diversity in a region.
The calculation of the PPH score is obtained by comparing the AKE score with the normative PPH score. Where the AKE score is the result of multiplying the energy consumption level (TKE) with a predetermined food weight score. The actual PPH scores for the Melati Putih Group KRPL program households and non-KRPL participating households can be seen in Table 5.
Table 3. Average Household PPH Score Foodstuffs Group Normative PPH
Score
Actual PPH Score
KRPL participants Non KRPL Participant
Rice 25.0 24.7 23.7
Tubers 2.5 0.8 0.5
Animal Food 24.0 20.5 14.1
Oil and fat 5.0 2.3 3.0
Oily Seed Fruit 1.0 0.5 0.5
Nuts 10.0 8.3 9.5
Sugar 2.5 1.8 1.8
Vegetable and
fruit 30.0
27.6 22.7
Etc 0.0 0.0 0.0
Amount 100.0 86.6 75.9
From the data in Table 5, it is known that the PPH score for the KRPL program households in the white jasmine group is 86.6 and the PPH score for non-KRPL participating households is 75.9. Each of these scores is still lower than the Nomative PPH score (recommended). However, the PPH score owned by KRPL participating households was higher than the PPH score owned by non KRPL participating households. So it can be concluded that the household food consumption patterns of participants are still not diverse, but are still more diverse than the food consumption patterns of non-KRPL participants.
The more diverse pattern of household food
consumption in the KRPL program for the white jasmine group was due to counseling from the Malang city agriculture office about the use of yards, family nutrition, nutrition in food and how to process food properly.
The diversity of household food consumption patterns can be seen from the PPH scores of each food group. The highest PPH scores in KRPL participating households were in the vegetable and fruit food groups, grains and animal foods, which were 27.6, 24.7 and 20.5, respectively. While the PPH scores from each group of vegetable and fruit foodstuffs, rice- grain and animal food owned by non KRPL
Available online at HABITAT website: http://www.habitat.ub.ac.id participating households were 22.7, 23.7 and
14.1, respectively. It can be concluded that the PPH scores for the groups of vegetables and fruit, grains and animal foods owned by households that participate in KRPL are higher than households that do not participate in KRPL.
The more diverse patterns of food consumption in KRPL participating households is because housewives participating in KRPL are given information both about the use of the yard to nutrition from food and how to process it.
Then the KRPL program in the white jasmine group also provided 10-30 polybags containing plants ranging from vegetables, fruits, and tubers.
In addition to plant cultivation, the KRPL program in the white jasmine group, Bandung Rejosari sub-district, also cultivates catfish.
However, even though the KRPL program has cultivated tubers, and there is counseling about food diversification. the score in the root food group is low, namely 0.8, which is the ideal score of 25. This is due to the mindset of the people who still consider grains as a staple food, this is evidenced by the higher score of the rice food group. grains compared with PPH scores from the root foods group.
5. Conclusions
Based on the results of research on the impact of the sustainable food housing area program on household food security in Bandungrejosari Village, Sukun District, Malang City, it can be concluded that the actual energy consumption of KRPL participating households has met the standards recommended by the government, in accordance with the Regulation of the Minister of Health of the Republic of Indonesia Number 75 Article 4 of 2013 concerning the recommended nutritional adequacy rate for the Indonesian nation reads, The average adequacy of energy and protein for the Indonesian population is 2150 kilocalories and 57 grams per person per day, respectively, at a consumption level of 2196.7 kcal/capita/day and 69.9 grams/capita/day. Meanwhile, the consumption of energy and protein by non-KRPL households has not yet reached the consumption recommendation set by the government, which is 1883.5 kcal/capita/day and 49.7 gram/capita/day.
The average PPH scores achieved by KRPL participating households and non-KRPL participants were 86.6 and 75.9, respectively.
This value shows the pattern of food consumption that has not been diverse. However,
it can be seen that households participating in KRPL have a more varied food consumption than households not participating in KRPL.
The need for socialization and distribution of information about the Sustainable Food House Area program so that people who have not become participants in the KRPL program know the benefits of the KRPL program.
References
Abebaw, Degnet, Yibeltal Fentie, and Belay Kassa. 2010. “The Impact of a Food Security Program on Household Food Consumption in Northwestern Ethiopia : A Matching Estimator Approach.” Food Policy 35(4):286–93. doi:
10.1016/j.foodpol.2010.01.002.
Amelia Annisahaq, Nuhfil Hanani, dan Syafrial.
2014. “PENGARUH PROGRAM
KAWASAN RUMAH PANGAN
LESTARI (KRPL) DALAM
MENDUKUNG KEMANDIRIAN
PANGAN DAN KESEJAHTERAAN
RUMAH TANGGA (Kasus Di Kelurahan Rejomulyo, Kecamatan Kota, Kota Kediri).” XXV(1).
Ariningsih, Ening. 2008. “RUMAH TANGGA RAWAN PANGAN Dialami Daerah , Masyarakat , Atau Rumah Tangga , Pada Waktu Tertentu Untuk Ketahanan Pangan Merupakan Terjemahan Dari Food Security , Secara Luas Diartikan Pangannya Agar Dapat Hidup Sehat Dan Beraktivitas . Membahas Ketahanan P.”
239–55.
Bappenas, Nasional. 2014. “BIDANG PANGAN DAN PERTANIAN.”
BPTP JATIM. 2012. “SERBA SERBI
KAWASAN RUMAH PANGAN
LESTARI DI JAWA TIMUR.”
Hardiansyah. 2013. “KECUKUPAN ENERGI ,
PROTEIN , LEMAK DAN
KARBOHIDRAT.” (May 2016).
Ilham, Nyak, and Hermanto Siregar. 2006.
“Efektivitas Kebijakan Harga Pangan Terhadap Ketahanan Pangan.” (70):157–
78.
Iskandar. 2015. “PERANAN PROGRAM MODEL KAWASAN RUMAH PANGAN
LESTARI (M-KRPL) TERHADAP
PENINGKATAN PENDAPATAN
RUMAH TANGGA DI KABUPATEN SIAK.” 2(1).
Kurniawan, Yusrizal Yoga, Akhmad Daerobi, Bambang Sarosa, and Yogi Pasca Pratama.
2018. “Analisis Program Kawasan Rumah Pangan Lestari Dan Hubungannya Dengan Ketahanan Pangan Serta Kesejahteraan Rumah Tangga (Studi Kasus Di Kota Surakarta).”Jurnal Ilmu Ekonomi Terapan 3(2):81–94. doi: 10.20473/jiet.v3i2.8451.
Ngurah, Gusti, Yogi Suputra, I. Gede Setiawan, and A. D. I. Putra. 2016. “Evaluasi Dampak Program Kawasan Rumah Pangan Lestari ( KRPL ) Pada Kelompok Wanita Tani ( KWT ) Tunas Sejahtera Di Kecamatan Blahbatuh , Kabupaten Gianyar.” 5(1).
Perdagangan, Kementerian. 2013. “ANALISIS
DINAMIKA KONSUMSI PANGAN
MASYARAKATINDONESIA.”
Purwantini, Tri Bastuti, and Sri Suharyono. 2012.
“PROGRAM KAWASAN RUMAH
PANGAN LESTARI ( KRPL ) DI KABUPATEN PACITAN : ANALISIS
DAMPAK DAN ANTISIPASI KE
DEPAN Sustainable Reserve Food Garden Program in Pacitan Regency : Its Impacts and Prospect.” (4):239–56.
Rachmat, Muchjidin, Gelar Satya Budhi, NFN Supriyati, and Wahyuning Kusuma Sejati.
2016. “Lumbung Pangan Masyarakat:
Keberadaan Dan Perannya Dalam Penanggulangan Kerawanan Pangan.”
Forum Penelitian Agro Ekonomi 29(1):43.
doi: 10.21082/fae.v29n1.2011.43-53.
Rumahtangga, Pangan, D. I. Pedesaan, and Pantai Jawa. 2010. “Two Stage Least Squares (2SLS).” 5(2):183–98.
Syam, Dhaniel, Novitasari Agus Saputri, and Aviani Widyastuti. 2018. “Analisis Added Value Program Kawasan Rumah Pangan Lestari (KRPL) Terhadap Ekonomi Rumah Tangga (Studi Kasus Pada Kelompok Wanita Tani ‘DEWI SRI’ Kota Batu).”
Jurnal Inovasi Ekonomi 3(02):73–82. doi:
10.22219/jiko.v3i02.7041.
Wossen, Tesfamicheal, Thomas Berger, Mekbib G. Haile, and Christian Troost. 2018.
“Impacts of Climate Variability and Food Price Volatility on Household Income and Food Security of Farm Households in East
and West Africa.” Agricultural Systems
163:7–15. doi:
10.1016/j.agsy.2017.02.006.
