Politics of ’s Soybean Policy Analysis on Roles and Interests Between Actors

Artha Yudilla, S.I.P, M.A [email protected] International Relation Study Program, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Islamic University of , Jl. Kaharuddin Nasution No. 13 Perhentian Marpoyan, , Indonesia 90221

Abstract

Soybean is one of Indonesia’s most strategic foods. Thus, it’s really ironic than, that Indonesia’s local soybean production is never be able to suffice domestic demand. For decades, Indonesia has been depend on import, as the result, it threatens Indonesia food security and food sovereignty, especially when crisis happen on soybean world trade like in 2008, 2010 and 2012-2013. Ministry of agriculture always set new programs to increase the local production and achieve the goal to be self sufficient but on the other side, ministry of trade just stuck to the former program which is keep depending on import and lowering the tariff. This contradiction shows how pragmatic the soybean policy in Indonesia. The goal is only to settle the surface problem with the easiest and shortest term policy. This paper will give the analysis on how this policy happen, and why is it so difficult to change the pattern of this politic. The significance of influences and interests of each stakeholders appear to be the reason of why the policy remain incremental until today and the problem about self sufficiency and self sovereignty regarding soybean as one of the most strategic food remain unsolved.

Keywords: Import, Food Sovereignty, Incremental Policy, Interests of Stakeholders

A. Introduction trade liberalization by WTO known as Food policy of the state will the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) largely determine the food security in 1995 and a Letter of Intent with conditions of the country. Ideally as the IMF in 1998 (Usman Sunyoto, engraved by FAO ( FAO REPORT, 2004), making protection and 2011), one country has the right to subsidies as well as tariffs and non- have food sovereignty with full tariff barriers must be eliminated, the authority to either setting result is Indonesia’s local soybean productivity, distribution, as well as can’t be competitive and soybean determining the price or guarantee farmers ironically chose to changed the equal access to the quantity and the commodities. This is the one that the quality for the whole society. This later became a vicious cycle. Local obviously refers to a nationalist soybean productivity declined and outlook or mercantilism who see the imports increased which ultimately state is indispensable in providing makes Indonesia face a dependency protection related to this vital sector. problem that still happening until But in practice, then, in the era of today. The impact of advanced form globalization which is full of these of food crisis is the world's soybean forms of trade liberalization, price became fluctuating in the excessive protection measures by one uncertain world and may surged country is considered as a barrier to drastically like that ever felt in 2008, trade and is strictly prohibited. until 2012. This then raises a dilemma, This phenomenon shows that especially for developing countries the country is in such a deep fall into such as Indonesia. Eventhough, the snare of food trade conducted Indonesia is an agricultural country, country and transnational company but due to the lack of sovereignty going forward. At this level, the over its food, the food crisis often country has already lost to the happens, as of for the fulfillment of its market. Will never be able to achieve food Indonesia has to rely on imports. self-sufficieny in food, even food One of the most strategic foods in sovereignty is no longer owned. BPS Indonesia with the largest number of Data (Supervisory statistics) import is soybean. Soybean is one of (Swastika, 2006) in 2011 implied that the most needed commodity in Indonesia annually issued foreign Indonesia because Indonesia is one of exchange up to Rp 50 trillion, which the largest soybean consumer which means 5 percent of the NATIONAL is about 26 million tons each year, but BUDGET to buy six commodities of unfortunately domestic farmers only food, namely, wheat, soy, beef, milk, capable to produce 700 thousands sugar and salt. Food imported by tons each year. This situation is very Indonesia as the country's agriculture strange considering as the country's is thus largely comes from largest soybean consumer, until now industrialized countries such as the Indonesia has not been able to , Australia, Canada, increase the resilience of food , and the European Union. commodities for the fulfillment of the Indonesia's own imported soybeans people needs, instead relying on to around Rp. 6 Trillion annually. other countries. A number of policies to Even worse, back than achieve self-sufficiency and food Indonesia even participated in the security of soybean over the long term have been done, and recently increased drastically to Rp issued to handle soy crisis in 2012, 9,000/kg.(Supadi, 2006) with a declining world soybean It’s clear than, that there is an supplies and surging prices in the ambiguity in the policy of Indonesia’s domestic market, the Government's soybean with no determined goal plan to restore the functions of regarding food sovereignty and the surveillance, buffer stock, price very vogue blueprint of soybean stabilizer and guarantor of local policy, where the Government has soybean market to the BULOG which always been issued with incremental were prohibited in respect of the policy, means it only concern the 1998 LoI. A complete Program to short-term and non sustain problem encourage the achievement of self- solving. Looking only for a domestic sufficiency in 2014 has also been demand fulfillment solutions by formed with expectations of domestic continuing to do the import and soybean production reaches 2.7 follow the flow of free trade, in order million tons with increasing rate in to get a cheap price of imported production reaching 1.5 tons/ha of without further consideration on the previous 1.3 tonnes/ha. multiflyer effects Of this count, then in 2014, This paper will explain how there is a surplus of 136 thousand the political form of government tons. With the amount of the import policies regarding soybean and why is assumed to be no longer necessary. it’s always been incremental by In addition, the Government has analyzing the roles and interests of determined to purchase the the associated actors (stakeholders). Government Price or HPP Rp. 7000/kg in June 2013.(Supadi, 2006) B. Theoritical Framework However, government programs to In case of Indonesia, what self-sufficiency is often a fairly heavy happens is the lack of clarity on policy opposition. Statistical Data showed blueprint so that food independency that last year's production was only or self sufficiency has never been 850 thousand tons, which means successfully achieved and there is no there was a deficit in the production sovereignty over food. Government of up to 1.9 million tons to reach 1.7 always target the fulfillment of an million tons. With a simple matter instant food needs by means of then every year, production should be imports. A series of regulations to increased by an average of 1.4 million facilitate the flow of imports and tons. This is obviously a difficult lowering import duties continue to be figure. In addition, the reactivated made. It is then contradictory with BULOG as buffer stock and price mercantilism principle which should controls to cope with the surge in be applied in the food sector, soybean prices internationally will especially the strategic food like also face some difficulties, as BULOG's soybean. the Government should capacity to maintain rice as the only have the power to control domestic commodity is still very lacking soybean trade flows, and protects especially on fund sector so it cannot farmers by giving subsidies and control the prices in the market. restrict imports. Instead, what Evenmore, the 2013 crisis, where happens now is freedom of private dollar exchange rate got soaring to parties in the trade of soy and the Rp. 11,000, the price of soybeans also Government does not have the power to act decisively. It shows how But it later be vicious cycle that keep liberalization of food happens for decline the local production because years in Indonesia. Although self the local farmers feel left behind by sufficiency policies have made, they government. never work because it always became contradictory with import policies C. Research Methods that always be the first choice. It The collection of this data is seems that was no some purposive, intends to strengthen the determination in government plans argument. The paper was conducted to succeed in self sufficiency and the using qualitative method because the policies made were always arguments are built based on a pragmatical that means the target rational basis. This paper seeks to projected only on a momentary understand social reality by problem solving policy without any understanding the rational long-term projection while relationship between one concept maintaining the existing policy with another concept. The research patterns with a little adjustment here method used is the method of case and there. studies which focus on the analysis of This is in accordance with the the political economy behind concept of incrementalism which Indonesia soybean import policy. To explain how the government policies obtain the data, the data collection actually does not really change techniques are also used in literature through years, there is a tendency to review, by searching, collecting, and retain the previous policies because it discuss secondary data that comes is considered as the easier way to do from a variety of literature such as and just make a policy to resolve the the review of books, articles, journals, problem on the surface. Do import to online data, newspapers, and meet domestic needs that can never magazines. While the primary data be met by local production, and when obtained from the interview or the crisis arises, just proclaimed the downloaded documents or blueprints self-sufficiency target again. This that are obtained directly from the pattern of incrementalism keeps website of ministry of trade and going on because of the interaction industry, ministry of agriculture, and between actors or stakeholders the Central Bureau of statistics (BPS). where trade Minister's priorities is D. Result and Discussion tofu tempe industry with depends on Imports of soybeans in the importers, yet the priority of the Indonesia according to the reports of Ministry of agriculture is farmers Bokhuis and Von Libbenstein(Sinar with the help of soybean farmers Tani, 2012) has been going on since association. What happen than is the 1928, first came from Manchuria, imbalance of power sharing between even though the number was not them, ministry of agriculture cannot much, around 63,000 tons/year. affect the policy made by ministry of Soybean shortages started again in trade and industry and soybean the early 1960s, so Orde Lama in its association is not that strong to take PERMESTA policy program part in decision making process. So as announced to increased production of long as the local production still soybeans in 1964, on the results of unable to meet domestic demand, the workshop on the formulation of import will always be the first choice. soybean in Bogor in 1964. However, imports of soybeans increased again level of village, district, regency and following a series of the count province until it is delivered to beginning in 1975, until now. In 1975 consumer. Soybean circulating in the to 1980 soybean imports was about market is coming from the farmers, 17,000 to 100,000 tons per year in and also comes from soy imports. But 1980 to 1990 rose to 300,000 tons to the majority of the soy trade in the 500,000 tons per year. Import from country dominated by soybeans 1991 to 2000 increased to 600,000 coming from imports. Soybeans tons to 1.2 million tons per year produced by local farmers sold to which was later kept on the numbers village traders, collecting from the above one million tonnes until 2009 town district. Soy that has been in the even until 2013 imports reach the hand of trader gatherers then sold to figure of 2.6 million tons. wholesalers. Soybeans that have been In terms of marketing, the at wholesale rates then sold to bargaining position of farmers tend to retailers as well as to the next sale remain weak. This is due to the lack and KOPTI sell them to consumers. of or limited access of farmers to the But soybeans coming from imports price information about how the are generally purchased by product to be marketed. In addition association of tofu and tempe to the nature of the market that tends (KOPTI), subsequently marketed to to be oligopoly, it debilitating the the craftsmen of tofu and tempe to farmers to negotiate. The presence of get to consumers. It shows how the pressure to farmers to immediately overall process of processing and sell its products because of the driven marketing of local soybeans ranging over pressure or household needs to from upstream to downstream is not pay debt and funding the farming very profitable for farmers. activities thus their bargaining Indonesia's soybean policies position remain in lowest chain of itself can be distinguished in two production and marketing like at phases, namely the phase prior to the following figure (sardayanto, liberalization of food and after the swastika, 2007). liberalization phase. Phase before the the liberalization including:(Bustanul Arifin, 2005) (a)the phase of the revolution Figure 1. Soybean Market (1945-1965) in this phase, the linkage Government as a very strong contributor in improving the agricultural sector and make fulfillment of food independently as a top priority by forming BAMA (Yayasan Bahan Makananan) (b) consolidation Phase (1967-1983) in this phase, the Government is working to improve the productivity of food through the green revolution Soybean in Indonesia range by forming BULOG ( Badan Urusan from food production centre to the Logistic ) and BIMAS (Bimbingan processing industry are marketed Massal ) program, INMAS ( through merchants gatherers at the Intensifikasi Masal ) and INMUM ( Intensifikasi Umum ) are contained in as the economic crisis and the State the repelita 1-4 ( c ) phase of fast debt makes plenty of food sectors growing ( 1984-1992 ) little different neglected (c) ambiguous phase where with the data of food production soybean productivity continues to overall where phase of fast-growing decline, resulting in dependency on last from 1978-1986, and (d) phase of import that lead to soybean crisis, deconstruction, in case of soybean, making the Government once again this phase only started in 1984 when like to focus on self sufficiency but the government started doing never been successful (2001-present) soybean intensification program as In 2000 the Government successor of of rice sufficiency in issued an action program “GEMA 1984. Soybean productivity ever PALAGUNG”(Swastika 2007) reached the height of production (Independent Movement of rice, closer to two million tons in 1992 soybeans, and corn) which aims at Furthermore since 1995, with tackling the food crisis caused by the creation of rules on the dryness, pests and diseases, as well as liberalization of food by the WTO in a decrease in crop productivity. In the Agreement on Agriculture and 2006, the Government again initiated with the signing of the memorandum programs “BANGKIT with the IMF to keep free trade in KEDELAI”(Swastika 2007), stand for 1998, Indonesia entered a practical Special and intensive Development. phase of liberalization where the top The Program aims to arouse passion prior policies for self-sufficiency in developing soybean farmers become difficult to achieve. The more through the efforts of increasing decreasing the tariff and reach the productivity, expanding the planting lowest at 0%, the more decreasing acreage, partnership, and others. the government power over Furthermore, according to the controlling and determining Directorate General of food crop production, marketing and production(Didik Rachbini 2008) distributing the soybean in domestic self-sufficiency rate of soy, the market. Limitation of subsidies, as Government set up the (five-yearly) well as the Elimination of BULOG's Long-term National Development role of soy, clearly shows how weak Plan (RPNJP) 2006-2009, 2010-2014, the government authority to create 2015-2019, 2020-2024 realizing food the optimal policy related to crop productivity and sustainability. soybean. It could be said Indonesia The Government also formed a Board has entered the phase of: (Bustanul of national soybean or DEKANAS in Arifin, 2005) 2009 and renew food policy ACT No. (a)Enter the liberalization of 7 of 1996 food into ACT No 18 0f food (1995-1998) phase in which 2012 with emphasis on self-reliance Indonesia must accept the rules in the and food sovereignty not just Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) in resilience and security. But in stead 1995 and a Letter of Intent (LoI) in the policy to increase import 1998 (b) phases of a crisis/transition activities by lowering the tariff (1998-2001) At this stage, Indonesia became more intense. The following experienced a period of political and table regarding an increase of the economic situation which is not in a volume of imports and the decrease stable condition. The turn of the in rates (Ministry of Trade and Government through the coup as well Industry,2013) Current opportunities to economic, cultural, geographical, etc). import soybeans increasingly opened In the end the soybean policies tend widely by the Government by to be pragmatic or incremental. changing the regulation of registered This paper uses the Group's importers into General importers, approach with a focus on important Tariff actors related policy making of Date Policy (%) soybeans and the Government as policymakers (Ministry of trade and General industry or kemendag, the Ministry of 1 agreement on agriculture or kementan, the Ministry 5 April 1994 Tariff and Trade 30 of finance or kemenkeu); Dewan Kedelai Nasional or DEKANAS, the Kepmenkeu No State Logistics Agency, or BULOG; January1 1998 543 1997 20 Association of Indonesia soy farmers (APKKI), Indonesia soybean Kepmenkeu No Association (AKINDO), Koperasi 9 September 1998 444 1998 0 Produsen Tofu tempe (KOPTI), as well as three giant soybean importer s in Indonesia namely PT FKS Agra Kepmenkeu No Multi PT Cargill, PT Gerbang Cahaya January1 2005 591 2004 10 Utama. The role and interaction as

well as the interests between these Kepmenkeu No 1 actors will determine the policy 8 January 2008 2008 0 taken. Ministry of trade and industry Kepmenkeu No 13 often issue the regulation that 1 january 2012 2011 5 encourage the smooth import practices with consideration to meet August - 31 Des the domestic needs that cannot be 2012 1 -- 0 done by local farmers, a row of regulation as decreasing tariff which the company has quite a entrance which also a verdict number of special principal importers readmitted finance, and change the (NPIK). That, the government policies requirement of imports from are so inconsistent and contradictory importers special and registered into between ministry of agriculture and common importer. On the other hand, ministry of trade and industry. ministry of agriculture only released To understand this political a row of improvement program on policy of soybean in Indonesia the local productivity which often made author refers to the writings of Budi only for the sake of the “proper Winarno(Budi Winarno 2009) related program to be taken” without model of political system that is effective implementation. predicated on the theory system of Both ministries issued a policy David Easton who consider public opposing each other, by increasing policy in response to a political imports along with a cheap price, the system against the forces of the input self-sufficiency program by ministry environment (input pressure or of agriculture can not run effectively support related actors, the influence because of the passion of farmers of social conditions, political, being reduced, and on the other hand with the failure of this program then the strength of the BULOG to control domestic needs will continue the soybean in 1998, the pace of imports demand for imports, it has become a getting harder to control. vicious cycle that is difficult to cut off. Soybean Commerce itself is National soybean Council which is the build in oligopoly system where newly formed in 2009 up until now imports are only controlled by three only acts as a giver of input and large companies namely PT Cargill, response of any policy issued by PT Gerbang Cahaya Utama and PT either ministry of trade and industry Multi FKS Agra with the quota and ministry of agriculture, but has reaches 70% of the total no authority to go directly in policy imports.(Opini Jalan Satu 2013). making. Cargill is a multinational company On the other hand the that originated in the US as the Association of Indonesia soybean or largest exporter of reaching 80% of Akindo focuses more on the the total imports, PT Gerbang Cahaya availability of national soybean food Utama is the veteran that been taking which means imports isn't a problem part as one of the big importers who as long as no harm. In fact, the also receive export subsidies by the founder of that association, Ir Yusan US program in 2001, while PT Multi is also taking big role as importer( PT FKS Agra, although a new importer FAS Multi Agro ) and former vice of yet has the largest quota by as much BKPM (Investing Coordinating as 50%, if we analysis it further, there Board). This surely give ambiguous was the name of Ir Yusan impression on this association. On the independent Commissioner is a other hand is a cooperative formed former Deputy Head of the capital kopti to assist bulog in the investment Coordination Board distribution of imported soybean (BKPM) that directly accompany Gita along with the Government in the Wirjawan, mendag, who was formerly era. Kopti simply has a the head of BKPM. strong influence in any policies Relationships between actors related to soy because kopti like this where no strong soybean accommodate the aspirations of tofu association and the magnitude of the and tempe producers who importer's role in meeting the needs outnumbered the needs that often of soy make the Government keep cannot be met by local farmers. The making incremental policies which main target of kopti is only the tend to solve the problem on the fulfillment of soybean stocks at low surface only about how to keep the prices, without focusing on whether supply of food security and tends to local or imported ones are from, but just follow policies that already exist in practice it is the imported ones with some improvements here and that was often taken because of large there according to the conditions possibilities to perform imports and (pragmatic). When the price of low tariffs, besides local production imported soybeans are low quality never came in par with the government will open the gate to imported ones and the prices are importer as loose as possible and the much more expensive than the rate will be decreased to 0%, imported. Moreover KOPTI has much however in the event of a crisis, a closer ties with importers compared program to reach self-sufficiency by with farmers and with degradation of encouraging the improvement of local production independently, but it soybean. Kopti which does not have doesn’t mean the import is the power to perform import itself terminated. The result is food has a closer relationship with sovereignty which the firmness in importers compared to farmers making policies that give protection because the price they offer is much to farmers so it can boost lower and the associated collateral productivity and guarantee the supply is always there. The importer supply of soybeans as well as national also has a significantly power space within the decision making especially large importers because of independently would never be the absence of Bulog, besides the succeed. It is also because there is no local production is always not figure of leaders who are prioritizing sufficient, thus importing is the only food like in the era of the old order way to meet domestic needs. and new order. On the other hand ministry of E. Conclusion agriculture with its self sufficiency Interests and roles and programs often stagnated with the interactions between actors in policy Board of the National Association of formulation was the deciding factor. soy (Dekanas) and soy farmers do not The actors here are Government have significant strength in their which is ministry of trade and soybean farmers local position in industry with cheap soy food domestic trade that often compete compliance policies for imports and with soybean imports, even worse ministry of agriculture which issued there is no protection or subsidies in local production improvement order to increase the productivity of program to achieve self-sufficiency. local soybeans. The absence of this On the other hand the soy farmers syncronization between these two association that should have a main ministries and pull and draw role in providing input to the action of important actors in the Government regarding soy policy has realm of program resulting the no significant power. Kopti as motor government policy is always for aspiration of tofu tempe industry pragmatic in nature or incremental. is more focus on the fulfillment of a Imports will be continued and need for cheaper soybean without whenever the crisis occurs the self- demanding specifically of where the sufficiency program will be soybeans come from. Importers on reformulated. The result is food the other hand certainly want the sovereignty can not be achieved nor leeway in conducting import with does food self-sufficiency, and by the such a low rate. time a crisis occurs, even the food There is the attraction of endurance became threatened. interests and different roles here, ministry of trade and industry is F. Referrences more focused on the fulfillment of the Agranoff, Jonathan, (2013). History aspirations of kopti because 70% of Tofu and Tempe. USA: utilization of soy is for manufacturing Soyinfo Center Altemeir, tofu and tempe as it is a strategic food Bottema, dan Rachman of Indonesian People. Also given the dalam Market Prospect for discretion to import because nearly Upland Crops in Indonesia 100% soybean that is used in the PDF, (1998). which can be industry of tofu tempe is imported accessed at http://ageconsearch.umn.e Produktivitas Menuju du/bitstream/32674/1/wp Kemandirian Pertanian 970025.pdf Indonesia. Graham & American National Institute of Food and Whiteside. Agriculture, (2012). Soybean Khan, Bano. (1998). Declining Research. which can be accessed at Agriculture Trade in an www.csrees.usda.gov/.../pbgg_sri_soy unequal World. Dapat diunduh bean.html di Arifin, Bustanul, (2005). http://gbr.sagepub.com/cgi/repr Pembangunan Pertanian int/8/1/99.pdf Indonesia Selama 60 Tahun Litbang, Deptan. (2010). PDF.which can be accessed at Seminar Kedelai Nasional http://repository.ipb.ac.id/bitstream PDF which can be /handle/123456789/43763/ accessed at Bustanul%2 http://digilib.litbang.dept 0Arifin.pdf?sequence=1 an.go.id/repository/inde Direktorat Jendral Pangan, (2011). x/3702.pdf Laporan Kinerja Kementan PDF. Opini Jalan Satu. Kartel Kedelai dan which can be accessed at Partai Penguasa. Kompas. 16 http://www.deptan.go.id/pengumuman September /berita/2012/Laporan-kinerja 2013. which can be accessed at kementan2011.pdf http://politik.kompasiana.com/2 FAO REPORT. 013/09/16/kartel kedelai-dan- (2000). partai-penguasa-593226.html Food Primasari, Ryan. 2008. Dampak Security Perubahan Tarif Kedelai PDF. which Terhadap Kesejahteraan can be Masyarakat Indonesia. accessed at Tesis Magister Ilmu http://bbc. pertanian Universitas world/fao.h Gajah Mada. tm Rachbini, Didik. Hancurnya Sistem Friedman, Milton, (1953). Food Kedelai Indonesia. Suara Security and Demography PDF. Merdeka. 21 which can be accessed at Januari 2008. which can be accessed at www.socjologia.amu.edu.pl/isoc/userfiles/ http://www.suaramerdeka.com/harian 40/friedman-1953.pdf /0801/21/nas05.htm Handayani, (2008). Simulasi Rahmana, Aditya, (2008). Analisa Kebijakan Daya Saing Ekonomi Politik Internaisonal Kedelai Lokal Pada Pasar Ketahanan Domestik. Tesis Fakultas Pangan Indonesia. Skripsi Fakultas Ilmu Teknik Pertanian Hubungan Internasional Universitas gajah Mada Universitas Gajah Mada. IKM, (2012). Tahu Tempe PDF which can Romala, Rini. 2010. Liberalisasi Sektor be accessed at Pertanian Pangan di Indonesia http://www.depgan.go.id/dataik Pasca Orba. mtahutempe2012.htm Tesis Magister Ilmu Hubungan Jaegopal, Hutapea, (2011). Ketahanan Internasional universitas Pangan dan Teknologi Gajah Mada. Salalahi, Sinar Tani, (2012). Indonesia kebijakan Pangan kedelai Pengimpor Pangan Terbesar Indonesia. Bogor: Badan PDF. which can be accessed at Penelitian dan Pengembangan http://pse.litbang.deptan.go.i Tanaman Pertanian. d/ind/pdffiles/ART7-1e.pdf Usman, Sunyoto. (2004). Politik dan Subandi, Harsono, dan Kuntyastuti, Ketahanan Pangan Kedelai. (2007). Kedelai: Teknik Produksi Yogyakarta: CIRED. dan Pengembangan. Bogor: Pusat Wardana, Kusuma Amri. (2004). Ekonomi Penelitian dan Pengembangan Politik Kebijakan Pangan Indonesia. Tanaman Pangan. Tesis Fakultas Ilmu Administrasi Sumber Tani, (2012). Seberapa Jauh Negara Universitas Gajah Mada. Indonesia dari Swasmbada Winarno, Budi, (2009). Kebijakan Pangan PDF. Publik: Teori dan Prose. which can be accessed at Yogyakarta: Media http://pustaka.litbang.deptan.go. Pressindo. id/bppi/lengkap/kl060513.pdf Windfhur, Michael, (2005). Supadi, (2006). Ketahanan Pangan dan Impact of Agreement of Produktivitas Kemandirian Agriculture PDF. which Pertanian Indonesia PDF. which can be accessed at can be accessed at http://www.ukabc.org/fo http://pustaka- odsovpaper2.htm deptan.go.id/publikasi/p327308 Yusnarida, Nizmi., (2004). 5.pdf Liberalisasi Pertanian AoA Suryana, (2005). Prospek dan Arah dan Kebijakan Pangan Pengembangan kedelai. Sekolah Indonesia. Tesis Magister pasca Sarjana Institut Pertanian Ilmu Politik Universitas Bogor. Gajah Mada. Swastika, (2007). Posisi Ekonomi Kedelai Indonesia: Menata ulang