The basic data for this study were derived from the sample of individual operators. However, it v/as necessary to supplement these data with information from the managers of central
factories, group processing centres, dealers and bureaucrats. Hence, after examining the questions posed to smallholders, the survey of managers of group processing centres, dealers and bureaucrats is considered.
Data from individuals.
The survey of individual operators was addressed to four key issues -- rubber replanting, fragmentation, process- ing and smallholder-dealer interaction. A summary in Table 3.3 shov;s the data required on each topic; it also identifies
possible overlaps. Three sets of data were required v/hich related to: production activity, including the area under
TABLE 3.2
RUBBER SMALLHOLDER SAI^IPLE BY DISTRICT AND C0MI'4UNITY GROUP IN SELANGOR, 197 5 54 District Malay Community Chinese group Other* Total Gornbak 20 0 0 20 Kelang 43 4 1 48 Kuala Langat 18 1 3 22 Kuala Solangor 23 8 3 34 Petaling 11 0 0 11 Sepang 22 5 3 30 Ulu Langat 62 15 2 79 Ulu Selangor 50 5 1 56 VJilayah Persekutuan 7 0 0 7 Total 256 38 13 307 Note: Source:
* includes Indians, Pakistanis and other groups.
A SUKiMARY OF THE DATA TO BE OBTAINED FROM INDIVIDUAL OPERATORS
D a t a KEY ISSUES
Rubber Fragmenta- Process- replanting tion ing
Smallholder- dealer inter- action 1. Background: (personal details) Age Family size 2. Production:
Rub'oer - Farm area
Mature (ha)
/
/
Year pDanted
/
/
Immature (ha)
/
Year planted
/
Other ~ Area (ha)
/
crops Year planted/
Farm expenditure
/
/
Tapping system Planting materials 3. Processing: Type Distance metrics/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
4. Marketing: Price information Distance to dealers Choice of dealers Frequency of sale Volume of rubber soldIncome: Rubber Other crops Other sources
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
5. General: Cultivation book Credit/
/
56 rubber (mature and inimature) , other crops and farm input;
processing, emphasising the distances travelled from home or farm; the marketing of rubber, including the journey to market, the choice of buyer, the frequency of such activity and income from rubber, other crops and other sources.
The ui.iestionnaires matched these data requirements with three parts relating to production, processing and marketing; in addition there was a general section which provided back- ground information on the operator and his farm. Altogether there were forty-seven questions, only some of which proved useful. For example, individuals v/ere often unable to specify the exact c.lone or planting materials which had been used on their holdings. Also the question of the route taken to the processing centre was unsatisfactorily answered because
different routes were used on different occasions. The route taken to a dealer's premises v/hen selling rubber was also variable. Four questions relating to the development of rural feeder roads in the rubber growing area (Questions 22 to 25) produced indifferent responses because no dates were specified. Clearly, there should have been more emphasis on such issues as the factors considered when making the decision to replant; the degree to which farm fragmentation affected production and related activities; the attitudes and
responses of individual operators to the government provision of processing facilities such as group processing centres and block rubber factories; and the degree to which incentives offered by private dealers ensured smallholder custom in the lona term.
After a preliminary analysis of the data two broad groups of smallholders, classified in terms of the size of their respective holdings were identified. As the size of holding was closely associated with the volume of production,
farm input, type of rubber sold, frequency of marketing and rubber income, it was decided to conduct follow-up case studies of thirty-three selected smallholders to detect
similarities and variations in their socio-econom.ic behaviour and outlook. This second survey produced m.uch of the detailed information on the operator and his farm (and was the basis of individual case studies). Nevertheless, it still had to be supplemented by surveys of managers of group processing centres, dealers and bureaucrats.
Data from bureaucrats and dealers.
As j.n the case of individual operators, the data,
surveys and issues pertaining to bureaucrats and dealers have been summarised in tabular form (Table 3.4). Information from
the bureaucrats was sought in terms of published and unpub- lished statistics concerning the smallholding sector. In particular, the following statutory authorities were visited to obtain the necessary data: Rubber Industry Smallholders Development Authority (the Head Office as well as the State Office), Malaysian Rubber Exchange and Licensing Board (Sel- angor Region), Malaysian Rubber Development Corporation (Head Office as well as the factories at Meru and Ulu Langat) and the Malaysian Departm.ent of Statistics. The study of six
TABLE 3.4
THE DATA REQUIRED, SURVEYS TO BE COITOUCTED AND ISSUES PJ>.ISED WITH GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS AND PRIVATE DEALERS
Data requir:^d from Surveys Specific issues
Group processing centres
Case study of six
group processing centres in Selangor, August
1975.
Location, progress and impact.
Bulk sales.
Government officials
Rubber Industry Small- holders Development Authority (Head Office and State Office)
Smallholder development and modernisation.
Production, processing and marketing.
Malaysian Rubber Ex- change and Licensing Board (Head Office and Selangor Regional office) Malaysian Department of Statistics
Regulation and supervision of rubber trade. Licensing, rubber market and prices. List of licensed dealers. Statistical data.
List of dealers. Private rubber
dealers
Survey of all first level dealers in Se].angcr, July - August 1975.
Spatial distribution. Market structure, conduct and perform.ance.
Transport and regulation of trade.
group processing centres V7as conducted after permission had been obtained from the Rubber Industry Smallholders Develop- ment Authority; three were chosen for further attention
(Chapter Six). Rubber Industry Smallholders Development Authority officials provided valuable information on rubber buying activities which they administered on behalf of the government and also details of smallholder development and modernisation. The Malaysian Rubber Exchange and Licensing
Board provided a list of licensed rubber dealers which proved to be a useful check against a similar one given by the
Department of Statistics -- a register used by the Department to collect its dealer trade statistics.
Before a survey of dealers could be conducted, the Malaysian Rubber Exchange and Licensing Board and the Depart- ment of Statistics dealer records had to be merged. This proved a valuable exercise; dual entries were detected
(especially where the licensees purportedly shared the same premises); de-registered licensees still appeared on the Department of Statistics records; and other anomalies were present (see Chapter Seven). In the main the survey of all first level dealers v/as focussed on market structure, conduct and performance; in addition the spatial distribution of these dealers were recorded. This collaborative information was vital as revealed in the study of four key issues -- rubber replanting, fragmentation, processing and smallholder-dealer interaction.
CHAPTER FOUR RUBBER REPLANTING
'... it seems clear that high yielding rubber trees, once they reach bearing age, promise a return greater than that of any other crop for which the vast majority of smallholdings would be suitable' (International Bank for Reconstruc- tion and Development, 1955: 34).
In the m.inds of smallholders replanting is inseparably associated with higher productivity and greater incom.e. Despite this association, according to Barlovj (1978: 86) there has been some resistance to rubber replanting and, therefore, attention is focussed in this Chapter on the reasons for this resistance.
Rubber trees experience declining productivity v/ith advancing age. The periodic renev/al of such assets is essential in order to maintain (and increase) production levels. In Malaysia, there has been a sequence of rubber replanting programmes facilitating the change-over fromi low to high yielding rubber trees. While these programjnes have been seen by economic planners as vital to the maintenance of export earnings from rubber, their success has depended heavily on the co-operation of individual operators. Yet, the literature review (Chapter Two) showed that there had been little Malaysian research into the varying responses of smallholders to rubber replanting programmes.
to rubber replanting, the first part of the Chapter outlines the procedures prior to asset replacement and describes the nature of the replanting programmes, while the second
identifies the key variables associated with the non-replanters As no single variable determined the decision not to replant
the final section undertakes a multivariate analysis to determine the key factors in the differential response to replanting which, in turn, occasions variations in rubber flows.