iurnatRODUKTIVITI
Bil. 15, Jun '94 PERBADANAN PRODUKTIVITINEGARA ISSN 0127-8223
TOWARDS PRODUCTIVITY LEARNING MODELSBy
Sushil K Sharmaand
Jalal Sajedi Sabegh(Page 6)
RUBBER SMALLHOLDINGS SECTOR IN MALAYSIA :AN ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY AND FACTOR INPUTS ALLOCATION
ByMohd Rosli
(University of Malaya)(Page 35)
THE STATUS OF THE FORESTRY AND TIMBER SECTOR IN MALAYSIABy
Burhanuddin Saidin(NPC)
(Page 53)
INDUSTRIALISASI SEKTOR DESA:KE MANA ARAH DAN KEBERKESANAN
STRATEGI PERLAKSANAANNYABy
Mohd Yusoff Hj. Sanusi(Universiti Malaya)
(Page 85)
SIFAT-SIFAT EKSEKUTIF YANG BERPOLAKAN PROFIL KREATIFOleh
Leonard S. Yong, Ph. D(Page 107)
AKTIVITIKEUSAHAWANAN BEKAS ANGGOTA TENTERA MALAYSIA:ASREK MODAL PERMULAAN DAN TENAGA KERJA
ByMahmood Nazar Mohamed
andSabitha Marican
(Universiti Utara Malaysia)(Page 119)
0000053844Jumal Produktiviti - [Journal].
iurnaC1PRODUKTIVITI
iurnatTRODUKTIVITI
PenasihatIsmail Adam
(Tim. Ketua Pengarah)
Ketua PengarangMohd. Zaki Hamzah
(Pengarah Direktorat Pengurusan Maklumat)
PengarangSujaidi Dasuki
Sidang PengarangDr. Abd. Wahab Muhamad
Isa Abu DakarMuhamad Saufi Ahmad
Joseph PaulHussin Mat IsaAnnie ThomasAzlan Kassim
Noorunsah Jakkaria
PenerbitPerbadanan Produktiviti Negara
(National Productivity Corporation)Peti Surat 64,
Jalan Sultan 46904Petaling Jaya, Malaysia.
Tel: 03-7557266
Pencetak/PrinterAmpang Press,
No. 6 Jalan 6/91,Taman Shamelin Perkasa,
Batu 31/2 Jalan Cheras,56100 Kuala Lumpur.Tel: 948 944 8/5036
Kami mengalu-alukan sumbangan rencana untuk dimuatkan di dalam jurnal ini. 'JurnalProduktiviti' diterbitkan enam bulan sekali, menampung semua aspek ekonomi danpengurusan serta lain-lain bidang yang ada hubungannya dengan konsep produktiviti.Rencana-rencana yang tersiar akan diberi honorarium dan tidak semestinya merupakanpendapat NPC.
NPCPerbadanan Produktiviti Negara
'Jurnal Produktiviti' diterbitkan oleh Perbadanan Produktiviti Negara(Kementerian Perdagangan Antarabangsa dan Industri) Peti Surat 64,
Jalan Sultan, 46904 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.Telefon ; 03-7557266 (15 Talian)
Teleks : MA 36312 Fax : 03-7578068. Telegram : Dayapeng.
PRODUKTIVITI UNTUK UNIVERSAL
Salah satuperanan Perbadanan Produktiviti Negara (NPQialah menjadi pusat penyebaran mengenai isu-isu produktiviti,kualiti dan keusahawanan yang unggul di negara ini. Edaranmajalah-majalah terbitan NPC bukan sekadar di dalam negeri,malahan tersebar ke 18 buah negara anggota APO (AsianProductivity Organisation) serta dilanggani oleh pusat-pusatpenyelidikan P&Q yang bertaraf antarabangsa seperti WCPS(World Confederation of Productivity Science), WPS (WorldProductivity Congress), WAPS (World Academy of ProductivityScience), JICA (Japanese International Cooperation Agency), JUSEatau Union of Scientists and Engineers of Japan, NUTEK atauSwedish National Board of Industrial and Technical Developmentdan loin-lain, organisasi dan masa kesemasa. Justeru itu apabttakita memberi keutamaan kepada penemuan-penemuan baru didalam isu-isu produktiviti dan kualiti, sama ada karyapenulis/penyelidik tempatan atau luar negara kita sebenarnya inginmeraih maklum balas dari para pakar antarabangsa sama ada'findings' itu bolek dilaksanakan atau memerlukan pembaikansemula. Sehubungan dengan peranan NPCsebagaipenyebarutamayang mempunyai rangkaian dengan organisasi-organisasi ternamadi atas, kita mempelawa para penults dan pengkaji mengenai isu-isu P&Q, pengurusan dan keusahawanan supaya memanfaatkanrangkaian yang ada pada kami agar hasil hasil kajian itu dapatdikongsi untuk universal.
Kitajuga ingin menyatakan bahawa setiap rencana yangtersiar tidak semestinya secocok dengan pendapat NPC.
BiodataSushil K Sharma is a Professor of Industrial Engineering and Managementin the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Banaras Hindu University,India. He has obtained his Ph.D. degree in the area of Industrial Engineer-ing from Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpurs and is working in thefield of System Dynamics; formulation and TQM. He has published over40 international papers in leading international journals and is the foundermember of the System Dynamics Society of India.
Jalal Sajedi Sabegh is a research scholar in the Department of MechanicalEngineering, Banaras Hindu University. He has obtained his bachelor intechnology degree in Agricultural Engineering Master in Technology inIndustrial Engineering and Management. At present he is conducting hisresearch in productivity measurement and improvement using systemdynamics. Mr. Jalal has attended many international conference in the areaof system dynamics. He will be submitting his thesis shortly.
ABSTRACT
This paper briefly reviews the productivity literature and points outthe type of work that has been carried out by many researches. The authorson productivity measurement and improvement advocate coordinatingand intergrating all the factors of productivity. It is viewed as a complexrelationship between output and input.
No single measurement index is ideal because production system is adynamic system and the performance of a company depend on the complexinteraction among its various subsectors, between company and its chang-ing environment. The paper stress on need to take "soft system thinking"approach to productivity as opposed to "hard system thinking" of the pastdecade. There is a need to develop "productivity learning model" asopposed to "productivity measurement model". In this paper the systemmethodology has been suggested to create a productivity learning modeland the authors are working on it.
TOWARDS PRODUCTIVITYLEARNING MODELS
Sushil K Sharma & Jalal Sajedi Sabegh(Banaras Hindu University)
INTRODUCTION.
1.1 PRODUCTIVITY CONCERNS
Nations whether developed, developing or underdeveloped are livingin a changing world, often hit by the economic inflation, recession,depression or economic slowdowns and then they are awakened by theconcern for improving productivity. Unfortunately, the attention paid bythe developed countries varies with the state of economy. They also takea lethargic attitude towards productivity improvement since they haveachieved affluence,while the developing and underdeveloped countrieslack knowledge, the people in the the developed countries take a lenientview forgetting that what might becoming up around the corner. Once theeconomic tailspin begins, the eyes of the people become glued to economicindicators like the eyes of an Indian fanner waiting for monsoon to arrive.Fortunately,unlike weather people can influence, productivity and can playa role about changing its course.
Unless an awareness of the importance of productivity is created atnational, organisational and individual levels, concern for productivitywill remain an issue without being put into for practice. Productivity hasto be treated as national welfare. Therefore, productivity is the only secureway of increasing the standard of living, of improving a national balanceof payments, of controlling inflation or providing more leisure time.
In the words of Andel (1981) 'Equally important to restoring eco-nomic stability in America is improvement of productivity growth. In-creasing productivity is the only way we can elevate our standard of living.For most of the history of our country productivity has increased resultingin an increase standard of living, expressed in higher pay, better workingconditions and more leisure time. At present, however, our productivity isnot in increasing. Our machines and factories are old and wearing out. Ifwe no longer can increase productivity, we will have less wealth forculture, for education, for religion and medicine. As our productivity goes
down our living standard also will have to move dowr and our prices willmove up.
Some countries that fail to keep pace with *he productivity levels ofcompetitors try to solve the problem by devalueing their national curren-cies. This step reduces real income in such countries by making importedgoods more expensive and by increasing domestic inflation. Figure 1.1shows a causal loop diagram of some of the factors and variables affectingproductivity. (Scot 1 1985).
Low Productivity Growth(compared with inputprices export goods
Lagging CapitalFormation (an unsufficient
capital labour ratio)
Lower Utilisation ofDomestic Plant Capacity
Rising Prices(domestic andexport goods)
Rising Unit(labour and energy)
Cost
Sluggish Sales(in domestic andforeign market)
Figure 1.1 Casual Loop Model for Low Productivity Trap.
1.2 PRODUCTIVITY CONCEPT : WHAT ISPRODUCTIVITY AND WHAT IT IS NOT?
Productivity is often a controversial term. The work itself elicits manydifferent types of feeling and responses that are dependend upon the biasesand values of the listener. Rosen (1984) says that "Productivity seems toproduce either resistance or inspiration. In some people it evokes distaste:versions of layoffs, exploitation of workers, and everybody playing gamewith simplistic and unfair measures. To others productivity movementprovide the exciting opportunities for a happier, more successful society,with less waste of expensive resources and improved quality of goods andeffective while the work place more human".
Boy (1992) states that, "Productivity is like politics - a lot of peopletalk about the subject, it probably doesn't mean the same thing to any twoof them, and theclout it wields can be downright devastating". Heap (1992)"The term productivity and productivity is measured by first measuringoutput and input and then calculating the ratio'.
The different definitions offered by the authors on productivity aregiven chronologically by Sumanth (1984). Figure 1.1 shows many otherdefinitions that followed due to the interest in productivity by manyauthors.
Goregerman (1984) "Productivity is a process whereby an organisa-tion effectively and efficiently convert its resources into product and services it offer for sale".
Joseph Propenko (1987) "As relationship between the output generated bya production or service system and the input provided to create this output. Productivity is definedas the efficient use of resources in production ofvarious goods and services".
Japan Productivity "As the ratio of input (man, material and money)(1987) to output (goods or services)"
Figure 1.2 Important definitions of productivity. The traditionalway to clarify the meaning of productivity has been to represent it in asimple and convenient term as ratio of output to input. (ILO, 1979;JPC,1987). If an organisation is seen as being a simple resource conversionsystem of the form.
Research OutputTransformation
Process(Organisation)
thenOutput Value of goods/services
Productivity =
Goods/Services
Input Cost of resources consumed
It captures one relationship between outputs (goods and servicesproduced) and inputs (the resource used to produce those outputs). Put itin another way it answers a question: What is the output produced per unitof input.
The concept of productivity recognises the interplay between factorsin the workplace. While the output or result achieved, may be related tomany different inputs, or resources, in its form of various productivity ratioi.e. output per labour hour, output per unit of materials or output per unitof capital, output per unit of energy. Each of the separate productivity ratiois influenced by a combination of many relevant factors. These influencingfactors include quality and availability of raw materials, throughputcapacity of capital equipment, the attitude and skill level of its workforceand the motivation and effectiveness of the management. Bain (1982) saysthat "the manner is wich these factors interrelate has an important bearingor its resulting productivity as measured by any of many possible ratio."
The words efficiency and effectiveness are quite commonly used inexplaining the concept of productivity. Effectiveness relates to the abilityof an enterprise to meet the goal it has set for itself and thus, productivityincrease are important only in so far as they contribute to organisationalobjectives. The efficiency is the ratio of actual output attained to standardoutput expected. Sometimes efficiency is also defined as actual outputattained in the minimum time. Therefore under traditional definition,productivity has primarily focused on efficiency with which input areconverted to output. The more recent emphasis to define productivity is ofrepresenting it having two dimensions: Efficiency and Effectiveness.
Mali (1987) brings together the terms productivity; effectiveness andefficiency in the following manner,
Output obtained performance achievedProductivity Index = ————————— = ————————————
Input expanded resources consumed
effectiveness
efficiency
Sumanth (1985) has pointed out that this definition is somewhatconfusing for two reasons:-
i) Productivity index is a numerical value, but effectiveness is not.
ii) Mali does not define efficiency in a technical sense, i.e., as the ratio ofactual output to expected or standard output.Further with decrease in efficiency productive index can go up which iscounter intuitive to reasoning.
1.3 THE MOST COMMON DEFINITIONS OFPRODUCTIVITY
The basic form of productivity indicator or definition of productivityare:
1.3.1 Partial Productivity
Partial Productivity is the ratio of output to one of the factors ofinput. The most common one is labour productivity i.e. ratio ofoutput to labour input. Similarly capital are examples of partialproductivity.
1.3.2. Total Factor Productivity
Total Factor Productivity is the ratio of net output to the sum oflabour and capital (factor) inputs. By 'net output' we mean total outputminus intermediate goods and services purchased. The dominator consid-ers only two factors - labour and capital.
10
1.3.3. Total Productivity
Total productivity is the ratio of total output to the sum of all inputfactors. This gives a better picture of productivity as this indicatorconsiders the joint impact of all the inputs in producing the output.
Japan Productivity Centre (1988) highlights two aspects ofproductivity:
i) Productivity as an objective: Economic Productivity
ii) Productivity as a means: Technical Productivity
The Economic Productivity is increasing in production of certainoutput like steel, agricultural outputs, etc. With increase in the number ofconsumers and improve standards of living we have to make a life longeffort to satisfy our desires. This concept is something like production andis applicable at national level.
The technical productivity ia measured as the ratio of output to input.The different factors, of productivity include capital, land, labour, organi-sation, information and energy.
These are partial productivity measures.
i) Physical Productivity:
An index of quantitative output (e.g. tons) per workplace, worker orhour is called physical productivity. It is convenient for determining theefficiency of workplace operation of new machine with an old one, or forcomparing machine output after improvement has been introduced,
Volume of ProductionPhysical Productivity = ————————————— (Sales)
input
ii) Value Productivity:
Value Productivity is most appropriate for showing productivityterms of monetary value.
11
Production ValueValue Productivity = —————————————— (Sales)
Labour
iii) Value-added Productivity:
The most frequent used numerator in equations for measuring valueproductivity is value-added. Value-added can be defined as the valuecreated by an enterprise through its activities as shown in figure below.
Purchase from market for salemarket
Value purchased Value addedfrom outside
Figure 1.7 What is Value-added
Value-added = Net sales - value purchased from outside
Value-added = Net profit + professional expenses +financial costs + taxes + rent+ Depreciation expenses.
Value-addedValue-added Productivity = ————————————
Labour
The concept of value-added has became popular mainly because toavoid double counting of the prices of purchased parts or raw material priceand therefore it reflects the true output of a firm.
1.4 MAJOR MYTHS AND VIEWS ABOUTPRODUCTIVITY
Major myths about productivity (Sumanth 1987: Prokopenko, 1987:Heap 1992) which are:
• productivity is about production
12
productivity is about labour productivityproductivity is about working harderproductivity is about profitimproving productivity means cutting costsincreased productivity means redundancyproductivity measurement about productivity improvementproductivity about efficiencyproductivity and quality.
In a study, Katzell (1965) has that most managers (78%) and unionleaders (70%) prefer more wide qualitative oriented definition of produc-tivity which reflect overall effectiveness and performance of individualorganisation. This includes less tangible features such as absence of labourstoppages, rate of turnover, absentism and even customer satisfaction.Therefore, with this broader definition, managers view a link betweenworker satisfaction, customer satisfaction and productivity.
Therefore, productivity could be considered as a measure of how theorganisations the following criterion (Lawler 1985 quoted in Prokopenko1987).
• Objectives : the degree to which they are achieved
• Efficiency : how effectively resources are used to generateduseful output
• Effectiveness : What is achieved compared with what is possible.
• Comparability : how productivity performance is recorded overtime
Heap (1992) views productivity as bottom line productivity and topline productivity. The bottom line productivity is the traditional way ofcutting cost, and looking to short term features by increasing quantitativeoutput. The top line productivity refers to such factors as value: comprisingof quality, reliability and functionality performance, aesthetics, size,weight, cost, life cycle costs, status fashion and availability. These top lineproductivity factor aim at long term solution and careful implementation.
13
1.5 MEASUREMENT OF PRODUCTIVITYAT FIRM LEVEL
Productivity is measured at a number of levels starting with interna-tional, national and sectional levels, then organizational level, sub-organi-sational level (dept. level) and perhaps down to the level of individuals.Since the measurement of productivity at firm level is considered in thisthesis some consideration are highlighted.
1.5.1 Measuring Output
In order to express output in terms of monetary units, a price factor hasto be introduced so that the values of different product can be addedtogether. A time period is also brought in like day, month or year as the unitto show the period during which the output is produced. The output or totalsales during a fiscal or calendar year are shown on balance sheet of acompany. The total sales of a firm represent only a portion of its outputbecause some products produced may not have been sold but kept ininventory. Product are often made by using semi-finished goods purchasedelsewhere. Sales may also include services rendered to customer, such asrepairs, on previously sold products. Also market prices fluctuate fromyear to year. When there is inflation, the prices may rise and its rise in pricemay not be true indicator of the value of output.
Value Added:
In a strict sense, value-added gives the true output. For example in aproduction unit, semi-finished or even raw materials are consumed duringthe process of production or are intermediate input. While aggregating thefinal product of the company, these as separate output will inflate theoutput quantity or value because of double counting. To avoid this, outputcan be measured in terms of value-added, which is defined as gross outputless intermediate inputs. Thus, the value-added for a garment companywill be its gross output less materials (say cotton, fabrics, threads, buttons,etc), less stocks or material and supplies at beginning of year plus those atend of the year, less contract work, repair and maintenance.
Constant Prices:
All output or value-added expressed in monetary units should reflectreal or constant value rather than current market prices. This can be done
14
by multiplying them by base year prices or by deflating the current priceswith a price index or appropriate deflator.
(QnPn) x (1)——— - QnPoPn/Po
Where Q = quantity of outputP = Prices or Value-addedn = current periodo = base period
If QnPo is known, an index of non base year with base year as 100(Ino) can be constricted for each of the year over a period of time by usingLaspeyres formula,
QnPoIon = ————————— xlOO
QoPo
The Laspeyres formula gives indexes at constant prices.
1.5.2 Measuring Inputs
Labour volume is measured in units such as man-hours, man-days,man-months and man-years and actual working hours should be taken intoaccount. In a narrow sense, labour productivity involves elements directlyrelated production when measuring labour productivity, working hours forindirect functions such as, maintenance, repair, transportation and storageare included in the input. When measuring labour productivity elementssuch as managers, and first line supervisor, engineers, clerical workers atshop office and helpers also should be excluded. When measuring thelabour productivity of management the working hours of personnel in theservice and administration departments of the head office are also in-cluded.
Material Input:
The material input consists of raw materials and purchased parts. Thevalue of raw materials can be computed as:
15
Value of a rawmaterial consumedfor a product inthis period
quantity of materialused for thisproduct in thisperiod
X
purchase priceof the materialin the baseperiod
The total value of the raw material is sum total of all materialsfollowing the above calculation for each of them.
Energy
Traditionally energy is usually a part of materials input but since theoil crises of the 1970s, it has become desirable to treat it as a separate input,especially in industries were energy consumption is high. In most cases itconsists of electricity, coal oil, gas, etc. The unit are different and thecommon unit for aggregating are also used such Btu. The total cost inmonetary units during a certain period can be obtained from the book ofaccounts and each of these have to be deflated to constant base periodvalues.
Capital
The capital cost is the most difficult to measure than other inputs, sincethese figures are not readily available in books of accounts. Sumanth(1985) Shen (1985) consider both fixed and the working capital. The fixedcapital comprises of land, plant (buildings and structures) machinery, toolsand equipments, and amortized research and development cost. Theworking capital, on the other hand includes money needed to supportinventory, cash, accounts receivables, notes receivables.
There are three popular method to measure the fixed capital:-
1. Depreciation method used as approximation of the fixed capital.
2. The labour-input equivalent method, where the capital chargesare converted into labour input equivalents.
3. Leasing concept of services value assumes that the firm leases itsfixed and working capital from subsidiary that expects return fromit in the form annuity at a required rate of return (Shen 1985,
16
Sumanth 1985: pp. 162, Craig and Harris 1973 pp. 18-21)
Other Expenses
This input includes travel expenses, taxes, professional fees, market-ing expenses, information processing expenses etc. The expenses onprofessional and manager has not been included in the labour cost, this maybe included in the overhead expenses. The other expenses input shouldinclude everything that other factors of input has not included.
1.6 PRODUCTIVITY MEASUREMENT MODELS
Productivity measurement has been carried out by persons havingdifferent points of view and aims. Authors have studied productivitymeasurement at global, national, regional, organisational and sub-organi-sational and workplace point of view. Since the thesis is concerned withproductivity measurement at organisational level or firm level only thesemodels have been reviewed and presented in appendix A. The survey hasbeen conducted by many authors, a review and update of these models canbe found in relevant literature (see Westwick 1973; Teauge and Ellon1973; Kurosawa 1980; Mammone 1980, and Clark 1983; Doqramaci1983; Sandana & Prem Vratl984; Sumanth 1984; Nakazawa 1985; Sink1986; Probopenko 1987; Mohanti 1987) A brief review of these modelsemphasises the need for developing another model to overcome the shortcomings of these models and the need to carry out research in this area.
The Productivity measurement approaches of the company level areclassified according to economist, engineers, managers and accountantswho use them (Sumanth 1984).
Economist : Index approach, production function approach;input-output approach
Engineers : Index approach, utility approach, servo-system approach.
Managers : Array approach, financial ratio approach.
Accountants: Capital budgeting approach, unit cost approach.
17
The different approaches to productivity measurement are classified as:
(A) Index approach
i) Kendrick-Creamer Model (1965)ii) Craig-Harris Model (1976)iii) Mines Model (1976)iv) APC Model (1981)v) The Total Productivity Model, Sumanth (1979)
vi) Mundel's Model (1976)vii) Tay lor-Davis Model (1977)viii) Kurosawa Structural Approach, Kurosawa (1980)ix) POP Model, Sardana & Prem Vrat (1984)x) Action Research Model, Mohanti & Rastagi (1987)
(B) Production Function Approach
i) The Cobb Douglas-Function.ii) The constant elasticity of substitution (CES) Arrow et. al (1961)iii) The variable elasticity of substitution function (VES) Kmenta
(1976) Hodges (1989)iv) Econometric theory of production functions see Domar (1961),
Solow (1957), Dhrymes (1963)v) Applied Econometrics theory of production -functions see Klotz
(1953)
(C) Input-output Approach
See Leontief (1953) Farag, (1967) Elliot Jones (1971) Henery(1975).
(D) Utility Approach
See Steward (1978a, 1978b), Radovilsy and Gotcher (1992)
(E) Servo -System Approach
See Herchaurer and Ruch (1978)
18
(F) Array ApproachSee Dewitt (1970,1975)
(G) Financial Ratio Approach
SeeTucker(1961),Gold(1976),Aggrawal(1979),Shimizu(1990)rightly summarises the different views of follows.
Accountant's View : Accountants take costing and budgeting ap-proach to productivity. When the estimated budget figures rather thanoptimum achievable values are used as standards, there could be falseimpression of high productivity.
Economists' View : They view productivity as partial productivity.The total factor productivity and total productivity have also been used butthe definition of output and input factors do not agree.
Behaviourists' View: This school view productivity based on labourabsent ism, percent of working time total time as their yardstick. But theutilisation of worker may not lead to high productivity on account of effort,skill requirement etc.
Engineers' View : Engineers generally seek measures of physicalassets and other resources, much as production per hour, man-hours perunit, materials per unit, machine utilization etc. This also is a partialmeasure as reducing labour cost may stop a few machines to be properlyutilised.
Managers' View : Managers use accounting ratios to measureproductivity of the company. These ratios assess the present profitabilityof the company. Recently, the value added productivity i.e value added tolabour ratio has been related to other ratios to reflect the relationshipbetween different factors.
The above discussion leads the conclusion that there is usually noconsistency in the measurement of productivity. McBeath (1974) recom-mends.
19
1.7 PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT CONCEPTS ANDMODELS
The continuous productivity measurement should be and intergralpart of any organisation, but productivity measurement is not productivityimprovement efforts by providing the indicators of productivity, whetherit is sitting or falling and whether efforts to improve productivity aresuccessful or not.
Productivity improvement is doing the right things right or betterMukherjee and Singh (1975) suggest a classification of productivityimprovement factors (figures 1.3):-
i) External (not controllable)ii) Internal (controllable)
The external factors are beyond the control of individual organisa-tions and internal factors are those which are in control. Once these groupshave been identified different strategies are required to deal with them.Since this thesis deals with the organisational level productivity theinternal factors have been discussed in little detail.
Catherine & Matti (1978) have pointed out four major clusters ofinternal factors as shown in figure 1.9 , these are behavioral, structural,technologies, and procedural factors. The United States Deparment OfCommence (1981) have pointed out our 25 factories that have contributedto the decline of productivity at national level. Mali (1978) discussestwelve causes for decline of productivity in firms, these factors are:
1) Inability to measure, evaluate and manage productivity of whitecollar employees. This causes a shocking waste of resources.
2) Rewards and benefits given without requiring the equivalent inproductity and accountably. This causes spiralling inflation.
3) Diffused authority and inefficiency in complex organisations, therebycausing delays and time lags.
4) Organisational expansion that lowers productivity growth. Thisresults in soaring costs.
20
5) Low motivation among a rising number of affluent workers withnew attitudes.
6) Late deliveries caused by schedules that have been disrupted byscarce materials.
7) Unresolved human conflicts and difficulties in team work, resultingin firm's ineffectiveness.
8) Increased legislative intrusions or antiquated laws, resulting inconstrained management options and prerogatives.
9) Specialisation in work processes resulting in monopoly andboredom.
10) Rapid technological changes and high costs, resulting in a declinein new opportunities and innovations.
11) Increasing demand of leisure time causing disruptions of timecommitments.
12) Practitioners inability to keep pace with latest information and keenknowledge.
Heap (1992) classifies the factors responsible for improving produc-tivity as: (i) The technologies in use, (ii) the structures, (iii) the system andprocedures and (iv) the people. He points out that it is important to makeproper use of technology not to use high technology for its own sake, butto remain aware of available and emerging technologies and make rationaldecisions as to what adopt and when to adopt it. Organisational structuresare especially important since they provide the basic potential for highproductivity; inadequate or inappropriate structures mitigate against pro-ductivity improvement. It is necessary to examine the structures at bothmacro and micro; level and create an organisation > /ith a high potiential forproductity improvement, before introducing any specific improvmentprogramme.
21
EnterpriseProductivity
Factors
Internal Factors External Factors
SoftFactors
StructuralFactors
Goverment andInfrastructure
- Product
- Plant andequipment
- Technology
- Materialand Energy
People
- Organistionand System
- Work Methods
- ManagementStyles
- Economic
- Demographicand Social
- Manpower
- land
- Energy
- RawMaterials
- InstitutionalMechanisms
- Policies andStrategy
- Infrastructure
- PublicEnterprise
FIGURE 1.3 THE FACTORS AFFECTING ENTERPRISELEVEL PRODUCTIVITY
22
Behavioral
abilitymotivationincentivestrainingleadershipcommunication
work conditions
organization climate
Technological
Structural
organisational designhierarchymatrixprogamcentralized/decentral izedscale contracting ordevelopinginter-organisationalrelationship
Productivity
Procedural
equipment & machinessystems
socio-technical mix
work flowwork methodspersonal developmentoperations designstandard setting
FIGURE 1.4 DETAILED MICRO LEVEL HARD ANDSOFT FACTORS
1.8 SOME APPROACHES TO PRODUCTIVITYIMPROVEMENT
The approach to productivity measurement which are concerned atfactory level can be classfied in two ways:-
1) Conceptual models2) Analytical models.
23
1.8.1 CONCEPTUAL MODELS
The conceptual models are those which provide the basic frameworkto highlight important factors and inter- relationship between them. Someof the popular approaches are:
1) Goodwin's model (1968)2) Sutermiester's model (1976)3) Hersheaur and Ruch's model (1978)4) Crandall and Woton's strategies (1978)5) Steward's Strategy (1978)6) Apprawal's approach (1992)7) Mohanti's approach (1992)
A detailed review of these models can be found in Sumanth (1984).The (Hersheaur & Ruch 1976) servosystem model is relevance as thismodel uses the feedback concept of system dynamic. The organizationaland individual factors interact and affect the workers performance.Hescheaur and Ruch (1976) admit their model's primary difficult inpractical uses as its inability to measure the behaviour and managerialfactors quantitatively . Mohanti (1992) suggest defining of (1) objectivesand long, medium and short term strategies, (2) organisation structure (3)development of responsibility centers, (4) comunications system (5)constitution of committees and implemention. However, he has notexplicitly suggested whether long and short term strategies will come ineach other's way.
1.8.2 ANALYTICAL MODEL'S
The conceptual approaches to productivity improvement are limitedin their inability to measure productivity changes and also they areadvocating productivity improvement by measurement of few isolatedfactors. Following are some approaches to productivity improvementbased on statistical and quantitative analysis,
1. Kurosawa Structural Approach (1980)2. Sumanth Analytical Productivity Approach (1984)3. Lawlor's Approach (1985)4. Zinory Radovilsky Approach (1992)5. Avedilo-Cruz (1984)
company Performance Appraisal
24
6. Japan Productivity Centre Approach (1988)7. Shimizu financial Ratio Approach (1992)
Sumanth's (1984) productivity approach is based on scientific selec-tion of a set techniques for a given time period to achieve a given level oftotal productivity. He suggests use of 54 techniques for improvement ofproductivity in a organisation grouped according to technology based -techniques . Using a linear regression analysis between change in totalproductivity and the use of some of these techniques, a productivitycoefficient of techniques K in final selection of the techniques is based onan integral programming formulation with constraints on funds, paybackand maximum allowable installation time.
Similar to Samanth's (1984) approach is the approach due to Zinovyand Radavilsky (1992), The other improvement approach are basicallyproductivity measurement model but lands itself with simple ratio calcu-lations for the purpose,
(a) comparing an enterprise with its competitors(b) determining the relative performance of departments and worker(c) comparing relative benefits of various types of input for collective
bargaining and gains showing.
The value added productivity model of Japan Productivity Centre(1988) is finally expressed as,
Value-added labour productivity= Value added ratio x Price x Degree of Production
Capacity x Level of Operation x Labour equipment ratio
The various factors in improving productivity are classified into fourgroups: (1) factors related to management (2) factors related to technologyand capital (3) factors related to labour (4) a factor related to labourmanagement relations. The model further makes analysis for raising valueadded ratio, by improving capital productivity.
SOME COMMENTS ON THE PRODUCTIVITY MODELS:
Many authors have advocated coordinating and integrating all theelements of productivity. They also emphasized that productivity in a
25
complex interrelationship between output and input.
Hine (1976) concludes by remarking that no single 'static' measure isideal for expressing a firm's productivity, and there are still conceptual andmeasurement problems. He also points that no single productivity indexis ideal, because a production system is dynamic system with interrelation-ships between various elements, which involves delays and non-lineareffects and feedback type of relationships typical to such dynamic system.
Heap (1992) states that, "There has been a tendency to concentrate onwhat is easily counted and measured and to pay too much attention to short-term futures at the expenses of the longer *.... the output of any organisationis much more than a simple quantitative throughout". In another contextHeap argues that...." Naturally these stages are not mutually exclusive:there is no reason why an organization should not keep all aspects of itsoperation under review at the same time the organization can addressseveral issues but the existing forms of structure adopted by most organi-sation is not suitable to address labour, product, process and 'other' issuessimultaneously."
The Japan Productivity Centre (1988) "the improvement of valueadded productivity all is possible only by coordinating and integrating allthe elements needed for business activities, i.e manpower, materials, andmoney."
Lorell and Dobbs (1978) "A Systematic Approach requires thelinking of diagonistic acitivity, to improvement strategies, to measurementin a continuous process".
Masayoshi Shimizu (1990) in his work on productivity analysiscomments "productivity analysis is not just a rearrangement of variousimplement constant improvements both management and labour, theyshould work in close cooperation."
Therefore, productivity is a long term issue and must be addressed ona continuing basis over a long period of time. The short terms results whichshow apparently beneficial result may mask the long term underlyingproblems. Therefore, for real and continuing gains to be made, a longerterm and more systematic approach to productivity improvement shouldbe taken.
26
The performance of a company depends on the complex interactionamong its various subsectors, between company and its changing environ-ment. The productivity measurement and improvement suffers whensome unforeseen interaction among parts of the organisation or environ-ment defeat the efforts of a good improvement plan. In any productivitymeasurement and improvement plan the following points have to keep inmind,
i) composite performance of functional areas plays importantrole for improving productivity,
ii) the productivity improvement effort is more on allocations ofresources rather than on policies
iii) Poor productivity man result from any policies design toimprove the performance, isolated by environment analysis
iv) there is a need to measure and improve the top line factors likequality, reliability, aesthetics etc.
NATURE AND SCOPE OF PRESENT WORK
From the above discussions it can be concluded that productivity atcompany level has to studied in more holistic and dynamic sense. Theoutput are not merely the quantitative output but has to incorporate sometopline factors in terms of 'values'. The value factors are quality,aesthetics, functionability, environmental friendly products etc. Theentire productivity issue has to studied from "systems thinking" point ofview. Fortunately, system (Forrester 1961, Lyneis 1988, Richardson1990, and the broader field do 'systems thinking' developed in past fewyears is now ready to meet this challenge (Richmond 1990, Grahams et.al.1989, Vennix 1990, Senge 1992a). The field of productivity measurementand improvement has to be linked with proper understanding of overallpattern of systems thinking. In the words of checkland (1985) hasdescribed the evaluation of system thinking in management from 'hardsystems thinkers of 1960's held an overarching conception of humansystems as goal seeking and sought to help in 'optimizing' those systems.Eventually the objective of optimization was abandoned. Checklandcontrasts hard systems thinking with more recent 'soft system thinking'.
The soft system thinking due of Vicker (1970) view of appreciationimplies a particular way of thinking about systems tools for learning as
27
opposed to problem solving. Checkland' s framework, which he "calls softsystems methodology ", proposes on going cycle of inquiry and experi-mentation that" moves from finding out about a problem situation totaking action in the situation". Conceptual models are used to focusdialogue and debate about problems situation, especially by "comparingmodels with perception of real world". The aim of this conversation is toseek possible courses of action that are "systemically desirable andculturally feasible. Formulating and taking such actions leads eventuallyto a new cycle of conceptualization and inquiry (Senge 1992b). Thevalidity or usefulness of these models must be assessed overtime by thequality of conversation they foster, and the clarity and effectiveness of theactions they participation. This is the essence of "productivity learningmodel" as opposed to "productivity measurement models," a view manyof us is system dynamics are considering more and more seriously. Thenew generation of productivity models should shift from authoritarian tolearning organizations, the necessity of replacing atomistic thinking withsystemic thinking in today's business world of increasing interdependenceand change.
REFERENCES
Adam, E.E., Jr., J.C. Hershauer, and W.A. Ruch, (1981), 'Productivity and Quality:measurement as a basis for improvement, Prentice Hall, Engle wood Cliffs,N.J. Agrawal,
S.C. (1979) 'A Study of Productivity measures for improving benefit-cost ratioof operating organizations in Proc. 5th. Int. Conf . Production Research,(Am sterdam) The Netherlands, Aug. 12-16, pp. 64-70.
American Productivity Centre, (1981) A report Published by American ProductivityCentre Inc.
Andel, J. (1981) in Imprimis, Trowbridge, Ronald L, ed. Vol. 10 No. 6 HillsdaleMichigan: Hillsdale Collge, June 1981 quoted in Produc tivity ImprovementGuide for Small Business, Gregerman Ira B, pp.1.
Arrow, K.J., H.B. Chenery, B.S. Minhas and R.M. Solow, 1961) 'Capital LabourSubstitution and Economic Efficiency', Review. Econ. Stais.,Vol. 18, pp.225-250.
Boy, A. Raymond, (186)'Improving Total Corporate Productivity'. VanNostrandReinhold Company, Inc. New York.
28
Burges,T.(1990), (A Review of Productivity', Work Study, Vol. 39, No. l.Jan/Feb., pp.6-9.
Brain David, (1982) 'The Productivity Prescription The Managers guide toimproving productivity', Mc-Graw Hill Book Company, New York.
Checkland P., (1981) System Thinking, Systems Practice, Chicester, Wiley.
Checkland, P., (1985) 'from Optimizing to Learning: A Development of SystemsThinking for 1990s*. Journal of the Operational Research Society. No. 36,pp. 757-767.
Clark, J.J, & M.T Clark, (1983) 'Statistics primer for Managers', Free Press, NewYork, 1983. 256 pp.
Craig, C.E. and C,R. Harris, (1973) 'Total Productivity Measurement at FirmLevel'. Sloan Management Review, Vol. 14. No. 3, pp. 13-29.
Catherine Lovell H. & Matti Dobbs, (1978) 'Productivity Improvement', Ropertfor the National Institute of Public Affairs, Washington D.C.
Callanghan, W, (1990), 'Productivity for Profit', Work Study, Vol.39, No. 2,March/April, pp.6-19.
Crossby, Phillip (1979), 'Quality is free', McGraw-Hill, New York.
Dahl, T, (1986) 'University of Minisota', Paper to World Productivity Congress,Indonesia.
Davis, H.S., (1955), 'Productivity Accounting', University of Pennsylavania Press,Philadelphia.
Dewitt ,F, (1970) 'Techniques of Measuring Management Productivity', ManageRev., Vol.59, pp. 2-11.
Dewitt, F., (1975) 'Productivity and Industrial Engineer', Industrial Engineering,Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 22-27.
Dogramaci, A., (1983) Developments in Economic Analysis of Produc tivity:Measurement and Modelling Issues, Kluwer Nijhaff, 172pp.
Domar, E.D., et.al., (1964) "Economic Growth and Productivity in the UnitedStates, Canada, United Kingdom, Germany and Japan in the postwarperiod' Rev. Econ. Statist., Vol. 66, pp.33-40.
29
Elliot-Jones, M.F., (1971) 'An Introduction to Input-out Analysis*. Conf. BoardRec., Vol. 8No.l,pp.l6-19.
Farag,S.M,,(1967) 'Input-Output analysis: Application to Business Accounting(Monograph NO, 5)', Centre for International Education and Research inAccounting, Urbana, HI.
Fabricant, S.,(1962) 'Which Productivity? Perspective on a Current Question',Monthly Labour Review, Vol. 86, No. 6,1962 pp. 609-613.
Graham, A.K., J.D.W. Morecraft, P. Senge, J. Sterman, (Computer-Based CaseStudies in Management Education and Research, in Computer-Based Managementof Complex Systems: Proceedings of the 1989 International Conference of theSystems Dynamics Society., P. Milling and E.Zhara, Ed., Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Gregerman, Ira B, (1984) "Productivity Improvement: A Guide for Small Business'.Van Nostrand Reinhold Publication pp.24.
Gold, B., (1974) 'Productivity Analysis: Some New Analytical and EmpiricalPerspectives' Bus. Econ., May, pp.4-72.
Gold, B. (1976) 'A Framework for Productivity Analysis', Ch. 2 in Samuel et.al;Applied Productivity Analysis for Industry, Pergamon Press, Oxford pp.22-23.
Henery, E.W and R, O'connor, (1975) 'Input-Output Analysis and its applica-tions', Hafer Press, New York.
Heap, (1992) 'Productivity Management: A Fresh Approach', Cassel Educational Ltd, England.
Hines,W.W.,(1976) 'Guidelines for Implementing Productivity Measurement',Ind. Engineering, Vol.8, No.6, pp.40-43.
Hodges, D, (1969) * A Note on Estimation of Cobb-Douglas and CES ProductionFunction Models' Econometrica, Vol.37, No.4, pp. 40-43.
Herchauer, J.C. and W.A. Ruch, (1978) * A Worker Productivity Model and Its useat Lincoln Electric', Interfaces, Vol.8, No.3, pp.80-89.
'Introduction to the Role of Productivity Facilitators', (1988), Japan ProductivityCentre, Tokyo.
'Introduction to Work Study', 3rd. Edition, (1979), International Labour Organi-sation, Geneva.
30
Katzell, R.A. et al. (1975) Work, Productivity and Job Satisfaction: An Evalu-ation of Policy Related Research, Psychological Corporation, New York.
Kendrick, J.W. and D. Creamer (1965) Measuring Company Productivity:A Handbook with Case Studies (Studies in Business, Economics No. 89),National Industrial Conference, Board, New York.
Kurosawa, K. (1980) 'Structural Approach to the Concept of Measurement ofProductivity (2)', in Keizai Shughi (Economic Journal of Nihon University),Vol.50.NO.2,pp.96-135.
Kementa, J.W., (1972) 'The Productivity Factor in Phase 2', Conf. Board Rec.Vol.9, No. 3, pp.28-35.
Leontief, W.et al. (ed.), (1953) 'Studies in the Structure of the American Eco-nomic Oxford University Press. New York.
Mao, J.C.T (1965) 'Measuring Productivity of Public Urban Renewal Expenditures', Michigan Bus. Rev., Vol. 17,00,30-34.
Mali, P., (1978) 'Improving Total Productivity: MBO Strategies for Business,Government, and Non-Profit Organisations' Wiley, New York.
Measurement and Interpretation of Productivity', (1979) National Research Council,National Academy of Sciences, Washington D.C.
Me. Beath, G., (1974) 'Productivity Through People*, Business Books, London.
Mohanti R.P and Mohd Hays R., (1987) 'Consensus and Conflicts in ConceivingProductivity', Productivity, National Productivity Corporation Malaysia,Vol. No.3, pp.35-37.
Mohanti R.P (1992) 'Planning for Productivity: Discussion on A Case Examples*.Journal of Productivity, Vol. 12, June. Malaysian Productivity Council.
Mundel, M.E. 'Measures of Productivity*, Ind. Eng., Vol.8. No.5, pp. 24-26.
Nakazawa, M., (1985) 'Measurement of Labour Productivity: The Japanese Experience*, Productivity, New Delhi, July-September, pp.145-148.
Organization for European Economic Cooperation, (1950) 'Terminology of Pro-ductivity*, Par. 2.2. Cue Andre'-Pascal, Paris -16.
Putty M. Joseph, (1986) Understanding Productivity, Federal Publication(s),Singapore.
31
Radovllsky.Z.D.&J.W.Gotcher (1992) 'Measuring and Improving Productivity:A New Approach*, Industrial Management, May/June, pp.22-25.
Richemond,B.(1990).'ITHINK Vser'sGuide,Hanover,NewHampshire:HighPerformance Systems Inc.
Rosen Ellen Doree, (1984) 'Productivity Concepts and Measurement' in Produc-tivity and Public Policy, HolzerMarc & Nagel Stuart S, ed., Sage PublicationInc. California.
Sardana, G.D. andPrem Vrat, (1984) 'Models of Productivity Measurement Surveyand Critical Appraisal', Productivity, NPC India, Vol.XXV.3. pp.271-289.
Senge, P. and J. Sterman (1992a) 'System Thinking and Organizational learning:Acting Locally and Thinking Globally, in Transforming Organizations,T.Kochan and Museemn, eds. New York: Oxford Press.
Senge, P. (1992b) 'You Can't Get There from Here: Why Systems Thinking isInseparable from Learning Orgaizations' Proceedings of 1992 Interna-tional Systems Dynamics Society, Holland, pp.675-684.
Sink, D.S., (1985) 'Productivity Measurement: Planning, Measurement andEvaluation, Control and Improvement', John Wiley & Sons, New York,pp.8.
Siegel, J.H., (1980) 'Company Productivity: Measurement for Improvement'The W.E UpJohn Institute for Employment Research, Kalamanzoo, Mich.
Steward, W.T, (1978a) *A Yardstick for Measuring Productivity', Ind. Eng.,Vol.10, No. 2,pp.34-37.
Stewart, W.T., (1978b) 'Facilitation of Production and Improvement in Manu-facturing Oranization*. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation, the Ohio StateUniversity, Columbus, Ohio.
Shen George C., (1985) 'Productivity Measurement and Analysis', Mono graphSeries 7, Asian Productivity Organization Tokyo.
Sumanth, D J. (1985} 'Productivity Engineering and Management*. Me Graw HillBook Company, New York.
Sumanth, D.J., (1979) 'Productuvuty Measurement and Evaluation Models forManufacturing Companies' Ph.D Dissertation, Illinois Institute of Tech-nology, (University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Mich.. No. 80-03, 665)
32
Sumanth, D.J., and V.J. Omachonu, (1982) 'Productivity Improvement in Manu-facturing Companies - a National Survey* working paper, February.
Taylor, B.W. m, and R.K. Dauis, (1977) 'Corporate Productivity -Getting it alltogether', Ind. Eng., Vol.9, No.3, pp.32-36.
Tucker, S .A., (1961) 'Successful Managerial Control by Ratio-Analysis* McGraw-HiU, New York, 1961.
Vennix, J. (1990) 'Mental Models and Computer Models: Design and Evaluationof a Computer-Based Learning Environment*. University of Nijmegen.
Westwick, C.A., (1973) How to use Management ratios, Essex, Cower, 228 pp.
33
Biodata
Mohd Rosli M. is currently a lecturer at the Faculty of Economics andAdministration, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur. Before doing hisMaster of Economics, he was a tutor at the faculty for three years since1989. After completed his Post Graduate Studies (M. Econ) in 1992, hewas appointed under Applied Economic Division in the university. He hastaught various economic disciplines ranging from micro and macroeco-nomics to Malaysian economics at various student (from undergraduate topost graduate.
Previously, he specialised in agricultural economics but with thedownturn of the sector he has diversified his specialisation to includeindustrial economics. This is done because he believes that the agriculturesector actually has significant correlation with the industrial sector.
As a newcomer, this is his inaugural article published in a professionaljournal. Nonetheless, he has a few more professional articles which areunder consideration for publication. So far, his ordinary articles dealingwithvarious issues have already been published in some prominent localnewspapers and magazines.
At present, he and his colleague, Prof. Madya Dr Pazimis involved inthe study of small and medium scale industries.
34
RUBBER SMALLHOLDINGSSECTOR IN MALAYSIA:
AN ANALYSIS OF PRODUCTIVITY ANDFACTOR INPUTS ALLOCATION
MOHD ROSLI1
University of Malaya
Abstract: This paper throughout analyses productivity performanceand factor inputs allocation in rubber smallholdings sector since pre-independence period. The analysis was devoted on land productivitypartly because land is a major issue in agriculture and partly because of thedata availability. A-log-linear Cobb-Douglas production function wasused to analyse factor inputs allocation in the sector. The finding in thisstudy suggests that productivity in smallholdings are always lower than inthe estates. At the same time, this productivity seems to have reached thesaturated point especially by the end of 1980' s and the early of 1990' s. Thestudy also found that misallocation of resources was also among otherimportant factors which led to the unfavourable productivity performance.The fertiliser subsidy scheme should be revised and adapted to stimulatethe smallholdings productivity and hence production in fulfilling bothinternal and external demand for rubber.
I. INTRODUCTION
The evolving development policies promoted by some other stimulativevariables have transformed the structure and orientation of Malaysianagricultural sector. The estates, while maintaining export crop productionhave evidently shifted from primary emphasis on rubber to other crops inparticular oil palm and cocoa. As a result, since the last three decades, thesmallholdings sector has dominated the rubber industry in many facets. In1993, cultivated area under rubber was 1,787 thousand hectares with totalproduction of 1,220 thousand metric tonnes. The smallholdings accountedto 82 percent of the total cultivated area and 72 percent of the totalproduction (Department of Statistics, 1993).
1.1 am grateful to Dr. Pazim 0 Fadzim Othman on his invaluable recommendations leadingto the completion of this paper. However, the author claims responsibility over the ideasthroughout this paper
35
The cultivated area under rubber for both estates and smallholdingshas however declined since early 1980's. Unfavourable price, conversionof land to other purposes and labour shortages are among other factorsleading to the current trends.
On the negative trend of cultivated area under rubber and limitationof potential land to be open, intensive development by increasing produc-tivity would be the best alternative to increase rubber production in thefuture to meet both internal and external demands.
This paper aims to analyse productivity performance and factor inputsallocation in rubber smallholdings sector. The main focus is on thesmallholdings because of its increasing importance in the national rubberindustry and its capability to cater employment.2 Study on factor inputsallocation would partly determine any misallocations of resources whichmay affect productivity performance. Through this study, the relatedagencies mav have space to adapt their persistent policies to improveproductivity.
II. METHODOLOGY
A study such as this involves a huge amount of information and dataeven at the first stage of identifying productivity measurement and factorinputs allocation.
Problems in collecting data led to the use of combination of primaryand secondary data in this study. The secondary data were used to analyseproduction and productivity of rubber smallholdings sector at nationallevel based on the data provision by the Department of Statistics. The datacovered 1946 to 1993. Primary data were also applied to analyse produc-tivity performance between small and large farms.
At the national level, productivity was only measured by dividingtotal rubber production and total planted hectareage. It is realised that iftapped hectareage is considered, rubber productivity will be higher,Nonetheless, since the data on tapped hectareage were only available forestates and not for smallholdings, thus the latter measurement was ignored.
2. Currently, 2.9 million households were dependent on the smallholdingscompared to only 111 ,086 on the estates sector.
36
Tapped hectareage was only considered particularly when the discussiontouches on the productivity of small and large farms at the micro level.
The primary data were obtained from a sample of farms taken withinthe year of 1993 in the District of Kuala Krai, Kelantan. Personal inter-views were conducted with farm operators (rubber smallholders) andinformation was obtained pertaining to various farm operations in theprevious year. The statistical analysis is based on data collected from 500randomly selected smallholder producers representing 10 percent of allfarm operators in the District.3
A log-linear Cobb-Douglas production function was used to interpretfactor inputs allocation. This function was employed partly because of itsadvantages in estimation and interpretation (Singh, Kant hi and Home,1986). However, if one assumes without testing that the underlyingproduction function is linear homogenous, he may be led to believe that thedifferences in allocative efficiency and in the configuration of input andoutput prices are responsible for any differences in yields and factorintensities, while actually the answer lies in the technological differencesamong the distinct group of farms (Bamum and Squire, 1976). Theassumption of linearity and homogeneity of the production function issatisfied if the elasticity of retums-to-scale is unity. The function anddefinition of the variables are as follows:
+ a^ In MH + a4 In M + u,
Where,
Y = the total production of rubber, in yearly kilograms per farm.
L = land area operated in hectares.F = the total fertiliser used, in kilograms,
MH = number of human labour hours used per annum on individual
3. There were 8,996 rubber smallholder producers registered with RISDA in the Districtinvolving 18,026 hectares of farms. Nonetheless, almost 60 percent of the farms was undertapping and the remaining was replanted. Only tapped farms were considered in this study.For sampling purposes, a list of smallholders was provided by RISDA.
37
farms. It includes family labour, hired and shared (pawah) labours(if any).
M = miscellaneous factors to include capital flow (farm machineryand equipment; annual depreciation charges, repair, and operating expenses-gas, oil etc) and others, per farm.
(0, = a random disturbance term which is assumed to be normallydistributed with zero mean ( £u,2 =02), and finite variance (Z[l =0).
III. PRODUCTIVITY
Since productuvity becomes a central point of human' skills andinterests, social and business activities, management and technologycapacities, its measurement is widely used to assess economic perform-ance (Kravis, 1976; Prokopenko, 1987). "It measures the extent to whichgiven inputs are transformed into output. Higher productivity meansaccomplishing more with the same amount of resources or achievinghigher output in terms of volume and quality for the same input" (Rugay ah,1991:100)
Various ways of measuring productivity have been employed in theliterature. "There can be as many partial productivity indices as there areinputs. They are partial productivities in the sense that output is comparedwith only one input at a time, without an explicit recognition of the changesin other inputs. Examples of these are output per unit of labour, or ofcapital, land, raw materials, fuels and other utilities" (Rugayah, 1991 :100).
In agricultural studies, productivity of land is however, most com-monly and widely employed device for measuring productivity (Berry andWilliam, 1979). This is because land economic resources have becomecentral focus in agricultural sector. Therefore, and supported by theavailability of data, this paper uses the latter productivity measurement.
Although this paper attempts to analyse productivity of rubber small-holdings sector, estates productivity is also displayed to make clearerpicture of the indicator comparability. Table 1 shows the productivityperformance of the two sectors over the period between 1946 and 1993.Explicitly, the changing trends of rubber productivity were influenced bythe change in planted hectarage and production but implicitly some otherfactors must also be considered.
38
TABLE 1
PRINCIPAL STATISTICS OF RUBBER,1946-1993, MALAYSIA
Planted Hectareage
Year ('000 Hectares)
Total SmallholdingsEstates
194619471948194919501951195219531954195519561957195819591960196119621963196419651966
1,3011,3421,3611,3611,3621.4341,4651,5121,4401,4221,4191,4211,4091,3931,5401,6001,6801,7201,7422,0442,051
534560571564567639657691607607607607607607765824
900943976
1,2551,281
767782790797795795808821833815812814802786783784700777766789770
Production Productivity
('000 tonnes) (Kg Yield Per Hectare)
Total SmallholdingsEstates
410656708681704614592582595647634646672707719746726765804917973
234290299275322281245235244290278272276293299311281299319409442
176366409406382333347347351357356374396414420435445466485508531
Total SmallholdingsEstates
315489520500517428404385413455447455477508464464432445462449474
43851852448856844037334040247845844845s483391377312317327326345
229468518509481419429423421438438459494527536555571600633644690
39
Table 1 (continued)
Planted Hectareage
Year ('000 Hectares)
Total SmallholdingsEstates
196719681969197019711972197319741975197619771978197919801981198219831984198519861987198819891990199119921993
2,0452,0222,0232,0192,0162,0001,9911,9891,9921,9981,9991,9961,9542,0052,0071,9921,9741,9671,9491,9111,8811,8661,8491,8371,8191,8011,787
1,3001,3071,3271,3421,3571,3621,3791,3921,4081,4251,4411,4551,4281,4941,5091,5101,4961,5121,5201,5111,5001,4951,4881,4881,4851,4781,465
745715696
677659638612597584573558541526511498482478455429400381371361349334323322
Production Productivity
('000 tonnes) (Kg Yield Per Hectare)
Total SmallholdingsEstates
9911,1001,2681,2691,3191,3041,5431,5251,4591,6131,5881,5831,5701,5301,5101,4941,5641,5311,4701,5391,5821,6601,4191,2921,2531,2201,200
448518656638647634858856867955954958958938932932
1,0161,013
9651,0411,0841,186
981892886870864
543582612631672670685669592658634625612592578562548518505498498474438400367350336
Total SmallholdingsEstates
485544627629654652775767732808794793803763
7,526750792778754805833890767703689677672
345396494475477465622615616670662658671628618617679669635689718793659599597589590
729814879932
1.0201,0501,1191,1211,0141,1481,1361,155T1631,1591,1611,1661,1461,1381,1771,2451,2841,2781,2131,1461,0991,0841,043
Note: - A smallholding is in general defined as lands, contiguous or noncontiguousaggregating less than 40.47 hectares (100 acres) in area, planted with the crop oron which the planting of the crop is permitted and is under a single legal ownership.However, land development schemes (RISDA, FELDA, FELCRA and others) areincluded as smallholders slthough some land schemes may individually be morethan 40.47 hectares (100 acres) in area.
40
Data for 1946-1986 were adapted from original data provided by the Departmentof Statistics, 1988.
Data for 1987-1993 were adapted from data provided by the Department ofStatistics, 1993.
- Data for 1964 only refer to Peninsular Malaysia.
Data for productivity were standardised by planted hectareage and not tappedhectareage becauce data of tapped hectareage for smal! holdings were not available. If productivity is weighted by consid ering the latter measurement, rubberproductivity will be higher.
e is estimation only.
The planted hectareage, production and productivity of rubber aredepicted in Figures 1, 2, 3 and 4.
Planted hectareage and production of the smallholdings increasedconsistently since 1946 attributed by replanting, new planting and landdevelopment schemes. This development was concomitant to the 1950'sand 1960's emphasis of the Malaysian agricultural policies on increasingproduction rather than productivity (Zulkifli, 1988),
Rubber replanting scheme was implemented by the Rubber IndustryReplanting Board RIRB; established in 1952), whereas land developmentwas implemented by Federal Land Development Authority (FELDA;established in 1956).
Since its establishment, RIRB had implemented five replantingschemes from Scheme I through V. However, until 1972, only 600thousand hectares of farms were replanted with high-yielding clones(World Bank, 1989). This small proportion of replanting contributed tolower productivity for the period 1946 to 1972. The productivity rangedfrom a meagre 312 kilograms per hectare to a hefty 568 kilograms,averaging 424.4 kilograms yearly per hectare during the period (calculatedfrom Table 1). Lower productivity was also due to slow rehabilitation afterSecond World War (Department of Statistics, 1988).
The intervention to increase productivity was seriously consideredwith the introduction of the New Economic Policy (NEP) in 1970 toincrease rural income and rectify equity problems in agricultural sector.Subsequently the Rubber Industry Smallholder Development Authority(RISDA) was established in 1972 to replace RIRB. Through this agency,
41
programme measures to increase productivity such as replanting andincentive schemes were enhanced and intensified since 1973.4
The policy and stimulated by the favourable price of rubber,5 bothproduction and productivity of smallholdings increased. This positiveperformance was contributed by an increase of 4.9 percent (increased from1,342 thousand hectares in 1970 to 1,408 thousand hectares in 1975) in theplanted hectareage and production of FELDA schemes totaling 53,900metric tonnes in 1975 (Malaysia, 1976). Consequently, productivityincreased from 475 kilograms in 1970 to 670 kilograms in 1976 (Table 1and Figure 1). Consistent increase in the planted hectareage of smallhold-ings (from 1,425 thousand hectares in 1976 to 1,510 thousand hectares in1982), whereas at the same time production decreased from 955 thousandmetric tonnes to 932 thousand tonnes led to deterioration in the productiv-ity by 7.9 percent (Table 1 and Figure 1). The decline in the price alsocontributed to this negative development. Price for RSSI declined fromRM279.12 in 1979 to RM2O1.13 per kilogram in 1982.6
Commensurate to the introduction of the National Agricultural Policy(NAP), the smallholdings productivity appeared to recover in the middleof 1980's.7 The policy, supported by the highest price achievementespecially in 1988 (RSSI price was RM309.99 per kilogram) pushed theproductivity to the highest level, i.e. 793 kilograms in the year (Table 1).The highest price achieved stimulated the operators using fertiliser andlatex stimulant particularly for ageing rubber tree.
Smallholdings production has been higher than estates especiallysince 1973 (Table 1 and Figure 2). Its productivity was however lower thanboth estates and national productivity since 1957 (Table 1, Figure 3). Thisperformance does not deny the fact that some of the better managedsmallholdings, particularly those in the FELDA and FELCRA (FederalLand Consolidation and Rehabilitation Authority schemes have recorded
4. According to the World Bank (1989), there exists between 17,500 and 40,000 hectares of farmsreplanted presently per annum depending on rubber price in the world market. The Incentive Schemesunder R1SDA included chemical and fertiliser, cover crops, latex stimulant, rainshield and bulkprocessing centers. Government allocations on Ihese incentives totalled RM93.4 million under theFifth Malaysia Plan (i986-1990) and RM6O.6 million under the Sixth Malaysia Plan (1991-1995)benefitling 140,000 smallholders.
.1. For example, price of RSSI was RM136.69 per kilogram in 1975,
6,Recession which began in 1979 and continued in the early 1980's as a result of Second Oil Crisis hasdepressed world demand for rubber and hence, price.
42
comparable yields with those of the estates, traditional smallholders,particularly those who operate small economic holdings, are obviouslyresponsible for lower productivity the macro aggregate level (Mokhtar,1991).
The smallholding operators of 2 hectares and below always resist"replanting their holdings with new high yielding clones on account of thelong gestation period of 6-7 years. As a result, despite conceited effort andincreased availability of replanting grants as well as the promotion of cashcropping opportunities, a large number of smallholders have yet toparticipate in RISD A's replanting schemes. RISD A's smallholders censusin 1977 found that only 51.2 percent out of 490,460 smallholders hadreplanted their farms inpeninsular Malaysia. Out of 239,227 smallholderswho had not replanted 80 percent of the very small ones were Bumiputeraowned. Although the participation rate has increased overall since thecensus, it is doubtful if the smaller smallholdings have registered asubtantial change in the rate of replanting. In fact, the probability that asignificant number of these smaller smallholdings have been left idle, isreasonably high. The structural characteristics of the rubber smallholdingssubsector have slowed down the rate of adoption of new technologieswhich is essentially biochemical in nature involving genetically improvedfertilizer responsive clones" (Mokhtar, 1991 : 33).
Within the traditional small holding itself, productivity of smallerfarms were found to be higher than the larger ones. The productivity was1,352 kilograms per hectare for farms less than 2 nectar but was only 1,211kilograms for farms 2 hectares and above. The details about rubberproductivity distribution by land holdings is shown table 2.
The performance is applicable because households with smallerholdings may have cheap and abundant labour and purchased or subsidedinputs per hectare and exhibit higher productivity (Chinn, 1979; carter,1984). This fact is strongly applicable in the Malaysian case. Under theRisda's subsidy schemes, fertiliser is only supplied to rubber smallholdingoperators with farm holdings less than four hectares. This subsidy isprovided once every three years and immediately supplied with no chargeafter the operators receive last replanting payment (Risda 1987) The latestdevelopment also shows that Malaysian has faced the storage of labourespecially in agriculturally sector because of rural-urban migration. Largefarms were most affected by this trend.
7. NAP was introduced in 1984, among others to stimulate agricultural production by increasingproductivity through intensive and non extensive development programmes.
43
In contrast, the estates productivity was higher because of theirefficient management and application of modern inputs (Zulkifli 1988,) Itwas also attributed by consistent reducation in planted hectareage underrubber since the midlle 1950 and especially since early 1970(Table 1 andfigure 4). This performance prevailed because the estates have shiftedconcentration from rubber the other crops especially oil palm and cocoa(Deparment of Statistics, 1989, Jomo, 1990).
Table 2 : Rubber Productivity by Various Farm Size
Farm sizeCategories(hectares)
below 1 .00
1.00- 1.99
2.00-2.99
Total output ofRubber (kg/year)
(kg)
58,004
497,787
444,490
Total farm(hectares)
43.34
364.61
352.35
OutputHectare
1,338.35
1,365.26
1,261.50
N
62
262
148
3.00-3.99 55,575
4.00 and above 73,800
43.35
67.83
1,282.00
1,088.01
13
15
Source; Based on the survey data (1993)Note - Rubber outputs include sheet and/or scrap.
Productivity is measured by dividing the total output and thetola! tapped hectareage of farms.
N. is ihe simple size.liy the end of !9SO's productivity of both smallholdings and estates
scirledlo decline. Smallholding productivity decreased significantly from793 kilograms per hectare in 1988 lo 590 in 1993. Estates productivity alsofollowed Ihe same trend (Table I and figure 3). This trend is a result of theunfavourable prices of rubber. The price of RSSI declined from RM309.99p e r k i l o g r a m i n l9N8toRM2IS .92 in 1992(L)eparlmentofStatistics 1993)The decline in price led lo operators abandoned iheir farms and discour-aged I hem from apply ing discussed earlier was labour shortage (Malaysia,
44
1993). Employment in rubber sector declined from 152,218 in 1980 to87,535 in 1990 (PORLA,I991)
IV. FACTOR INPUTS ALLOCATION
This section in concerned with the structural relationship of land,fertiliser, labour and other miscellaneous inputs with smallholder rubberproduction. This structural relationship is fruitful to analyse factor inputsallocation in rubber smallholdings sector.
Characteristics of the population as estimated by sample are presentedin Table 3. In the studied area, the mean of land under rubber was 1.98hectares per smallholder. The yearly means of fertiliser, labour and othermiscellaneaous inputs per smallholder were inputs and other omittedfactors, the smallholders observed a mean rubber production of 4,535.97kilogram per year.
The estimated Cobb-Douglas production function showing structuralrelationship between the studied explanatory variables and rubber produc-tion is presented in Table 4. The sum of coefficients of the output responsemodel was 1,036 for overall rubber smallholder samples. Nevertheless, theresults were mixed for different farm size categories. For the first (0.01-1.99 hectares) and the second (2.00 hectares and above) farm size catego-ries, the value were 1.035, respectively. Thus, the results show thatconstant returns to scale as usually prevailed in agricultural sector (Mokthar,1979) Barnum and Squire, 1975 Anuar 1987 Mohd Noor and Shaaban,1989) is also seen in this study. It means that if the smallholders doubletheir inputs (with technology being assumed as constant) they wouldexpect to double their ouputs (Heady and Dillon, 1961).
45
Table 3 : Mean, Mode, And Median of Variables Used
Variable Mean Mode Median
Land (ha)
Fertiliser(kg)
Labour (m-hour)
Ith. Inputs (RM)
Production (kg)
1.98
201.59
2,424.68
226.91
4,535.97
2.43
400.00
825.00
106.00
1,200.00
1.62
325.00
1,726.00
166.00
2,160.00
Source : Base on survey data (1993)
Note : Only 352 (70.4%) smallholder households used fertiliseron their rubber farms.
Measured in this study. It was instead included under miscellaneousinputs. Tree corps is excluded from the model because this factor wouldnot explain rubber output variability which will be discussed later.
Empirically, the model exhibits strength of the relationship betweenexisting explanatory and dependent variable. As shown table 4, theexplanatory power of the model (R" i.e. the coefficient of multipledetermination) for overall rubber smallholder samples was-0.95 to meanthat explanatory variables (land, fertiliser, labour and other miscellaneousinputs) explain at 95 percent of the variation in rubber production. In thefirst and second farm size categories, the model explains at 91 percent and94 percent respectively. This means that other omitted variables includingtree crops age could only improve R" between five and nine percent in thesector. Apparently, tree crops age would not much improve the model.Probably, rubber production function is slightly different from other treecrops. Age of rubber tree sometimes indefinitely correlates with rubberoutput. If latex stimulant is applied, production would increase irrespec-tive of tree age. Therefore, if this factor is included into the model, it willnot explain the variabality in rubber production accurately. Detailed
46
studies and discussions about this exception should be extended in otherstudies. In this paper, discussions was only confined the critical explana-tory variables which were already highly significant at various facets.
The estimated model is strongly acceptable since statistic was highlysignificant to indicate that at least one of the regression coefficients isdifferent from zero. In this case, all the explanatory variables (land,fertiliser, labour and other miscellaneous inputs) contribute to thevariabilities in total production of each smallholder rubber farm.
In addition, this model is valid through hypothesies which was mostlytested at 5 percent level of significance. All but one of the explanatoryvariables were statisticaly signifance at the 5 percent probability level, thisconfirming that these variables contributed to inputs of land, fertiliser,labour and other miscellaneous input influenced output of rubber.
The production function as shown in the table produced mixed resultsbased on various farm size categories. Since this is a Cobb-Douglasproduction function, the data were transformed into logarithmic form.Hence, the variable coefficients also indicate also indicate the outputsupply elasticities.
The output supply elasticities of both land and fertiliser rubbersmallholdings (pooled samples) were 0.37. This means that a one percentincrease in both land and fertiliser supplies to the smallholders wouldrespectively cause in increase in rubber production by 0.37 percent. Thisshows that land and fertiliser are equally important in the sector produc-tion. Labour and other miscellaneous inputs attributed to only 0.15 and0.14 percent in rubber output variabilities, respectively.
In the first farm size category (0.01 - 1.99 hectares), land was moreimportant than fertiliser in affecting the output. The output supply elasticitiesof land and fertiliser were respectively 0.40 and 0.24 to mean that onepercent increase in land and fertiliser supplies to the smallholders wouldcause an increase in rubber production by 0.40 and 0.24 percent each. Theless important factors were labour and other miscellaneous inputs becausetheir coefficients were both about 0.19.
However, for the second farm size category (2.00 hectares and above)fertiliser was more significant than any other inputs in influencing theoutput of rubber. The coeficient for land was not statistically significant at
47
5 percent probabilitiy level. Land coefficient was 0.30 compared with 0.50for fertiliser. This means that fertiliser provided higher variability inrubber output for this farm. The finding clearly indicate that fertiliser wasnot an important input as land in upgrading rubber in the smaller comparedto the larger farms.
CONCLUSION.
The latest development shows that the efforts to increase the small-holdings productivity should be enchanced and intensified. Plantedhectarage of the smallholdings under rubber seems to decline consist-ently . This trend prevails lately because organised smallholdings (FELD A,FELCRA and other development schemes) replanting of rubber with oilpalm, by 1987, they accounted for about half of the total hectarage underoil palm cultivation. (Mokhtar, 1990)
The government's commitment to increase productivity since inde-pendence has appreared to be fruitful. The smallholding productivityincreased gradually averaging to 444.5, 363.0, 593.1, 670.5 and 594kilograms per hectare in 1950's, 1960's, 1970's, 1980's, and 1990-1993,respectively.
Although, the productivity was higher especially in the 1980's andearly 1990' s compared to the 1960' s and 1970' s, it is still far from reachingthe levels by estates. It also seems to have reached saturated point.
The latest development alerts the policy-makers to take more aggresi veefforts in increasing productivity to reach estates or at least nationalproductivity levels.
The lower productivity achieved in the smallholdings sector is notonly because of input, management and structural factors but is also dueto misallocation of resource particularly by RISDA. In the economic pointof view, the RISDA's fertiliser subsidy scheme must be revised accordingto present needs. It should particularly be directed towards smallholders inthe second farm size category and not the first. In other words, to increasethe smallholdings productivity by allocating fertiliser,the second farm sizecategory is the most appropriate targeted group.
In practice,there was some misallocation in the scheme. As
48
defmed,fertilisers are supplied to rubber smallholders with farm less than4 hectares. Therefore, all smallholders in the first category are eligible forthe scheme. Nonetheless,only a portion of the smallholders in the secondfarms (who have forms over 2 hectares but less than 4 hectares) are eligiblefor the scheme.
To rectify this misaUocation and stimulate rubber smallholdingsproductivity, fertiliser should equally be distributed for all smallholdersinstead of presently practised. It is realised that to include all smallholdersin a scheme would be burdening the government. This however can beovercome if free fertiliser scheme as currently held can be replaced withfertiliser price support as in the paddy sector.
In fact, the fertiliser scheme could not solely help to increase thetraditional smallholdings productivity. Land redistribution must also beimplemented through land reform, active land market or land develop-ment scheme.
Land reform could significantly improve the productivity as provenby the previous countries which implemented it (Hung, 1974). Given theMalaysian environment,this policy is impossible to materialise(Kashem, 1988: Jomo, 1990). The best alternatives are only land redistribu-tion through active land market and land development scheme.
Land distribution would help smaller operators to have larger farmsand at the same time the fertiliser commences to be effective. Thisalternative, however, could not be implemented drastically because suit-able and potential land is limited and cost of developing new land hasincreased substantially (Malaysia,1993).
Given the constraints, intensive and extensive development should beseriously considered as additional remedies to increase productivity.Application of modern inputs, improved farming technologies and prac-tices as well as improved post-production activities supplemented byadequate relevant production incentives, support services and facilities asbeing planned and implemented would help augment rubber productivityand hence production.
The smallholdings productivity would increase further if smallhold-ings management could be extended to reach estates. On the contrary, untilrecently,smallholdings management was still not as efficient as estates
49
causing its productivity far below its rival.In 1993, the smallholdingsproductivity was only 590 kilograms per hectare compared with 1,043kilograms for estates.
The suggested options are not new because they were already imple-mented through the prevailing agricultural development policies andstrategies,but are still insufficient and inadequate. In the efforts to increasethe productivity, policy implementation would require well co-ordinatedplanning and approach combining tasks at all levels from the operators toimplementors and policy decision makers.
REFERENCES
Anuar,M. A. 1987. Distributive effects of the paddy subsidy scheme in PeninsularMalaysia, Ph.D. disssertation,University of Malaysia,Kuala Lumpur.
Barnum,H.N. and Squire,L.,1975. Technology and relative economic efficiency,employment and Rural Development, 34 (Washinton D.C.)
1976. Technology and relative economic efficiency, unpublished paper,WorldBank,Washington D.C.
Berry A.R. and Cline W.R.,1979. Agrarian Structure and Productivity in Deve-loping Countries (Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press).
Carter ,M.r.,l 984. Identification of the inverse relationship between farm size andproductivity: An empirical analysis of peasant agricultural Production,Oxford Economic Papers,36(l);131-145.
Chinn, Dennis,L.,1979. Rural poverty and structure of farm household incomein developing countries: Evidence from Taiwan,Economic Developmentand Cultural Change, 27(2):283-301.
Department of Statistics, 1989. Agricultural Statistics-Time Series {KualaLumpur:Department of Statistics).
Department of Statistics,1993. Annual Statistical Book (Kuala Lumpur: Depart-ment of Statistics.
Domar, E.D.,162. On total productivity and all that. The Journal of Political Eco-nomy ,70:597-608.
Heady,E.O.and Dillon,J.L.,1961. Agricultural Production Functions (Ludhiana:Kalyam Publishers).
50
Hung-Chao tai,1974. Land Reform and Politics (U.S.A. University of CaliforniaPress Ltd).
Jomo,K.S.,1990. Growth and Structural Change in the Malaysia Economy(Hong Kong:The Macmillan Press Ltd).
Rugayah Mohamed, 1991. Comparative Performance of Public and PrivateEnterprises in Malaysia, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Developmentand Project Planning Centre, University of Bradford, U.K.
Kashem,M.A.,1988. Land Reform in Bangladesli,Land Reform:Land Settlementand Cooperatives, 1/2:63-68.
Kravis,I.B.,1976. A survey of international comparisons of Product! vity.TheEconomic Joumal,86:l-44.
51
Nama :
Tarikh Lahir :
Pendidikan :
Pengalaman :
Jawatan Sekarang :
BiodataBurhanuddin Saidin
3 November, 1960
B. Sc. (Pertanian)Universiti Pertanian Malaysia
Pegawai Latihan dan Penyiasatan di NPC(1984-1991)
Pegawai Perunding Ksnsn di NPC(1991 hingga sekarang)
52
THE STATUS OF THE FORESTRY ANDTIMBER SECTOR IN MALAYSIA
By: Burhanuddin Saidin(NPC)
INTRODUCTION
The forestry and timber sector plays an important role and contributessignificantly to the Malaysian socio-economic development, as reflectedin its export earnings and employment. Ranging from logging to furniture-making, this sector generated a revenue of M$8.9 billion in 1990 ascompared to only $4.3 billion in 1985. Within the primary commoditysector, it ranked second in export earnings after petroleum and petroleumproducts, and far exceeded the earnings from the other non-oil fuelcommodities such as rubber and palm oil. The sector accounted for about12.0% of the Gross Domestic Product, and created employment opportu-nities to some 150,500 or about 2.6% of the country's total employment.
CURRENT STATUS OF FORESTRY RESOURCESAND UTILISATION
Forestry Resources
The abundance of natural hardwood forest resources has made Malay-sia, which consists of 3 regions namely Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah andSarawak, the world's leading exporter of tropical timber in the form oflogs, sawntimber as well as major exporter of tropical plywood andhardwood moulding. Out of the 32.9 million hectares of land available inMalaysia in 1990, about 56.3% or 18.5 million hectares were underforestation (Figure 1) with 5.51 million hectares in Peninsular Malaysia,4.44 million hectares in Sabah and 8.45 million hectares in Sarawak. Outof the 18.5 million hectares of forestation, 15.8 million hectares weredipterocorp forest, while the remaining 2.1 million hectares and 0.6million hectares were freshwater swamp and mangrove forests respec-tively (Figure 2). The dicterocarp forests which represented 85.4% of thetotal forestation supply a variety of forest besides timber. Meanwhile, the
Paper presented at the multi Country Study Mission on Wood Production & Marketing, DiamondHotel, Japan, June 16-26, 1992.
53
mangrove forests are also economically important in producing poles,firewood and charcoal, besides playing an important role in the protectionand conservation of the coastal ecosystem for fishery and agricultureactivities. The peat-swamp forests also yield some species of high qualitytimber.
In 1991, the total area under natural and plantation forest in Malaysiais estimated to decline by 0.3% to 19.3 million hectares. Under the re-afforestation programme in 1991, it is estimated that 157,240 hectares offorest land will be replanted.
Malaysia is committed to achieving sustainable forest management ofits forest resources on a sustained yield basis. Towards this end, measureshave been and are continually undertaken to conserve forest resourcesincluding setting aside 1.39 million hectares of land for national wildlifesanctuaries and another 12.74 million hectares as Permanent Forest Estate(PFE).
In Peninsular Malaysia, the PFE covers 4.75 miliion hectares, inSabah, 3.35 million hectares and in Sarawak, 4.64 million hectares. ThePFE comprises both productive and protective forests as shown in Table 1.
Table 1:Malaysia - Permanent Forest Estate (PFE)
Units : Million hectares
PFEi. Productive
Forestsii. Protective
Forests
PeninsularMalaysia
4.752.85
1.90
Sabah
3.353.00
0.35
Sarawak
4.643.24
1.40
WholeMalaysia
12.749.09
3.65
Source: Forestry Department, Malaysia
Deforestation in Malaysia
Deforestation can be defined as the clear felling of a large forest areafor conversion to other uses, usually agriculture. However, in Malaysia,deforestation usually means the conversion of natural forests into agricul-
54
Fig. 1 : Malaysia - Forested andNon-Forested Land, 1990
Forested Area 18.5
Non-Forested Area 14.4
(Unit in million hectares)
Fig. 2 : Malaysia - Major Forest Type1990
Dipterocarp 15.8
Peat Swamp 0.6
Mangrove 2.1
(Unit in million hectares)
55
tural plantations of rubber trees and oil palms. Shifting cultivation, as oneof the causes of deforestation, is quite wide-spread in Sarawak and Sabah.It is estimated that less than 50,000 hectares are cultivated every year bythis form of agriculture.
However, the extent of deforestation attributed to by shifting cultiva-tion has been effectively reduced by the government through resettlementprogrammes.
Table 2:Malaysia: Main Causes of Deforestation
Units = '000 hectares
Causes
1.
2.
3.
Shifting cultivation
Government Programmesi. Resettlement schemesii. Others (agriculture conversion)
Others (agriculture conversionby joint- venture/private sector)
Total
Annual Average Area(1981-1985)
50
41834969
11
479
Conversion of forest land for agricultural purposes started on a large scale
under the First Malaysia Plan (1966 - 1970). During the First MalaysiaPlan a total of 200,000 hectares were converted, mostly into rubberplantations (Figure 3 ) . About 1,280,000 hectares were subsequentlycoverted during the following 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Malaysia Plan. However,during the 5th Malaysia Plan the total area has been reduced to slightly lessthan 300,000 hectares.
Fig. 3: Malaysia - Deforestation forAgriculture Development
600 i
SOO
4OO
300-
200
100
1966-70 1971-75 1976-80 1981-85 19 86-BOPeriod
56
The conversion of forest land for the above mentioned purposes hasbeen undertaken through environmentally sound land use practices andcarried out systematically under a series of 5-year development pro-grammes. Most of the cleared forests have been replaced by higher valuetree crops such as rubber, oil palm, cocoa and other products for export. Inspite of the forest conversion and land development programmes, asubstantial part of the country (56.3%) is still under forestation. Moreover,by 1995, large-scale deforestation for conversion to agriculture willprobably cease in Peninsular Malaysia, partly due to a shortage of suitablevirgin/forested land and also partly due to the reduced pressure forresettlements.
Wood Production and Consumption
Malaysia is one of the leading producers of tropical hardwoods in theworld, accounting for about 12% of the total world production of non-coniferous sawlogs. Between 1986 - 1990, production of sawlogs hasgrown by 5.8% annually to41 million cubic metres in 1990(Appendix 1).Sarawak contributed 47.0% of the total production, followed by Peninsu-lar Malaysia (31.9%) and Sabah (21.1%).
Most of the sawlogs produced are consumed by sawmills, plywoodandveneermills. In 1988, total domestic consumption of sawlogs grew by19.8% to 15.5 million cubic metres as compared with 12.9 million cubicmetres in 1987 (Appendix 2). Out of the total sawlogs production of 41million cubic metres in 1990, 20.6 million cubic metres were convertedinto sawntimber while another 7.7 million cubic metres into veneer andplywood. Almost the entire output in Peninsular Malaysia was utilised bydomestic processing compared with 32% each in Sabah and Sarawak.
For sawntimber, its production had increased by 9.9% annuallyduring 1986 - 1990 period to 8.9 million cubic metres in 1990. Thisincrease was due to higher overseas demand with favourable prices and theGovernment policy of encouraging more downstream processing of tim-ber. Out of the total sawntimber production of 8.9 million cubic metres in1990, 41.6% was consumed domestically with increasing demand fromconstruction, moulding, joinery and furniture sectors.
Rubberwood, which is well recognised as an excellent timber forfurniture, panelling and parquet flooring has emerged as an important
57
timber species over the past few years. The low price of rubberwoodmakes it the most convenient substitute for Rumin, the supply of which hasbeen adverselly affected by demand from Indonesia and overseas buyer.Production of rubberwood in Peninsular Malaysia increased rapidly by38.2%, from 898,022 cubic metres in 1988 to 1,240,980 cubic metres in1989.
Timber Trade
The bulk of Malaysia's timber exports is in the form of sawlogs, whichaccount for more than 45% of the export earnings. After experiencing agrowth of 5.4% between 1981 - 1985, export volume of sawlogs grew bya relatively lower rate of 1.3% during the period 1986 -1988, reaching atotal of 20.6 million cubic metres in 1988. The slower growth was partlyin response to the Government's call to reduce logging activities as ameasure to conserve natural forests as well as indirect measures to keepunit value high. During the same period (1986 - 1988), export value ofsawlogs increased strongly by 13.0% to M$4,011.7 million in 1988. Thiswas due to the improvement in unit value which rose by 11.5 % per annumfrom M$ 140.7 per cubic metre in 1985 to M$ 195.0 per cubic metre in1988. The growth in export volume continued into 1989, reaching a totalof 21.1 million cubic metres before declining to 20.4 million cubic metresin 1990 (Figure 4). Due to this, sawlogs export earnings in 1990 registeredonly M$4,041.4 million, 7.2% lower than the amount in 1989 atM$4355.5million (Appendix 3).
Most of the sawlogs were exported by Sarawak and Sabah and thepopular species were MerantiandKapur. Traditional markets for Malay siansawlogs are Japan, Taiwan and the Republic of Korea which collectivelyimported more than 80% of the total export volume in 1990. Out of this,Japan accounted for 51.3% followed by Taiwan (15.4%) and the Republicof Korea (15.3%). Meanwhile, Malaysia's import of sawlogs increasedsignificantly from M$2.8 million in 1989 to M$4.8 million in 1990(Appendix 4). The main exporters to Malaysia are Indonesia, Thailand andUSA.
Malaysia's export of sawntimber has also increased since 1985(Figure 5). In 1990, 5.3 million cubic metres were exported with exportearnings of M$3,071.0 million (Appendix 3). The better performance wasdue to the export bans and restrictions implemented by tropical forest
58
Figure 4 : Malaysia - Production andExport of Sawlogs
1985 19861987 1988YEAR
1989 1990
I PRODUCTION CH EXPORT
FIGURE 5: MALAYSIA - PRODUCTION ANDEXPORT OF SAWNTIMBER
1985 1986 1987 1988
YEAR
19B9 1990
! PRODUCTION CD EXPORT
59
producers, namely Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines, which hadprompted buyers to turn to Malaysia for their raw material supplies. Themajor buyer for Malaysian sawntimbers are Thailand, Singapore and theEEC countries (Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and the United King-dom) . During the year 1990, Thailand was the leading importer accounting23.1% of the total export volume, followed by Singapore (18.0%) and theEEC (17.8%). Contrary, Malaysia's import of sawntimber showed adownward trend in its volume since 1986 i.e. from 252.6 thousand cubicmetres in 1986 to only 51.8 thousand cubic metres in 1990. However, dueto a higher FOB unit value, the import value increased from M$11.7million to M$34.5 million during the same period (Appendix 4). Indone-sia, USA, Philiphines and Thailand were the major exporter of sawn timberto Malaysia in 1990.
Forest Products Marketing System
Currently in Peninsular Malaysia, 95% of all logs produced areconsumed by sawmills and plywood mills and downstream industries. Thelogs are sold directly to the mills or through traders/agents who often actas financiers to the loggers, most of whom are small operators.
Figure 6 ; A Schematic Model ol Sawlogi Marketing
Sawmills
Plywood/Veneer Mi Hi
OlherWood-BatedIndustries
60
Figure 7: A Schematic Model ofSawntimber and Plywood Marketing
Sawmills Plywood/Veneer Mills
Wholesaler
Retailer
Wood ProductsIndustry
Construction
Other Uses
Exporiters &Agents
OverseasMarket
61
In Sabah dan Sarawak, the loggers are big consession owners and theygenerally sell their logs through agents who act on behalf of the principalsin the Republic of Korea, Taiwan, China, and other countries. Sometimesthe log exporters in Sabah and Sarawak sell through a thrid party who actsas their agent to deal with the overseas buyers. Domestic sales aretransacted directly with sawmills and plywood mills (Figure 6)
The primary wood-based industries in Malaysia are export-orientedbut as the mills are generally small almost all sawntimber export arehandled by exporters or agents who buy on behalf of overseas clients. Forthe domestic consumers, the main one being the construction sectorabsorbing 60% of the sawntimber and plywood market, the wholesalersand retailers are important linkages between the mills and the consumerindustries, often assuming the role of stockists, wholesalers and retailers(Figure 7).
WOOD-BASED INDUSTRY
The forestry sector provides an important resource base for the wood-based industry in Malaysia. The wood-based industry has been identifiedunder the Industrial Master Plan (IMP), which was launched in 1986, as thepriority sector in view of its vast potential for contributing to the country' seconomic development. There are four major subsectors hi the wood-based industry, namely, sawmilling, plywood/veneer, moulding/joineryand furniture. Other subsectors include wood packaging, chopsticks,parquet, utensils, pencil and match factories.
The sawmilling industry, which contribute more than 35 per cent ofthe total export earnings from timber and timber products in 1990, is themost important wood-based industry in the country. This is followed byplywood/veneer industry. Moulding and furniture industries all of whichare also growing.
The wood-based industry is characterised by small-scale individu-ally-owned operations which produce are catered mainly for the domesticmarket. Most of these companies are highly labour intensive, with limitedequipment, low technology, poor management skills and low outputvolume.
Over the years, the wood-based industry has recorded tremendous
62
growth. In 1990, it provided employment for more than 88,000 people andthe number of mills in Malaysia has increased to 1,063 for sawmills, 68 forplywood/veneer mills and 120 for moulding mills (Figure 8). There werealso more than 2,000 furniture manufacturers, out of which 150 wereexport-oriented with reasonably large capacities and modern facilities,and the rest included 13 blockboard plants, 12 laminated board plants, 4match factories, 4 particle board plants, 3 woodwool/woodcement boardplant and 2 woodchip.
Fig. 8 : Malaysia-Number of OperatingTimber Processing Mills by Type,
1990
Sawmills Plywood/Veneer Mouldings
jjjjpl Peninsular L I Sabah Sarawak
63
Figure 9 : Labour Productivity InWood-Based Industry, 1985-1989
140MS'000 (<J) P r o d u c t i v i t y Level
1985
MS'000140
1989
(b) P r o d u c t i v i t y Growth
-601985
—— Food Proeaiilno;
-*- Pap«r Product*Ibbaeco ~~*~ Wood-Band
Rubbar Producti ~^~ M!g. Sector
64
Productivity Performance
Labour productivity (measured by added value per employee) inwood-based industry grew at an annual growth rate of 4.6% from M$ 12,100in 1985 toM$15,800in 1989. In 1989, the industry achieved aproductivitygrowth rate of 7.8% after experiencing negative productivity growth (-3.2%) in 1988. The productivity growth rate in 1989 also exceeded theaverage for 1985 -1989 by 3.2% point (Appendix 5).
As shown in Figure 9(a) and Appendix 5, it can be noted that theproductivity level in wood-based industry was lower than that of the otheragro-based industry and manufacturing sector in 1989. Its productivitylevel was 23.9%, 44.3%, 46.7%, 62.6% and 55.8% of the tobacco, foodprocessing, paper products, rubber products and manufacturing sectorproductivity respectively. However, in terms of growth, the wood basedindustry has performed better than the other industries. In 1989, itsproductivity growth (7.8%) exceeded the productivity growth in tobacco(-43.0%), food processing (2.6%) and rubber products (-12.2%) respec-tively (Figure 9(b)). Meanwhile its average annual growth rate (4.6%)during 1985-1989 period was also higherthan the average annual growthrate in tobacco (-11.3%),rubber products (3.6%) and manufacturing (4.1 %)(Appendix 5).
Supply and Demand of Major Wood Products
Plywood
Malaysia's plywood production increased from 0.55 millioncubic metres in 1985 to one million cubic metres in 1989.With the increase in number of ply wood processing mills andthe support of stable export prices, production of plywoodcontinued to grow rapidly by 26.7% to 1.27 million cubicmetres in 1990 (Figure 10 and Appendix 6). Domestic use bythe construction sector amounted to 106,000 cubic metres,while 26,000 cubic metres were consumed by the furnitureindustry.
In 1990, plywood export sales totalling M$863.0 million was19.9% higher than that of 1989. Export volume totalled 1.02million cubic metres, 11.1% higher than in 1989. A large
65
Figure 10 : Malaysia - Production andExport of Plywood
1985 1986 1987 1988YEAR
1989 1990
i PRODUCTION EXPORT
proportion (almost 83%) of the export was from PeninsularMalaysia. The main importers were Singapore, EEC, USAand Hong Kong. These countries accounted for more than72% of the Malaysian exports. Meanwhile, import of ply-wood by Malaysia showed a decreasing trend from 1,036.4thousand cubic metres in 1986 to only 15.7 thousand cubicmetres in 1990 (Appendix 4).
Veneer
Production of veneer in Peninsular Malaysia increased tre-mendously from 16.2 thousand cubic metres in 1985 to 660thousand cubic metres in 1990 (Figure 11). During the sameperiod, export volume of veneer decreased from 0.4 millioncubic metres in 1985 to 0.3 million cubic metres in 1990
66
(Appendix 3). However, due to increased FOB unit value,export earnings of veneer increased from M$65.5 million in1985 to M$202.9 million in 1990. Among the major marketsof Malaysian veneer were Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, theRepublic of Korea, China and the EEC. In 1990, Malaysiaimported 7.8 thousand cubic metres of veneer worth M$7.8million (Appendix 4).
Moulding
Production of wood moulding was on the increase from 1985-1988 and decreased after the following years. It dropped by11.0% to 146 thousand cubic metres in 1990 from 164thousand cubic metres in 1989 (Appendix 6). Following asimilar trend export of moulding dropped by 4.4% to 319thousand cubic metres (M$487.8 million) from 333 thousandcubic metres (M$519.4 million) in 1989 (Appendix 3). Morethan 80% of the total moulding export were from PeninsularMalaysia while the remaining were from Sarawak. Theimporters of Malaysian moulding were Australia, EEC, Ja-pan, USA, Singapore and Canada.
Furniture
Official focus on the development of the furniture sector hadled to an upsurge in the establishment of export-orientedfurniture projects. This in turn had led to a substantialincrease in the export of both rattan and wooden furniturefrom Malaysia from M$27.5 million in 1986 to M$269.7million in 1990 (Figure 12). However, compared to coun-tries, like Taiwan, the Republic of Korea, Hong Kong,Singapore, the Phillipines, Thailand and Indonesia, Malaysiastill lags behind in furniture export. Malaysia is also a marketfor imported furniture. However, import of all types offurniture which totalled M$18.7 million in 1986 had de-creased to M$13.7 million in 1990.
67
Figure 11 : Production of Veneer andMoulding in peninsular Malaysia
700 -f
1985 1986 1997 1988 1989 1990
YEAR
I VENEER CD MOULDING
300
FIGURE 12 : MALAYSIA - EXPORT ANDIMPORT OF F U R N I T U R E '
YEAR
S3 EXPORT EH IMPORT
Inelud*t both uoodvn and talton lurnilor*
68
MARKET ACCESS AND PROMOTION
The accessability of Malaysia's timber and timber products into theexport markets continued to be restricted by tariff and non-tariff barriersin certain major markets such as the EEC, Japan and Australia.
In the EEC market, veneer and sawntimber enjoyed duty-free entrywhile moulding and furniture parts were subject to import tariffs of 3% and5.6% respectively. In the case of plywood, the first 86,000 cubic metresare duty-free but any volume above the quota is subject to a tariff of 10%.
In the Japanese market, Malaysian moulding qualifies for free entryunder the GSP rates, but subject to a GSP ceiling of 18.2 million Yen. Asfor plywood, effective from 1st April 1988, tariff rate, ranging from 10%to 15%are imposed onplywood. In the case of veneer, starting from April1987, the tariff rate was reduced to 5% from the previous rate of 7.5%.
In the Australian market, Malaysian plywood which is subject to ayearly tariff reduction of 2% under the structured reduction measure, iscurrently subject to a new preferential rate of 14% from previous rate of16%. Veneeriscurrentlysubjecttoa5%tariffrate. In the case of mouldingand furniture, the current preferential rates are 7% and 16% respectively.
In view of the relatively high protective tariffs imposed by the majorimporting countries, Malaysia continued to make representation to therespective Governments for further reduction in tariff rates and increase induty-free quotas for Malaysia's timber and timber products. Similarefforts are also made through regular consultations and dialogues held atbilateral and multi-lateral levels.
The Government together with the industry also continue to pursuemarket promotion efforts to boost the export of timber products in bothtraditional and new markets. Such efforts include timber trade andtechnical missions organised by the Ministry of Primary Industries and theMalaysian Timber Industry Board (MTIB) to specific countries, generalmissions by the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) andtimber exhibitions both overseas and locally.
69
MAJOR PROBLEMS
The timber sector faces numerous problems among which are:
Depleting Log Supply
The Malaysian forests are facing timber depletion despite variousmeasures taken to ensure an adequate supply. It is estimated that annuallog production in Peninsular Malaysia may decline from 11.05 millioncubic metres in 1993 to 6.88 million cubic metres in the year 2000(Appendix 7). Fast depleting forest resources and forest conservationefforts by the Government would further reduce log production from analready reducing forested area.
Uneconomic Operation
The industry is saturated with unplanned small scale enterprise,involved mainly in the less capital-intensive primary processing operationsuch as sawmilling, moulding and furniture production. As these labour-intensive factories have low output volumes and poor quality products, theindustry faces survival problems in the competitive domestic market, letalone penetrate the export market.
Unbalanced Development
Structurally, there has been unbalanced distribution of sawmillingand plywood/veneer activities which are concentrated in Peninsular Ma-laysia where there is excess capacity to raw material supply, while theconverse is happening in Sabah and Sarawak which consume only 20% oftheir total log production. (Most of the quality logs are sold overseas).Although Peninsular Malaysia has the industrial base and technology, logsare getting scarcer due to Government forest conservation efforts.
Competition
The industry faces stiff competition from overseas manufacturersboth for the supply of raw materials (sawlogs and sawntimber) and marketfor finished products. In the case of raw materials, local manufacturershave to compete with overseas buyers for quality timber. Furthermore,their finished products face keen competition from the major producers ofother countries. Consequently, it is difficult for Malaysian manufacturersto expand into the world market.
70
Shortage of skilled labour
The shortage appears in the secondary processing sectors .especiallyin the furniture and moulding industries. There is a lack of expertise inareas such as production designing, marketing, management as well asresearch and development.
Low Productivity
Common causes of low productivity in most mills are low usage ofmechanical aids and high labour turnover. Work studies to determine thecauses of bottleneck in production and to increase productivity are oftennon-existent. Mill managers and manufacturers are not well exposed totechnical publications which could assist them in improving productivity.
Inconsistency in Product Quality
Only few manufacturers have introduced adequate procedures forquality control. Products are normally subject to visual inspection basedon past experience but quality control throughout all stages of productionis rarely practised.
Failure to give due recognition to the importance of quality can betraced to a lack of trained personnel. Most of the workers obtained theirskills mainly through years of experience. Without formalised trainingfew can appreciate the importance of maintaining high quality standards.
Low Recovery Rates
The problem of low recovery rates registered by most sectors (be-tween 46% - 56% for sawmills and between 36% - 52% for plywood) isoften caused by inaccurate sawing, low quality of machines, damageincurred during transport and storage, and down grading due to inexact anduneven sizes.
GOVERNMENT POLICIES AND MEASURES
Various policies have been adopted and measures taken by theGovernment to promote the development of the wood-based industry inthe country. Since sawlogs is the key raw material in the industry, serious
71
efforts have been made to guarantee its future supply for domesticprocessing on a sustained basis. This is achieved through better and properforest management practices, and planning and development strategiessupported by research. Silvicultural treatment, enrichment planting andforest plantations have been carried out in order to meet the future timberrequirements of the country.
Furthermore, serious efforts have been made to reduce annual loggingin order to bring it within the limits of sustained yield in line with theNational Forestry Policy. Peninsular Malaysia has already banned theexport of all log species above 40 cm diameter since 1985 in addition to theban on 27 species since 1983. These measures were further intensifiedwith the implementation of an export levy and quota on various species ofsawntimber and veneer effective from September 1, 1990 and March 1,1991. (List of the selected species of sawntimber and veneer is presentedin Appendix 8).
As one of the major components of the Industrial Master Plan (IMP),the development strategies for the growth of the wood-based industries,especially the moulding/joinery and furniture sectors have been outlinedand undertaken. In addition, modernisation and rationalisation of theprimary processing industry has been recommended so as to make it morecompetitive in the world market. Besides that, the Malaysian TimberIndustry Board (MTIB) paves the way for continued growth in the timbersector by encouraging and promoting:
• efficient processing and use of timber;• greater specialised proficiency in the techniques of production;
• greater output of high quality timber products;
• better marketing and export capabilities;• closer working relations between the industry and the Board;
As the timber sector can no longer rely solely on the export of roughsawntimber, the Government is encouraging the industry to diversify itsproducts especially toward added-value and export-oriented manufactur-ing and specialised items by:
• developing opportunities for transfer of technology and foreigninvestment;
72
• improving timber technology and establishing training facilitiesespecially in product design and evaluation;
• discouraging the export of primary and low-value products;
• providing infra-structural facilities for the furniture industry.
In efforts to restructure the industry from manufacturing primarycommodities to manufacturing added value of high quality products,various incentives have been provided by the Government to the industryunder the Industrial Adjustment Programmes. The incentives include :-
a. Industrial Adjustment Allowance (IAA) of up to 100% of theexpenditure on new factory building, plant and machinery andequipment incurred for purposes of restructuring within a period of5 years;
b. Double deduction of operational expenses in the employees relatedto an approved industrial adjustment activity;
c. Double deduction of operational expenses incurred on R&D relatedto an approved industrial adjustment activity;
d. Industrial building allowance for buildings used for training andR&D;
e. Exemption from withholding tax on royalty payment; and
f. Exemption from real property gain tax (RPGT) as a result ofparticipating in an industrial adjustment activity.
Furthermore, the industry also benefits from the various incentiveswhich include Pioneer Status and Investment Tax Allowance (ITA). Theprior of tax relief under pioneer status is five years commencing from theproduction date as determined by the Ministry of Trade and Industry.Furthermore, to encourage expansion and reinvestment, the tax reliefperiod has been extended to ten years for companies that invest anadditional capital outlay of M$25 million or employ 500 full-time Malay sianworkers or meet other requirements. Under the ITA, a company may begranted an allowance of up to a maximum of 100 % in respect of qualifyingcapital expenditure incurred within 5 years from the date of approval of the
73
project. Company granted the Pioneer Status or the ITA is eligible to applyfor the IAA in respect of a manufacturing activity/product other than thepromoted activity/ product for which the Pioneer Status or the ITA hasbeen granted.
In addition to the above-mentioned incentives, companies that exportcomponent products are eligible for Export Allowance under the Promo-tion of In vestment Act, 1986 (PIA). Companies that import raw materialsand components which are used directly for the manufacture of productsto be exported are exempted from import duty.
To further encourage more downstream activities, additional incen-tives were given to the wood-based industry in the 1990 Budget. Themanufacturers of rattan and wood-based furniture and furniture compo-nents are now eligible for an extension of pioneer status for an additionalfive years without having to comply with the criteria on capital andemployment. Besides, companies which export 60 per cent or more oftheir component products will now be eligible for export incentives underthe PIA as long as at least 51 per cent of the equity is owned by Malaysians.
FUTURE PROSPECTS
The 1990' s mark an era of growth potential for the wood-based sector,as various policy measures and programmes have been put in place, toaccelerate growth in the sector. However, the commitment to realize thispotential brings with it challenges, both from within and outside theeconomy.
One of the many challenges that need to be met in the longer term, iskeeping the industry competitive. A recent study indicates that the wood-based industry, particularly secondary processing, has adomestic resourcecost (DRC) of 0.71 (DRC denotes the international competitiveness of theindustry and readings of DRC of less than one indicates that the industryis competitive). However, the competitive position is crucially dependenton the continued availability of domestic timber, at reasonable prices.Hence, the competitiveness of the sector in the future hinges on theeffectiveness of forest resource management in the long term and theability to maintain a sustained yield of forest resources.
74
Other challenges include being able to restructure the primary indus-try to comply with the availability and location of raw materials, to retoolthe present industry, to increase efficiency through improved recovery rateand productivity, as well as to improve product quality and reducewastage. The development of relevant skills necessary to ensure the sounddevelopment of the sector, including management, marketing, designingand research skills, will also be a prerequisite to the further developmentof the sector in the longer term. A total investment of M$7,778 million willbe required, including an additional M$2.7 million for training andM$ 1,100 million for forestry development between 1990 to 2000 in orderto achieve future development in the sector.
The international scene, on the other hand, poses different challenges.Competition is keen, both in acquiring raw materials as well as in sellingfinished products, with the entrance of new players like Indonesia, Thai-land, Papua New Guinea and Brazil in the downstream market. Localmanufacturers have access to cheaper raw materials but the export levymay still not be prohibitive enough to prevent foreign buyers from gettingthe best logs. In addition, the environmental resistance to tropical hardwood products in Europe, is expected to adversely affect exports ofmoulding products from Malaysia. Unilateral policies, aimed at avoidingthe use of tropical hardwoods have already succeeded in influencingconsumers to switch to substitutes. It would appear that concerted andincreased efforts especially on the part of the industry is crucial, if thesechallenges are to be successfully met. Funds channeled from the imposi-tion of export levies to the Timber Industry Development Fund could beused to assist such efforts.
Despite the challenges ahead, market studies have indicated that thefuture demand for tropical wood products remains favourable and Malay-sia is well placed, to expand its production of added-value products. Aseller's market is expected to prevail for sawn tropical hard wood due tothe increasing demand in the Pacific area. Marketing opportunities forplywood remain good as Malaysia's competitive advantage remains in itsreliability and flexibility and the demand for wooden and rattan productsis forecast to remain encouraging. The future prospects of the sector,therefore, hinges on the ability and urgency with which the sector can shiftits focus from primary wood products to processed products, its ability torespond to the rapidly changing export market and the ability of the sectorto carve a niche for itself, in the world markets, in the face of risingenvironmentalism and conservation.
75
Appendix 1
o\
MALAYSIA : PRODUCTION OF SAWLOGS AND SAWNTIMBER, 1980 - 95
Volume in '000 cubic metres
^̂ \̂ YEAR
PRODUCTS^\
SAWLOGS
SAWNTIMBER
1980
27,916
6,238
1985
30,956
5,500
1986
29,869
5,424
1987
36,149
6,222
1988
37,728
6,684
1989
39,709
8,322
1990
41,000
8,900
1995
29,000
9,100
Average AnnualGrowth Rate (%)
1991-85
2.1
-2.9
1985-90
5.8
9.9
1991-95
-6.7
0.4
Source : Fifth Malaysia Plan : 1986 - 1990Sixth Malaysia Plan : 1991 - 1995
Appendix 2
MALAYSIA: CONSUMPTION* OF TIMBER ANDTIMBER PRODUCTS
-o-j
••'Pr«?ci!*f
Logs
Sawntimber
.:,,,̂ ,,:,f...
12,733
3,195
1985 .
1 1 ,205
2,648
1986, :
11,069
2,427
198?
12,946
2,508
; 1988 ' "'
15,5062,732
-V Average ArmSai-":,>- ; ~Growth Rate {%)
1981-85
-2.5-3.7
:'- " ' -'--'''.&
• 1986.̂ 1:
-1.2-8.3
IpiUr*
?:.qy87
17.03.3
wtfft'&J^
19S8
19.88.9
Consumption = Production + Imports - Exports
-4OO
Appendix 3 MALAYSIA : EXPORT OF MAJOR TIMBER PRODUCTS
Volume in '000 cubic metresValue in MS mil l ion
;|YEAR
1980
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
SAWLOGS
Volume
15,192
19,77]
18,995
22,854
20,571
21,100
20,355
Value
2,622.1
2,781.6
2,849.9
4,238.1
4,011.7
4,355.5
4,041.4
SAWNT1MBER
Vbjiirne
3,135
2,740
2,991
3,829
4,102
5,115
5,283
''. :vtiue•: -&*1. •
1,211.3
1,009.5
1,235.9
1,680.2
1,878.4
2,934.5
3,070.9
*PLYWQQD
Volume
434
363
453
718
819
915
1,017
' Value ,
278.7
192.8
282.7
479.6
663.1
719.6
863.0
VENEER
Volume
111
415
405
492
210
248
332
Value
36.5
65.5
77.4
102.9
118.9
146.0
202.9
**MOULD1NG
Volume
153
185
184
267
355
333
319
Value
212.5
228.0
232.3
314.6
410.1
519.4
487.8
GRAND TOTAL'.
Volume
19,025
23,474
23,028
28,160
26,057
27,711
27,506
Viilue^
4,361.1
4,277.4
4,678.2
6,815.4
7,082.3
8,675.1
8,666.0
* Plywood Inclusive of Blockboard and Laminboard (laminated board)**Volume for Peninsular Malaysia only.
Source: Malaysian Timber Industry Board, Malaysia.
-J\o
Appendix 4
MALAYSIA : IMPORT OF TIMBER PRODUCTS, 1986 - 90
Volume in '000 cubic metresValue in MS '000
^̂ .̂ YEAR
PRODUCTS*^^^
SAWLOGS
SAWNTIMBER
PLYWOOD
VENEER
MOULDING
1986
Volume
194,524.4
47.8
1,036.4
3,203.7
42.7
Value
1,629.8
8,914.1
1,893.6
2,534.1
202.6
1987
Volume
169.5
24.0
487.3
1,776.8
43.8
Value
1,363.3
7,498.3
1,608.5
2,205.1
123.6
1988
Volume
77.0
252.6
98.6
982.5
15.2
Value
1,361.3
11,678.6
1.737.8
4,879.3
683.5
1989
Volume
53.6
197.1
33.6
15.2
27.8
Value
2,771.0
24.9
1,397.4
4,204.5
3,831.4
1990
Volume
173.1
51.8
15.7
7.7
7.4
Value
4,797.4
34,519.6
3,551.2
7,786.8
3,157.1
Source : Malaysian Timber Industry Board, Malaysia
Appendix 5: Productivity Performance of Wood-Based Industry versus Agri- Based Industryand Manufacturing Sector, 1985 -1989
ooo
t I N D U S T R Y . . "
5 WOOD-BASED
: PAPER PRODUCTS
RUBBER PRODUCTS
FOOD PROCESSING .
'..TOBACCO
'" MANUFACTURING• SECTOR
1985
12,777(5-6)19,563(7.7)22,461
(1.0)29,453(-14.2)
112,165(22.5)23,831(3.4)
• 198614,176(10.9)22,352(14.3)25,314(12.7)
27,926(-5.2)
124,065(10.61)24,272
(1-9)
t1987 ;
15,148(6.8)24,449(9.4)24,215(-4.34)
27,793(-0.5)
125,601(1.24)24,715(1.8)
Jt' 198814,660(-3.2)
24,898(1.8)28,729(18.6)34,773(25.1)
115,794
(-7-81)25,798(4.4)
;%'r".Jjl|;l989
15,800
(7-8)33,838(35.9)25,225
(-12.2)
35,677(2.6)66,039(-43.0)28,320(9.8)
Avera¥&%inu:il Growth " :
.MliRate(%). - flJ&S - i9&>)
4.6
12.0
3.6
6.0
-11.3
4.1
Note : Figures in brackets refer to an average growth rate (%)Source : Department of Statistics, Malaysia
National Productivity Corporation, Malaysia
Appendix 6
MALAYSIA : PRODUCTION OF WOOD PRODUCTS.1985 - 1990
. Volume in '000 cubic metres
YEAR
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
PLYWOOD
550
635
870
904
1,001
1,269
VENEER/BLOCKBOARD*
162
321
478
589
590
660
MOULDING*
83
94
139
171
164
146
* Refers to Peninsular Malaysia
Source : Department of Statistics, MalaysiaMalay si an Timber Industry Board, Malaysia
81
Appendix 7
PENINSULAR MALAYSIA : ESTIMATED TOTAL ANNUAL LOG SUPPLY
Volume in million cubic metres
:.; YEAR 1 NATURAL^-• •
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
FOREST ,.;";'
8.20
8.20
8.20
7.08
4.80
4.80
4.80
4.80
4.80
4.80
4.80
4.80
4.80
4.80
4.SO
4.80
FOREST
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
0.19
0.20
0.73
0.90
1.21
5.58
1.64
1.64
1.85
; TOTAL' •
/,,-
8.20
8.20
8.20
7.08
4.80
4.80
4.80
4.99
5.00
5.53
5.70
6.01
10.38
6.44
6.44
6.65
'RUBBER '. .' PLAKTATIONS ,.
2.43
2.54
2.85
2.3
2.20
1.46
1.43
0.69
0.91
1.35
1.42
1.35
1.61
1.22
1.30
1.30
; GRAND;!:!TOTALf
10.63
10.74
11.05
49.42
7.00
6.26
6.23
5.68
5.91
6.88
7.12
7.36
11.99
7.66
7.74
7.95
Source: Ministry of Primary Industries, Forestry in Malaysia, 1989
82
Appendix 8
EXPORT LEVY AND QUOTA ON SELECTED SPECIESOF SAWNTIMBER AND VENEER FOR PENINSULAR MALAYSIA
SPECIESWf«»!WKSpMHs;fts»;{WH.' f - .fSKf. "I -iM>»i8K.f
RubberwoodRubbenvood dressed timber(except finger jointed)ChengalDamar MinyakRuminRed Meranti (includingMelantai).Kembang SemangkukNyalohJeluiong SepetirMersawaSesendukYellow and White MerantiRed BalauKempasMerbauMengkulangGeronggangBintangorGerutuDurianKeruingVeneer
Implementation Dales w.e.f.
1.6.1990all sizesall sizes
--
.
-----------------
1.9.1990all sizesall sizes
all sizesstripsstrips
stripsstripsstripsstripsstripsstripsstripsstripsstripsstripsstripsstripsstripsstripsstripsstripsall sizesall species
1.3.1991all sizesall sizes
all sizesall sizesall sizes
all sizesall sizesall sizesall sizesall sizesall sizesall sizesall sizesall sizesall sizesall sizesall sizesall sizesall sizesall sizesall sizesall sizesall species
Levy Rales. (5/cu,m)
12080
120120120
1201201201201206060606060'60606060606060
120
Source : Malaysian Timber Industry Board, Malaysia
<£
83
BiodataNama : Mohammad Yusoff Hj. Sanusi
TarikhLahir : 1960
Pengalaman : Guru (1980 -1983)Tutor di Fakulti Ekonomi dan PentadbiranUniversiti Malaya (1986 - 1987)
Jawatan Sekarang : PensyarahBahagian Pembangunan DesaFakulti Ekonomi dan PentadbiranUniversiti Malaya
84
INDUSTRIALS ASISEKTOR DESA:KE MANA ARAB DAN KEBERKESANAN
STRATEGIPERLAKSANAANNYA
Mohd Yusoff Hj.Sanusi(Universiti Malaya)
Pengenalan
Pembangunan ekonomi negara kini kian menjurus kepada kegiatany ang lebih berorentasikan perindustrian.Petunjuk-petunjuk ekonomi nyatamenunjukkan seolah-olah sektor perindustrian sebagai "enjin" untukmengekal dan meningkatkan pertumbuhan y ang ada sekarang.Transformasistruktur yang berlaku sekarang semakin menampilkan peningkatan sektorini yang dilihat dari segi Keluaran Negara Kasar (KDNK) (Jadual l),telahmengatasi sumbangan sektor pertanian yang dahulunya menjadi tunggakekonomi negara.Dari segi pertumbuhan,sektor ini telah mencapai kadarantara 10-15 peratus dalam tahun 1987-1989 berbanding dengan tahunsebelumnya.Sebaliknya,telah berlaku kemerosotan secara relatif dalamsumbangan sektor pertanian pada tahun-tahun kebelakangan ini (AbdulAziz-1993).Namun begitu.ini tidak bererti bahawa sektor tersebut telahmengalami kemerosotan dalam pembangunannya yang menjejaskanpertumbuhan sektor ini.Prestasi sektor ini masih stabil bila mana kadarpertumbuhan yang dicatitkan dari tiga tahap Rancangan Malaysia LimaTahun terakhir tidak begitu jauh berbeza. 1
Di sebalik pembangunan yang bergerak pesat,sektor pertanian terusdilanda berbagai masalah yang berkait dengan kadar kemiskinan sertaketidakserataan bandar-desa.Misalnya pada tahun 1987 kadar kemiskinandi desa ialah 22.4 peratus berbanding dengan di bandar 8.1 peratus.Dalamtahun 1990 kadar ini berkurang kepada 19.3 peratus di desa dan dijangkamasih lagi berada di paras 16.8 peratus bagi tahun 1995.Dari keadaan inisejumlah 556,400 isi rumah telah dikategorikan sebagai miskin dalamtahun 1985,berbanding dengan 530,300 isi rumah dalam tahun 1990 dandijangka masih terdapat sejumlah 401,200 isi rumah yang masih miskin didesa pada tahun 1995 (Malaysia,1991).Dari segi pendapatanpuratabulanansektor desa ialah RM 853 berbanding dengan RM 1,467 di bandar dalamtahun 1987 (Malaysia 1989).Begitu juga bagi negeri-negeri yangmempunyai kawasan desa yang luas serta sektor pertaniannya yang
85
mantap seperti Kedah, Kelantan, Perils dan Terengganu hanya mencapainisbah pendapatan purata bulanan isi rumah diantara 0.57 hingga 0.69berbanding dengan pendapatan purata bulanan isi rumah Malaysia (Ma-laysia 1991).
JADUAL1
Sumber Pertumbuhan Mengikut Industri Asal StrukturPengeluaran (Mengikut harga tahun 1978)
Sumber pertumbuhan (%) Struktur PengeluaranBahagian kepada KDNK (%)
Sektor Pencapaian MatlamatRRJP1 RRJP2
1970 1980 1990 2000
Pertanian &Perhutanan 1.0 0.5
Perlombongan &Kuari 0.6 0.1
Pembuatan
Pembinaan
Perkhidmatan
2.1 3.3
0.2 0.2
3.0 3.4
Duti import ditolak bayaran perkhid-matan bank -0.2 -0.5
29.0 22.9 18.7 13.4
13.7 10.1 9.7 5.7
13.9 19.6 27.0 37.2
3.8 4.6 3.5 3.5
36.2 40.1 42.3 45.4
3.4 2.7 -1.2 -5.2
KDNK mengikut nilaipembeli 6.7 7.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
SumberRangka Rancangan Jangka Panjang (RRJP) Kedua 1991-2000
Untuk meningkatkan taraf hidup penduduk desa berkenaan agarsejajar dengan wawasan pembangunan ekonomi negara menjelang abadke 21 akan datang.maka pembangunan industri di sektor desa merupakanantara ruang yang perlu diutamakan bagi mencapai matlamat tersebut
86
(Malaysia,1991). Penekanan kepada sektor ini adalah sebagai alternatifkepaada perkembangan pesat sektor bandar yang agak terbatas untukmenampung keperluan ke arah perindustrian sekarang.Misalny akeperluankepada kaw.asan perindustrian yang lebih luas dan lebih selesa tidak dapatdisediakana di kawasan perbandaran pada masa kini kerana kos yangtinggal dan kekurangan tanah.Sektor desa akan menjadi tumpuan kawasanperindustrian yang baru sejajar dengan berbagai kemudahan dan sifatpersekitarannya yang menggalakkan perkembangan industri ke sektordesa itu. Antaranya faktor tenaga kerja yang sedia ada, bahan mentah yangbanyak dan penyaluran infrastruktur yang lebih teratur dengan mud ahboleh didapati di kawasan desa berkenaan.2
Sebaliknya dengan perkembangan pesat sektor pembuatan dariberbagai bentuk industri di bandar-bandar tertentu menyebabkanterbatasnya ruang untuk menyediakan kawasan perindustrian yang baru dikawasan bandar berkenaan.Sebagai alternatif kepada masalah ini makapihak MIDA telah mendapatkan kerjasama dengan berbagai peringkatterutamanyakerjasamadengan berbagai pihaksepertiperbadananekonomiekonomi negeri bagi membuka kawasan baru bagi menempatkan industri-industri yang semakin bertambah di negara ini.
Walaupun pihak MIDA lebih banyak berurusan dengan syarikat-syarikat besar yang diperlukan oleh pengusaha luar negara,namunpenempatan kawasan baru perindustrian tersebut secara tidak langsungtelah memberi insentif dan kesan yang positif kepada pembangunan desayang terletak sekitar kawasan industri tersebut.
Peralihan perindustrian ke sektor desa secara tidak langsung akanmemberi berbagai faedah kepada persekitarannya terutamanya kepadamasyarakat setempat.Peningkatan dari segi peluang pekerjaan akanmembantu ke arah pengurangan kadar pengangguran di kawasan desa.Inibermakna pembangunan tersebut akan meliputi usaha-usaha untukpenyediaan peluang bagi pengusaha-pengusaha sumber desa yang adasekarang oleh kalangan penduduk desa itu sendiri bagi bersaing danberhadapan dengan sektor pembuatan yang lebih moden.Dalam tempohRancangan Malaysia Kelima (1986-1990) program industri desa inimisalnya telah secara aktif menangani masalah yang sedia ada di sektorpertanian,khususnya yang berkaitan dengan kegiatan ekonomi sektor iniyang mana sebahagian besarnya adalah bergantung kepada komoditipertanian (Malaysia 1986).Berikutnya penekanan kepada programperindustrian desa ini lebih nyata lagi dalam Rancangan Malaysia Keenam
87
(1991-1995).Antara usaha yang dilakukan ialah penyusunan institusi-institusi dan menyediakan berbagai insentif bagi keperluan danmemudahkan perlaksanaan program perindustrian desa berke-naan.Kesemua usaha tersebut diharapkan akan memberi lebih banyakpeluang pekerjaan dan peningkatan produktiviti ke atas usaha-usahaekonomi yang sedia ada.
KONSEPINDUSTRIALISASI DESA
Kesan daripada perubahan struktur ekonomi negara yang menekankanaktiviti perindustrian yang secara tidak langsung memberi dorongan kearah kepelbagaian kegiatan ekonomi di sektor desa.Dahulu sektor desayang lebih dikaitkan dengan aktiviti pertanian,telah mula mempelbagaikanaktiviti ekonominya kepada perindustrian. Aktiviti ini dijangka akan dapatmembantu keseimbangan pertumbuhan sektor tersebut dengan sektor-sektor lain dalam era pembangunan ekonomi akan datang.Dalam keadaanini terdapat sedikit kekaburan untuk mendefmasikan industri desaberkenaan.ini kerana aktiviti perindustrian sebelum ini lebih cenderunguntuk dikaitkan dengan kegiatan ekonomi di kawasan bandar.Pembangunanaktiviti perindustrian yang berasaskan kepada estet-estet perindustrian iniadalah sebahagian besarny a terletak di dalam kawasan bandar.ini bermaknaperkaitan antara perindustrian dan sektor desa hanya mungkin melibatkanindustri kecil sahaja.Perkaitan ini mungkin kerana industri kecil tersebutdikategorikan melalui jumlah modal berbayar yang melebihi RM 500,000dan mempunyai pekerja tetep yang kurang dari 50 orang (SaadulBaharin,1988).Sedangkan sebahagian besar industri kecil ini terletak dikawasan bandar di mana pengusahanya adalah orang Cina yangkebanyakannya tinggal di kawasan bandar.Dalam hal ini ternyata sekalitidak tepat untuk menyamakan industri desa dengan industri kecil.
Terdapat juga kecenderungan untuk menyamakan industri kampungdalam mendefmasikan industri desa kerana ia adalah antara aktiviti bukan-pertanian yang utama sebelum ini.Sebaliknya dari segi imperikal ternyatatidak hanya industri kampung sahaja yang terdapat di desa-desa padawaktu kini.Ini bermakna agak sukar untuk merialisasikan konsepperindustrian desa ini.Tambahan pula terdapat kekurangan maklumattentang perkembangan perindustrian yang terdapat di sektor desaberkenaan.
Dari perkembangan yang ada sekarang ternyata bahawa sebahagiandaripada industri-industri berskel kecil dan sederhana serta ada yang
berskala besar telah beroperasi di kawasan desa.Misalnya denganpenyediaan kawasan estet perindustrian yang terletak agak jauh daribandar utama telah mendorong kepada kemasukan berbagai industri kekawasan berkenaan.Sebagai contoh,di Negeri Sembilan,Senawang telahdikenali sebagai kawasan perindustrian yang berhampiran dengan bandarSeremban,tetapi dengan pertambahan permintaan dari dalam dan luarnegeri serta kedudukan tempat yang lebih strategik kini wujudnya satu lagikawasan perindustrian yang baru iaitu Nilai.Kawasan ini rnerupakankawasan yang agak jauh dari bandar utama iaitu Seremban.Secara tidaklangsung kawasan Nilai akan berkembang sejajar dengan keperluan semasakhususnya dari segi penempatan,taman-taman perumahan dan rumahkedai yang akhirnya akan mewujudkan satu pola perbandaran yang baru.
Berdasarkan kepada defmisi yang dinyatakan di dalam RancanganMalaysia Keenam,industri desa adalah termasuk projek perintis industrikampung,projek perintis industri tunjang,projek bantuan,galakanpemasaran dan latihan kemahiran (Malaysia 1991).Terayata di sinikekaburan tentang konsep industri desa ini masih nyata.J ika kita bersetujubahawa pada ketika ini wujudnya estet perindustrian yang sengajaditempatkan di kawasan jauh dari bandar utama sama ada untuk tujuanmengelakkan kesesakan atau untuk membangunkan kawasanberkenaan,maka pada hakikatnya industri tersebut telah pun sedia maklumterletak di kawasan desa.Ini bermakna untuk melihat ruang Ingkup industridesa ini,maka sudah tentu tidak perlu mengambilkira eleman-elemenindustri yang terdapat di kawasa desa ketika ini.Ia termasuklah kegiatanseperti industri kampung atau industri di rumah-nimah,industri kecildansederhana serta industri berskel besar.
Kesimpulan industri desa ini boleh didefmisikan sebagai sebarangbentuk industri yang terdapat di kawasan desa.Ia meliputi meliputi samaada industri yang bersifat skel kecil mahu pun besar.Pengusaha industri inijuga mungkin terdiri dari anak tempatan ataupun dari luar yang berminatmembuka kilangnya di kawasan berkenaan melalui berbagai insentif yangditawarkan oleh kerajaan negeri ataupun pihak Perbadanan KemajuanPerindustrian Malaysia sendiri.
STATEGI PERINDUSTRIAN DESA
Dari segi sejarah ternyata kegiatan industri desa ini telah lamabertapak di kawasan desa di seluruh Malaysia.Walaupun sebahagianbesarnyahanyadiusahakan secarakecil-kecilan namun sumbangan kepada
89
ekonomi tempatan atau negara adalah amat ny ata.Inddustri yang melibatkankegiatan seperti kraftangan,tembikar,anyaman dan sebagainya secaratidak langsung telah dijadikan sebagai sebahagian dari aktiviti ekonomibagi penduduk desa yang mempunyai kemahiran berkenaan.Percubaanawal untuk meningkatkan usaha-usaha ini ialah pada 1950an,dengantertubuhnya Lembaga Kemajuan Perasahaan Luar Bandar (RIDA)padatahun 1951 .Tumpuan ketika itu hany a melibatkan usaha-usaha peneranganbagi memajukan industri desa dari sudut pembesaran program industriberkenaan,memberi galakandan usaha sama melalui khidmatnasihat,pemasaran dan kredit.
Sebahagian dari usaha-usaha untuk meningkatkan perindustrian desaadalah memperkemaskan struktur dan pengurusan kemudaihan awamkepada beberapa bidang yang dikenalpasti.Di antaranya ialah kegiatan-kegiatan yang meliputi perusahaan di rumah dan kraftangan serta bidangusaha bukan-pertanian yang lain.Bidang usaha ini mungkin akan melibatkanberbagai jenis industri sama ada berskel kecil hingga yang berskel besaryang mungkin terlibat dengan berbagai industri seperti aktivitipemerosesan,perniagaan dan jugaperkhidmatan komersial.Berdasarkanini maka beberapa Pusat Pertumbuhan Desa (Rural Growth Centre)telahpun dikenalpasti untuk melicinkan perlaksanaan program berkenaan.
Program pembangunan industri turut melibatkan usaha untukmembantu pengusaha-pengusaha yang sedia ada di dalam aktiviti-aktivitiseperti pemasaran,infrastruktur dan kewangan.Secara tidak langsung jugaia dapat menyusun semula industri-industri di desa untuk membolehkanmereka menikmati perkhidmatan yang lebih baik khususnya kewangandan kredit.Secara umum,program perindustrian desa ini menghala kepadapembaikan sistem pemasaran,penawaran bahan mentah,peningkatanproduktiviti,penyerapan teknologi,memperbaiki bentuk keiuaran dankemampuan pengurusan oleh semua industr yang sedia ada dan yang akandatang.
Perlaksanaan perindustrian desa ini telah dimulakan sebagai satupendekatan strategi pembangunan desa yang dipersepadukan.Umumnyaia dapat dilihat sebagai satu program pembangunan yang akan membentukdan mengubah masyarakat desa daripada masyarakat tani kepadamasyarakat perindustrian.Pada masa yang sama ia masih mengekalkanidentiti desa yang sedia ada khususnya dari segi struktur penempatan danpersekitaran.perubahan ini dirasakan perlu bagi mengatasi masalah yangsedia ada di sektor desa tersebut.Keseimbangan pembangunan antara
90
sektor desa dan bandar agak berbeza terutama untuk penyesuaian kepadaabad ke 21 yang lebih mencabar bagi sektor desa.Ini kerana setelah sekianlama sektor ini lebih menumpukan kepada pembangunan pertanian.Walaubagaimanapun pembangunan terhadap pertanian tersebut tidak dapatdielakkan kerana ia merupakan struktur fizikal terawal yang perlu diberiperhatian bagi sesebuah negara dalam era awal pembangu-nannya-Pembangunan ekonomi sesebuah negara yang berlandaskan kepadapertanian perlu melalui beberapa tahap perubahan seperti perubahan pra-syarat,pengembangan pengeluaran pertanian berasaskan teknik-teknikyang menggunakan lebih buruh dan jimat modal dan akhirnya ialah tahapdi mana penggunaan modal secara intensif berbanding dengan buruh(Johnston and Mellor, 1961). Di peringkat awal tahap ketiga tersebut akanberlakunya pengurangan jumlah penduduk di sektor pertanian dalamusaha mengimbangi pembangunan. Di Malay sia.berbagai tahap keniajuanterutamanya dari segi taraf hidup dan kuasa beli penduduk desa sudahmula meningkat.Sebaliknya kadar pertumbuhan penduduk yang sentiasameningkatmenyebabkansektordesaperlumengubahpenumpuankegiatanekonomi kepada bukan-pertanian iaitu perindustrian di sampingmengekalkan petumbuhan sektor pertanian itu sendiri.
Pertumbuhan industri di desa akan mewujudkan alternatif bagi sumberpendapatan dan guna tenaga,terutama dalam keadaan sektor desa yangmen gal ami keadaan pengangguran tidak ketara dan daya pengeluaranyang rendah.ini bererti penduduk desaberkenaan masih boleh meneruskanaktiviti asas mereka yang asal di bidang pertanian,tetapi mereka atausebahagian isi rumah desa boleh bergiat di dalam kegiatan industri yangterdapatdisekelilingmereka-Begitujugakitadapati melalui perkembanganpengurusan pertanian sekarang petani tidak perlu lagi turun ke ladangsepanjang masa.Misalnya bagi pengurusan ladang kelapa sawit petanihanya memerlukan masa beberapa hari sahaja dalam sebulan untukmenguruskan ladang mereka.Begitu juga penoreh-penoreh getah tidakperlu ke ladang setiap hari tetapi hany apelu menorehsekali dalam seminggudengan kaedah penorehan terbaru iaitu suntikan pokok getah.ini bermaknapetani mempunyai banyak masa yang boleh disesuaikan dengan kegialalain yang boleh menambahkan pendapatan isi rumah mereka.
Melalui penglibatan penduduk desa kepada perindustrian ini makasecara tidak langsung tingkat pendapatan dan kuasa beli keluarga merekajuga akan bertambah.ini bermakna usaha-usaha untuk mengurangkankemiskinan akan dapat dilakukan dengan lebih berkesan.Pembaharuandalam aktiviti pembaharuan ini juga diharapkan agar penduduk desa akan
91
menjadi lebih mahir dan mampu mewujudkan berbagai usaha bagimeningkatkanpendapatan.Merekabolehmelibatkandirisebagaipengusahabagi aktiviti mengeluarkan barangan akhir untuk keperluan pengguna.Begitu juga mereka boleh menjadi pembekal barang sepamh siap ataukomponen barang akhir bagi keluaran beberapa industri yang telah kukuh.
Dalam konteks yang lebih luas,perindustrian desa ini adalah untukmembawa sebarang bentuk industri sama ada berskel kecil, sederhana danbesar ke sektor desa.Terutamanya melibatkan aktiviti yang berpotensiuntuk menggunakan berbagai sumber-sumbertempatansertaberintensifkanburuh.Secara tidak langsung program ini akan mewujudkan peluangpekerjaan kepada penduduk desa berkenaan. Pertumbuhan industri desayang lebih teratur akan memudahkan pihak perancang menyediakanberbagai kemudahan prasarana yang tidak hanya akan memberi akanmemberi kemudahan kepada kilang-kilang atau pengusahaterlibat tetapijuga kepada penduduk setempat.Kawasan desa yang dahulunya sepi atauketinggalan mungkin boleh dipulihkan dengan membawa masuk berbagaiindustri yang boleh menarik minat penduduk setempat sama ada dari segipenyertaan sebagai penyumbang tenaga kerja mehupun sebagai pembekalbahan mentah yang diperlukan oleh industri-industri yang terlibat.
Dari kaca mata DEB dan Rancangan Jangkamasa Panjang EkonomiNegara.program perindustrian desa ini secara tidak langsung mampuuntuk membabitkan dan meningkatkan penyertaan masyarakat desakhususnya Bumiputera dalam perindustrian dan perdagangan.Walaupunterdapat alternatif lain bagi masyarakat desa berkecimpung denganperindustrian dan perdagangan, tetapi dengan adanya dasar yang lebihtersusun melalui program ini akan mempercepatkan proses berkenaan.Malahan kerjasama dari berbagai badan atau agensi telibat akandiseragamkan bagi memastikan kesinambungan matlamat DEB tersebutdalam era pembangunan ekonomi negara seterusnya.
FAKTOR PENEMPATAN INDUSTRI KE DESA
Dalam usaha untuk merialisasikan perindustrian sektor desa inipastinya ia akan menghadapi berbagai masalah.Antaranya ia berkisarkepada masalah bagi menempatkan industri-industri berkenaan agarbersesuaian dengan matlamat pembangunan sektor desa tersebut dansejajar dengan dasar pembangunan ekonomi negara. lanya mungkinberdasarkan kepada berbagai faktor vtolakan' dan 'tarikan'. Kedua-duafaktor ini akan lebih kuat mempengaruhi peranan industrialisasi melalui
92
pengukuhan oleh faktor sosial dan ekonomi serta politik yang terdapat dipersekitaran.
Kesukaran pihak pengusaha untuk mendapatkan tenaga kerja yangterbatas jumlahnya di kawasan bandar. Selain dari itu faktor kebersihanalam sekitar juga sering dikaitkan dengan industri yang terlalu bertumpudi sesebuah kawasan. Misalnya hujan asid yang pencemaran sungai bagikawasan Lembah Kelang yang dijangkakan membahayakan hidupan disekitarnya.Begitu jugapermasalahan sepertipenempatan haramdi bandar-bandar,masalah sosial generasi muda dan permasalahan kependudukanyang semakin rumit akibat peningkatan jumlah penduduk di kawasanbandar atau industri tersebut.Bagi mengatasi sebahagian dari permasalahantersebut pihak berkuasa kepadapenempatan industri ini ini telah mengambillangkah untuk mengurangkan tumpuannya di bandar-bandar denganmengalihkan kawasan industri berkenaan ke kawasan yang pem-bangunanny a agakperlahan khususnya di kawasan desa. Akhirnya kawasandesa berkenaan dijangka akan berkembang menjadi kawasan yang seimbangdari segi aktiviti ekonomi dan pembangunan keseluruhan.
Sebaliknya faktor 'tarikan' adalah disebabkan oleh keperluan kepadapembangunan di kawasan desa yang berkenaan. Pembangunan tidakhanya dilihat dari sudut fizikal tetapi juga meliputi keperluan pekerjaandan taraf hidup masyarakat desa. Tambahan pula waktu ini temyata hasilpendapatan dari kegiatan komoditi utama telah pun merosot. la disebabkanoleh tingkat harga komoditi seperti getah dan kelapa sawit yang terlalurendah sehingga menyebabkan terjejas tingkat pendapatan mereka.Tambahan pula dengan beberapa langkah kemajuan di dalam pengurusanaktiviti pertanian membolehkan petani atau penduduk desa mempunyaibanyak masa lapang. Mereka memerlukan pekerjaan sampingan bagimemenuhi masa lapang tersebut bagi meningkatkan pendapatan mereka.
Secara umumnya kita juga dapat menilai bahawa kemasukan sesuatuindustri ke sektor desa adalah didorong oleh beberapa faktor ekonomi,sosial dan politik yang saling bertindakbalas antara satu sama lain. lamungkin akan menjadi faktor penggenap kepada faktor-faktor yang lain.Misalnya di bahagian dari industri desa ini bertumpu disesebuah kawasanakibat pengaruh budaya masyarakat dan kemahiran yang diwarisi turuntemurun atau pengaruh persekitaran yang mewujudkan pasaran permintaan.Antarany a kegiatan seperti membuat batik dan tekstil yang kebanyakannyaterdapat di daerah Kota Bharu, Kelantan, tembaga dan tenunan di daerahKuala Trengganu, rotan dan buluh di kawasan Kuala Pilah, sementaraanyaman boleh diaktakan meliputi kebanyakkan kawasan desa di
93
Semenanjung. Aktiviti anyaman ini dapat dibezakan mengikut bentuk danjenis serta bahan mentah yang digunakan untuk keluaran masing-masing.Dari kajian ke atas industri desa mendapati beberapa kombinasi faktor-faktor tersebut adalah seperti peluang pasaran, jarak dengan tempattinggal, bahan mentah, dan nasihat daripada institusi perkhidmatanperindustrian. Berdasarkan keutamaan menepatkan industri, sebahagianbesar pengusaha industri di desa ini menyatakan faktor yang palingdominan bagi inenernpatkan industri yang dijalankan adalah atas doronganoleh faktor persekitaran (85.6 peratus) berbanding dengan hanya 59.5peratus dari segi kemudahan infrastruktur dan 53.1 peratus dari segipeluang pasaran (Jadual 2)
Jadual 2
Faktor-faktor pemilihan lokasi oleh pengusaha.
Faktor-faktor bilangan peratus
Peluang PasaranTempat sendiriKemudahan InfrastrukturKemudahan bahan mentahNasihat dari institusiLain-lain
25040428131210732
53.185.659.666.122.76.8
Sumber: Chamuri Siwar, Amhamd Md.Zain, dan Abd. Hamid Jaafar. 1990
Dalam usaha mengimbangkan pembangunan desa dan bandar, pihakpemerintah ternyata telah memainkan peranan yang utama dalammemajukan kawasan industri di kawsan desa. Misalnya, KementrianPembangunan Negara dan Luar Bandar, secara langsung telah menyediakanberbagai bentuk bantuan khususny a dalam program-program perbandaranyang telah membentuk peningkatan berbagai infrastruktur dan fasiliti didesa (Malaysia, 1986). la juga telah menyediakan berbagai programlatihan dan kemudahan kursus dalam usaha peningkatan aktiviti-aktivitiperindustrian di sesebuah desa berkenaan. Penyusunan semula kampung-kampung kecil seperti yang dilakukan oleh RISDA dan programperbandaran tersebut telah melahirkan beberapa ciri ke arah perindustriandesa berkenaan. Antaranya:
i. Menyediakan berbagai kemudahan bagi keperluan industri-indus-
94
tri kampung atau pun yang dilakukan oleh pekebun-pekebun kecilsendiri melalui galakan dari agen-agen koperasi mereka.
ii. Pembangunnan kegiatan pertanian yang lebih komersil melaluipenyatuan akti viti-aktivit yang sebelumnya adalah dilakukan secarakecil-kecilan sahaja. Keadaan ini memberi berbagai peluang kepadapekebun-pekebun kecil berkenaan ke arah usaha niaga yangberasaskan bahan keluaran mereka sendiri.
iii. Penyusunan kampung bermakna struktur masyarakat desa lebihtersusun dan ini membolehkan berbagai malumat dan bantuan
disalurkan untuk meningkatkan berbagai aktiviti sampingan bukan-pertanian.
Peningkatan dalam pembangunan desa kini juga dilihat sebagaipembangunan wilayah yang lebih bersepadu. Penibangunan wilayahini secara tidak langsung akan membantu ke arah peningkatan sisteminfrastruktur dan kemudahan awam di kawasan desa yang mendorongkepada aktiviti perindustrian. Antaranya ialah:
i. Pembaikan sistem j alan ray a yang membolehkan perhubungan antarakawasan desa dan bandar lebih baik. Ini memudahkan bekalan inputdi bawa masuk dan membawa output ke kawasan pemasaran denganlebih cepat dan cekap.
ii. Pembangunan wilayah ini telah menggalakkan kepada pening-katan industri asas tani khususnya aktiviti pemerosesan dan lain-lain aktiviti-aktiviti hiliran.
iii. Pembangunan ini juga menyediakan berbagai kemudahan fizikalyang memenuhi keperluan aktiviti-aktiviti industri itu sendiri.Misalnya penyediaan ruang niaga dan rumah-rumah kedai di pusat-pusat pembangunan kawasan tertentu. Keadaan ini akan mendorongkepada aktiviti sampingan dalam memenuhi keperluan penggunadi persekitarannya. Pemusatan ini membolehkan pihak berkuasamemberi berbagai bantuan dan kemudahan asas dengan lebih murahmelalui perancangan yang lebih teratur.
Berdasarkan kepada kemudahan infrastruktur dan lain-lain faktorpersekitaran kita dapat meringkaskan beberapa kawasan tumpuan kepadaperkembangan industri desa ini di Semenanjung Malaysia. Kawasan
95
tersebut dinilai adalah berdasarkan kepada tumpuan pelbagai kegiatanindustri desa yang terdapat di kawasan tersebut (Chamhuri, Ahmad, danAbd. Hamid 1990). Kawasan tersebut ialah:
1. Kelantan - di jajahan Kota Bharu, Pasir Mas, Tumpat, Bachok danPasirPuteh.
2. Trengganu - di kawsan Jerteh, Kuala Besut dan Kuala Trengganu.
3. Perlis - Kaki Bukit, dan Jalan Sultan.
4. Kedah- Pulau Langkawi, Sanglang, Anak Bukit, dan Alor Setar.
5. P. Pinang - Kampung Pertama, Kebun Sireh, dan Kepala Batas.
6. Perak - Lenggong, Kuala Kangsar, dan Sayong.
7. Pahang - Kawasan Persisiran Pantai.
8. N. Sembilan - Jelebu dan Kuala Pilah
9. Selangor - Hulu Langat, Kuala Langat dan Kelang.
10. Johor - Batu pahat dan Muar
11. Melaka - Kota Melaka, Batu Berendam, Jasin dan Alor Gajah.
Dari segi polisi dan dasar pembangunan ekonomi negara programperindustrian desa adalah bersesuaian bagi meningkatkan penyertaanbumiputra kepada ekonomi perniagaan dan perdagangan. Sejakperlaksanaan DEB us ah a-us ah a kearah pembasmian kemiskinan danmenyusun semula masyarakat adalah berkait rapat dengan perancangan didalam aktiviti perdagangan dan perindutrian. Memandangkan sebahagianbesar penduduk bumiputera ini adalah tinggal di kawasan desa (Malaysia,1991) maka secara tidak langsung program ini akan dapat menyalurkanberbagai kemudahan dan keperluan dengan lebih berkesan. Antaranyaialah menggalakkan pembangunan sektor desa adalah dikaitkan denganstrategi perindustrian desa melalui perubahan di dalam teknik pengeluaran,menyediakan perkhidmatan sokongan kepada usaha pertanian, dan bukanpertanian terutamanya dari segi kredit pengembangan pertanian dan
96
pembaikan usaha pemasaran. Permodenan sektor desa adalah dikaitkandengan strategi perindustiian desa melalui usaha masyarakat desa itusendiri kepada aktiviti-aktiviti ekonomi industri desa dan usaha komersialyang lain. Tidak dapat dinafikan bahwa terdapat berbagai agensi yangmemberi khidmat sokongan kepada aktiviti perindustrian ini misalny a daripihak MARA, RISDA dan berbagai jabatan dan Agensi Pembangunanyang lain.
PERKEMBANGANINDUSTRIALASASI DESA
Perkembangan ekonomi Malaysia yang pesat secara tidak langsungtelah mewujudkan satu pola permintaan oleh syarikat besar terhadapkeperluan bahan mentah atau komponen di dalambarang keluaran mereka.Ruang ini perlu direbut untuk meningkatkan dan mengembangkan usahaniaga oleh pengusaha-pengusaha atau syarikat kecil yang sedia ada.Galakan dan insentif oleh pihak kerajaan melalui konsep 'payung' secaralangsung memberi nafas baru kepada industri desa berkenaan. Sejumlahperuntukan yang begitu besar telah pun diperuntukkan di dalam RancanganMalaysia Keenam untuk penyediaan infrastruktur bagi industri berskelkecil dan sederhana yang mana sebelum ini tidak ada peruntukan yangserupa itu secara langsung yang diberi. Begitu juga bagi perindustriansektor desa di mana peruntukannya telah ditingkatkan dari RM162.3 jutabagi tempoh Rancangan Malaysia Keenam (Jadual 3). Ini merupakanpeningkatan sejumlah 110 peratus. Dalam tempoh rancangan ekonomitersebut peruntukan ini akan digunakan untuk latihan-latihan dalam berbagaibidang seperti kraftangan, peningkatan infrastruktur, promosi keluarandesa dan juga bantuan kewangan dan kredit untuk membeli peralatan bagikegunaan induStri di rumah. Pada masa yang sama sokongan kepadapembangunnan RM166 juta bagi memenuhi program keseluruhanperindustrian yang secara tidak langsung akan memberi kesan positifkepada perindustrian desa tersebut. la merupakan satu panduan bagi pelanpembangunnan perindustrian di negara ini untuk tempoh jangka pendek,sederhana dan jangka panjang (Malaysia 1991).
97
Jadual 3
Peruntukan Perbelanjaan Pembangunan Industri 1986-95 (RM Juta)
R.M kelima R.M keenam
Peruntukan Perbelanjaan Peruntukan
Pembangunan Estet 127.7 127.1 291.4Perindustrian
Pembangunan untuk - - 493.1Infrastruktur Industri
Industri Am - 222.1
Industri Kecil & Sederhana - 140.6
Sokongan InfrastrukturTekno. Tinggi - 129.7
Industri Desa 77.4 77.0 162.3
Latihan & KhidmatPerundingan 28.1 27.7 341.7
Pelaburan utk IndustriHerat
Program PembangunanKomersial & Perindustrian 25.0 25.0 235.0
Perlaksanaan Tindakan PlanPembangunan Teknologi Industri. - - 166.0
Jumlah 2,811.8 2,809.9 3,186.8
Sumber: Disesuaikan dari Rancagan Malaysia Keenam, Malaysia 1991,
98
Akibat dari pembangunan sektor pertanian yang sedia ada danperkembangan sektor perindustrian yang begitu pesat dalam tempoh duadekad yang lalu, struktur ekonomi sektor pertanian telah bertukar kepadasatu pola industri pertanian atau perniagaan tani. Perladangan adalahsebahagian daripada industri ini, di mana terdapat beberapa komponenyang utama iaitu industri pemerosesan input yang menghasilkan bijihbenih, baja, bahan-bahan kimia ladang, jentera ladang dan lain-lainkeperluan ladang. Bahagian kedua ialah ladang-ladang yang menggunakaninput berkenaanuntukmengeluarkanhasiltanaman,teniakan dan perikanan.Manakala bahagian ketiga ialah industri hiliran yang berasaskan pertanianyang mengambil alih hasil-hasil dari ladang, mengangkut, memproses danmengilang, membungkus dan me label dan seterusnya mengagihkan kepadapengguna.4 Kini dengan peningkatan permintaan dari berbagai dimensipasaran maka aktiviti hiliran ini menjadi lebih ketara bila mana adanyapenekanan oleh pihak keraj aan dan perbadanan kemajuan perindustrian keatas industri ini melalui pembangunan industri kecil dan sederhana. Olehkerana perkaitannya secara langsung dengan pertanian maka kebanyakanaktiviti hiliran ini telah mengambilalih sebahagian daripada pengisianterhadap perindustrian desa. Walau bagaimanapun sehingga tahun 1984,sebahagian besar penglibatan pengusaha-pengusaha di kawasan desamasih bertumpu ke atas industri kampung yang bukannya aktiviti hilirandari hasil ladang-ladang pertanian seperti kegiatan anyaman (41.7 peratus)dan perusahaan buluh (24.1 peratus) (Malaysia 1984). Tetapi kini denganadanya berbagai dimensi sokongan oleh industri-industri yang kukuh dibandar, perkembangan IKS serta industri kampung telah mempercepatkanlagi pertumbuhan perindustrian desa ini.
Dari segi pembangunan wilayah, pertumbuhan industri desa banyakbergantung kepada taburan penempatan industri. Di Malaysia, taburanindustri dapat dilihat dengan jelas berdasarkan kepada negeri-negeri.Misalnya pembangunan industri ke atas beberapa buah negeri sepertiPerlis, Kedah, Kelantan dan Terengganu agak rendah berbanding dengannegeri lain. Pengusaha terhadap kecenderungan industri ke negeri-negeriini hanya berkisar antara 0.2 hingga 4.4 peratus dari jumlah industri yangtelah diluluskan oleh MIDA (Malaysia, 1986). Begitu juga dari segi modalpenguasaan negeri-negeri ini tidafc melebihi 3.74 peratus daripada jumlahmodal yang dilaburkan iaitu sejumlah RM18,191 juta dalam tempoh 1986-1988 (Malaysia, 1991).
Dari keadaan ini ternyata bahawa semakin rendah taraf pembangunansesebuah negeri berkenaan maka semakin rendah kadar pelaburan
99
perindustrian ke atas negeri tersebut. Keadaan ini juga akan memberikesan langsung kepada pembangunan perindustrian sesebuah desaberkenaan. Misalnyajika kawasan bandar masih mempunyai ruang yangluas bagi penempatan industri bermakna ia akan bersaing dengan sektordesa sendiri untuk menempatkan industri berkenaan.
Walau bagaimanapun dalam Rancangan Malaysia Kelima, PelanInduk Perindustrian (PIP) telah menyesuaikan penempatan ini melaluisistem galakan. Namun perlaksanaan ini tidak begitu menumpukankepada pembangunan industri desa kerana sebahagian besar penempatanindustri masih lagi berasaskan kepada kehendak dan keperluan pasaranoleh syarikat-syarikat pembuatan. Industri-industri yang berasaskaneksport akan digalakkan untuk ditempatkan di kawasan yang menikmatifaedah ekonomi. Manakala industri yang senang bertukar tempat dan yangmengeluarkan barang untuk keperluan tempatan akan digalakkan untukditempatkan di bandar-bandar kecil (Malaysia, 1986). Ini bermakna kesandari PIP ini mungkin akan mengurangkan keberkesanan proses perindustriandesa.
Walau bagaimanapun program perindustrian desa pada tahunberikutnya adalah lebih berkesan apabila Pelan Tindakan PembangunanIndustri Kecil dan Sederhana disediakan. Sejajar dengan berbagai tarikankepada kegiatan perindustrian akibat pertumbuhan ekonomi yang lebihbaik, taburan perindustrian ke kawasan desa mula berubah. Misalnyaselepas tahun 1989, didapati sejumlah 91.8 peratus Industri Kecil danSederhana (IKS) terletak di Semenanjung Malaysia manakala hanya 8.2peratus di Malaysia Timur (Fong, 1989). Dari jumlah ini hanya 28.2peratus IKS tersebut yang terletak di kawasan bandar utama, 31 peratus dibandar-bandar kecil 40.8 peratus daripada IKS ini tertumpu di kawasandesa.
Berdasarkan kepada keadaan ini Rancangan Malaysia Keenam telahmerancang berbagai program yang bertujuan untuk menyediakan peluangterutamany a kepada pengusaha bumiputera di desa untuk bersaing dengansektor pembuatan yang lebih moden. Dalam usaha ini maka PusatPertumbuhan Desa (PPD) ini ditubuhkan bagi memenuhi keperluanpengusaha tempatan (Malaysia, 1991). Pada masa yang sarnainfrastruktursektor ini akan ditingkatkan bagi memudahkan integrasinya terhadapkeluaran yang mempunyai nilai tambah yang tinggi dan mewujudkanpeluang baru untuk meningka|kan penglibatan masyarakat desa kepadaaktiviti ekonomi moden (Malaysia, 1991). Dengan kata lain usaha-usaha
100
ke arah meningkatkan pertumbuhan akti viti y ang mempunyai nilai tambahyang tinggi merupakan teras kepada perindustrian desa ini. Secara tidaklangsung aktiviti ke atas keluaran ini akan mengeratkan lagi pertalianekonomi dan komersial antara sektor tersebut dengan sektor bandar yangsedia ada.
Kejayaan industrialisasi desa ini akan lebih berkesan jikadisandarkankepada program-program lain yang selaras. Misalnya proses urbanisasikawasan desa secara tidak langsung akan menggalakkan pertumbuhanindustri di kawasan yang dirancangkan. Ini adalah kerana prosespertumbuhan industri merupakan salah satu daripada tarikan ke arahurbanisasi. Terdapat tiga pendekatan yang boleh dilakukan dalam prosesurbanisasi desa (Ashwani Saith, 1990). Pertama ialah meningkatkanpengurusan perladangan (estatisation), yang melibatkan pengurusanpekebun kecil yang lebih tersusun seperti yang dilakukan oleh perladanganswasta. la bertujuan supaya sektor ini mampu bersaing dengan aktivitiekonomi yang lain dari segi produktiviti tenaga kerjanya. Dalam hal iniberbagai institusi telah memainkan berbagai peranan misalnya koperasi,kumpulan peladang dan juga pemulihan semula pemegangan harta yangtidak ekonomik. Peringkat kedua ialah perlaksanaan program perbandarankhususnya dilakukan ke atas kampung-kampung tertentu, di sampingmenggalakkan industri berskel kecil bagi aktiviti bukan-pertanian yangterlibat di dalamya. Tahap ketiga ialah penyusunan semula kampungkepada suatu susunan untuk memusatkan pertumbuhan. Kaedah inidilakukan dengan memindahkan penduduk yang berkepadatan rendahkepada penempatan yang sekurang-kurangnya menjadi 2,500 orang.Kawasan yang dijadikan pusat pertumbuhan ini akan dibangunkan semuladengan rumah-rumah baru, infrastruktur dan berbagai kemudahan awambagi penggunaan penduduk berkenaan. Pemusatan seperti ini akanmendorong kepada pertumbuhan kegiatan industri oleh penduduk setempat.Akhirnya tapak perindustrian desa boleh diwujudkan di kawasan yangberhampiran.
Sebahagian daripada kejayaan program perindustrian desa adalahbergantung juga kepada sistem pemasaran hasil industri desa tersebut.Pada waktu ini beberapa usaha telah dilakukan bagi meningkatkanpemasaran hasil keluaran yang khususnya berasaskan kraftangan danmakanan ringan. Antaranya, dengan menyalurkan hasil keluaran inimelaluiagensi-agensi seperti Karyaneka, Batik Malaysia, KEMAS, SyarikatPembangunan dan Pemasaran Industri Kampung (SPPIK) dan lain-lain.Dalam aspek ini penekanan kepada pemasaran tempatan adalah antara
101
strategi yang utama. Keadaan pasaran tempatan yang baik ini adalah hasildari permintaan oleh pelancong dari luar negeri yang berkunjung kenegara ini. Dari kajian yang dibuat menunjukkan bahawa hampir 70peratus daripada pembeli-pembeli hasil industri desa ini adalah daripelancong luar negeri ini. Selain dari itu terdapat juga permintaan yangagak meluas misalnya batik (25 peratus), tenunan dan sulaman (20peratus), anyaman (18 peratus) barang-barang perak (25 peratus) danselebihnya ialah barangan tembikar, tembaga, ukiran kayu, hasil laut dankulit (Chamhuri, Ahmad dan Abdul Hamid, 1990).
Secara amnya pembangunan industri desa sebelum ini hanyamenumpukan kepada industri sumber asas seperti kraftangan, kejuruteraanringan dan industri berasaskan makanan. Sebalikny a strategi perindustriandesa melalui pertumbuhan IKS kini lebih menumpukan kepada penjanaankeluaran baru yang berasaskan sumber-sumber seperti getah, kelapa sawit,kayu balak dan galian. Keluaran dari aktiviti hiliran ini telah meningkatpermintaannya akibat dari penggunaan oleh masyarakat tempatan yangberterusan. Selain itu terdapat juga peluang dari segi sub-kontrektorkepada industri bukan-sumber asas seperti elektrik dan elektronik sertaindustri pelancongan.
PENUTUP
Dari segi matlamat ternyata program perindustrian desa ini amat baikterutama bagi meningkatkan kegiatan ekonomi moden di kalanganmasyarakat desa supaya dapat bersaing dengan masyarakat bandar dalammemenuhi keperluan ekonomi yang lebih mencabar. Akan tetapipembangunan perindustrian seperti yang dirancangkan di dalam PIPmenunjukkan bahawa perindustrian sektor desa masih lagi terabai. Inidisebabkan oleh tiadanya plan yang konkrit bagi tujuan ini. Akibatnyasemenjak pertumbuhan ekonomi industri ini berkembang di negara kitaternyata kawasan pantai Barat Semenanjung Malaysia menjadi tumpuanpelabur-pelabur sama ada dari dalam dan luar negeri. Sebaliknyapertumbuhan perindustrian bagi negeri-negeri lain terutamanya di PantaiTimur Semenanjung dan Malaysia Timur masih terbatas. Pada masa yangsama industri desa yang terdapat seperti dalam kawasan yang dinyatakan,masih menunjukkan suatu rantaian yang lemah dengan pembangunansektor desa itu sendiri. Ini kerana tumpuan pada waktu ini masih lagiberkisar terhadap kegiatan industri tradisional seperti kraftangan, perabotdan juga makanan ringan.
102
Penekanan program perindustrian ini perlu dilakukan untukmemastikan elemen-elemen yang lebih luas dan bukannya ke atas industrikampung traditional sahaja. Selain dari member! tumpuan kepada usaha-usaha lokasi dan penempatan, rnaka pengkajian tentang rantaian sektordesa dengan sektor lain perlu ditingkatkan bagi memastikan keberkesananpembangunan perindustrian desa ini. Misalnya perkara yang melibatkankemudahan infrastruktur dan perkhidmatan sokongan yang akanmembolehkan industri berskel sederhana atau besar akan menempatkanoperasi mereka ke kawasan desa yang terpilih.
Dalam aspek pemasaran, perlu ada suatu badan yang akan membantupengusahakecil atau sederhana ini untuk menyelesaikan masalah pemasarandan melicinkan rangkaian agihan barang keluaran industri desa. Walaupuntelah terdapat beberapa agensi-agensi yang bertanggungjawab ke ataspromosi dan pemasaran hasil kraftangan dan hasil keluaran industri desa,namun ianya masih tidak ada keseragaman. Pengusaha masih lagi tidakberupaya menghadapi masalah yang ditimbulkan oleh orang tengah ataupengedar-pengedar. Begitu juga kemampuan sebahagian dari pengusahaini memasarkan keluaran mereka hanya bergantung kepada keupayaanmereka sendiri untuk mendapatkan langganan atau pembelian kontrek dariberbagai pihak. Penekanan pemasaran bagi hasilkeluaran yang berasaskankraftangan dan makanan juga harus meliputi keperluan pasaran luarnegeri.
Selaras dengan pembangunan yang dihasilkan oleh sektor-sektor lainmaka sewajarnya pembangunan perindustrian desa ini perlu disesuaikandengan kehendak dan keperluan sektor yang telah maju. Selain darimempastikan pembangunan yang seimbang di antara wilayah, perindustriandesa juga akan membolehkan sektor desa terns memberi sum bang ankepada pembangunan dan peningkatan produktiviti negara. Pembaikantaraf hidup melalui peningkatan dalam pendapatan perkapila sektor desaakan lebih menyakinkan pertumbuhan sektor itu dalam perkembanganekonomi perindustrian negara.
Akhirnya, pembangunan perindustrian desa yang berjaya tidak hanyadapat memberi nafas baru kepada masyarakat desa melalui aktiviti ekonomiyang lebih moden, tetapi menjadikan sektor desa lebih bermakna dalammenyumbangkan pembangunan ekonomi negara. Jika pada tahap awalpembangunan sektor ini berkembang kerana pembangunan komoditieksport, tetapi kini ia tidak hanya masih dapat mengekalkan sumbangandalam pembangunan komoditi yang berterusan. Sebaliknya sumbangan
103
sektor desa kini telah mula beralih kepada keluaran industri yang tidakhanya membantu pertumbuhan industri-industri yang telah kukuh tetapijuga terus menyumbang kepada pertumbuhan ekonomi negara. Selain daridapat mengatasi masalah penempatan perindustrian negara, program inisecara tidak langsung dapat meningkatkan infrastruktur sektor ini ke arahperbandaran desa bagi mengimbangi pembangunan wilayah di negara ini.Pembangunan tersebut secara tidak langsung akan dapat mengatasi beberapamasalah yang berkait rapat dengan sektor pertanian itu sendiri pada masaakan datang.
NOTA HALAMAN
1. Prestasi pertumbuhan sektor pertanian masih stabil jika dibandingkan antara bebe-rapa jangkamasa rancangan Pembangunan Lima Tahun. Misalnya untuk tempohRancangan Malaysia Keempat (1981 -1985) sektor ini tumbuh dengan kadar 3.1peratus setahun, diikuti dengan 4.6 peratus setahun bagi tempoh Rancangan Ma-aysia Kelima (1986 -1990) dan dijangka mencapai 3.5 peratus untuk tempoh Ran-cangan Malaysia Keenam {1991 - 1995).
2. Faktor tenaga kerja dalam perbincangan ini adalah penduduk di sektor desa yangpada masa kini sedang bergiat dalam sebarang aktiviti pertanian. Kesan dari kece-kapan pengurusan pertanian membolehkan mereka mempunyai lebihan masa la-pang yang mendorong mereka terlibat dengan kerja-kerja bukan-pertanian iaitu di-sektor perindustrian. Penglibatan mereka mungkin sama ada secara penuh masaatau sambilan, namun ia akan memberikan kesan positif ke atas permintaan tenagakerja oleh industri-industri yang bergiat dipersekitaran desa.
3. 'Konsep Payung' dalam era pembangunan perindustrian akan datang merupakansatu bentuk kerjasama antara syarikat-syarikat yang sudah kukuh dengan syarikat-syarikat kecil khususnya industri yang berskala kecil atau sederhana. Bentuk ker-jasama ini mungkin dalam bentuk penawaran barang siap oleh industri kecil terse-tersebut sama ada untuk digunakan dalam komponen keluaran syarikat yang kukuh
but atau dipasarkan terus melalui rangkaian pemasaran syarikat tersebut (Malaysia1991: 144 dan 149).
4. Untuk meneliti rangkaian aktiviti industri pertanian ini sila lihat Mohd. GhazaliMoayidin dan Abu Hasan Md. Isa, 1993, "Masa Depan Sektor Pertanian dalamEkonomi Perindustrian " di dalam Newsletter of the Centre for Agricultural PolicyStudies: OPTIONS. Volume 8, No. 2 (July 1993), Universiti Pertanian Malaysia.
BIBLIOGRAFI
Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahman, 1993."The National Agricultural Policy 1992 - 2010: Prospects and Challenges", didalam Newsletter of the Centre for Agricultural Policy Studies OPTIONS, Vo-lume 8, No. 1 (Jan 1993).
104
Ashwani Saith, 1990."Location, Linkage and Leakage: Malaysia Rural Industrialisa lion Strategies inNational Perpective ", di dalam Hans J. Esderts & Ismail Md. Salleh (ed), Promo-tion of Small-Scale Industries Strategies for Rural Industrialisation, The Ma-laysia Experience (Kuala Lumpur: Freidrich-Ebert Stiftung).
Johnston B.F dan Mellor W., 1961."Peranan Sektor Pertanian di dalam Pembangunan Ekonomi" di dalam, AmirHussinBaharuddin(Teijemahan),EkononiiPembangunan. 1984(KualaLumpur:Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka).
Chamhuri Siwar, Ahmad Md. Zin dan Abdul Hamid Jaafar, 1990."Peranan Industri Desa dalam Pembangunan Industri" di dalam, Mohd FauziMohd. Jani dan Madelina Berma (ed), Malaysia, Development Towards anIndustrialized Economy, Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, No. 21 & 22 (1990) 265-304.
Fong Chan On, 1989.Laporan Akhir PelanTindakan Pembangunan Industri Kecil dan Sederhana(Kuala Lumpur: Universiti Malaya).
Malaysia, 1986.Fifth Malaysia Plan, 1986 -1990 (Kuala Lumpur: Jabatan Percetakan Kerajaan).
Malaysia, 1989.Kajian Separuh Penggal Malaysia Kelima (Kuala Lumpur: Jabatan PercetakanKerajaan).
Malaysia, 1990Sixth Malaysia Plan, 1991 -1995 (Kuala Lumpur: Jabatan Percetakan Kerajaan).
Malaysia, 1991.Rangka Rancangan Jangka Panjang Kedua, 1991 - 2000 (Kuala Lumpur:Jabatan Percetakan Kerajaan).
Mohd Ghazali Moayidin dan Abu Hasan Md. Isa, 1991."Masa Depan Sektor Pertanian dalam Ekonomi Perindustrian ", di dalam Newsletter of the Centre for Agricultural policy studies: OPTIONS, Volume 8, No. 2,(July 1993).
Saadul Baharin Abdul Mutalib, 1988.Industri Kecil dan Sederhana Pembangunan Industri: PeluangyangTerdapatBag! Sektor Industri Kecil dan Sederhana (Kuala Lumpur: Kementerian Per-dagangan Antarabangsa dan Industri (MITI).
105
Biodata
Leonard Yong (B. Sc. (Hons); Dip Ed; Ph.D) has been a lecturer in theFaculty of Education, University Malaya since 1981. He was a chemistryand mathematics teacher in St. John's institution before he joined Univer-sity Malaya as a tutor in 1979. Presently, he is attached to the Departmentof Pedagogy and Educational Phychology in the of Education. His mainresearch interests are in educational psychology, particularly in creativity.He has written a book on creativity in Malaysian students and publishedand edited more than 30 articles and publications in local and foreignjoutnals. Dr. Yong is also frequently been called upon to serve as apsychological and research consultant for market survey companies andmajor research projects.
106
SIFAT-SIFAT EKSEKUTIF YANGBERPOLAKAN PROFIL KREATIF
oleh : Leonard S. Yong, Ph. D(Universiti Malaya)
Abstrak
Makalah ini membincangkan dapatan daripada suatu kaj ian empirikaltentang siri-siri gaya tingkah laku eksekutif Malaysia. Sungguhpun lebihdaripada 100 orang eksekutif pengurusan menjadi sebahagian daripadasasaran kaj ian ini, perlu diambil perhatian bahawa dapatan-dapatan dalammakalah ini adalah berdasarkan kepada temubual-temubual yang tidakformal dan pemerhatian-pemerhatian yang tertumpu kepada sedozenindividu yang telah dikenal pasti sebagai pemilik Pola atau Corak SifatKreatif. Ini dilakukan dengan menggunakan Sistem Profil Peribadi, iaitusuatu alat lapor sendiri tentang gaya tingkah laku diri sendiri. Sungguhpunseseorang itu tidak seharusnya memiliki Pola Sifat Kreatif untuk menjadiseorang yang kreatif, namun ada bukti yang menunjukkan bahawa terdapatimaginasi dan inisiatif di kalangan individu yang mempunyai Pola ProfilKlasikal. Eksekutif-eksekutif Malaysia yang menjadi sebahagian daripadakaj ian ini memperlihatkan tendensi atau kecendeningan kelakuan DiSCiaitu Dominans (atau Penguasaan) dan keberhati-hatian atau Sikap Berhati-hati yang dihubungkan dengan Pola Sifat Kreatif.
107
Penyelidik-penyelidikyang mengkaji perihal tingkah laku telah bertahun-tahun mengkaji sifat-sifat insan kreatif. Hasil kajian mereka menunjukkanbahawa walaupun terdapat keluarbiasaan dan individualisme pada dirimereka, insan kreatif mempunyai banyak sifat dan ciri yang serupa.
Didapatibahawainsan kreatif berkecenderunganmempunyaikeyakinan,bersifat berdikari, dan sanggup menempuh risiko. Ini tidak menghairankankerana insan kreatif seharusnyalah berani menonjolkan sifatnya yangtersendiri untuk membebaskan diri mereka daripada kekangan-kekanganbiasa yang tidak memungkinkan sesuatu pencapaian atau kejayaan yang luarbiasa.
Data kaj ian membay angkan bahawa insan kreatif mudah tenggelam dankeasyikan dalam kegiatan kreatif mereka, biasanya sehinggakan merekatidak sedarkan pergerakan waktu dan asyik menumpukan perhatian kepadaprojek yang memikat minat mereka sehingga ke jauh malam. Merekamenunjukkan daya tenaga dan sifat ingin tahu yang kuat, dan didorong kuatoleh keinginan untuk memahami alam sekeliling mereka.
Suatu usaha bersepadu telah dilakukan di Malaysia dalam dekad yanglalu untuk mempertingkatkan daya kreatif rakyat Malaysia pada semuaperingkat, termasuk para eksekutif perniagaan Malaysia. Makalah inimembincangkan dapatan-dapatan daripada kajian secara empiris tentangciri-ciri gaya para eksekutif Malaysia, yang dilakukan dengan menggunakanSistem Profil Peribadi. Secara khusus, kajian ini menumpukan perhatiankepadaeksekutifMalaysiayangdikenalpasti mempunyai PolaProfilKlasikalKreatif.
Dimensi Tingkah Laku DiSC
Sistem Profil Peribadi mengenalpasti tendensi atau kecenderungantingkah laku seseorang dan mengklasifikasikan kecenderungan tersebut kedalam salah satu daripada lima belas Pola Profil Klasikal. Pola Profil Kreatifmerupakan salah satu daripada Pola Klasikal ini. Pola-pola Klasikal inidiperolehi berdasarkan kehebatan setiap satu daripada empat dimensi tingkahlaku. Empat dimensi tingkah laku ini ialah : Dominans atau Penguasaan(Dominance, D), Pengaruh (Influence, i), Ketabahan (Steadfastness, S), dankeberhati-hatian atau sikap berhati-hati (Cautiousness, C); demikianlahterbitnya akronim DiSC.
Empat Dimensi Sistem Profil Peribadi
Demi membantu pemahaman ciri-ciri orang kreatif, beberapa jadualdikemukakan selepas ini.
108
INSAN DOMINANSTeori: Pergerakan positif dan aktif dalam persekitaran yang tidakmenggalakkan.
MATLAMAT: Hasil/PencapaianPengawalan/Kuasa
KEBIMBANGAN: Hilang kuasaDiperalatkanTidak memperolehi hasil
PENEKANAN: Pengawalan Cabaran
CIRI-CIRI
POSITIF
Terus terangKehendak kuatTegasCepat bergerakKeinginan-Perubahan,cabaranCenderung menggemaripersainganYakinBe raniCekap
NEGATIF
Menolak orang yangmerupakan 'Pengalah'Ingin menguasai danbanyak menuntut(Demanding)Terlalu cepat bertindaktanpa berfikir panjangTegas dalam tuntutannyaTerus terang, Melukakanhati, Kurang bijaksanasehingga menyinggungperasaanKritikalTidak berfokusMengecam dahulu
109
INSAN BERPENGARUH
TEORI: Aktif, positif dalam suasana yang menggalakkan
MATLAMAT: Pengiktirafan Sosial dan Penerimaan
KETAKUTAN : Penolakan dan Ketidakpersetujuan
PENEKANAN : Interaksi
CIRI-CIRI
POSITIF
Senang bergaulPeramah, LucuMenaruh kepercayaan/emosionalBertenagaSenang memujukBerazam, BerminatOptimistik
NEGATIF
••
Kurang pengurusan masayang baikBanyak bercakapMemanipulasi orang lainBercakap lebih daripadamendengarPerasaan yang senangdiransangkan/dikejutkanTidak teratur pengurusannyaSenang bertindakbalas
110
INSAN BERKETABAHAN
TEORI: Pergerakkan pasif dalam persekitaran yang menggalafckan
MATLAMAT : Kestabilan dan keselamatan
KETAKUTAN : Perubahan Melampau, Keraguan KehilanganKeselamatan
PENEKANAN : Kerjasama
CIRI-CIRI
posmFBoleh dipercayaiTaat, PenyokongSuka membantuPeramahPuas hatiBertimbangrasa dan Mene-rimaorangSemangat BerpasukanTenang dan StabilBersenang diri (Easy going)
NEGATIF
CemburuKurang motivasiTerlalu bersenang-lenangTidak mengambil risikoLambat bekerjaIngin memiliki (possesive)Takut (Insecure)'Laidback'
111
INSAN BERHATI-HATI
TEORI : Respons yang berhati-hati untuk mengurangkan faktor-faktor yang bertentangan dalam persekitaran yang tidakmenggalakkan.
MATLAMAT : Tepat dan TerperinciAturan dan kesempurnaan
KETAKUTAN: Perubahan prosedur-prosedurPerlanggaran standardKritikan terhadap prestasi
PENEKANAN : Kualiti
CIRI-CIRI
POSITIF
TekadMementingkan kesempurnaanTepatBerwaspadaMementingkan kenyataanBertumpu
NEGATIF
Tidak Menanggung RisikoMenggelakkan EmosiKritisLambat membuatkeputusan'Judgemental'Lambat bekerja
112
Pola Profil Peribadi Kreatif
Pola Sifat Kreatif menunjukkan ciri yang merupakan kombinasiDominans Tinggi dan Keberhati-hatian Tinggi. Menurut Sistem ProfilPeribadi: "Orang yang mempunyai PolaSifat Kreatif memperlihatkan duakuasa yang bertentangan dalam tingkah laku mereka. Keinginan untukmencapai kesempurnaan. Sifat agresif diperlembut oleh sifat sensitif.Kepantasan berfikir dan bereaksi dikekang oleh keinginan mahu menelitisemua penyelesaian yang mungkin sebelum membuat keputusan apabilamemfokus kepada projek-projek, dan mereka sesungguhnya membawaperubahan".
Insan dengan Corak Keratif berupaya menilai secara kritis sesuatuidea atau pencapaian, berdasarkan kecenderungan mereka untuk bersikapberhati-hati, di samping sanggup membawa perubahan kepada keadaanstatus quo, berdasarkan tendensi sifat Dominans mereka. Mereka bosandengan kerja-kerja rutin.
Insan dengan Porla Sifat Kreatif boleh dengan cepat membawaperubahan kepada tugas-tugas yang sedang mereka laksanakan ataukendalikan. Kadangkalanya ini dilakukan tanpa komunikasi secaraberdiplomasi yang diperlukan; sehingga menyebabkan orang lainmenganggap mereka bersikap melulu dan angkuh. Mereka juga adakalanya menunjukkan sikap menyendiri dan meninggi diri.
Eksekutif dan Porla Sifat Kreatif
Lebih daripada 100 orang eksekutif Malaysia telah menjalani kajiandengan aplikasi Sistem Profil Peribadi. Daripada bilangan ini, sedozenorang eksekutif dikenalpasti mempunyai Pola Profil Kreatif. Ekskutif inibekerjauntuk syarikat tempatan (Malaysia) dan juga syarikat multinasional.
Eksekutif-eksekutif lebih mendominasi atau menguasai keadaanpersekitaran mereka daripada rakan sejawat mereka. Mereka dapatmenerima konflik dan konfrantasi sebagai cabaran. Mereka tidak keberatandipanggil sebagai berani, suka menempuh bahaya dan cabaran, danmalahan bersifat agresif. Sifat Dominans seringkali terpapar dalamkesediaan mereka untuk mencabar status quo. Mereka seringkalimeninggalkan kesan ke atas keadaan persekitaran mereka dengan secaraaktifnya membawa perubahan, dan mereka mencemuh sikap mengambilpendirian yang selesa dan pasif terhadap sesuatu isu.
113
Eksekutif-eksekutif ini lebih berorientasikan kandungan (content)daripada manusia. Mereka lebih gemar mengusahakan sesuatu projekdengan penyeliaan yang minimum, dan jarang-jarang membuat laporankepada penyelia mereka. Mereka juga mengambil kesempatan untukmencapai kejayaan secara individu dan sentiasa mencari kejayaan ataupencapaian baru. Kesudahanny a, mereka seringkali mengalami kerumitandengan rakan sejawat dan juga orang atasan mereka.Keinginan merekayang kuat untuk bebas bertindak menyebabkan mereka menghadapimasalah dan kerumitan apabila orang-orang yang bekerjasama denganmereka menganggap bahawa mereka bersikap egois dan sukar bekerjasamadengan orang lain.
Eksekutif dengan Pola Sifat Kreatif yang suka diperhatikan inididapati mempunyai tendensi untuk bersifat suka bersaing berbandingdengan sifat kerjasama dalam interaksi mereka dengan orang lain.Merekamengutamakan pencapaian dan penghargaan.walaupun terpaksamengenepikan faktor-faktor motivasi yang ekstrinsik seperti kenaikanpangkat dan ganjaran kewangan.
Eksekutif-eksekutif ini tidak menggemari sesuatu yang dilakukansecara regular dan berulangan. Mereka lebih suka memilih pendekatan-pendekatan yang sukar ditelah kesudahannya,dan tidak merasa cemasapabila berhadapan dengan keadaan persekitaran dan suasana yang cepatberubah-ubah.Malahan, secara terbuka mereka mengakui bahawa merekamudah merasa bosan dengan kerja rutin dan yang berulangan.
Tali Unting-Unting Mental
Di samping mempunyai sifat Dominans eksekutif Malaysia denganPola Sifat Kreatif didapati mempunyai sifat Keberhati-hatian.SifatKeberhati-hatian ini selalunya mengimbangi keinginan yang kuat yangmendorongmereka ke arah Dominans.Sifat Keberhati-hatian iniseringkalinya berfungsi sebagai tali unting-unting (plumbline) mentalyang sedia ada dalam kepala mereka,serupa dengan tali unting-untingfizikal yang digunakan oleh penurap bata untuk memastikan agar tembokdibina tegak melurus.
Dalam tabii kerja sehari-hari mereka,eksekutif-eksekutif ini bersifatlebih fleksibel dan sanggup mengubah kaedah pendekatan apabilaberhadapan dengan masalah yang kompleks.Mereka mempunyai tendensiuntuk mengelakkan diri daripada bersikap tegar atau rigid apabila
114
mempraktikkan kaedah-kaedah tradisional dalam menyelesaikan masalahmereka.
Mereka menyesuaikan setiap situasi dengan piawaian yang telahditentukan oleh mereka sendiri dalam pemikiran mereka. Seringkalinya,mereka menganggap situasi yang dihadapi tidak selaras dengan sifatKeberhati-hatian yang ada dalam diri mereka.Itulah ketikanya merekaterasa tercabar untuk menyumbang input kreatif mereka.
Cadangan untuk Insan Kreatif.
Eksekutif-eksekutif Malaysia dengan Pola sifat Kreatif seringkalimemperlihatkan penglibatan yang gigih dan penuh minat dalam projekyang dilibati mereka. Mereka mempunyai tenaga pada tahap yang tinggidan bekerja bermati-matian demi melaksanakan tugas mereka.Merekamenunjukkan keazaman untuk mencapai matlamat dan tidak mudahterpesong daripada hala tujuan mereka oleh tentangan dan cemuhan.sertalebih mudah merasa selesa dengan keadaan yang tidak teratur berbandingdengan setengah-setengah rakan sejawat mereka.
Tambahan lagi mereka tidak mudah merasa puas dengan penyelesaianyang padapendapat merekaboleh disempurnakan atau diperbaiki lagi.Olehyang demikian,apabila mereka berusaha menyelesaikan sesuatu masalah,mereka cenderung mengambil masayang lebih lama sedikit pada peringkatawal dalam proses mengenal pasti masalah, dan mereka mahu melihatpotensi atau kemungkinan untuk mendapatcara-cara penyelesaian masalahyang lebih berpelbagai pada peringkat mencari penyelesaian.
Apabila menghadapi sesuatu tugas, ekskutif dengan Pola Sifat Kreatifberkecenderungan melaksanakannya dengan cara yang lain daripada yanglazim,dan dengan demikian menempuh risiko yang lebih tinggi atau lebihbanyak. Tanggapan orang lain bahawa mereka itu luar biasa adalahdianggap suatu pujian oleh mereka.
Dalam membuat keputusan, mereka berkecenderungan bergantunglebih kepada'intuisi dan wawasan mereka daripada penilaian sesuatusituasi secara objektif dan rasional. Ini tidak pula bermakna bahawamereka tidak rasional. Dalam konteks perhubungan antara manusia,kecenderungan demikian menimbulkan beberapa kesulitan.
Sebilangan eksekutif Malaysia, dalam kajian ini, diperhatikan atauditanggapi oleh rakan sejawat mereka sebagai tidak mengambil kisah
115
tentang perwatakan sosial mereka. Mereka jugatidak begitu mengendahkanpandangan dan anggapan rakan sejawat mereka terhadap mereka.Kadangkalanya mereka kelihatan menyendiri dan bersikap angkuh. Sifatini lebih-lebih lagi tertonjol apabila mereka berperanan sebagai ketuasesuatu pasukan. Sebagai ketua pasukan,mereka dijangka berkomunikasisecara diplomasi, adakala sebaliknya mereka mungkin kelihatan bertindakwajar dan berlaku zalim.
Kesimpulan
Daripada kajian kami.didapati bahawa golongan yang memiliki PolaSifat Kreatif boleh mempertingkatkan daya pengeluaran mereka denganmembina cara berkomunikasi yang lebih berkesan dan berdiplomasi untukmenyampaikan idea-idea mereka.Kajian kami menunjukkan bahawamereka merupakan pemikir dan perancang yang baik dan kritis. Merekamerupakan individu yang memberikan perhatian kepada butiran-butiranutamadan dapat menonjolkan atau mengemukakan aspek-aspekpencapaianyang seringkali tidak disedari orang lain.
Kajian kami menunjukkan bahawa sebaiknyakita jelas tentang garis-garis kerja apabila berurusan dengan insan yang mempunyai Pola SifatKreatif. Kajian kami juga menunjukkan bahawa mereka perlu menyedaribahawa persetujuan pihak atasan (sanctions) wujud dalam situasi kerja.
Ringkasnya, eksekutif dengan Pola Sifat Kreatif perlu lebih menyedaribahawa tradisi sesebuah organisasi seharusnya diiktiraf dan dihormati.Perubahan lebih disenangi semua orang kalau amalan-amalan tradisionaldiubahsuai dan tidak dibuang sama sekali, manakala corak-corak tingkahlaku yang lain juga diberikan pertimbangan.
Untuk mengimbangi aspek negatif orientasi mereka yang kuat terhadapkandungan dan bukannya manusia, ekskutif dengan Pola Sifat Kreatifyang berjaya, belajar berkomunikasi untuk menyampaikan rancangan danidea mereka dengan cara yang kurang memaksa, dan seterusnya mencubamendapatkan bantuan kerjasama daripada rakan-rakan mereka. Untukmempertingkatkan usaha berpasukan, mereka juga menyedarikecenderungan merekauntuk seolah-olah meninggikan diri dalam interaksidengan orang lain.
Sebagai eksekutif, orang yang memiliki Pola Sifat Kreatif Malaysiayang telah mengubahsuai tingkah laku sendiri,amat berjaya dalam usahamembawa pembaharuan dan pencapaian baru dalam persekitaran mereka.
116
Apabila potensi kreativiti dikendalikan dan disalurkan ke arah tujuan y angbetul, mereka memainkan peranan yang lebih besar dalam persekitarankerja mereka. Mereka menjadi aset kepada organisasi sebagai pembawainovasi dan pengembang idea. Tambahan lagi, mereka memainkan perananyang amat penting dalam organisasi yang berkenaan, tidak kira sama adamereka pegawai bawahan atau atasan.
Rujukan
The Personal Profile System (Minneapolis Minnesota,1993).
Geier, John G.and Downey M.S, Dorothy E.Library of Classical Profile Pattern (DiSC Dimension of Behaviour Model). VolumeVCreative Personal Profile Pattern (Minneapolis:Carlson Learning Company, 1979),ms 17
Geier John G. Personal Profile System(Minneapolis, MM: Carlson Learning Company,! 976,1992),ms 15
Kuhn,R.L.,(ed). Handbook for Creative and Innovative Managers.New York: Me Graw Hill,1988).
Yong, Leonard Creativity: A Study of Malaysian Students.(Petaling Jaya, Malaysia: Cordia Publications,1989).
Yong, Leonard "Creativity for Productivity in The Malaysian Context," JurnalProduktiviti.(Malaysian National Productivity Centre, Dec 1990) n 7, ms 37-43.
117
Nama
Tarikh Lahir
Pendidikan
Jawatan Sekarang
BiodataMahmood Nazar Mohamed
2 September, 1960
Dip. Science (ITM)B. Sc. (Bio Science)B. A. (Psychology)Sedang mengikuti Program Doktor FalsafahdiUKM
Pensyarah Psikologi Sekolah Pengajian Asasi,Universiti Utara Malaysia. Bidang kesihatanpengkhususan ialah psikologi an kesihatanmental. Banyak menjalankan penyelidikandalam bidang berkenaan serta bidang keusa-hawanan dan pengurusan sumber manusia.
Nama
Pendidikan
Pengalaman
Jawatan Sekarang
Sabitha Marican
Diploma dalam bidang Mikrobiologi (ITM)Sarjana Muda dari Point Park College danIjazah Lanjutan di dalam pentadbiran awamdari Universiti Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Penolong Pegawai Penyelidik dan PegawaiPerhubungan Awam di MARDI
Pensyarah di Universiti Utara Malaysia.Bidang-bidang pengkhususannya ialah DasarAwam, 'Stress Management', 'ConflictManagement' dan 'Career Development'.
118
AKTIVITIKEUSAHAWANAN BEKASANGGOTA TENTERA MALAYSIA:
ASPEK MODAL PERMULAANDAN TENAGA KERJA
Mahmood Nazar MohamedSabitha Marican
Universiti Utara Malaysia
1.0 Pendahuluan
Bekas anggota tentera merupakan segolongan manusia yang unik darisegi ke wujudan mereka dalam masy arakat kita. Semasa dal am perkhidmatanketenteraan, mereka berada dalam alam yang terasing daripada duniaawam. Kehidupan mereka yang penuh dengan latihan regimentasi, suasanaagresif dan disiplin ketenteraan di samping pakaian seragam telahmemisahkan mereka daripada alam awam (Mahmood, Taib, Habshah,Safri, Najib & Idris, 1990).
Sebilangan besar dari anggota tentera Malaysia bersara selepas 21tahun berkhidmat dalam angkatan tentera. Kumpulan ini mendapat pencen,gratuiti dan pampasan yang secukupnya. Namun sebilangan yang signifikanjuga akan menamatkan perkhidmatan sebelum jangka masa itu. Selalunyagolongan ini tidak menerima pencen, tiada peluang terlibat dalam kursusperalihan, serta menerima gratuiti yang lebih rendah. Walau apapun tarafpersaraan mereka, anggota tentera negara ini berhadapan dengan cabarankehidupan yang agak serius kerana perubahan ketara pada cara hidupapabila mereka bersara (Mahmood, Taib & Habshah, 1992a; 1992b).
Sebilangan signifikan anggota tentera yang bersara tidak dapatmenggunakan kemahiran yang mereka pelajari dari ATM (Mahmood &Taib, 1992). Kebanyakan daripada kemahiran yang diperolehi dari ATMadalah terlalu khusus pada perkhidmatan ketenteraan dan tidak bolehdigunakan dalam alam kehidupan awam (Mahmood et. al., 1990). Justeruitu, ramai dari kalangan bekas anggota tentera terpaksa memulakansemula kerjaya baru untuk menampung pembangunan keluarga yangmasih mengharapkan sumbangan dari mereka.
Dalam keadaan yang sedemikian, sebilangan yang signifikan cuba
119
menceburi bidang usahawan. LaporanBahagian Hal Ehwal Bekas AnggotaTentera Malaysia (1991) melaporkan bahawa hampir satu per empatpermohonan dari anggota tentera adalah untuk kursus peralihankeusahawanan. Tetapi, apabila memulakan aktiviti keusahawanan, dikalangan 'usahawan' bekas anggota tentera, maksud usahawan selalunyadisinonimkan dengan aktiviti perniagaan. Ini termasuklah aktiviti-aktivitiperniagaan seperti menjalankan perniagaan makanan, membuka warongkopi, jualan runcit atau borong di pasar-pasar malam Jualan di kedai runcithinggalah kepada pengendalian perniagaan yang dikategorikan sebagai"medium-scale industry".
Kajian ini meneliti aktiviti keusahawanan yang dikendalikan olehbekas anggota tentera Malaysia, terutama sekali di negeri-negeri pantaitimur seperti Pahang, Terengganu dan Kelantan. Antara persoalan yangutama yang diperhatikan ialah aspek perniagaan yang dikendalikan,modal dan gunatenaga.
2.0 Maklumat Demografi Responden Kajian
Seramai 53 orang bekas anggota tentera yang sedang menjalankanaktiviti perniagaan terlibat dengan kajian ini. Julat umur responden ialahdi antara 32 hingga 61 tahun dengan min umur pada 46.9 tahun. Hampirsemua responden masih berkahwin (98.0) dan bumiputra (90.4).
Sejumlah 68.0 mula berniaga sejurus selepas tamat denganperkhidmatan dengan angkatan tentera; 18.0 bekerja dengan kerajaansebelum memulakan perniagaan dan 14.0 bekerja dengan pihak swasta.
Dari segi tahap pendidikan, 39.6 mempunyai pendidikan kurang daridarjah 6, 52.8 berada di tahap SRP dan 7.5 di tahap pendidikan SPM.
3.0 Mengenai Perniagaan Mereka
Sejumlah besardaripada bekas anggota tentera baru menceburi bidangperniagaan. Sejumlah 34.0 baru dua tahun mulakan perniagaan; 9.4berniaga di antara dua hingga lima tahun; 26.4 berniaga selama limahingga sepuluh tahun dan 30.2 sudah berniaga lebih daripada 10 tahun.
Mengenai jenis perniagaan yang dikendalikan, hampir separuh (49.1 %)
120
berkecimpung dalam sektor perkh id matan; 17.0% dalam sektor pembuatan;26.4% dalam sektor makanan dan 7.5% dalam sektor jualan atau runcit.
Kebanyakan dari bekas anggota tentera mempunyai perniagaan miliksendiri (75.5%), 9.4% milik keluarga; 7.5% milikusahasamadan selebihnyadikategorikan sebagai lain-lain.
Daripada maklumat ini, kebanyakan daripada bekas anggota tenteramemiliki perniagaan sendiri yang baru diusahakan kurang dari dua tahunserta menjalankan perniagaan perkhidmatan dan makanan. Ini bermaknagolongan bekas anggota tentera yang menjalankan perniagaan berhadapandengan cabaran yang agak tinggi untuk berjaya dalam usaha niaga mereka.
4.0 Persoalan Modal
Mengenai modal permulaan (start-up capital), julat yang dilaporkanialah di antara RM 120.00 hinggalah kepada RM 216,000.00, Medianialah RM 5,200.00, mod modal ialah RM 5,000.00, manakala min modalpermulaan ialah RM 16,041.32. Nilai min yang dicatatkan adalah lebihtinggi kerana pengaruh beberapa nilai modal yang tinggi (melebihi RM100,000.00) yang dilaporkan oleh sebilangan kecil usaha wan (5.7%).Maklumat ini menunjukkan bahawa julat modal permulaan usaha niagabekas anggota tentera adalah amat besar dengan 13.2% memulakanperniagaan dengan modal kurang dari RM 1,000.00; 47.2% pada tahapRM 5,000.00 ke bawah dan 73.6% dengan modal kurang daripada RM10,000.00 sahaja.
Sejumlah signifikan (47.2%) mendapatkan modal permulaan daris impanan sendiri, 34% daripada keluarga dan hanya 18.9% dari bank-bankkomersial. Ini menunjukkan bahawa bekas anggota tentera banyakmenggunakan wang simpanan yang mungkin diperolehi dari gratuiti,insurans, simpanan serta tabungan LTAT untuk modal perniagaan mereka.
Jugasejumlahbesar(73.5%)tidakmemohonataumenerimasebarangbantuan modal dari agensi-agensi kerajaan; bagi yang menerima bantuankerajaan ini (26.4% sahaja), 11.3% mengatakan yang ia mencukupi, dan15.1% mengatakan iatak mencukupi. Selebihnya (73.5%) tidak memberirespon kerana tiada bantuan yang diterima.
Namun demikian, dari segi halangan mendapatkan modal, hanya26.4% melaporkan tiada halangan untuk mendapatkan modal; 34.0%
121
melaporkan bahawa mereka terpaksa membuat cagaran harta untukmendapatkan modal; 18.9% melaporkan masalah kewangan menghalangmereka mendapatkan lebih banyak modal dan 7.5% sukar mendapatkanmodal kerana tiada kelulusan yang diperlukan pada diri mereka.
Sebagai rumusan, modal permulaan yag digunakan oleh peniagabekas anggota tentera untuk memulakan usaha niaga mereka adalah kecil,yang mana kebanyakan darinya diperolehi daripada simpanan sendiri.Juga, ramai yang tidak memohon atau mendapat apa-apa bantuan daripelbagai agensi kerajaan dan sebilangan signifikan menghadapi cabaranuntuk mendapatkan modal tambahan.
5.0 Kursus Persediaan
Anggota tentera yang tamat perkhidmatan dengan ATM dikehendakimengikuti kursus persediaan keusahawanan sebelum mereka bersara dariperkhidmatan ketenteraan. Kursus persediaan, atau lebih dikenali denganistilah "kursus peralihan" memberi pengetahuan dan kesediaan kepadaanggota ATM yang akan bersara untuk melibatkan diri dalam aktivitiekonomi yang mereka minati.
Kajian ini mendapati bahawa dari kalangan responden kajian, 67.9%pernah mengikuti kursus yang berkaitan dengan perniagaan dan 32.1%tidak melaporkannya. Kursus-kursus yang diikuti adalah kewangan(15.1%), pemasaran (18.9%), pengurusan (37.7%) jualan (17.0%),pembuatan (1.9%), dan keusahawanan (9.4%). Ini menunjukkan bahawawalaupun bekas anggota tentera berhadapan dengan banyak cabarandalam usaha niaga mereka, sebilangan signifikan dapat menyediakan dirimelalui kursus-kursus perniagaan yang mereka ikuti.
6.0 Mengenai Gunatenaga dan Tenaga Kerja
Perniagaan yang dijalankan oleh bekas anggota tentera adalah kecildan ini dapat dilihat daripada modal permulaan dan tenaga kerja mereka.Sejumlah 9.4% tidak menggunakan pekerja; 67.9% mempunyai di antarasatu hingga lima pekerja; 7.4% mempunyai enam hingga sepuluh pekerja;9.4% mempunyai di antara 11 hingga 21 orang pekerja dan hanya 5.7%mempunyai lebih daripada 50 orang pekerja.
122
Dari segi latarbelakang pekerja, 35.8% mempunyai pekerja darikalangan ahli keluarga sahaja; 34.0% mempunyai pekerja dari kalanganahli keluarga dan orang lain manakala 30.2% mengambil pekerja selaindari ahli keluarga mereka.
Mengenai tenaga kerja profesional dan separa profesional, 64.5%tidak menggunakan tenaga kerj a kategori ini; 16.7 % menggunakan khidmatpengurusjualan/pemasaran; 10.4% menggunakan khidmat akauntan/keraniakaun; dan 5.3% lain-lain kategori tenaga kerja profesional. Tidak adausahawan bekas anggota tentera yang menggunakan perkhidmatanperundingan perniagaan, tetapi 39.6% memberi khidmat latihan kepadapekerja mereka dan 26.4% pentingkan kelulusan apabila mengambilpekerja.
Rumusannya ialah sebilangan besar peniaga dari kalangan bekasanggota tentera mempunyai perniagaan yang kecil-kecilan sahaja, justeniitu hanya dapat mengajikan sebilangan kecil pekerja yang kebanyakkandari mereka adalah dari kalangan ahli keluarga sendiri. Oleh yang demikian,peniaga ini tidak berupaya menggajikan tenaga kerja separa profesional,profesional atau perunding untuk mengembangkan perniagaan mereka.
7.0 Masalah yang dihadapi
Mengenai persoalan masalah yang dihadapi oleh peniaga-peniaga ini,26.4% menghadapi masalah dengan modal; 9.4% hadapi masalahpersaingan yang sengit; 9,4% hadapi masalah modal dan pasaran; 13.2%hadapi masalah modal dan latihan dan selebihnya (antara 1.9% - 5.7%)hadapi masalah yang berkaitan dengan latihan pekerja, keluarga, lokasiperniagaan.
8.0 Aspek yang berkaitan dengan Modal Permulaan
Beberapa aspek di teliti untuk melihat hubungannya dengan modalpermulaan yang dilabur oleh bekas anggota tentera dalam usaha niagamereka. Aspek-aspek berkenaan adalah ras, pengalaman berniaga sebelumini, latihan yang diberikan kepada pekerjanya, kepentingan kelulusanpekerjanya, kursus yang diikuti, pekerjaan dahulu, tahap pendidikan,usahaniaga kini, sumber modal dan halangan untuk mendapatkan modal.Hasil ujian t dan ANOVA satu hala adalah seperti yang dicatatkan dalamJadual-jadual 1 dan 2.
123
Jadual 1:Ujian t bag! beberapa pembolehubah dengan
modal permulaan peniaga
Pembolehubah min modal (RM) t
Mengikuti kursus 22,216.67Tidak mengikuti kursus 2,964.12
2.337**
Usahawan Bumiputra 17,906.17Usahawan Bukan Bumiputra 1,680.00
Pentingkan kelulusanpekerjaTidak pentingkankelulusan pekerja
45,764.285,371.54
2.544**
Berniaga sebelum iniTidak pernah berniaga
Melatih pekerjaTidak melatih pekerja
14,525.7617,500.74
31,804.005,696.56
-2.590
1.892*
2.034*
** k < 0.05*k<0 .1
Daripada Jadual 1, dapat dilihat bahawa peniaga yang mengikutikursus persediaan lebih banyak melaburkan dalam modal permulaan ber-banding dengan mereka yang tidak mengikuti sebarang kursus persediaan.Juga dari kalangan peniaga bekas anggota tentera bumiputra, modalpermulaan mereka adalah lebih tinggi.
Walaupun demikian pengalaman dalam bidang perniagaan merekasebelum ini bukanlah aspek yang menentukan sama ada modal permulaanyang dilaburkan dalam perniagaan kini lebih tinggi atau besar.
124
Dari segi tenaga kerja pula, sememangny a perniagaan y ang mempuny aimodal yang lebih besar akan melaburkan sedikit sumber untuk melatihpekerja mereka.
Juga usaha niaga seperti ini amat pentingkan kelulusan yang ada padapekerja mereka. Namun demikian jumlah usahaniaga seperti ini adalahkecil, terutama sekali yang dikendalikan oleh bekas anggota tenteraMalaysia.
Jadual 2:Ujian ANOVA satu hala beberapa pembolehubah
dengan modal permulaan peniaga
Pembolehubah min modal(RM)
nilai F
PEKERJAAN DAHULUtentera 22,294.00kerajaan 5,032.00swasta 5,786.00
0.86 0.4301
TAHAPPENDIDIKANDarjah6SRPSPM
21,000.0013,929.004,800.00
0.33 0.7234
PERNIAGAAN KINIperkhidmatanmakananjualan/runcitpembinaan
26,853.001,867.006,586.00
10,750.00
1.22 0.3111
SUMBER MODALsimpanankeluargabank komersil
6,440.005,647.00
58,755.00
8.44 0.0007*
125
HALANGAN DAPAT MODALtiada halangan 19,018.00 0.39 0.8126cagaran harta 23,858.00kewangan 6,980.00kelulusan 9,300.00susah dapat 6,786.00
JENIS KURSUS YANG DIIKUTIkewangan 9,188.00 1.12 0.3643pemasaran 4,037.00pengurusan 32,995.00jualan 3,069.00pembuatan 5,200.00usahawan 8,720.00
* k < 0.05
Merujuk kepada Jadual 2 pula, tidak ada perbezaan yang signifikandicatatkan pada aspek-aspek pekerjaan dahulu, tahap pendidikan, jenisperniagaan yang dikendalikan kini, halangan mendapatkan modal ataujenis kursus yang diikuti dengan saiz modal permulaan yang dilaburkanoleh peniaga bekas anggota tentera. Hanya, bagi peniaga bekas anggotatentera yang mendapat pinjaman dari bank-bank komersil sahaja yangmempunyai modal permulaan yang besar (min = 58,755.00)
9.0 Rumusan
Sebagai rumusan, kajian ini mendapati bahawa usaha niaga yangdilakukan oleh bekas anggota tentera Malaysia adalah dari skala yangkecil, dengan menggunakan modal permulaan yang sedikit serta tidakbanyak menggunakan tenaga kerja yang ramai atau yang berada di luarlingkungan kekeluargaan. Ini bermakna ramai dari kalangan bekas anggotaATM berniaga secara kecil-kecilan untuk menampung kehidupan sertaekonomi keluarga apabila mereka bersara daripada perkhidmatanketenteraan dan bukannya menjalankan projek keusahawanan yang benar-benar "viable".
126
Jikalau ditinjau dari satu aspek perniagaan mereka, katakan aspekmodal permulaan, hanya 32.1% sahaja dari kalangan peniaga bekasanggota ATM mempunyai modal melebihi RM 10,000.00. Ini bermaknalebih dari dua per tiga yang lain hanya menjalankan perniagaan kecil-kecilan sahaja jikalau disamakan dengan takrif SMI.
10.0 Cadangan
Walaupun Angkatan Tentera Malaysia (ATM) dan Bahagian HalEhwal Bekas Anggota Tentera Malaysia (HEBAT) menyediakan danmenganjurkan kursus-kursus peralihan untuk membantu anggota tenteramenyesuaikan diri, kehidupan dan keadaan ekonomi sewaktu merekabersara kelak, namun, ban man ini hanya dihulurkan sepanjang jangkamasa kursus peralihan sahaja (Laporan Hebat, 1991).
Ini bermakna juga, tidak ada bantuan secara langsung yang diberikankepada anggota tentera selepas mereka bersara kecuali pendaftaran mencaripekerjaan, bantuan kesihatan dan beberapa perkhi^matan kecilan yanglain.
Namun, jikalau seseorang itu ingin menceburi bidang keusahawanan,bantuan, sokongan serta latihan yang lebih berpanjangan diperlukan,umpamany a seperti dalam menyediakan kursus lanjutan dalam perniagaan,bantuan untuk mendapatkan modal tambahan, bantuan kepakaran, khidmatperundingan serta penyelidikan pasaran dan pelbagai yang lain. Juga,usaha perlu dilakukan oleh pihak ATM, HEBAT dan lain-lain badan ataupertubuhan yang berkaitandengan halehwal sertakebajikan bekas anggotatentera Malaysia untuk membantu mendaftarkan dan seterusnyamelibatkanpeniaga serta usahawan ini dalam dewan-dewan perniagaan, pertubuhanatau persatuan keusahawanan yang bersesuaian agar bantuan dan maklumatdari agensi kerajaan mahupun sektor swasta dapat di salurkan kepadamereka dengan cara yang lebih teratur dan berkesan.
127
RUJUKAN
LaporanTahunanBahagian Hal EhwalAngkatanTenteraMalaysia (HERAT), 1991.
Mahmood Nazar Mohamed, Mohd Taib Arifin, Habshah Bakar,Safri Samit, Najib Marzuki & Idris Salleh. (1990). Status Sosio-ekonomiBekas Perajurit Malaysia. Laporan Akhir Penyelidikan. Universiti UtaraMalaysia.
Mahmood Nazar Mohamed & Mohd Taib Arifin. (1992). Sumbangan Guna tenagaBekas Perajurit Ke arah Pembangunan Negara: Cabaran dan Strategi.Jurnal Produktiviti Malaysia, 13, 53-62.
Mahmood Nazar Mohamed, Mohd Taib Arifin & Habshah Bakar. (1992a).Status Sosio-ekonomi dan Penyesuaian Umum Bekas Perajurit Malaysia.Jurnal Parlimen Malaysia, 11,3, Apr., 7-15.
Mahmood Nazar Mohamed, Mohd Taib Arifin & HabshahBakar (1992b).Membantu Bekas Perajurit menyesuaikan diri sebagai orang a warn: Kearah pembinaan masyarakat penyayang. Jurnal Kebajikan Masyarakat,15, l.Jun, 1-8.
128
Recommended
