Research Paper Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture and Society

8 (2) August 2020

Comparative study on agrochemical residue on rice

cultivation in Tasikmalaya, Indonesia: organic versus
conventional
Wahyudi David 1*, Ardiansyah1, Nurul Asiah1, Sandra Madonna 2
1Department of Food Science and Technology, Universitas Bakrie, Indonesia
2Department of Environmental Engineering, Universitas Bakrie, Indonesia

* Corresponding author: wahyudi.david@bakrie.ac.id

Data of the article

First received : 08 Juni 2019 | Last revision received : 26 Juni 2020

Accepted : 08 Juli 2020 | Published online : 12 August 2020
doi:10.17170/kobra-202007201468

Keywords
This study was designed to examine the agrochemical residue and farmer characteristic
Comparative study, strategy in two methods of rice cultivation, organic and conventional. Two groups of farm-
organic rice, pesticide ers were examined, each group (n = 18) with five hectares of land for rice cultivation. This
residue, tasikmalaya, study conducted rapid rural appraisal (RRA) and focus group discussion (FGD), and de-
indonesia termined agrochemical residue in water, soil and paddy. The results show that organic rice
cultivation has a higher margin of profit at 0.32 USD/kg as compared to conventional rice
cultivation, which is about 0.12 USD/kg. In organic rice cultivation, farmers have to spend
more time in the cultivation process as opposed to the conventional forms of cultivation.
This is mainly due to the time-consuming manure preparation process as well as plant
protection. Agrochemical residues are detected only in conventional rice cultivation. Di-
azinon, Aldrin, Heptachlor, and Dieldrin were detected as the major chemicals present.
Diazinon was detected in the water, soil and plants with a frequency of occurrence at 60%,
80% and 40%, respectively. Aldrin, Heptachlor and Dieldrin were detected in plants with
the frequency of occurrence at 40%, 60% and 60%, respectively. Furthermore, heavy metals
such as Mercury (Hg) and Arsenic (As) were also detected in the water with a frequency of
occurrence at 10% and 40%.

1. Introduction
Rice is one of the most important food crops for and increase agricultural production. In 2016, over
over half of the world’s population, especially in and 3.930 agrochemicals were registered in Indonesia
around Asian countries, as a staple source of nutri- (DSPKP, 2016). Pesticides of various kinds have been
tion, providing carbohydrates, protein, fat, vitamin, used on a large scale in Indonesia since the beginning
and minerals. In modern agriculture, agrochemicals of the green revolution between 1980–1990 (David &
(both pesticides and synthetic fertilisers) play an im- Ardiansyah, 2017a). Green revolution refers to the set
portant role in intensive agriculture. Indonesia is an of research and technology transfer in agriculture to
agricultural country with approximately 8.087 million increase agriculture production. They are used glob-
hectares of land area used for rice cultivation (BPS, ally in the industrial agricultural system to control
2018). Large amounts of agrochemicals are used to pest population; they protect crops from losses/yield
control pests, weeds, and diseases to protect the crops reduction, improve the quality of rice and prolong
1
 Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture
and Society, 8 (2)

shelf-life (Abdollazadeh et al., 2015; Onojoh, 2013). Studies have also compared organic farming with con-
According to Aktar et al. (2016), there are different ventional farming systems across different parts of the
types of pesticides including insecticides, fungicides, world in terms of soil nutrient contents, yields, eco-
herbicides, rodenticides, molluscicides, and nemat- nomics, biodiversity, environmental impact, green-
icides. The uses of chemical fertilisers have become house gas emission, carbon sequestration, energy use,
an essential component of modern rice production groundwater pollution and food quality (Jahanban &
technology to provide appropriate nutrients for high- Davari, 2013). On the one hand, farmers are aware
er rice productivity (Singh & Singh, 2017). Food Ag- of the health concerns caused by pesticide use and
ricultural Organization (FAO) reported that the use feel concerned about plant diseases (Luck & Grimm,
of fertiliser, such as Nitrogen (67%), Phosphate (33%) 2018). The consumption of pesticide-contaminated
and Potassium (22%) increased significantly from foods may pose potential health risks; therefore, the
2002 to 2014 worldwide (FAOstat, 2018). contamination of the environment and food by pesti-
cide residues is a significant issue in many parts of the
Pesticides have played an essential role in improving world (Rice et al., 2007; Li et al., 2008; Karunamoorthi
public health through disease vector reduction and in- et al., 2011; Mohanthy et al., 2013).
creased food production (World Bank, 2008). Despite
its benefits, the use and disposal of pesticides have re- The understanding of farmers’ perceptions about
sulted in the undesirable release of these toxic chem- the risk of pesticides and the determinants of pesti-
icals directly into the environment. While beneficial cide overuse are important aspects that can help to
in farming, it produces several negative effects such modify their behaviour towards reducing the usage
as environmental pollution and risks to human health of pesticides (Jallow et al., 2017). The determination
owing to their agrochemical residue in rice. Recent- of pesticide residue in food becomes the essential re-
ly, farmers have begun to shift towards organic farm- quirement for consumers, producers and authorities.
ing; they have begun fertilising soils and protecting Therefore, to address consumer expectation of lesser
crops with organic and sustainable techniques to offer agrochemical residue in organic agriculture in Indo-
healthier food and ensure environmental sustainabili- nesia, this study compares organic and conventional
ty. This condition is followed by a massive demand for rice cultivation in the context of agrochemical residue.
organic rice of premium quality (Hazra et al., 2018).
2. Materials and Methods
Organic rice is the second most purchased organic
product in Indonesia (David & Ardiansyah, 2017b). 2.1.Study sites
The increase of organic food product consumption
is triggered by the consumers’ awareness of healthy The study was conducted in the Southeast part of
foods and their concern regarding environmental Tasikmalaya Regency in the West Java Provinces.
protection (David & Ardiansyah, 2017b). Many stud- Tasikmalaya Regency is one of the most critical or-
ies have reported health as the foremost reason be- ganic agricultural areas in Java. Recently, it has been
hind the increase in consumers purchasing organic reported as one of the regencies that exports organic
foods. Baudry et al. (2018) suggested that an organ- rice to Europe. This study focuses on two groups of
ic food-based diet may help reduce dietary pesticide farmers; one group of organic farmers and the other
exposure for at least a few organo-chemicals, such as group of conventional farmers. The first group is an
those belonging to the organophosphate and pyre- organic farmers’ group named ‘Sriwantani’, located in
throid families. However, Benbrook and Baker (2014) Kampung Cipalegor Kecamatan Sukehening, and the
stated that organic food is not entirely free of pesticide second group is a conventional farmers’ group named
residue. Data shows that organic foods are more likely ‘Jati Karya’ Kecamatan Jamanis. The distance between
to have pesticide residues than conventional, though both groups is 7 km. Both areas are located approxi-
far less likely to have multiple residues of pesticides. mately 500 m above sea level, and the rate of rainfall
Additionally, on average, the pesticide level in organ- is about 2.000 mm/year. The daily temperature on av-
ic foods is significantly lower than in inorganic foods erage is 18⁰C–25⁰C. These areas were selected for this
(Smith-Spangler et al., 2012). study because these regions have similar geographical,
cultural and practical characteristics but with differ-

2 ISSN-Internet 2197-411x OLCL 862804632

UniKassel & VDW, Germany- August 2020
 Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture
and Society, 8 (2)

ent modes of cultivation. Data were collected between The analysis of agrochemicals was performed using the
June–July 2018. GC method. This method of analysis was described by
Cid et al. (2007). Two kinds of extraction were used:
2.2. Ampling procedure Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) and Liquid-Liquid Ex-
tract (Falaki, 2019). Each sample was injected in the
This study has been divided into four steps: (1) Survey split mode on a Thermo Finnigan GC equipped with
diagnostic by using Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA), (2) a 63 Ni-µ electron capture detector (ECD). The GC
Focus Group discussion with farmers, (3) Collecting analysis employed a DB-5 MS capillary column (30
sample (plant, soil and water), and (4) Agrochemical m x 0.25 mm; with a film thickness of 0.25 µm). The
residue determination. GC column temperature was programmed from 150⁰
C to 300⁰C at 8⁰C/min and held at 300⁰C for 10 min.
2.2.1. Rapid rural appraisal (RRA) The injector and detector temperatures were 250⁰ to
300⁰C. The Helium carrier and Nitrogen making up
RRA aims to examine the extent of contamination the gas flow were set at 150⁰C at 2 and 3 mL/min. All
in organic farmlands as well as conventional ones. It samples were analysed for 16 OCPs.
generates information such as dosage, area of usage,
type of agrochemical used, frequency of usage, pro- 2.3.2. High-Performance Liquid Chromatogra-
ductivity and rice varieties cultivated. phy-UV detection (HPLC)

2.2.2. Focus group discussion (FGD) Agilent Technologies 1220 infinity high-performance
liquid chromatography with a UV/visible detector
FGD aims to gather information from farmers re- was used for the identification and quantification of
garding their strategy when using pesticides and oth- pesticides. The separation was performed on a re-
er agrochemicals. Furthermore, FGD also attempts to versed-phase C-18 column (Water). The samples
confirm the information gathered from RRA. were injected manually. The detector was connected
to the computer for data processing. In this study, a
2.2.3. Sampling of soil, water, plant reversed-phase semi-micro column was used for si-
multaneous determination, reducing the solvent vol-
Based on the RRA and FGD, soil, water and plant ume and measurement time and obtaining high sep-
samples were collected by using grid systems. The soil aration. These pesticides, capable of determination by
was collected at a depth of 0–20 cm. One soil sample HPLC, were mainly selected among other pesticides
consisted of five sub-samples, which were taken from to set a regulated value in Japan. Recovery tests from
a 100-meter radius. Each subsampling was mixed, of samples were ultimately performed for 27 pesticides.
which only 0.5 kg was collected. Water samples were These were divided into five groups because the reten-
collected from the river and from the water that flows tion times of some of the pesticides were very close.
through channels. Each water sample consisted of five The working condition of HPLC was binary gradient;
sub-samples, which were mixed, of which only 500 the mobile phase was acetonitrile: water (60:40), the
ml was collected. Plant samples were collected by cut- flow rate was 0.3 mL min-1, the injection volume was
ting the leaves and stems of paddy stalks. Each sample 25 µL, and the wavelength of the UV/visible detector
consisted of five sub-samples, that were mixed and, was fixed at 254 nm for the pesticides.
only 100 gr were collected. Each sub-sample consist-
ed of 20 gr. All the sub-samples were stored in a tube 2.3.3. Heavy metal analysis
container that was subsequently placed in a 50 L cool
box. For one day, the samples were transported by car Hg and As levels in the soil and plants were analysed by
to the laboratory. a two-step process: dry-ash and acid digestion. First,
samples (5 g) in a crucible were dry ash by remov-
2.3. Agrochemical residue analysis determination ing moisture at 105°C for 6 h. After, the dried samples
were placed in the furnace at 500~600 °C for another
2.3.1. Gas Chromatography Mass spectrometry 12-14 h until they turned into a white ash mineral. For
analysis (GC MS) the second step of acid digestion, the ash samples were
ISSN-Internet 2197-411x OLCL 862804632 3
UniKassel & VDW, Germany-August 2020
 Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture
and Society, 8 (2)

dissolved in concentrated nitric acid or HNO3/H2O2 using organic pesticides. This is considered lower than
with appropriate dilution (the samples being diluted conventional cultivation, which is up to 16.17 USD/
to 25 mL with deionised water). Heavy metals in the ha. The cost is only calculated from how much farmers
acid-resolved samples were determined by using an need for pesticide usage (organically or synthetic pes-
atomic absorption spectrophotometer. ticide). Even though the cost for plant protection for
organic farmers was lower than conventional farmers,
2.4. Data analysis the working time for plant protection was three times
higher than for conventional farmers.
Descriptive analysis and cross-tabulations were used
to simplify and compare the quantitative data, obser- The margin of profit is calculated from the price gap
vation and measurement. Data are presented as mean between unhulled rice with a final selling price. The
± SEM. organic farmers gain a higher margin of profit com-
pared to the conventional farmer. According to Tashi
3. Result and Discussion and Wangchuk (2016), the case study of organic and
conventional rice production in Buthan found that
3.1 Observation the benefit-cost ratio was significantly higher in con-
ventional cultivation. Furthermore, Pattabaont and
In both organic and conventional rice cultivation, the Shivakoti (2009) found that organic rice production
crops are irrigated by water spring. Water is availa- increases labour costs. Organic farmers believed that
ble throughout the year, and both groups use similar they have to spend more time on plant protection
varieties of seed “Sintanur”. Wet rice cultivation is compared to conventional farmers.
the most common type of agriculture (crop) in both
groups. Based on FGD, the farmers admitted that the According to Luck and Grimm (2018), who researched
use of agrochemicals was higher in the conventional Tasikmalaya, on an average, households retained
groups. This condition is confirmed by the study con- around half of their harvest for their consumption
ducted by Luck and Grimm (2018) in Tasikmalaya. and the other half was sold or handed over to their
They stated that nearly 97% of respondents used syn- landlord, based on the sharecropping arrangement.
thetic fertilisers during the last planting period in the This condition was also prevalent in the area of our
year of 2017. They also reported that the use of organ- study, where both organic and conventional farmers
ic manure and organic pesticides was lower than 9% sold half of their harvest to middlemen and kept the
within the total number of respondents. other half for consumption.

Most of the farmers in both groups have been farming 3.2.Focus Group Discussion (FGD)
for 13–20 years. However, the organic farming group
began only four years before the study. The average Based on FGD, eighteen farmers in each group volun-
land ownership is only 0.18 hectares for organic farm- tarily participated in FGD. The farmers admitted that
ing and 0.21 hectares for regular farming. The owner- they often have to discuss their strategies on manag-
ship of organic agriculture is lower than the national ing pests and diseases prior to cultivation (Table 2).
average of land ownership (BPS, 2018), which report- Almost 55.5% of conventional farmers possess knowl-
ed that the average amount of land owned by Indo- edge of the detrimental impact of pesticides on the
nesian farmers is 0.20 Hectares. A challenge here was environment. However, they continue adapting to the
that 0.20 Hectares of land was, in most cases, owned use of synthetic fertilisers and pesticides. In contrast,
by farmers only as sharecroppers, as shown in Table 1. most of the organic farmers understand the gravity of
the adverse impact of synthetic pesticides on their en-
The average respondent in our study is male, married vironment.
and 54 years old. The average household size is three In Table 2, both groups' strategies for plant protection,
hectares for organic farmers and 4–5 hectares for con- as explained by the farmers, has been provided. Or-
ventional farmers. Organic rice cultivation only needs, ganic farmers use spice and other organic pesticides
on average, 0.8 USD/ha cost for plant protection by that are self-prepared. Most of the organic farmers

4 ISSN-Internet 2197-411x OLCL 862804632

UniKassel & VDW, Germany- August 2020
 Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture
and Society, 8 (2)

Table 1. Comparison of organic and conventional farmers

Characteristic Organic (n=18) Conventional (n=18)

Farmers Age (years old) 54.94 ± 9.997 54.64 ±8.85
Education Elementary School (n=15) Elementary School (n=16)

Junior High School (n=3) Junior High School (n=1)

Senior High School (n=0) Senior High School (n=1)

Land (m2) 1868.13 ± 863.29 2162.35± 959.58

Average of HH (persons) 3 4.5
Farming (years)/Organic (years) 19.83 ± 13.62 / (3.55± 0.78) 13.82 ±7.86
Land ownership Owner (n=10) Owner (n=8)

sharecroppers ( n=8) sharecroppers (n-10)

Cost for plant protection (USD ha-1) 0.8 ± 0.43 16.17 ± 3.12
Time spending for plant protection (hr) 4±0.08 1±0.5

Cost for Manure/fertiliser (USD ha-1) 20.03 92.85

Yield (kg/ha) 4246.03±456.52 6100.05±30.01

Margin of profit (USD kg-1) ±0.32 ±0.21
Selling price of unhulled rice (USD kg ) -1
0.41±0.016 0.31±0.010

Final Selling price of rice (USD kg-1) 0.73±0.075 0.52±0.075

HH: Households

have the required knowledge about different organic pesticides is strongly affected and influenced by their
pesticides. Conversely, conventional farmers use in- pest management methods. The implementation of
secticides, fungicides and herbicides frequently. Pes- alternative methods of pest control as determined
ticides were the most frequently used agrochemical. by the farmers is based on the knowledge of the pros
(beneficial effects) and cons (harmful effects) of us-
Both groups were exposed to organic rice production; ing pesticides. Several variables have influenced their
there is a program of the local government of Tasik- pest control strategies and attitude regarding pesticide
malaya to increase organic rice production. However, use. It is entirely subjective and may depend on their
only a group of farmers called Sriwantani agreed to socio-economic characteristics, farm characteristics,
convert their land completely and change to organ- personal beliefs, tradition, perceptions and preferenc-
ic methods. The reason for the farmers' conversion is es (Abdollahzadeh et al., 2015). Pesticides enter and
mainly due to a belief that the soil dries with the use pollute any component of the environment in sever-
of synthetic pesticides as well as syntenic fertilisers. al ways, including application, accidental spillage or
Organic experts supervised the conversion. Mean- through the unauthorised dumping of pesticide prod-
while, a group of farmers called Jati Karya argued that ucts right on their container (Akoto et al., 2016).
they do not have a strong enough reason to convert
their land to accommodate organic cultivation. So According to Shahnaj (2010), the more educated
far, this group believes no issues have arisen from the farmers are, the more aware they are of the pesticide
use of synthetic fertiliser, both cost or environmental residue problem. However, in this study, the level of
concerns. The degree of the 'do not' awareness about education of farmers does not reflect their motiva-

ISSN-Internet 2197-411x OLCL 862804632 5

UniKassel & VDW, Germany-August 2020
 Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture
and Society, 8 (2)

tion in converting from conventional to organic cul-

are chlorinated hydrocarbons, organic phosphorus
tivation. Convincing farmers that their perceptions of
pesticides, and carbamate pesticides (Sawyer et al.,
crop-yield loss due to pest-related disease are over-es-
2003). Among the organophosphate pesticides, Diaz-
timated and helping them improve their knowledge inon was found to be a frequently recurring pesticide
of pest management and pesticide safety do not, thus,
with 60% of presence from the total sampling in the
serve as adequate arguments. Based on FGD, the or- water sample, 80% in the soil sample, and 40% in the
ganic farmers admitted that they were willing to con-
plant sample (Table 3, Table 4, and Table 5). However,
vert from conventional to organic cultivation owingthe Indonesian pesticide residue standard SNI 7313:
to the desire to keep the spring free from pesticide
2008 regulated that the amount of maximum residue
contamination and wanting to get better prices in the
is allowed to vary based on a particular chemical com-
sale of produce as well. pound. The occurrence of Diazinon is high in the soil
sample, which is 80%, followed by 60% in the water
3.3.Agrochemical residue samples. The residue levels of Diazinon exceeded the
Indonesia national standard in water and soil samples.
3.3.1 Organophosphates Organophosphorus pesticides, such as Diazinon, are
more resistant to microbial degradation (Akoto et al.,
The most common types of synthetic pesticides used 2016).

Table 2. Frequency and plant protection strategy by farmers

List of Strategy Organic Conventional

Type of organic pesticide Lemongrass, Dioscorea hispida Insecticide (n=7)
Dennst, Cosmos caudatus, (Peritroid, Carbamate,
Nicotiana spp., L, Annona organo Organophospate
squamosa Fenil Phenylpyrazole)

L., Annona muricata Fungicide (n= 2)

L., Allium sativum Herbicide (n= 1)

L., Tinospora crispa

(L.)

Frequency of spraying (times/weeks) Lemongrass (1-2) Insecticide (1-3)

Depending on how often the Fungicide (1)

occurrence of pest
Herbicide (1)

Planting duration (days) 45 45

Pesticide dosage (ml/tank) No pesticides Insecticide (15 ml/tank)

Herbicide

Fungicide

Knowledge of pesticide residue Knowing the negative impact: Knowing the negative
n=18 impact: n=10, Not Sure
there is a negative impact
n=8

6 ISSN-Internet 2197-411x OLCL 862804632

UniKassel & VDW, Germany- August 2020
 Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture
and Society, 8 (2)

Table 3. Organophosphates in water sample organic vs conventional

No. of samples (n) Chlorpyriphos Diazinon Profenofos Parathion

(mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l)
Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co
1 ND ND ND 0.47 ND ND ND ND
2 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
3 ND ND ND 0.18 ND ND ND ND
4 ND ND ND 0.42 ND ND ND ND
5 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
mean ±SD ND ND ND 0.35±0.15 ND ND ND ND
Freq= % n 0% 0% 0% 60% 0% 0% 0% 0%
SNI7313:2008 0.5 0.1 n.r n.r
SNI7387:2007
ND: Not Detected; n.r: not yet regulated
SNI 7313:2008 and SNI 7387:2007: Indonesian Standard Limitation of Contaminant

Table 4. Organophosphates in soil sample organic vs conventional

No. of samples Chlorpyriphos Diazinon Profenofos Parathion

(mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg)
Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co
1 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
2 ND ND ND 0.73 ND ND ND ND
3 ND ND ND 0.51 ND ND ND ND
4 ND ND ND 0.89 ND ND ND ND
5 ND ND ND 0.80 ND ND ND ND
mean ±SD ND ND ND 0.73±0.16 ND ND ND ND
Freq= % n 0% 0% 0% 80% 0% 0% 0% 0%
SNI7313:2008 0.5 0.1 n.r n.r
SNI7387:2007
ND: Not Detected; n.r: not yet regulated
SNI 7313:2008 and SNI 7387:2007: Indonesian Standard Limitation of Contaminant

Table 5. Organophosphates in plant sample organic vs conventional

No. of samples Chlorpyriphos Diazinon Profenofos Parathion

(mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg)
Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co
1 ND ND ND 0.0019 ND ND ND ND
2 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
3 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
4 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
5 ND ND ND 0.0025 ND ND ND ND
mean ±SD ND ND ND 0.0022±0.00 ND ND ND ND
Freq= % n 0% 0% 0% 40% 0% 0% 0% 0%
SNI7313:2008 0.5 0.1 n.r n.r
SNI7387:2007
ND: Not Detected; n.r: not yet regulated
SNI 7313:2008 and SNI 7387:2007: Indonesian Standard Limitation of Contaminant

ISSN-Internet 2197-411x OLCL 862804632 7

UniKassel & VDW, Germany-August 2020
 Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture
and Society, 8 (2)

3.3.2. Organochlorine compounds such as the sediments of organic carbon

position coefficients (log Koc). Studies have shown
Among the organochlorine pesticides, Lindan, that pesticides with log Koc values > 5 are primarily
Aldrin, Heptachlor, Dieldrin, Endrin, DDT, Endo- transported in the environment and are bound to sus-
Sulfan I and Corbofuran were not detected both in pend sediments (Schafer et al., 2008). According to
the organic and conventional water and soil samples the Indonesian Standard of pesticide contamination,
(Table 6 and Table 7). Aldrin, Haptaclor and Dieldrin Aldrin, in the plant samples were lower than the Indo-
were detected in plant samples in conventional farm- nesia National Standard (SNI 7387, 2007) (SNI 7313,
ing with a frequency of occurrence at 40%, 60%, 60%, 2008). Meanwhile, the minimum residue of Heptaclor
respectively (Table 8). Pesticides may gain access to has not been regulated yet. Dieldrin was detected to
groundwater and surface water supplies through di- be higher than the Indonesian Standard and had the
rect application or percolation and run-off from treat- most occurrences in the organochlorine sample. In
ed areas. Concentrations are typically higher in sur- general, the chlorinated pesticides are the most re-
face water than in groundwater (Sawyer et al., 2003). sistant to biological degradation and may persist for
According to Mackay et al. (2006), the distribution months or even years, following application (Sawyer
of pesticides between the water and the sediments et al., 2003).
depends on the physical-chemical properties of the
Table 6 Organochlorine in water sample organic vs conventional

No. of samples Lindan Aldrin Heptachlor Dieldrin Endrin DDT EndoSulfan Carbofuran
(mg/l (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) I (mg/l) (mg/l)
Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co
1 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
2 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
3 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
4 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
5 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
mean ±SD ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Freq= % n 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
SNI7313:2008 0.01 0.02 n.r 0.02 n.r 0.01 0.01 0.01
SNI7387:2007
ND: Not Detected; n.r: not yet regulated
SNI 7313:2008 and SNI 7387:2007: Indonesian Standard Limitation of Contaminant

Table 7. Organochlorine in soil sample organic vs conventional

No. of Lindan Aldrin Heptachlor Dieldrin Endrin DDT EndoSulfan Carbofuran

samples (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) I(mg/kg) (mg/kg)
Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co
1 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
2 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
3 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
4 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
5 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
mean ±SD ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
Freq= % n 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
SNI7313:2008 0.01 0.02 n.r 0.02 n.r 0.01 0.01 0.01
SNI7387:2007
ND: Not Detected; n.r not yet regulated
SNI 7313:2008 and SNI 7387:2007: Indonesian Standard Limitation of Contaminant

8 ISSN-Internet 2197-411x OLCL 862804632

UniKassel & VDW, Germany- August 2020
 Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture
and Society, 8 (2)

Table 8. Organochlorine in plant sample organic (or) vs. conventional (co)

No. of Lindan Aldrin Heptachlor Dieldrin Endrin DDT EndoSulfan Carbofuran

samples (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) I (mg/kg) (mg/kg)
Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co Or Co
1 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.15 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
2 ND ND ND ND ND 0.02 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
3 ND ND ND 0.0019 ND 0.01 ND 0.16 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
4 ND ND ND ND ND 0.03 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
5 ND ND ND 0.001 ND ND ND 0.15 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
mean ±SD ND ND ND 0.0019 ND 0.02 ND 0.153 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND
±0.00 ±0.01 ±0.05
Freq= % n 0% 0% 0% 40% 0% 60% 0% 60% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

SNI7313:2008 0.01 0.02 n.r 0.02 n.r 0.01 0.01 0.01

SNI7387:2007
ND: Not Detected; n.r: not yet regulated
SNI 7313:2008 and SNI 7387:2007: Indonesian Standard Limitation of Contaminant

3.3.3. Heavy metals chemicals to crop production and the negative impact
of their use on the environment and human health.
Heavy metals, such as As and Hg, were not detected Ardiwinata and Nursyamsi (2012) studied pesticide
in organic rice cultivation. However, in conventional residue central in Java. They found organochlorine
rice cultivation, they were detected frequently, with an and organophosphate residue, as well as carbamate
occurrence at 10 % and 40 % for Mercury and Arsenic insecticides residue in the rice, soil and water. Based
(Table 9). The level of heavy metals found in the sam- on the Pesticides Commission, there are 1082 pesti-
ple was lower than the Indonesian National Standard, cide formulations, that were legally distributed across
which was 0.5 mg/l for Arsenic, and 0.2 mg/l for Mer- Indonesia, with insecticides being the highest in num-
cury. In this study, conventional farming did not vio- ber (Komisi Pestisida, 2005). Meanwhile, according
late national regulations (SNI 7387, 2007). to the Ministry of Agriculture (2016), for subsidised
fertilisation, there were five types of fertilisers distrib-
There is a broad debate on the contribution of agro- uted: urea, SP36, NPK, ZA and organic fertilisers. The

Table 9. Heavy metal in water sample organic (or) vs conventional (co)

No of Sample As (mg/l) Hg (mg/l)

Or Co Or Co
1 ND ND ND 0.009
2 ND 0.01 ND ND
3 ND ND ND ND
4 ND 0.01 ND ND
5 ND ND ND ND
mean ±SD ND 0.01±0.00 ND 0.009±0.00
Freq= % n 0% 40% 0% 10%
SNI7313:2008 0.5 0.2
SNI7387:2007
ND: Not Detected
SNI 7313:2008 and SNI 7387:2007: Indonesian Standard Limitation of Contaminant

ISSN-Internet 2197-411x OLCL 862804632 9

UniKassel & VDW, Germany-August 2020
 Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture
and Society, 8 (2)

realisations of subsidised fertiliser distribution are in- ence the adoption of biological control. Crop Pro-
creasing, except for urea. Numerous monitoring stud- tection, 124-131. DOI: 10.1016/j.cropro.2015.05.018
ies from Europe and Japan have provided evidence URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
that paddy rice cultivation is responsible for surface pii/S0261219415300302
and groundwater contamination, with pesticide con-
centrations exceeding 0.1 µg /L (Lamers et al., 2011). Akoto, O., Azuure, A.A., Adotey, K.D. (2016). Pesti-
cide residues in water, sediment and fish from Tono
Reservoir and their health risk implications. Sprin-
4. Conclusions gerplus, 1849. DOI: 10.1186/s40064-016-3544-z
URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/
Based on our findings, we conclude that the levels of PMC5075320/
education of farmer did not reflect their awareness on
converting conventional rice cultivation to organic Aktar, M.W., Sengupta, D., Chowdhury, A. (2016).
rice cultivation. The primary reason for their motiva- Impact Of Pesticides Use In Agriculture: Their Bene-
tion to cultivating organic crops owes to their aware- fits and Hazards. Interdisc Toxicol, vol 2, 1–12. DOI:
ness about the selling price and use of spring water. 10.2478/v10102-009-0001-7 URL https://www.ncbi.
Organic rice cultivation has lower agrochemical res- nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2984095/
idue and has specific benefits concerning the lower
cost for plant protection as well as better selling price, Ardiwinata, A.N., Nursyamsi, D. (2012). Residu
economically as well as ecologically. Even though Pestisida di Sentra Produksi Padi di Jawa Tengah.
agrochemical residues in conventional farming are PANGAN, 39-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33964/jp.
higher than organic farming, in particular, the level of v21i1.103 URL http://jurnalpangan.com/index.php/
the residue is still lower than the Indonesian National pangan/article/view/103
Standard. Organic farmers spend more time prepar-
ing their manure and organic pesticides compared to Badan Pusat Statistik. (2018, June 18). Luas lahan
conventional farmers. The occurrence of heavy metals sawah menurut provinsi. Retrieved from https://www.
Hg and As was high in conventional rice cultivation as bps.go.id/dynamictable/2015/09/10/895/luas-lahan-
compared to organic rice cultivation. sawah-menurut-provinsi-ha-2003-2015.html

Conflict of Interest Baudry, J., Ebrauwer, l., Durand, G., Limon, G.,
Delcambre, A., Vidal, R., et al. (2018). Urinary pesti-
The authors declare no conflict of interest. In addition, cide concentrations in French adults with low and high
the funders had no role in the design of the study; in organic food consumption: results from the general
the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in population-based NutriNet-Santé. J Expo Sci Environ
the writing of the manuscript, and in the decision to Epidemiol. DOI: 10.1038/s41370-018-0062-9. URL
publish the results. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30185942

Acknowledgement Benbrook, C., Baker, B. (2014). Perspective on dietary

risk assessment of pesticide residues in organic food.
We would like to thank RISTEKDIKTI- RI for fund- Sustainability, 3552-3570. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ing this research. We would like to thank Ms Wiwit su6063552 URL https://www.mdpi.com/2071-
Purwita and Mr M. Yayan Royan for assisting data 1050/6/6/3552
collection as well as farmer group Sriwantani and Jati
Karya for their hospitality. Cid, F., Anton, R., Caviedes, Vidal, e. (2007). Or-
ganochlorine pesticide contamination in three bird
References species of the Embalse La Florida water reservoir
in the semiarid Midwest of Argentina. Science of
Abdollahzadeh, G., Sharifzadeh, M.S., Damalas, C.A. the Total Environment, 86-89. DOI: 10.1016/j.scito-
(2015). Perceptions of the beneficial and harmful ef- tenv.2007.07.004 URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
fects of pesticides among Iranian rice farmers influ- pubmed/17688913

10 ISSN-Internet 2197-411x OLCL 862804632

UniKassel & VDW, Germany- August 2020
 Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture
and Society, 8 (2)

David, W., Ardiansyah. (2017a). Perception of Karunamoorthi, K., Mohammed, A., Jemal, Z. (2011).
young consumers toward organic food in Indone- Peasant association member's knowledge, attitude
sia. International Journal of Agriculture Resources, and practices toward safe use of pesticide man-
Governance and Ecology, 315-324. DOI: 10.1504/ agement. Am J. Ind. Med, 965-970. DOI: 10.1002/
IJARGE.2017.088373 URL https://www.inderscience. ajim.21008 URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu-
com/info/inarticle.php?artid=88373 bmed/21919031

David, W., Ardiansyah. (2017b). Organic Agricul- Komisi Pestisida. (2005). Pestisida Untuk Pertanian
ture in Indonesia: Challenges and Opportunities. Or- dan Kehutanan. Jakarta: Ditjen Bina Sarana Pertani-
ganic Agriculture, 329-338. https://doi.org/10.1007/ an.
s13165-016-0160-8 URL https://link.springer.com/
article/10.1007/s13165-016-0160-8 Lamers, M., Anyusheva, M., La, N., Nguyen, W.,
Streck, T. (2011). Pesticide pollution in surface and
Ditjen Sarana dan Parasarana Kementrian Pertani- groundwater by paddy rice cultivation: A case study
an (DSPKP) (2016). Agricultural Infrastructure and from Northern Vietnam. Clean-Soil, Water, 356-
Facilities Statistic 2015. Jakarta: Setditjen Sarana dan 361. https://doi.org/10.1002/clen.201000268 URL
Prasarana Kementrian Pertanian. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/
clen.201000268
Faostat. (2018, October 10). Fertiliser consumption in
nutrients. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/faostat/ Li, X., Gan, Y., Yang, X., Zhou, J., Dai, J., Xu, M.
en/#country/101 (2008). Human health risk of organochlorine pesti-
cides (OCPs) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
Falaki, F (2019). Sample preparation technique for in edible fish from Huairou Reservoir and Ga-
Gas Chromatography (Eds) Peter Kush in Gas Chro- obedian Lake in Beijing, China. Food Chem, 348-
matography: Derivatisation, Sample Preparation, Ap- 354. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2007.12.047 URL
plication. IntechOpen https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S0308814607013064?via%3Dihub
Hazra, K., Swain, D., Bohra, A., Singh, S., Kumar,
N., Nath, C. (2018). Organic rice: potential produc- Luck, N., Grimm, M. (2018). Organic farming in the
tion strategies, challenges and prospects. Organic province of Yogyakarta and the District Tasikmalaya.
Agriculture, 39-56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13165- Briefing notes. IndOrganic: Promise and Challenges
016-0172-4 URL https://link.springer.com/arti- of organic farming in Java’. Bogor.
cle/10.1007/s13165-016-0172-4
Mackay, D., Shiu, W., Ma, K., Lee, S. (2006). Hand-
Jahanban, l., Davari, M. (2013). Prospect and prob- book of Physical-chemical properties and environ-
lems of organic farming and its environmental im- mental fate for organic chemicals. Boca Raton: CRC
pacts. 1st International Conference on Environmental Taylor & Francis Group.
Crisis and its Solutions Kish Island, (p. 549-554). Iran.
Mohanthy, M., Behera, B., Jena, S., Srikanth, S., Mo-
Jallow, M., Awadh, d., Albaho, M., Devi, V., Thomas, B. gane, C., Samal, S. et al. (2013). Knowledge attitude
(2017). Pesticide risk behaviours and factors influenc- and practice of pesticide use among agricultural
ing pesticide use among farmers in Kuwait. Science workers in Puducherry. South India J, Forensic Leg.
of the Total Environment, 490–498. DOI: 10.1016/j. Med, 1028-1031. DOI: 10.1016/j.jflm.2013.09.030
scitotenv.2016.09.085 URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
gov/pubmed/27644027 abs/pii/S1752928X13002692?via%3Dihub

Kanazawa, J., Kilin, D., Sutrisno, Oritas, S. (1985). Oerke, E., Dehne, H., Schohnbeck, F., Weber, A.
Residu of Diazinon in rice plant and paddy soil. Pene- (1995). Crop production and crop protection: Esti-
litian Pertanian, 83-84. mation lost in major food cash crop. Amsterdam: El-
sevier.

ISSN-Internet 2197-411x OLCL 862804632 11

UniKassel & VDW, Germany-August 2020
 Future of Food: Journal on Food, Agriculture
and Society, 8 (2)

Onojoh, P., Nsi, E., Aliyu, A. (2013). Determination of Nasional.

Residual Content of Pesticides in Rice Plant and Rice
Grains (Oryza Sativa) From Four different regions of Tashi, S., Wangchuk, K. (2016). Organic vs Conven-
Omala LGA, KOGI State, Nigeria. The International tional rice production: Comparative assessment un-
Journal's Research Journal of Science. der farmer condition in Bhutan. Organic Agriculture,
255-265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13165-015-0132-
Pattabaoant, A., Shivakoti, P. (2009). Opportunities 4 URL https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/
and constraints of organic agriculture in Chiang Mai s13165-015-0132-4
Province, Thailand. Asian Pac Dev J 16, 115-147.
DOI:10.18356/341adb3e-en Yudelman, M. Ratta, A., Nygaard, D. (1998). Pest
management and food production: looking to the fu-
Rice, P., El, E. A., Ac, A. B. (2007). Advances in pesti- ture. Food, Agriculture and the Environment Discus-
cide environmental fate and exposure assessments. J sion paper 2.
Agric Food Chem, 5367-5376.DOI: 10.1021/jf063764s
URL https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jf063764s World Bank. (2008). World Development Report: Ag-
riculture for Development. World Bank.
Sawyer, C., Carty, P. M., Parkin, G. (2003). Chemis-
try for Environmental Engineering and Science. Mc
Graw Hill.

Schafer, R., Mueller, R., Brack, W., Wenzel, K., Streck,

G., Ruck, W., et al. (2008). Determination of 10
particles-associated multiclass polar and semi-po-
lar pesticide from small streams using accelerat-
ed solvent extraction. Chemosphere, 1952-1960.
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2007.09.058 URL
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S0045653507012349?via%3Dihub

Shahnaj, P. (2010). Rice Farmers’ Knowledge about

the Effects of Pesticides on Environmental Pollution
in Bangladesh. Bangladesh Res. Pub. J., 1214-1227.

Singh, B., Singh, V. (2017). Fertilizer Management

in Rice. Dalam Book of Rice Production Worldwide.
Springer International Publishing AG.

Smith-spangler, C., Brandeau, M., Hunter, G.,

Bavinger, J., Pearson, M., Eschbach, P., et al. (2012).
Are organic foods safer or healthier than convention-
al alternatives? A systematic review. Ann Intern Med,
348-366. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-157-5-201209040-
00007

SNI 7313. (2008). Batas Maksimum Residu Pestisida

pada hasil pertanian. Indonesia: Badan Standarisasi
Nasional.

SNI 7387. (2007). Batas Maksimum cemaran logam

berat dalam pangan. Indonesia: Badan Standarisasi

12 ISSN-Internet 2197-411x OLCL 862804632

UniKassel & VDW, Germany- August 2020