Peningkatan Peran dan Performan Inovator untuk Pengembangan Sumber Daya Manusia Pedesaan

Asep Suryana

Abstract


The methodology used in this study was survey. Interview and observation were executed on 100 respondents (innovaators) in Kabupaten Bandung, selected randomly. The unit sampling was 50 respondents on rural area, and 50 respondents on urban area. The result of the study showed that: in the general, there was not significantly different between rural and urban areas in factors of human resources deveopment for innovators’ role and performance; all of respondents needed training and education program in leadership, effective communication, enterpreneurships, management of organization, skill of agriculture, skills of breeding, technology, rural economics, and human resources development; the man or institution hoped by respondents to involve in the program were agriculture instructure, nonformal organizations (non government organization), and university; on cognitive domain: respodents in rural area preferred science and skills of agriculture, breeds, and simple technology, whereas respondents in urban area preferred managerial and startegic aspects, like science of enterpreneurship, human resources development, leadership, and rural economics.

Keywords


Participatory Approach, Rural Development, Era of Reformation

References


A World Bank Country Study. 1990. Indonesia: Strategy for A Sustained Reduction in Poverty. Washington DC: The World Bank.

Alfian.1986. Tranformasi Sosial Budaya dalam Pembangunan Nasional. Jakarta: UIP.

Budiman, Arief. 1994. State and Civil Society in Indonesia. Clayton: Monash University.

Bunge, Frederica. 1983. Indonesia: A Country Study. Washington: Department of Army USA.

Chopra, Kadekodi and Murty. 1990. Participatory Development. London: Sage Publications.

Cohen, John M & Norman T. Uphoff. 1977. Rural Development Participatory: Concept andmeasures for Project Design, Implementation and Evaluation. Ithaca: Cornel University.

Eisenstadt. 1966. Modernisation: Protest and Change. Sydney: Prentice-Hall.

Elderige, Philip. 1994. NGOs and The State in Indonesia. in Budiman, Arief. State and Civil Society in Indonesia. Clayton: Monash University.

Escobal, Arturo. 1994. Encountering Development. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Gatra. 1998. Tantangan Pembangunan Indonesia. Jakarta: PT Tempo. Agustus, 1998.

Jayasuriya, L and Lee, Michael. 1994. Social Dimensions of Development. Western Australia: Curtin University of Technology.

Korten, David C. 1986. Community Organisation and Rural Development: A Learning Process Approach. in Okamura Y. Jonathan. Participatory Approaches to Development: Experiences in the Philippines. Manila: De la Salle University.

Lele, Uma. 1975. The Design of Rural Development Lessons from America. Ballimore: John Hopkins Press.

Nair, KS. and White S.A. 1993. Perspective on Development Communication. London: Sage Publications.

Okamura Y. Jonathan. 1986. Participatory Approaches to Development: Experiences in the Philippines. Manila: De la Salle University.

Saha, R., G.P. Ghosh, and P.B. Roy. 1993. Role of Libraries in Rural. in Nair, KS. and White S.A. Perspective on Development Communication. London: Sage Publications.

Sinha, P.R.R. 1976. Communication & Rural Change. Singapore: AMIC.

Uphoff, Norman T., Cohen. J., and Goldsmith. 1979. Feasibility and Application of Rural Development Participation : A State of Art Paper. Ithaca: Cornell University.

Windahl, S., Signitzer, B.H., & Alson, T. 1992. Using Communication Theory. London Sage.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.29313/mediator.v2i1.712

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




 

   

 


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a 
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License