*3.2. Social Network, The Instrument of Migration Decision Making*

As detailed elsewhere [30], three main network models reflected strategies used by migrants in their decision to migrate. The first model was a kinship-based network of either close relatives or immediate family, as well as distant relatives or extended family (53.84%). This strategy was commonly deployed by migrant communities who tended to be more mature, had sufficient capital to start migrating, as well as knowledge of cocoa or coffee cultivation as a requirement for planting. However, some landless people also decided to migrate as on-farm labor for other migrant communities who had established their farming practices in destination areas. Those migrants could be temporary, permanent, or seasonal. An excerpt from an interview that illustrates this pattern follows.

Mr T, a resident of T, Lawonua Village, stated, *"I was visited by my uncle* . . . *and he said, come on, move* . . . *What are you doing staying in this village? You can plant a cocoa plantation there and the price of the land is cheap, not as expensive as here. Sell your plantation or cows here, it's enough to buy land there". [30]*

The second was a network set up to gain profit (44.12% of the total network). This network was either run in balance or not and built through a patron–client mechanism. A capital owner who later acts as a patron needs workers who are his inferiors as clients. The patron provides jobs and financial support, including the cost of migrating and supporting the clients' living needs in the early days of migration. These clients need the patron to improve the economic conditions of their families through

managing their land as well as minimizing their migration risks. In this type of relationship, often the client's decision to migrate was not voluntary but forced owing to economic pressure and the vertical relationship with the patron.

The third network is a pattern of relationships that emerge owing to similarity of purpose. Generally, this pattern is characterized by identity, location of origin, and current residence similarities and was generally found in migrant communities who had been pioneer settlers in Southeast Sulawesi and Lampung. These groups built a network of neighborhood or identity similarity among community origin who had the same goal of increasing the number of plantations by expanding to villages that still had available land.

In the case of West Java, the first settlers in Lampung joined the transmigrant program in the early 1960s [35]. With their success in managing coffee systems apparent by the late 1980s, migrants joined from West Java originally as laborers and opened new coffee plots when they had access to capital [36].

These various relationship patterns often overlapped. A vertical relationship pattern, such as the patron–client relationship, could be reinforced by the patterns of kinship and neighborhoods, which were horizontal. For example, in the patron–client relationship, the kinship between the two often enlarged the client's decision to migrate not only because of economic need but also reluctance to reject an offer from a relative. Moreover, the overlapping relationship was also enforced by brokers, intermediaries, or ones who bridge the various groups of migrants from different regions to select land and encourage them to move. An intermediary or broker is an actor who can bridge and build the trust of the individual or group of individuals who initially were not interconnected. They facilitate social interaction, increase a community's economic activity, and minimize the risks of migration. On the other hand, the broker or intermediary is often associated with exploitation, transfer of risk into profits for intermediaries, and the accumulation of profit.

#### *3.3. Type of In-Migrant*

Migrant characteristics in receiving communities vary, however, among (1) new migrants (first-time movers), (2) recurrent migrants (multiple movers), and (3) follow-up migrants (family movers), as shown in Table 2. New migrants (pioneer migrants) are categorized as migrants who come directly from the area of origin to the receiving community and who have not migrated to other areas before. They may have a connection to the receiving community, through their family or neighbor who has lived in those areas, or they just decided to move, driven by the motivation to obtain land and increase their incomes.

Recurrent migrants or multiple movers are those who have already moved into, and out of, the region in surrounding receiving communities more than once. They may have some experience abroad in Malaysia or in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Recurring migrants in Southeast Sulawesi were generally migrants moving from an area near to their current receiving communities but decided to move to other areas in the same province to find better economic opportunities. A summarized excerpt from an interview that illustrates this pattern follows.

*P, 68 years-old, a cocoa farmer from Kampala Village in Sinjai District, South Sulawesi sailed to Konaweha, Kolaka District, Southeast Sulawesi in the 1970s. He crossed the Gulf of Bone with his youngest child, aged 6 years, bringing five sacks of rice, two cows, and money amounting to IDR 35,000 (*≈*USD 3.50). After sailing for three days and two nights, he arrived at Kolaka and immediately visited his uncle who had already moved to Konaweha Village. He was helped by his uncle to look for flat land to be used to grow rice. After two days, he found land owned by a native resident who had received the land from the government but was unable to cultivate it. The land was sold cheaply to P. Over time, P's desire for land increased, especially for providing land for his children to equip them for the future. In 1995, P sought land in Lawonua (their current location) assisted by SF. Once the land was obtained, P did not move to Lawonua but still lived in Kolaka. However, in 2000, P finally decided to move to Lawonua with his wife and child. [30]*

*Land* **2020**, *9*, 529


**Table 2.** Migrant types and characteristics in Southeast Sulawesi [30].

These recurring migrants migrated with the motivation to increase the amount of land they owned. Some of them had financial difficulties and intended to sell land in Pinanggo or Konaweha to overcome their problems. Land in the area was more expensive than land in Lawonua. Selling the land in their area and looking for land in a cheaper place could solve their problems. Some other migrants who were able to accumulate capital deliberately looked for land in new areas to increase the number of their plantations. Recurring migrants usually owned land. The acquired land was later shared as inheritance or dowry for the marriages of their offspring.

Follow-up migrants are descendants of migrants who have lived for a long time in receiving communities. Most of them were born in their origin areas and later moved to the receiving communities as toddlers or teens after their parents had already moved there. They are follow-up migrants who have not received a share of the family land nor been able to obtain their own.

#### *3.4. Gender Relations in Communities of Origin*

In describing the gender and age specificity of migration patterns, we used distinctions based on the status of who had migrated, as shown in Table 3. From the two case studies, we could see that for land-based livelihood options, youth or single men and adult or married men migrated by themselves and left their families in the origin area, who might join later. However, the discussion has shown that no married women left their villages for land-based options but perhaps to work in urban areas.


#### **Table 3.** Livelihood options based on the type of migration, age, and gender.

Source: Household survey in West Java, Southeast and South Sulawesi, and focus group discussions in West Java and South Sulawesi.

From the case study in West Java, of the family members left behind in the origin communities, some were maintaining their agricultural systems and there were some changes in the roles of family members—when men migrate, the women or other family members maintain their agricultural plots. Statistical analysis of the difference in women's roles showed that women's decision making was significantly increased in paddy rice cultivation and regular maintenance; in particular, for fertilizer and pesticide purchasing, as shown in Table 4. Decision making on other agricultural practices was slightly increased although not significantly. Although women's roles increased in maintaining plots, decision making regarding timber cultivation was still considered to be the man's domain. An excerpt from an interview illustrates this pattern.

*"When father migrated, I had the responsibility to cultivate our timber garden. Usually, I weed the plot. To me, cultivating a timber garden is not so di*ffi*cult, just weeding. If we need to harvest it, we need to wait for my husband, who usually knows how to calculate the timber prices and who can negotiate the price. I don't know anything about selling timber and how to calculate the price of timber"* (in-depth interview, Rajadesa Village, West Java).

When we compare the situation of land-based out-migrant and off-farm out-migrant situations, the role of women in decision making is greater in the off-farm, in which the men move to urban areas

#### *Land* **2020**, *9*, 529

and have less involvement in agriculture. For land-based out-migrant communities, men and women still worked together on agricultural practices and most decisions were made jointly, or by the man alone, as shown in Table 5.


**Table 4.** Women's workload and power related to decision making based on different periods, West Java.

Source: Household survey, West Java (2016).

**Table 5.** Women's workload and power related to decision making based on the type of migration, West Java.


Source: Household survey, West Java (2016).

#### *Land* **2020**, *9*, 529

We might see that this migration owing to land-based activities does not improve women's role in decision making. However, we could see that this means less burden for women. When the male migrates and women are responsible for the land, the extended family may be involved, or the woman hires labor. However, for a poor family, women's work in agriculture will be increased. We see that in land-based migration, women can still make decisions in certain cases but for more strategic decisions they needed to discuss it with the man, as the land manager. Additionally, in land-based migration, at certain times, i.e., in seasons when source areas need more labor, the male might return to the village to help while for off-farm migrants, opportunities to return to the village were less.

#### *3.5. Returnee Migrants*

Some of the migrants who had accumulated considerable capital moved back to their place of origin, cleared land, and started to cultivate. The remittances and investment of the returnee migrant could be in various forms, such as building a mosque or road for the villages of origin. In the West Java study, some of the migrants once back in their village, in addition to managing their agricultural land there, kept their land in Lampung or other destination areas, employing landless farmers from their village of origin to cultivate it. Hence, inducing follow-up migrants.

In West Java, returnee migrants from Lampung used their collected capital and skills they built during the migration experience to manage the coffee system in the Gunung Sawal protected area under a community-based management scheme. De Royer [37] stated that while there seems to be no clear correlation between the beginning of the community forestry program in 2008 and the mass return of migrants, the program has been perceived by migrants as a great opportunity to make money from the skills they obtained in Lampung while re-establishing themselves in West Java. The Gunung Sawal region has since developed into the coffee hub of West Java with a very well-developed market. Here we can see a clear link between the return of migrants and the rapid expansion of land under coffee cultivation during the last two decades. People converted their mixed tree gardens into coffee gardens; those who were not migrants learned from those who were.

In Sulawesi, returnee migrants did not move back to cultivate their land. Some of them tried to find better luck elsewhere with cheaper, or any available, land, thereby creating multiple-time migrants. A few of them used their network and their knowledge of land information to connect people from the origin areas to available land in destination areas, acting as intermediaries or brokers. However, the legality of such land in the market is often "grey". Some land "ownership" does not have a strong legal basis supported by a letter or certificate from the National Land Agency.

#### **4. Discussion**

These various observations can be interpreted as pieces of a larger puzzle in which migration decisions become linked at human life-cycle scales, as shown in Figure 1, based on the five questions raised in the introduction. We split the first question ("What are the gendered patterns of movement concerning age and life histories in both source and target areas? Do gender norms of behavior influence land-use patterns differentially in source and target areas?") into two parts.

#### *4.1. Q1A. Which Conditions within the Community of Origin Have Been the Main Trigger for People to Try Their Luck Elsewhere (Overseas, Urban, or Rural), at Least Temporarily?*

In the two study cases, economic needs were the main trigger for migration. The lack of arable land and lack of capital to intensify farming systems pushed the pioneer farmers in West Java and South Sulawesi to search for land elsewhere. The choice of target areas was usually decided through existing kinship or neighborhood networks. The broker or intermediary mechanism was formed through informal relationships and occurred at almost all stages of migration. In South Sulawesi, during the era of crop development implemented by government programs (the "Green Revolution", agricultural intensification, and agricultural extension), migration occurred spontaneously into those communities that wanted to improve their livelihoods by attracting more labor [38]. Kinship networks were so strongly binding that the functions of intermediaries were not visible. After the boom in cocoa

commodity development in Sulawesi, the rate of migration rapidly increased, the primary purpose of which was to improve incomes through the expansion of cocoa plantations. Migration increased massively and spread to other areas; migrants from different villages began to arrive. The roles of intermediaries became stronger during this phase, using networks of kinship, neighborhood, and friendship.

What occurred in the two study areas was similar to that described in a study of motivations to migrate conducted by Amacher and Hyde [39] in remote areas in the Philippines. They indicated that the direction of migration to remote areas was largely determined by the availability of land that was accessible for migrants, resulting in a preference for areas with low population density. Accessible in this context meant that the land had no clear ownership status so that they could easily start cultivating it.

#### *4.2. Q1B. What Effects Did Migration Have on Gender-Specific Land Use and Livelihoods in the Areas of Origin?*

Feminization of agriculture as described elsewhere [40] under dominantly male migration patterns, appeared to be less common in the two study areas. What occurred was often a pattern where elderly people or other extended family members taking care of grandchildren stayed behind and struggled to maintain their agricultural practices. In the case of the West Java study, male farmers still had the decision-making power on tree-based farming in the origin area. Male farmers would return during harvesting or for any other activity that required their presence. Vice versa, females could undertake temporary migration to help harvesting or other laborious activities. However, in the day-to-day decision making in managing households and annual crops, there were significant differences in decision making compared to when the male was not on migration. Despite the changing roles in the households of a migrant community, balancing the needs of agricultural labor, work seasons, and family needs might be achieved through mutual adjustments of marriage partners [41]. This could be the key to the success of livelihood actions in the areas of origin adapting to change.

Hecht (2015) [42] indicated that off-farm labor migration could result in changes in land uses and forest dependence, following shifts in gender and generational relations. Our findings indicate, though not significant, that women's burden was heavier in the off-farm-based migration situation and abandonment of land could occur more readily. Further exploration is needed to see patterns of work and the success of working relationships in non-land-based migration.

### *4.3. Q2. How Do (Temporary) Migrants Compare the Positive and Negative Aspects of Home and Temporary Abodes?*

The influx of migrants into new areas can change the type of farming systems. For example, the Bugis migrants entering Southeast Sulawesi in the era of the rice-focused Green Revolution began to switch their interest to cocoa cultivation. It became easier for them to find new areas that were suitable for planting cocoa because of their migration experience, under the schemes inspired by the Green Revolution, which turned out to be compatible with cocoa cultivation. New technology (such as herbicides and hand tractors) introduced in the Green Revolution for rice fields reduced the length of time on the farm, and therefore, the opportunities to manage more land became greater. Their mobility was increased as well, owing to less time being consumed on-farm and were motivated even more to look for land and manage cocoa plantations in other places. In some of the cases, experience with more intensified land use in the source area (e.g., West Java) enriched agriculture and agroforestry in the new environment (e.g., South Sumatra).

The influx of migrants also triggered a new type of job. The farmers in Southeast Sulawesi who were no longer interested in farming and planting began to turn to other sources of income (off-farm). Those who understood land matters later became intermediaries in land markets, drawing on the pool of people they knew, be they relatives or neighbors, to buy land. Absorption of new labor can start as paid labor and a patron–client relationships or share-cropping but also involve land renting and buying within customary ownership rules (rarely involving formal land certification).

In both Southeast Sulawesi and Lampung, migrants from more densely populated South Sulawesi and Java, respectively, did not arrive on an empty slate but in landscapes where local farming communities of Semendo (a southward expansion of a group in the neighboring province of South Sumatra) and Tolaki ethnic identity had converted forests for extensive land use. The migrants brought traditions of more intensive agroforestry management of coffee and cocoa, leading to a synergy where the group with longer presence opened forest and the newcomers bought existing gardens and intensified them before they returned to fallow vegetation. In the surveys of local ecological knowledge in Sumberjaya in Lampung, the two groups were distinguishable in knowledge and concepts [43].

Similarly, experience in farming cultivation can have an impact on the farming systems in the origin areas. Such is the case with the West Java migrants who, upon returning from Lampung and gaining access to forest land through a social forestry scheme, were able to manage coffee systems that were considered to be more environmentally friendly than timber systems, which were the traditional farming systems in the area.
