THE CHANGES OF AGRARIAN STRUCTURE AND SOCIAL

DIFFERENTIATION IN RURAL COMMUNITIES IN

BANJARWANGI VILLAGE

By: Rita Rahmawati

ABSTRACT
This study is intended to analyze the changes of agrarian structure and its
implication on social change, social differentiation and the perception of
public welfare in the village. Particularly, this study aims to analyze how the
transformation of modes of production and agrarian structure has affected the
social differentiation and how the differentiation of modes of production and
agrarian structure affect the public perception of welfare.
This research took a case study in Banjarwangi Village, Bogor Regency in
West Java, Indonesia. This research was conducted with the historical
approach. The data collected comprised of primary data and secondary data
with a qualitative approach.
The results have shown that the change of agrarian structure occurred in
rural communities and the differentiation of modes of production has
implicated on the social differentiation and public perceptions of welfare. The
influence of capitalism toward the practice of the development of modes of
production is stronger, particularly with the entry of modes of foreign
production and the establishment of a doll factory wrapped in a concept of
home industry, has changed the public perception of welfare and the
implications on changes in family livelihood strategy, especially among the
youth. The changes of agrarian structure has not only changed social structure
in the farming community but also the overall social structure, and the
definition of welfare is no longer determined by the amount of agricultural
land tenure but based on other modes of production.

Key Words: Agrarian Structure, Social Differentiation, Modes of

Production, Perception of Public Welfare

INTRODUCTION
For years land has become an important mode of production for rural
communities. The ownership and or control of land is a guarantee for a high
social status in their society. History has proven that land has become a source
of power for some local authorities called landlords. Through land, a landlord
easily obtains other social rights from others. As conveyed by Tjondronegoro
in Tjondronegoro and Gunawan Wiradi (1984) that problems of land related
to the social and economic status of the rural area residents has started to
accumulate since the beginning of the 19th century and the policy of the
Netherlands Indies Government after running the government in a more direct
way after VOC became bankrupt (1799) focused more on the exploration of
land resources in guided ways, such as forced planting (cultuurstelsel)
between 1830 and 1870.

1
 The control of land has an influence on the achievement of social structure
in the society. History of the past proved that whoever has control over land
will gain the highest position in social structure. This was also put forward by
Husken (1998). Husken underlined the existence of social structure in the
Javanese society and its differentiation from time to time is always influenced
by the existence of the mode of production that is based on land. In the
explanation of the importance of land in forming the Javanese structure,
Husken strated by explaining about the suggestion to utilize land optimally
and extend farmland as much as possible, which was conveyed by King
Wengker long before the colonial times in Java and before the island of Java
lacked land.
Along with the entrance of the capitalist mode of production into the rural
areas, the social srtucture in rural areas has also changed. A study on this
occurance of social change caused by the change in mode of production has
also been conducted by Shanin (1990) and Ray (2002). The rural social
economic structure is not something which is stable and the occurance of
change may be influenced by the change in modes of production.
The study on social structure related to the difference in the application of
modes of production has been widely conducted, for instance the research
results of Kano (1984) that the use of a relatively more commercial mode of
production (on sugarcane farming) has urged the process of change of control
of agricultural resources which urges the forming of a polarized agricultural
society. On the contrary, in other rural areas in Java that only use a relatively
subsistent mode of production (on rice farming), the process of change of
control of agricultural resources evidently directs to the form of a stratified
agricultural society.
A study on social differentiation with a historical approach has also been
conducted by Husken. The results of Husken’s study showed that social
differentiation is a social phenomenon which has occured since liberal
capitalism infiltrated into the rural society, from the many influences of local
policy, regional, national to international which give an increasingly more
significant influence on the rise of differences between classes and an
increasingly sharper economic and political conflict.
This increasing gap is related to the process of a wider structural change in
the Indonesian society and economy. The rapid growth in commercial
agriculture, the relative growth of non-agricultural sectors, such as mining
and light industry and those that relate to changes in government political
policy (particularly bureaucracy and or military domination). The influence of
political and economic transformation on the relationships between remote
areas, particularly rural areas. As a village that still has rural characteristics,
Banjarwangi Village also cannot escape from those various influences. The
problems of land and agriculture which in the beginning became the main
characteristic of rural life in the village, along with the development of time
and social orientation, gradually shifts towards industry. The high social status
which in the beginning was marked by land ownership has also changed into
the ownership of other modes of production. In the past, the authority of
landlords in their capacity of absolute authority even had influence on the
village political situation, where a landlord may be elected as village leader
because coincidently the majority of village people were also his employees

2
(tillers/servants). Therefore land ownership as a mode of production in the
past has influenced the rural society structure polically and economically.
However, along with the change in agrarian structure where land does not
become the main mode of production, the social structure also becomes
differentiated.
Based on this background, therefore this research is conducted, to know
and analyze how far the change in agrarian structure and modes of production
has an influence on the social differentiation of the people of Banjarwangi
Village.

PROBLEM FORMULATION
The research question to be answered in this research is “how the change in
agrarian srtucture and modes of production taking place in the society of
Banjarwangi Village has an implication on the social differentiation and the
change in community perception on welfare”. Further, some more detailed
questions which will be studied in this research are:
1. How did the capitalist mode of production enter into the life of the
people of Banjarwangi Village and change the agrarian structure in the
village?
2. How does the change in agrarian structure and modes of production
have an implication on the social differentiation in communities, does
it become increasingly polarized or stratified?
3. How does the perception of social welfare change along with the
change in agrarian structure and modes of production and what factors
should be considered by communities in defining welfare?

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE
The objective of the research is to analyze the occurance of change in
agrarian structure on the people of Banjarwangi Village and its influence on
social change, social differentiation and the perception of welfare among the
people of Banjarwangi Village.
The objective of this research can be formulated as follows:
1. To analyze how the change in agrarian structure occures on the people of
Banjarwangi Village.
2. To analyze how the transformation of modes of production and agrarian
structure has an influence on the social differentiation of the people of
Banjarwangi Village.
3. To analyze how the differentiation in modes of production and agrarian
structure has an influence on the people’s perception on welfare.

RESEARCH METHOD
The method of this research applies the qualitative approach where the
understanding of findings or facts are constructed based on the subjective
perspective of the researcher. The understanding on the description,
comprehension and explanation of complex phenomenons on the relations,
patterns and configuration between factors apply the historical analysis. In this
perspective, research and proving on the social phenomenon is conducted
more constructively where the position of the reflective approach, inter
subject, and thinking of meaning becomes very important in obtaining the
meaning of the truth of a fact. Nevertheless, this study also provides sufficient

3
space on the efforts to investigate the causes and consequences which arise as
a result of political economic decisions made by authorities in the study
region.

GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF BANJARWANGI VILLAGE

Banjarwangi Village is one of the villages in the territory of Ciawi
Subdistrict, Bogor Regency, with an area of 109.7 hectares, and located 550
meters above sea level, with a moderate climate condition where rainfall is
120 m3. The population of Banjarwangi Village until the end of December
2008 was recorded as 5,825; comprising of 3,003 male and 2,822 female. The
population in families/number of Head of Families (HF) were 1,414; meaning
that each family had an average number of 4 to 5 family members.
When Indonesia became independent in 1945, the name Banjarwangi
Village had not existed. At that time, this village was still known as
Cukanggaleuh Kampong (Village) which according to history of the Dutch
colonial times, was taken from the word Cukang (bridge, intermediary) and
the word galeuh (taken from the Sundanese language which means buy, pay).
According to another understanding, the word galeuh shows a place of
gathering/a place to pay “tribute” from the people of the kampong to the
authorities in their times. Therefore, based on the origin of the words, the
word “cukang galeuh” means a place (kampong) as a means of transit/main
way, as a location for transaction and or paying tribute/tax to the authorities,
district heads and or landlords.
At the beginning of its establishment in 1978, the election of village head
for this new village (Banjarwangi Village) still applied the acclamation
system, where the village head was directly elected based on the agreement of
the people. The factors taken into consideration in electing someone to
become a leader were viewed from the aspects of: economy, social
intercourse and closeness to the related officials, in this case the head of
dictrict, police detective; and ownership/extent of land.
Before 1979, Banjarwangi Village ran the village government without
reference to law, but rather depended on the policy of the village head, and
only controlled by the authority of the head of district as a higher ranking
official above the village head. Since 1979, with the enactment of Law
number 5, 1979 on village administration, villages have had a strong legal
ground in running their government.
In running its government, a village has special autonomy in electing its
village head, running its government and finding its source of living, as well
as financing operating expenses for its government. Whereas village income
comes from monthly tax, service, and donations from third parties.

THE POSITION OF FARMERS IN SOCIAL STRUCTURE IN THE

COMMUNITY OF BANJARWANGI VILLAGE
From time to time, the fate of farmers has always been the same. In the
Dutch colonial times, farmers of this time could only perform farming which
was adjusted to the condition at that time, and from here they started to
become familiar with paddy but even that was only possessed by important
people (Dutch confidants) and most of the community only acted as
farmhands. Rice farming in the colonial times was very limited, considering

4
the land available in Banjarwangi Village at this time was still similar to a
forest.
At the end of the Dutch occupation and entering the Japanese colonial
times, farmers could only farm for 2 years because at that time, the Japanese
had not shown their greed, but after that, the existing agriculture (small
farmers) could not perform it anymore because of the romusha forced labor
which was not focused on agriculture but on plantations, spices, rubber and
infrastructure, and the worst was on mines for the interest of war of the
Japanese troops who were having warfare in their country (with the Allied
Forces) and in other countries such as in Thailand, the Philippines and the
United States.
Besides small farmers who owned small areas of land, there were also a
minority of the people of Banjarwangi Village whose status were as
farmhands. The fate of farmhands in the colonial times was not very good.
The relationship between farmhands (as employees) and land owners
(landlords) was not merely a patronage relationship (patron-client) but more
than that, farmhands were almost like slaves to their landlords; the term was
servant (lower helper). Landlords could treat their laborers to their heart’s
content. However, a landlord in Banjarwangi Village in the colonial times
(Mr. Suminta) was not a very cruel person. Nevertheless, compared to small
farmers, farmhands were still viewed as less fortunate, because besides having
to cultivate their master’s ricefields, they also had to serve their master’s other
needs such as being a night watchman, guarding their master’s home.
After Indonesia became independent, farmers started to gain back their
rights to farm, despite in a small volume (small area of land), even by utilizing
land owned by plantations/forests. This condition continued until the times of
the Old Order government, farmers started to gain their cultivation land. Small
farmers could feel relieved because they had started to feel the support of the
government towards them. Farmers were considered as a source of welfare for
the country, so that vacant lands owned by the state started to be given to
farmers to be cultivated. The faith of farmers continued to improve (at least
that was what was uttered by Mrs. Yayah) along with the development of
times, likewise the faith of farmhands started to improve and they did not
suffer too much as in the colonial times.
In the times of the New Order, the faith of farmers had experienced a very
rapid progress compared to the times of the Old Order, i.e. small farmers had
been given much attention which was proved by a government program
termed “Binmas” (Community Guidance) i.e. in the form of funds/goods
allocated for farmers for the progress of agriculture, in the form of seeds/
fertilizers etc., managed by the KUD (Village Unit Cooperative) and other
factors such as development, information, welfare, economy and health.
The majority of development was focused on irrigation facilities so that the
agricultural sector was given more attention, so part of the community (small
farmers) felt a wind of change and it was indeed proved at this time that small
farmers were more prosperous in their livelihoods with this program.
Since the times of the New Order, the relationship between small farmers/
farmhands/tiller farmers and land owners (landlords) has been a patronage
relationship that has applied modern ways of employment agreement. At this
time, land owners and farmhands had arranged an employment
agreement/contract, although not actually written. The contents of the

5
employment agreement is that the materials (ricefields) as a mode of
production owned by the land owner was given its handling to farmers
(farmhands/tiller farmers) to be managed with an agreement called “ngepak”
(lease or rent of land) meaning production sharing, but the land owner still has
the responsibility to prepare seeds and fertilizer, while the handling, starting
from planting to harvest is performed by farmhands. After harvest (with crop
yeild), production sharing will be calculated with a system of 10 : 1.
At the time of reformation up to the present, farmers have experienced
difficult times with the high price of basic commodities, but at present, the life
of small farmers continue to improve gradually, despite some difficulties still
faced by farmers, such as the smaller volume of business, scarcity of
fertilizers, the low price of gabah both for dry rice grains (HGPK) and wet
rice grain price (HGPB).

OWNERSHIP PATTERN, CONTROL AND UTILIZATION OF LAND

In the colonial times, land was still controlled by the Netherlands Indies
State. This territory of Ciawi was not targeted as a location for agriculture or
plantation by the Dutch but only as a place of transit because of its natural
factor which still took the form of wilderness and also its population was still
distributed as small groups. At this time, the land in Banjarwangi Village was
still forests and became possession of the government (forestry). At the time
of the Dutch occupation, all the land was controlled by district heads.
However, along with the clearing of land by the people, the cleared lands
started to be claimed as the people’s land. At that time, whoever dared to clear
land could obtain land ownership. Of course district heads and landlords who
had control were the ones who dared to clear and control land. This tradition
of taking possession of government land still continues until independence
times and the Old Order times.
In the independence times, ownership and control of land was still handed
down from generation to generation. Anybody who could, sometimes with the
exchange system with goods or livestock, and occasionally from a rentier
when the borrower could not afford to pay, his land was taken without any
agreement from the land owner. The land owner was asked to sign on duty
stamp as a proof that his debts had been settled.
With the enactment of Law number 5, 1960, land owned by the people
started to be regulated by the government. This Law regulates agrarian affairs.
According to UUPA (Land Act/Law) number 5, 1960, what is meant by
agraria is: the earth, water and space including all the natural resources under
and above it (see article 1 section 1-5), so that forestry, mining, natural
resources under rivers and seas as well as environment are included.
Law number 5, 1960 on Basic Reguations of Agrarian Principles (usually
abbreviated UUPA) is an important milestone in the national agrarian reform
politics. Through UUPA, Indonesians established their political determination
to break the structure of agrarian control with the colonial and feudal
characteristics above into a structure of control that can guarantee the
realization of “as much as possible for the prosperity of the people”.
Therefore, there are five main missions of UUPA, namely:
(1) restructuring of Land Law;
(2) implementation of land reform;
(3) arrangement of land utilization;

6
 (4) liquidation of foreign rights in agrarian affairs;
(5) elimination of remains of feudalism in agrarian affairs
The agenda on this transformation of agrarian structure as desired by the
UUPA which in the translation of its general policy is called the agenda of
agrarian reform, which is addressed to:
a. the efforts of economic development based on national strength,
b. configuration of legislation and national institutional which will be
organized for the future.
In essence, agrarian reform is a systematic political efffort to carry out a
change in the structure of land control and improvement of assurance
guarantee on land control for people who utilize land and the natural resources
included in it, an which is also followed by the improvement of production
system throuh the providing of technical facilities and agricultural credit,
improvement of farming methods, to other social infrastructure. In such
comprehension, the agenda of transformation on the biased agrarian structure
had been positioned by UUPA as an independent variable itself in the post-
independence national agrarian politics. As part of the effort to realize an
“Agrarian Transition”, the Indonesian nation is heading for an independent
agrarian order, fair and creating prosperity for the entire people of Indonesia.
In technical terms, what is meant by agrarian transtion here is the transition
from the “traditional agrarian” structure which was biased, feudal, and had
colonial characteristics into a structure of relations where the agricultural
sector and the rural society in it is not biased, isolated and involuted, but
instead becomes strong, independent and integrated into other economic
pillars, therefore becomes more productive, expereince their own genuine
industrialization process, and where the welfare of the people will continue to
increase.
With the enactment of a government regulation followed up by BPN
(National Land Agency), the definition of one’s ownership of land is regulated
by the land act. Since then up to the present, the controlling of land ownership
is still the same except for an addition on its regulation administration, that
there is an allocation on the ownership of land with an allocation and
utilization of land permit (IPPT). The existence of land regulation is also
proved by a buying and selling transaction on duty stamp/seal and is
acknowledged by the official concerned [village head or head of RT
(Neighborhood Association)/RW (citizens association)] as a witness before
proceeding to a sales agreement or cerificate.
In the times of the New Order, the rearranging of this land ownership
administration was being more promoted. Rearranging of land ownership
administration by the Land Agency of Bogor Regency by issuing a proof of
ownership in the name of each owner proved by a document called tupi or
girik (a temporary deed of ownership) in which the name of owner, block of
land area and the amount of tax is included. These grounds were meant to
eliminate the word landlord and to know the name and the number of land
ownership with an ownership of land object in the territory of each village.
Each village is given a book called the registry of land ownership (land
object) called book c. village.
In 1968, the land allocated for ricefields was 80%, the remaining 20% was
allocated for plantation, while the residents’ homes were scattered among the
agricultural and plantation lands. In 2008, the remaining ricefields comprised

7
of 60.7%; 17% was used for plantation and 22.7% for housing. In 2009,
another change occurred; 10 hectares of ricefield became land for housing and
another 1.2 hectares of ricefield became residential areas (housing).
This change of pattern on land utilization is related to the change in the
people’s orientation on modes of production. Land does not become the
people’s main mode of production to gain social status in their society
anymore. There has been a change in the people’s mindset where the
ownership of a house and other luxury goods becomes the main point in
determining social status in their society.
There are very little descendants of landlords in the past who are still
respected as people with high social status and addressed as Den/Juragan
(young master/master). This proof is supported by the experience of
descendants of Haji Muhtar who in the past was an authority (village head)
and also as a landlord.
However, different from the descendants of Haji Suminta, namely Den
Makmun and his son Den Ilyas, the title Den still adheres, because they still
have a vast area of land. Therefore, land is not fully released from the view of
the people, but land is not the only determiner of social status in society.

CHANGE OF STRATEGY IN FAMILY SOURCE OF INCOME

In the past, the structure of the people’s livelihood was still oriented on
agriculture. In the Dutch colonial times, the residents’ livelihood were only as
farmers, differentiated as landlord farmer, small farmer and tilling farmer and
farmhands. Agricultutal yeild produced in these times were rice, vegetables
and rubber and clove plantations. Likewise, in the Japanese colonial times,
there was almost no difference in the choice of source of income for the
residents of Banjarwangi Village, still on agriculture with the products of rice
and vegetables.
After the times of independence, besides being a farmer, there were other
choices chosen by the residents of Banjarwangi Village, i.e. being a trader.
Agricultural products produced at this time were rice, nonstaple food crops
and horticulture. Until the times of the Old Order, most of the people still
consider agriculture as the main livelihood besides new choices of being a
trader, cattle raiser and fish farmer (fisheries).
Along with the development of times, the need for land for other
necessities increased. The government’s orientation which starts to shift from
agriculture to industry starts to change the strategy in family source of
income. Agriculture was not the only livelihood of the people anymore. The
structure of livelihood at present in Banjarwangi Village has started to vary,
there are residents who become civil servants, traders, employees, factory
laborers and construction workers, and farmers. Residents who choose the job
as farmers comprises of 40%, consisting of owners, tillers and farmhands.
The choice to become factory laborers is the most menguntungkan choice
for the village residents, particularly young women (female) considering the
salary offered by pabrik boneka as factory laborers is quite high, namely
minimum wage i.e. Rp. 920.000/month. All the factory laborers are women.
While the male (young men) in this village mostly choose a job as an ojek
(motorcycle put to use as means of hired transportation) driver.
The booming of ojek in this village started from the monetary crisis in
1998, then the rise of the free market (at least that was what was said by an

8
informant) which had an impact on the ease to gain access to credit on
motorcycles without down payment and collateral. Since 2002, the growth of
ojek in this village has increasingly boomed.
One of the profiles of the owner of a peci (cap, headdress worn by Muslim
men and as a symbol of nationalism) sewing business is Misbah (who is also a
village officer/village secretary). Misbah opens a hat sewing business. The
hats produced are hats typical of his own, any sewing business would not be
able to make. The pattern is made of wood. The idea to make hats was
inspired by seeing modifications of hats abroad showed on Metro TV. The
initial capital to open this business was Rp. 4 million. The money was used to
buy 1 (one) unit of sewing machine and other business capital in 2006.
At present Misbah has 3 sewing machines and 6 employees whom all are
relatives. The earnings from this ready-to-wear business can pay for his
children’s education, daily needs, 1 (one) unit of sewing machine, and
motorcycles both for running the business operation and for private use.
Misbah’s wife has her own business by taking orderss from the doll factory.
With a capital of 1 (one) unit of sewing machie, his wife with the help of her
sister carry out a number of orders taken from a Korean factory (owned by
Mr. Lee) which factory is near the Village hall of Banjarwangi. There are
three doll factories located in Banjarwangi Village, namely Family Toys doll
factory with 27 employees, Dream Toys doll factory with 90 employees and
BLK oy factory tranferred from Ciawi with 22 employees. The existence of
factories in this village shows the entrance of new modes of production
besides land. Nevertheless, although there is a change in modes of production,
relationships of production in the past which was still based on land is not
very different from the relationship of production between the owner and
laborers of the factory, which still shows the class type, i.e. social relationship
of production which is exploitative (see Russel, 1989).
The existence of the peci factory and doll factory as a new mode of
production besides land has changed the strategy in family source of income.
The mode of production meant here is the power/production ability which will
influence productivity, social relationship of production which will form a
superior position and a subordinate position so that the social relationship
forms a social structure in controlling the power of production (see Shanin,
1990; Russel, 1989). The power of production is a material basis consisting of
employee skills and means of production. Meanwhile, the social relationship
of production consists of the realtionship between an actor and another actor.
The social relationship includes: property, power, control in controlling
productive assets of the people, cooperative work relation and relationship
between classes in society (see Undang Fadjar, 2009).

THE CHANGE IN THE PEOPLE’S PERCEPTION ON WELFARE

The change of the village agrarian structure, and the people’s mode of
production, has changed the strategy in family source of income. Besides
having an implication on the change of cultural value, these changes also have
an implication on the change of perception on welfare. This change of
perception eventually makes a map of a new social structure in the community
of Banjarwangi Village.
In the Dutch colonial times, the ones considered rich were those who had
influence and were close to the Dutch colonial government. Similarly, in the

9
Japanese colonial times, the rich were those who had influence and were close
to the colonial government.
In the times of independence and the times of the New Order, the ones
considered rich were those who had vast areas of land (landlords). With this
power on land, landlords could have power in other aspects, for instance Haji
Muhtar. Because he was a landlord, he was elected as village head where
coincidentally 75% of the village residents worked as tillers on his land. We
can say that the rich of the past (the Old Order times) were only several
people, for instance Haji Sohib who has 40 hectares of land. Haji Muhtar has
only 10 hectares of land left, Haji Sai has 9 hectares, Mbah (grandmother)
Dari has 30 hectares, Haji Najmudin and Haji Sahroni have a lot of land
(farming), and Juragan Suminta has 400 hectares.
However, since the New order up to the present, the perceptionof wealth is
not merely determined by land as a mode of prouction, but there are other
perceptions which can be seen by the ownership of buldings, houses, cars, etc.
The people considered wealthy in the village at present are: Haji Adang; Haji
Endin, Sri Wahyuni, Nyoman, Ponto, Rizal, Edi Supriyadi, Sunaryo, Haji
Mahmud, Haji Awal, Budi, and Benny. The wealthiest person is Haji
Dudung/Ramdani because he is generous, has a beautiful house (the surface
area is approximately 100 m2 with two floors), has 4 cars of Kijang Inova and
Avanza make. Haji Dudung has 1 (one) wife and 4 (four) children.
In this village there is nouveau riche woman named Mrs. Hatta/Sri
Wahyuni, who is the owner of the building and the Assyifa Koranic study. Her
wealth makes her have informal power so that she can call village officers to
her home for various interests for herself.
The change in agrarian structure and the changes in the people’s modes of
production has an implication on the social differentiation where land is not
the only consideration anymore.
The existence of other modes of production such as houses and land have
given a place for itself for the so-called rich people who have informal
authority to obtain special service from the village officers.

CONCLUSION
From various discussions through historical approach based on periods
before and after independence, we can say that actually the social structure in
the village has not changed much. The village elite as the upper class who
control vast lands remain dominant, but the elements of other modes of
production are also taken as other consideration which give a place of their
own in the social structure in society.
Viewed from the periods of history, several conditions of the community in
Banjarwangi Village can be described. The community in Banjarwangi
Village has been differentiated into two categories, namely developed farmers
and poor farmers. In the colonial times, farmers who are said to be developed
are those who get the opportunity to try to form a strong rural middle class.
This matter relates to the scenario of macro economy politics with a micro
social scenario. But after the independence time, developed farmers were
marked by the control of various modes of production.
The mechanism of social differentiation caused by commercialization,
the acccumulation of land control, agricultural modernization and local

10
political conflicts as a reflection of processes at the national level, causes the
reshuffling of the social structure in the society of Banjarwangi Village.
The change of strategies in development including agricultural
development, from the effort to revise the balance between land, labor and
capital immediately to modernization and intensification causes a change in
the relationship of agricultural system which gives a more equal space
between landlords and tillers.
The development of change in agricultural structure and farmers as
well as farming systems in the community of Banjarwangi Village influences
the change in social structure and different modes of production that causes
different social differentiation, which in the past was differentiated in two
classes, i.e. the owner (landlord) and poor farmers (with no possession of
land) or tillers of lands owned by landlords, while at present it is differentiated
by the title the rich and the poor which indicator is economy (the control of
money and other modes of production, not only land and farming).
Since the entrance of new modes of production and the choice of source of
living to the direction of service and industry, there is a shift in the change of
social structure, but the phenomenon is always the same in each period. The
difference is in the number of the poor and the rich and the change of status
from rich to poor or from poor to rich. This change is also accompanied by a
striking change in social differentiation which causes the rise of a new social
structure, which is not determined by the land mode of production anymore,
but by other economic modes of production.

REFERENCES
Husken, Frans, 1998. Masyarakat Desa Dalam Perubahan Zaman. Jakarta:
PT Gramedia Widiasarana Indonesia (Grasindo).
Kano, Hiroyoshi, 1984. ”Penguasaan Tanah dan Diferensiasi Masyarakat
Desa” in S.M.P. Tjondronegoro (editor). Dua Abad Penguasaan
Tanah: Pola Penguasaan Tanah Pertanian di Jawa Dari Masa ke
Masa. Jakarta: PT Gramedia.
Ray, Christhoper, 2002. ”A mode of production for fragile rural economics:
the territorial accumulation of form of capital” in Journal of Studies.
18 (2002) 225-231.
Russel, James, 1989. Modes of Production in World History. Routledge.
London and New York.
Shanin, Teodor, 1990. Defining Peasant. Essays Concerning Rural Societies,
Expolary Economies, and Learning from them in the Contemporary
World. Cambridge: Basil Blackwell.
Tjondronegoro and Gunawan Wiradi, (ed.), 1984. Dua Abad Penguasaan
Tanah: Pola Penguasaan Tanah Pertanian di Jawa Dari Masa ke
Masa. Jakarta: PT Gramedia.

11