Tri Hita Karana as the basic
philosophy of Balinese Political
Ecology: a case study of traditional
Balinese agricultural organization
Subak
I Gede Herry Purnama*
*School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine,
Udayana University – Bali
Address : Gedung PS-IKM. Fakultas Kedokteran, Universitas Udayana
Jalan PB. Sudirman, Denpasar, Bali, Indonesia 80232
Email : patjoel@yahoo.com
Abstract
One of the basic Balinese philosophies is Tri Hita Karana, which is
central philosophy and influences many sectors of Balinese livelihoods. A
good example on the implementation of Tri Hita Karana is Subak, a
Balinese socio-religious traditional rice farming organization. This paper
presents the implementation of political ecology in Subak based on the Tri
Hita Karana philosophy, emphasizing on the way Subak defines water
rights for each member within Subak, dealing with conflict, and how inter-
Subak works to allocate water.
The Subak are one of the strongest examples of user-based
allocation, water is allocated based on their spacious size or based on
tektek, a principle of proportional water allocation to each individual
member. As an autonomous socio-religious community, Subak system
shows a high degree of flexibility and responsiveness to negotiations
among members. It includes making sure that every member of the Subak
receive a fair share of water for the cultivation of their rice fields,
negotiation with other Subak, and dealing with conflicts among members or
other parties in terms of Subak activities.
In terms of conflict resolution in an inner Subak members or
conflict with other Subak members, there is certain kind of bottom up
process for conflict management in the Subak body. The interesting part is
any conflict which arises within Subak members mostly resolved and
handled by their own without any outsider influences or mediators.
Nowadays, conflict which arises in Subak body is mainly caused by
the “income jealousy” between agriculture industry and tourism industry. A
form of financial incentives to farmers and effective policy of land reform
1
should be applied by government, especially in the making of urban
expansion planning to the rural areas in order to make Subak sustained as
one of the main backbones of Balinese economics and tourism industry.
Keywords: Political Ecology, Subak, Tri Hita Karana
Introduction
Bali is one of Republic Indonesia’s Provinces and located between Java
Island and Lombok Island, right in the middle of Indonesian archipelago.
Bali Province has a land area of 5,632.86 square kilometer (km2) and a
population of 3.179.918 million, with a density of 565 persons per km2
(Utari et al, 2006). Bali has made the most rapid economic development of
all the islands of Indonesia. One of the main reasons is the many income
possibilities created directly by tourism or indirectly by industries which
produce goods for the tourism industry. In fact, tourism has developed fast
in the late 1960’s. In the following years arrivals at the Ngurah Rai
International Airport increased significantly from 5000 tourists per year in
1968, to 3900 per day in 2001 (BPS, 2004 as cited in Artha, 2005). In the
early period, tourism centers were concentrated in the south of Bali around
Kuta, Sanur and Nusa Dua. Nowadays, with the constant arrival of more
tourists every year, tourism can now be found all over Bali Island.
Beside the panorama of Bali’s landscape, tourism in Bali is based on
Balinese culture; lots of tourist comes to Bali for this reason, a unique
culture which is different from any other culture in the world. What makes
it unique is the collaboration between Hindu as the largest Balinese religion
and the origin of Balinese culture which was influenced by the Majapahit
Kingdom invasion, and is a daily practice for all Balinese. One of the basic
Balinese philosophies is Tri Hita Karana, which is a central philosophy and
influences many sectors of Balinese livelihoods.
According to Sutawan (2004), Tri Hita Karana means “three causes of
happiness/ prosperity/peacefulness”. Consisting of three elements namely:
Parahyangan (supra natural realm or belief in God), Palemahan
(environmental realm), and Pawongan (social realm). Tri Hita Karana
emphasizes the importance of maintaining harmony within the universe.
Horizontally, man should live in harmony with one another as well as with
other living creatures and the natural environment. Vertically man should
live in harmony with God as The Creator of the universe, in the sense that
man must be a constant worshipper of God and pray for His blessing. Only
in this way, human happiness and welfare both materially and spiritually
can be achieved. Since man is a part of nature, he is responsible for its
2
sustainability. Thus, natural resources should not be exploited just for the
sake of the present generation but should be preserved to support the
livelihood of future generations as well.
A good example on the implementation of Tri Hita Karana is Subak, a
Balinese socio-religious traditional rice farming organization, which has
existed for centuries in Bali. In this essay I will present the implementation
of political ecology in Subak based on the Tri Hita Karana philosophy. I
will emphasize the way Subak defines water rights for each member within
Subak, dealing with conflict, and how inter-Subak works to allocate water.
The implication of Tri Hita Karana in Subak
Subak are autonomous socio-religious communities which organize
activities related to rice cultivation. The organization activities include
water allocation and distribution, the operation and maintenance of the
physical infrastructure of irrigation, as well as conflict resolution and
religious ceremonies within a clearly defined geographical area. Subak
have been widely recognized for their flexibility to operate efficiently, to
incorporate new farming practices, and to adapt to external changes in the
past (Lorenzen and Lorenzen, 2005).
Furthermore, Artha (2005) describes the Subak as a mixture of different
units: It is a technological unit containing a dam and collectively owned
irrigation canals. It is a physical unit containing all rice terraces within
clearly defined Subak boundaries. It is a social unit consisting of all farmers
who cultivate land within the Subak boundaries and receive water from the
Subak irrigation infrastructure. Finally, it is a religious unit consisting of
rituals on the individual level, the Subak level, and the inter-Subak level.
The application of the Tri Hita Karana concept in Subak can be seen from
the daily activities of the rice farmer in Bali. For the philosophy of building
harmonic relationships with God as the creature of the universe, the Subak
organization has several activities to maintain the harmony; they can be
done by an individual farmer or farmers among the group of a Subak. There
is certain level of temple which is related to the Subak worship activities. In
the rice field, usually each farmer has a small temple called Sanggah Catu,
this temple is a place to pray and give offers to God within each individual
rice field boundaries. For the Tempek (sub-division of Subak) there is a
special temple called Ulun Suwi or Ulun Carik, this temple is the place to
pray and give offers to God for the members of a particular Tempek. For all
members of a Subak, the place to pray and give offers to God is in the
temple called Pura Bedugul. Lastly, for the members of all Subak
organization in Bali, the biggest and highest level to do worship and give
3
offers to God is in Ulun Danu Temple, which located in Bedugul Lake in
Northern part of Bali.
The ritual worship activities in every level of temples are maintained daily
and every 210 days in the Balinese calendar system. The worship for
individual temples are the individual farmer responsibility, and the ritual
worship for the temple which is not cover individual boundaries are the
responsibility of every member of the Subak.
To maintain the harmony with other living creatures in the universe, the
Balinese rice farmers have their own way in terms of taking care of the
pests and insects, they are not killing the pests or insects but rather doing a
regular ritual called Nangluk Merana, this ritual aims to ask God for help
and blessing, so their paddy cultivation will not destroyed by pests and
insects, and only let the pests and insects harvest a small portion of the
paddy cultivation. This ritual are still exist until today.
In maintaining the harmony among Subak members, every Subak has an
operational role called Awig-awig. It specifies various matters such as
organizational structure, membership, rights and duties of each member,
cropping patterns, planting schedule, methods of water allocation and
distribution, Subak meetings, kinds and forms of prohibition, and many
other matters including the sanctions against rules violation (Lorenzen et al,
2005). Again, the Tri Hita Karana philosophy is also the basis for the
clearly defined roles of Subak. The Awig-awig also consist regulation to
give equal water access among members at all times, by putting into action
a fixed proportional flow division structures.
The Subak are one of the strongest examples of user-based allocation, water
is allocated based on their spacious size or based on tektek, a principle of
proportional water allocation to each individual member. The tektek shares
are based on a proportion flow through diversions structures. Equity of
water portion is the basic principle of tektek , so that allocation takes into
account the farmers role in the association. Distance from the intake is also
the main consideration in this system, usually the farthest rice field from
the intake will firstly received water from the intake (Sutawan, 1996 as
cited in Dinar et al, n.d).
In the Subak sytem, the water is distributed from the primary canal to the
secondary canals into the Subak territory which are divided again into
tertiary (sub-group territory) and quaternary canals (farmer single rice
field). The primary and the secondary canal are provided by the
Government, while the tertiary and quaternary are provided and managed
by Subak. Most of the canals technical set up is based on a continuous flow
4
principle (Horst, 1998 as cited in Lorenzen et al, 2005). From the main
irrigation system, such as rivers and lakes, only the diversion weirs to the
Subak territories have gates which can adjust or decrease the flow of water
into them. These gates are regulated and operated by a government agency
upon Subak’s requests but are usually left open at all times.
The Subak system shows a high degree of flexibility and responsiveness to
negotiations among members. Each Subak has their head of organization
called Pekaseh which has responsibility to all activities within the Subak
members. It includes making sure that every member of the Subak receive a
fair share of water for the cultivation of their rice fields, negotiation with
other Subak, and dealing with conflicts among members or other parties in
terms of Subak activities. For instance, if there is not enough water in his
area, the Pekaseh may ask to borrow water from the Subak which has same
primary canal or from the upper stream Subak. Theoretically “the Pekaseh”
would have to contact the government agency which then issues a formal
letter for the gate operators. Practically, the Subak heads of the other Subak
in nearby areas, which has the same main intake, will negotiate water needs
among each other without contacting the agency. The formal procedure is
regarded as impolite and would imply that there is a problem among that
neighborhood Subak. According to Meinzen-Dick and Bruns (2000)
negotiation among users is a “must” approach to reach equal share on a
particular common resource, which is water, and needed in order to obtain
efficiency in allocating water in the face of emerging demand.
Sutawan (2000) as cited in Lorenzen et al (2005) argues that “borrowing
water” is another form of negotiating for water rights among users. Subak
has fixed proportional flow division structures divert the water into the
single rice fields. Theoretically, they are not allowed to change the portion
of water by individual decision. However, in reality manipulation occurs,
especially in the early stage of the rice cultivation when the Young Rice
Plants need more water than the rest of the cultivation stages.
By closing half of the other Subak main weir, the volume of water flows to
a particular Subak who borrows water will increase. But, in this case, they
will not call the action as stealing water; this action is labelled as borrowing
water, as long as there is a negotiation between the heads of the Subak who
borrows water and the heads of the Subak who own the water at that
particular time. In the rice field, the heads of the Subak who own water will
stay next to the heads of the borrower Subak until the areas are flooded
with water and return the weirs to normal after the level of water reached
the level of consensus which has been agreed previously. If the weirs and
the water flow are not returned to normal, farmer or a Subak will be blamed
for water stealing.
5
This method is vice versa, other times the borrower should agree to lend
their water if others nearby Subak need water. This method also implies to
members within a Subak and among different Subak who gain water from
the same main irrigation channel. The negotiation and consensus to borrow
water or other agreements related to water allocation, usually run by
informal means rather than formal ones among internal member of a
particular Subak or inter Subak agreement.
Conflict Management
One of the interesting things in Subak systems is how they manage conflict
within their members or conflict with other Subak members. Generally, any
conflict which arises within Subak members can be handled by their own
without any outsider influences or mediators. Usually the source of the
conflicts are water allocation (usually water stealing), cropping patterns and
disturbances of cattle to other farmer rice field. Informal approach is
usually implied to reach a conflict resolution before they switch to formal
ways such as Awig-awig.
Pitana (1993) asserts that there is certain kind of bottom up process for
conflict management in the Subak body. This structure is implied to reach
conflict resolution among Subak members or inter-Subak conflict. Conflict
between members in a Tempek will be mediated by their heads of Tempek
or Kelihan Tempek. As long as Kelihan Tempek can handle the problem, he
will not ask for assistance from the upper level which is the heads of the
Subak or Pekaseh. Conflict between different Tempek in a Subak will be
handle by Pekaseh.
Conflict between Subak will be mediated by Pekaseh Gede, which heads
the Subak federations that receive water from the same primary irrigation
system. Usually at this stage, Pekaseh Gede will involve a Government
agency if the problem is caused by water allocation from the main
irrigation channel or problem of defining geographic boundaries of
neighborhood Subaks. The government agency is a formal mediator, but
doesn’t make any decisions; conflict resolutions are taken by negotiation
processes among the Subak itself. This process reflects how effective and
democratic the Subak system, in terms of managing conflict. Meinzen-Dick
and Pradhan (2002) suggests that effective negotiating forum is needed in
order to prevent a conflict escalation, and by the effectives means of
negotiations, various stakeholders can adapt to changing conditions and
receive better outcomes.
In the present day, conflict which arises in Subak body is mainly caused by
the external pressure, such as lack of incentives for the Subak as one of the
6
backbones of tourism industry in Bali. The possibilities to work in the
building or tourist industry combined with the high land prices tempt more
and more farmers to sell their rice fields and work in other professions. A
main threat to the Balinese rice culture is the rapid conversion from rice
fields to non-agricultural land. The decreasing farming community and
increasing pressure on land and water resources might change the integrity
and sustainability of the Subak system and its social framework.
Conclusion
Subak represent the dynamic of Balinese farming life, while putting the
basic Balinese philosophy of Tri Hita Karana as their basis for individual
and social relationship, Subak shows the successful of maintenance of
harmony between man and God, man and nature, and lastly maintaining
harmonic relationship between humans themselves. However, in recent
times Subak faces heavy external pressure due to the “development” of the
tourism industry, which affects the sustainability of Subak in the future.
Some integration efforts of Government and other elements of society
should be made to overcome the problem and keep Subak sustained.
Sutawan (2005) suggests that the sustainability of Subak should cover the
sustainability of some other aspects, which are: 1) Farmers organization or
institution (institutional sustainability); 2) Irrigation networks (technical
sustainability); 3) Agricultural production (economic sustainability); 4)
Local natural environment especially the upstream watersheds
(environmental sustainability).
Based on these factors, better understanding on the complexity of social
relations and political implications of Subak is important as a base of
irrigation, land and other government policies. In my opinion there are
other important factors to keep Subak sustained. Firstly, governments
should give some incentives for farmers, as one of the backbone of
Balinese tourism industry. This could be done by direct financial incentives
through Subak or by giving subsidies to seeds and fertilizer. This incentive
can benefit farmer in some ways. It can prevent land conversion due to the
high prices of land in Bali. It can prevent “income jealousy” between
agriculture industry and tourism industry. The money can be taken from the
tourism services tax which manages by Subak federation in cooperation
with a government body, in order to prevent corruption and guaranteed the
transparency of the distribution process. Secondly, careful and effective
policy of land reform should be applied by government as the regulator of
the industry, especially in the making of urban expansion planning to the
rural areas in order to make Subak sustained as one of the main backbones
of Balinese economics and tourism industry.
7
References
Artha, I WA, Lorenzen, RP & Lorenzen, S 2005, “Past, present and future
– perspectives of Balinese rice farming”, Proceeding of International Rice
Conference, Tabanan – Bali, 12 – 14 September 2005. The Indonesian
Center for Rice Research (ICRR), Indonesian Center for Food Crops
Research and Development (ICFORD) and the Indonesian Agency for
Agricultural Research and Development (IAARD), Indonesia.
Dinar, A, Rosegrant, MW & Meinzen-Dick, R (n.d), “Water Allocation
Mechanisms Principles and Examples”, viewed 8 March 2007,
http://www.worldbank.org/html/dec/Publications/Workpapers/WPS1700ser
ies/wps1779/wps1779.pdf
Lorenzen, RP & Lorenzen, S 2005, “A case study of Balinese irrigation
management: institutional dynamics and challenges”, Paper presented at
2nd Southeast Asia Water Forum, 29 August – 3 September 2005, Nusa
Dua – Bali.
Lorenzen, S, Lorenzen, RP & Perez, P 2005, “I am just borrowing water
but I will return it in an hour” : How Balinese Farmers negotiate their
daily use of irrigation water”, Paper presented at International Symposium
on Ecohydrology, 21 – 25 November 2005, Bali.
Meinzen-Dick, R & Bruns, BR 2000, “Negotiating Water Rights:
Introduction”, in: B.R. Bruns and R. Meinzen-Dick (eds) 2000 .
Negotiating Water Rights, International Food Policy Research Institute,
Washington DC.
Meinzen-Dick, R & Pradhan, R 2002, “Legal Pluralism and Dynamic
Property Rights”, CAPRi Working Paper no. 22, viewed 8 March 2007,
http://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/worpps/22.html
Pitana, I G 1993, “Subak, sistem irigasi tradisional di Bali: sebuah
Canangsari”, Upada Sastra, Denpasar – Bali.
Sutawan, N 2004, “The Need to Keep Irrigated Rice Culture Sustainable”,
Proceedings of the World Rice Research Conference, Tsukuba-Japan, 4-7
November 2004, International Rice Research Institute (IRRI).
Sutawan, N 2004, “Tri Hita Karana and Subak: In search for alternative
concept of sustainable irrigated rice culture”, viewed 8 March 2007,
http://www.maff.go.jp/inwepf/documents/inaugural/sutawan-note.pdf
8
Utari, N, Gonarsyah, I, Rustiadi, E & Juanda, B 2006, “Subak’s social
th
capital: could they enhancing the existence”, Paper presented at the 11
Biennial Conference sponsored by International Association for the Study
of Common Property, held in Bali, Indonesia on June 19 – June 23, 2006.
