| Summary: | This study aims to determine the villages in the Kepulauan Mentawai
Regency can be classified as vulnerable villages to guide the allocation of food so
raskin. This is done by classifying villages into several levels or categories of food
vulnerability. In addition, this study also aims to determine the relationship
between the Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping (Level Vulnerability) with the
price level in the village Raskin, matching funds for each village and each village
raskin total allocation.
The data used in this study is secondary data from the data staging
classification and families throughout villages in the Kepulauan Mentawai
Regency obtained from the Agency for Badan Pemberdayaan Masyarakat dan
Keluarga Berencana (BPMKB). In addition, the target data and the distribution of
rice by the sub-regional divisions during the year 2011 Sumatera Barat to
Kepulauan Mentawai Regency. Analysis tools used in this study was Vulnerability
Analysis and Mapping (VAM) and Correlation Test.
The results showed that of 43 villages were observed, there are 3 villages
namely Saumanganyak, Muara Taikako and Sikakap who are at the highest level
of vulnerability. There are as many as four villages namely Simatalu, Madobag,
Taileleu and Tuapejat are at a high level of vulnerability. This means that the
seven villages are in desperate need of Raskin and require special attention from
the Mentawai Islands regency administration. A total of 22 villages belonging to
the level of vulnerability is, 11 villages belonging to the low level of vulnerability
and the three villages belonging to the lowest level of vulnerability.
The results of correlation test showed that there is a positive and significant
correlation between the VAM (vulnerability) to the amount of 0.649 raskin per
village, a village that is increasingly vulnerable to the tendency that the number
raskin distributed in the village tend to be much. The results of the correlation
between VAM (vulnerability) and matching funds did not prove significant, the
mean between the VAM and the price level do not affect each other. The results of
the correlation between VAM (vulnerability) and the additional price of the
receiver does not prove significant, the mean between the VAM and the additional
price of the recipients do not affect each other.
|
|---|