Article
Field-level Assessment of Associations among Soil Fertility, Soil Biological Properties, and Rice Productivity under Regenerative and Conventional Management in Subak Uma Lambing
International Journal of Agricultural Social Economics and Rural Development (Ijaserd), Vol. 6 No. 2 (2026), hlm. 84–92
Abstrak
Regenerative agriculture is an agroecosystem management approach that uses context-specific combinations of practices to improve soil health and ecosystem functions. This study assessed field-level associations among soil fertility, soil biological properties, and rice productivity in Subak Uma Lambing, Badung Regency, Bali. The study used an observational survey and laboratory soil analyses with purposive sampling of nine field-level observational units: one conventional field (A1) and eight regenerative management categories (B1–B8). Soil samples from each field were composited, so the field was the analytical unit and no independent replication was available within management categories. We analyzed cation exchange capacity (CEC), base saturation (BS), organic C, total P, total K, total N, soil pH, soil respiration, C-biomass, and rice productivity. Soil fertility status was classified according to the criteria of the Soil Research Center (1995), and associations among variables were explored using Spearman rank correlation (n = 9). Most fields had moderate soil fertility status, whereas B5 and B8 were classified as having high fertility. Soil respiration and C-biomass tended to be higher in regenerative fields than in A1, with the highest values in B7 at 8.91 mg C-CO₂ kg⁻¹ d⁻¹ and 15.24 mg C kg⁻¹, respectively. Rice productivity ranged from 1.132 to 4.350 t ha⁻¹, with the highest value in B6 and the lowest in B8. Organic C showed a positive association with CEC (rₛ = 0.667, p = 0.050), whereas CEC and C-biomass showed a positive but non-significant association (rₛ = 0.627, p = 0.071). Soil pH was negatively associated with rice productivity (rₛ = -0.708, p = 0.033), but the observed pH range was narrow (approximately 6.4–6.6). These results describe field-level associations rather than causal effects of regenerative agriculture.