Business ethics of te’seng in the agricultural sector in Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/sctconf20251429Keywords:
Accounting, Bugis Culture, Business Ethics, Socio-Economic Sustainability, Sustainable Agriculture, Te’seng BusinessAbstract
Objective: This study aims to examine the concept of ethics and accounting in the te'seng business in Bugis culture in the agricultural sector in Indonesia as a profit-sharing system based on trust between landowners and cultivators.
Method: A qualitative ethnographic approach, influenced by Spradley's methodology, was adopted to explore te'seng's accounting and ethical practices. The researcher conducted participatory observations and interviews with stakeholders, including practitioners, cultural experts, and community members. The study's focus was on capturing the interplay of cultural values and practices, supported by direct involvement in agricultural and livestock management.
Results: The study finds that te’seng, which prioritizes moral and social values, can serve as an alternative model for a more equitable and sustainable economy. With its emphasis on solidarity and sustainability, the te’seng business presents a critique of neoliberal economics, which tends to foster inequality and environmental degradation. Core values of Bugis culture, such as lempu, pacce, reso, and siri, along with acceptance of divine will, constitute the ethical foundation of this business practice.
Conclusions: These findings suggest that a culture- and morality-based approach can strengthen stakeholder relationships and promote socio-economic sustainability.
References
Dhani GT. Pelaksanaan perjanjian bagi hasil pertanian di Desa Lestari Dadi, Kecamatan Pegajahan, Kabupaten Serdang Bedagai [Implementation of agricultural profit sharing agreements in Lestari Dadi Village, Pegajahan District, Serdang Bedagai Regency] [Undergraduate thesis]. Medan: Universitas Sumatera Utara; 2018. Available from: http://repositori.usu.ac.id/handle/123456789/6756.
Sila MA. Sosiologi Ekonomi: Teori dan Praktik (Institusionalisasi, Hibridisasi, dan Modal Sosial Ekonomi Islam di Indonesia) [Economic Sociology: Theory and Practice (Institutionalization, Hybridization, and Islamic Social Capital in Indonesia)]. In: Wibowo W, editor. Jakarta: Rajawali Press; 2022.
Ali MD. Hukum Islam, Pengantar Ilmu Hukum dan Tata Hukum di Indonesia [Islamic Law, Introduction to Legal Science and Legal System in Indonesia]. 5th ed. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada; 1996.
Rusmiati ET. Internalisasi nilai-nilai Islam dalam praktik Nengah Sawah pada masyarakat terdampak pembangunan Waduk Jatigede Sumedang [Internalization of Islamic values in the practice of Nengah Sawah in communities affected by the construction of the Jatigede Dam, Sumedang]. ABDI MOESTOPO: J Pengabdian Pada Masyarakat. 2021;4(02):96–101. doi:10.32509/abdimoestopo.v4i02.1579.
Lai P-H, Chuang S-T, Zhang M-C, Nepal SK. The non-profit sharing economy from a social exchange theory perspective: A case from world wide opportunities on organic farms in Taiwan. J Sustain Tour. 2020;28(12):1970–87. doi:10.1080/09669582.2020.1778709.
Martin CJ. The sharing economy: A pathway to sustainability or a nightmarish form of neoliberal capitalism? Ecol Econ. 2016;121:149–59. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.11.027.
Schor J. Debating the sharing economy. J Self-Gov Manag Econ. 2016;4(3):7–22. doi:10.22381/JSME4320161.
Botsman R, Rogers R. What’s Mine is Yours: The Rise of Collaborative Consumption. New York: Harper Collins; 2010.
Geissinger A, Laurell C, Öberg C, Sandström C. How sustainable is the sharing economy? On the sustainability connotations of sharing economy platforms. J Clean Prod. 2019;206:419–29. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.196.
Polanyi K. The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time. Boston: Beacon Press; 2001.
Venugopal R. Neoliberalism as concept. Econ Soc. 2015;44(2):165–87. doi:10.1080/03085147.2015.1013356.
Gössling S, Hall CM. Sharing versus collaborative economy: How to align ICT developments and the SDGs in tourism? J Sustain Tour. 2019;27(1):74–96. doi:10.1080/09669582.2018.1560455.
Chua WF. Radical development in accounting thought. Account Rev. 1986;61(4):601–32. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/247360.
Freeman RE, Harrison JS, Wicks AC, Parmar B, Colle S de. Stakeholder Theory: The State of the Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010.
Gray R, Dey C, Owen D, Evans R, Zadek S. Struggling with the praxis of social accounting. Account Audit Account J. 1997;10(3):325–64. doi:10.1108/09513579710178106.
Jensen MC, Meckling WH. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. J Financ Econ. 1976;3(4):305–60. doi:10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X.
Patton JM. Accountability and governmental financial reporting. Financ Account Manag. 1992;8(3):165–80. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0408.1992.tb00436.x.
Wolk HI, Tearney MG. Accounting Theory: A Conceptual and Institutional Approach. Nashville: South-Western College Publishing; 1997.
Lannai D, Prabowo MA. Strengthening the auditor ethics with Bugis culture value in phenomenology perspective at Makassar-Indonesia. Aust J Basic Appl Sci. 2016;10(Nov):263–74.
Vives-Gabriel J, Van Lent W, Wettstein F. Moral repair: Toward a two-level conceptualization. Bus Ethics Q. 2023;33(4):732–62. doi:10.1017/beq.2022.6.
Pek S, Mena S, Lyons B. The role of deliberative mini-publics in improving the deliberative capacity of multi-stakeholder initiatives. Bus Ethics Q. 2023;33(1):102–45. doi:10.1017/beq.2022.20.
Koppell JGS. Pathologies of accountability: ICANN and the challenge of “multiple accountabilities disorder.” Public Adm Rev. 2005;65(1):94–108. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00434.x.
O’Connell L. Program accountability as an emergent property: The role of stakeholders in a program’s field. Public Adm Rev. 2005;65(1):85–93. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00433.x.
Chowdhury R. Misrepresentation of marginalized groups: A critique of epistemic neocolonialism. J Bus Ethics. 2023;186(3):553–70. doi:10.1007/s10551-022-05229-4.
Chowdhury R, Sarasvathy SD, Freeman RE. Toward a theory of marginalized stakeholder-centric entrepreneurship. Bus Ethics Q. 2024;34(1):1–34. doi:10.1017/beq.2022.29.
Tamvada JP, Chowdhury R. The irrationality of rationality in market economics: A paradox of incentives perspective. Bus Soc. 2023;62(3):482–7. doi:10.1177/00076503221101888.
Arnold DG, Ross RL. Care in management: A review and justification of an organizational value. Bus Ethics Q. 2023;33(4):617–54. doi:10.1017/beq.2022.31.
Comeau-Kirschner C, Wah L. Holistic management: A new millennium calls for a new approach to employee management. Welcome to the age of holistic management. Manag Rev. 1999;88(11):26–32.
Peus C. Money over man versus caring and compassion? Challenges for today’s organizations and their leaders. J Organ Behav. 2011;32(7):955–60. doi:10.1002/job.751.
Rynes SL, Bartunek JM, Dutton JE, Margolis JD. Care and compassion through an organizational lens: Opening up new possibilities. Acad Manag Rev. 2012;37(4):503–23. doi:10.5465/amr.2012.0124.
AlAali ZM, Paucarima RP. How ethics affect in logistics. International Journal of Applied Business and International Management. 2018 Aug 7;3(1):111-7. doi:10.32535/ijabim.v3i1.82.
Seele P. Business ethics without philosophers? Evidence for and implications of the shift from applied philosophers to business scholars on the editorial boards of business ethics journals. Metaphilosophy. 2016;47(1):75–91. doi:10.1111/meta.12170.
Martin K. Who counts in business ethics. Bus Ethics Q. 2023;33(1):216–43. doi:10.1017/beq.2022.34.
Triyuwono I. Organisasi dan Akuntansi Syari’ah [Sharia Organization and Accounting]. Yogyakarta: Penerbit LKiS; 2000.
Dang CT. Taylor-ing ethics: Implications of Charles Taylor’s work of retrieval on moral foundations theory. Bus Ethics Q. 2023;33(4):655–81. doi:10.1017/beq.2022.10.
Roy A, Newman A, Round H, Bhattacharya S. Ethical culture in organizations: A review and agenda for future research. Bus Ethics Q. 2024;34(1):97–138. doi:10.1017/beq.2022.44.
Prabowo MA. Akuntanesia: Nusantara Dalam Perspektif Akuntansi Multiparadigma [Akuntanesia: Nusantara in the Perspective of Multiparadigm Accounting]. Jakarta: Orbit Publishing; 2024.
Spradley JP. Metode Etnografi (The Ethnographic Interview). Yogyakarta: Tiara Wacana; 2007.
Hanif H, Ludigdo U, Rahman AF, Baridwan Z. Akuntansi Bagi Hasil Sistem Mato Etnografi Bisnis Restoran Padang [Profit Sharing Accounting Mato System Ethnography of Padang Restaurant Business]. Bogor: Mitra Wacana Media; 2015.
Permatasari MP, Triyuwono I, Mulawarman AD. Islamic values in accounting information governance of third-sector organisation. J Akuntansi Multiparadigma. 2021;12(1):1–26. doi:10.21776/ub.ja-mal.2021.12.1.01.
Polanyi K. Sozialistische rechnungslegung [socialist accounting]. Arch Für Sozialwissenschaft Und Sozialpolitik. 1922;49(2):377–420.
BPS Kabupaten Bone. Luas Panen & Produksi Padi Bone 2021 [Internet]. Bone: BPS Kabupaten Bone; 2021 [cited 2024 Dec 28]. Available from: https://bonekab.bps.go.id/publication/2022/12/30/7070717bb470bd673ad2ea9b/luas-panen-dan-produksi-padi-bone-2021.html.
BPS Sulawesi Selatan. Statistik Pemotongan Ternak Provinsi Sulawesi Selatan 2021 [Internet]. Makassar: BPS Sulawesi Selatan; 2021 [cited 2024 Dec 28]. Available from: https://sulsel.bps.go.id/id/publication/2022/09/29/492b32ee5dc8551dc3ca8764/statistik-pemotongan-ternak-provinsi-sulawesi-selatan-2021.html.
BPS Sulawesi Selatan. Produksi perikanan tangkap menurut Kabupaten/Kota dan jenis penangkapan (Ton), 2018-2020 [Internet]. Makassar: BPS Sulawesi Selatan; 2020 [cited 2024 Dec 28]. Available from: https://sulsel.bps.go.id/indicator/56/1769/1/produksi-perikanan-tangkap-menurut-kabupaten-kota-dan-jenis-penangkapan.html.
Rohani S, Siregar AR, Rasyid TG, Aminawar M, Darwis M. The farmer competency that doing partnership systems (teseng) in beef cattle business at Bone Regency, South Sulawesi province, Indonesia. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci. 2020;492. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/492/1/012148.
Rohani ST, Siregar AR, Rasyid TG, Aminawar M, Darwis M. Differences in characteristics of farmers who do and do not conduct a beef cattle business partnership system (teseng). IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci. 2020;486(1):012–47. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/486/1/012047.
Rohani ST, Siregar AR, Rasyid TG, Aminawar M, Darwis M. Perception and motivation and its effect on the farmers decision to conduct beef cattle business partnership system (teseng). Am-Eurasian J Sustain Agric. 2019;13(2):68–76. doi:10.22587/aejsa.2019.13.2.8.
Hafid A. Peranan Te’seng Dalam Pemberdayaan Sumber Daya Manusia Pada Masyarakat Petani di Kabupaten Bone [The Role of Te'seng in Empowering Human Resources in Farming Communities in Bone Regency]. Makassar: Buletin Bosara. 2000.
Prabowo MA. Akuntansi Dalam Kebudayaan Bugis [Accounting in Bugis Culture]. In: Thoriq I, editor. Malang: Penerbit Kota Tua; 2018.
Prabowo MA. Praktik ekonomi islam dalam Suku Bugis Bone (suatu studi etnografi ala Spradley) [Islamic economic practices in the Bugis Bone tribe (an ethnographic study by Spradley)]. In: Yasdin M, Takbir M, Aziz MA, Kurniardi A, Hamzah H, editors. Prosiding Konsolidasi Keilmuan Nasional Mahasiswa Pascasarjana di Indonesia “Bersinergi Menuju Kedaulatan Bangsa: Upaya Refleksi, Proyeksi, & Resolusi Masalah Negara.” Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press; 2017. p. 81–91.
Prabowo MA, Kalsum U. Te’seng accounting as an alternative in realizing sustainable development goals. J Akuntansi Multiparadigma. 2021;12(3):565–82. doi:10.21776/ub.jamal.2021.12.3.32.
Krüger A. Islands of deliberative capacity in an ocean of authoritarian control? The deliberative potential of self-organised teams in firms. Bus Ethics Q. 2023;33(1):67–101. doi:10.1017/beq.2021.39.
Wibawanti ES, Murjiyanto M. Hak Atas Tanah dan Peralihannya [Land Rights and Their Transfer]. Yogyakarta: Liberty Yogyakarta; 2013.
Harefa BDS. Kekuatan hukum perjanjian lisan apabila terjadi wanprestasi (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Yogyakarta Nomor 44/PDT.G/2015/PN.YYK) [The legal force of oral agreements in the event of default (Study of Yogyakarta District Court Decision Number 44/PDT.G/2015/PN.YYK)]. Private Law. 2016;4(2).
Putera A, Sukotjo E, Dharmawati T, Mokodompit EA. Model of community empowerment based on local wisdom through corporate social responsibility in North Konawe District. Asia Pac J Manag Educ. 2020;3(2):1–10. doi:10.32535/apjme.v3i2.842.
Wahyuningsih W, Wardhana D, Kharisma DD, Hariyadi. Masyarakat Adat di Indonesia: Menuju Perlindungan Sosial yang Inklusif [Indigenous Peoples in Indonesia: Towards Inclusive Social Protection]. Jakarta: Direktorat Perlindungan dan Kesejahteraan Masyarakat; 2013.
Efferin S. Akuntansi, spritualitas dan kearifan lokal: Beberapa agenda penelitian kritis [Accounting, spirituality and local wisdom: Some critical research agendas]. J Akunt Multiparadigma. 2015;6(3):466–80. doi:10.18202/jamal.2015.12.6037.
Kiat CJ, Kee DMH, Siew A, Chai PA, Jamal G, Chen SM, et al. Manpower and employees’ attitudes are very important in an organisation. Int J Appl Bus Int Manag. 2019;4(3):137–43. doi:10.32535/ijabim.v4i3.692.
Matthes BF. Makassaarsch-Hollandsch Woordenboek. Uitg. voor rekening van het Nederlandsch Bijbelgenootschap ... bij Ferderik Muller; 1874.
Haarjärvi T, Laari-Salmela S. Site-seeing humanness in organizations. Bus Ethics Q. 2024;34(1):60–96. doi:10.1017/beq.2022.12.
Watts RL, Zimmerman JL. Positive accounting theory: A ten year perspective. Account Rev. 1990;65(1):131–56.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Muhammad Aras Prabowo, Meutia, Windu Mulyasari, Agus Sholikhan Yulianto (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
