The Competitiveness Analysis of Superior Village Products in Gunung Sari District, West Lombok Regency, Indonesia

Village superior products play an important role in driving the regional economy by optimizing the management of small industries, agriculture, and handicrafts. This study analyzes the competitiveness of village superior products in Gunung Sari District, West Lombok Regency. This type of research is a descriptive, quantitative study involving 16 respondents and using both primary and secondary data. The analysis includes sorting methods, Composite Performance Index (CPI), and Domestic Resource Cost (DRC). The results show the types of village superior products based on the criteria of the number of Small and Medium Industries (SMEs) and production value, the level of competitiveness of village superior products based on five main criteria (number of Small and Medium Industries (SMEs), production value, percentage of local raw material use, percentage of regional and export marketing, and net B/C ratio) in Gunung Sari District, West Lombok Regency, and the competitiveness of village superior products in utilizing domestic resources and having a comparative advantage. Based on the results of sorting the types of village superior products in Gunung Sari District, West Lombok Regency, the agro-industry sector is dominated by agricultural and plantation-based food processing. Ten villages develop food craft products, and six villages develop non-food craft products. Based on the CPI analysis, the priority for developing superior village products is carving wood-cukli products in Midang Village (ranked highest at 3,634.09), berugaq in Taman Sari and Ranjok Villages (2,851.51 and 2,830.75), and palm sugar in Gelangsar Village (1,662.51). The results of the DRC analysis show that three superior village products are highly competitive, with DRC values < 1: palm sugar (0.11), carving wood-cukli (0.32), and berugaq (0.44). These findings indicate that superior village products in Gunung Sari District can efficiently utilize domestic resources and are highly competitive. Therefore, business actors are expected to maintain the efficient use of domestic resources by continuously improving product quality, workforce skills, and the application of appropriate technology, thereby enabling sustainable development and contributing to regional economic growth.

competitiveness, village superior products, composite performance index (CPI), domestic resource cost (DRC), local raw material

1. A. Prawira and B. Hakim, “Study of the role of the agricultural sector in regional economic development,” Emb. Econ. Manag. Bus. Res. J., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 88–95, 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. World Bank, Climate Action for Development. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. A. Purbantara, D. Mujianto, and N. Rahmawati, “Developing the competitiveness of superior products from villages and underdeveloped regions and transmigration,” J. Ilm. Ekon. Bisnis, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 278–292, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. B. Morisson and A. A. H. S. Fikri, “Digitalization of MSMEs as a strategy to increase competitiveness in the digital economy era,” EBISNIS J. Ilm. Ekon. dan Bisnis, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 289–299, 2025. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. I. Wardani, T. R. Dewi, and W. T. Nugroho, “Implementation of the AHP method for prioritizing agro-industry MSMEs,” J. Pertan. Agros, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 3431–3436, 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. C. Muslim and T. Nurasa, “Competitiveness of mangosteen export promotion commodities,” J. Agroekonomi, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 87–111, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. S. Sugiyono, Quantitative, Qualitative, and R&D Research Methods. Bandung: Alfabeta, 2016. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. J. Sarwono, Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods, 2nd ed. Yogyakarta: Suluh Media, 2018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. I. R. Dhaifullah, M. H. Muttanifudin, A. A. Salsabila, and M. A. Yakin, “Survey of software testing techniques,” JACIS J. Autom. Comput. Inf. Syst., vol. 2, no. 1, 2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. A. S. Millah et al., “Data analysis in classroom action research,” J. Kreat. Mhs., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 140–153, 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. V. Arumsari and S. Syamsiar, “Empowerment of rural communities based on local food agroindustry,” SEPA J. Sos. Ekon. Pertan. dan Agribisnis, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 35–41, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. I. P. Sari, S. W. Dachi, and T. H. Harahap, “Composite Performance Index (CPI) decision support system,” PRINCIP Portal for Software Research and Innovation, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 83–90, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. I. Y. Astuti and U. Jatmiko, “Revitalizing the mindset of wood craftsmen through diversification and digitalization,” Kumawula J. Pengabdi. Kpd. Masy., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 49–56, 2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. E. Setiajatnika and Y. D. Astuti, “Potential regional superior products and development strategies,” J. Ilm. Manaj., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 98–114, 2022. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. T. Tajidan et al., “Feasibility and priority of developing superior village products using CPI analysis,” Asian J. Educ. Soc. Stud., vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 1–11, 2026. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. M. Bruno, “Domestic resource costs and effective protection: Clarification and synthesis,” J. Polit. Econ., vol. 80, no. 1, pp. 16–33, 1972. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. R. A. Nadja et al., “Competitiveness of collated Arabica coffee,” J. Pertan. Agros, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 1453–1457, 2023. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. H. E. Dewi, D. Koestiono, and S. Suhartini, “Comparative advantages and policy impact on potato commodity development,” Habita, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 85–95, 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. T. Mizik, “Agri-food trade competitiveness: A review of the literature,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 20, pp. 2–14, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. E. Antriyandarti, “Competitiveness and cost efficiency of rice farming in Indonesia,” J. Rural Probl., vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 74–85, 2015. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. I. A. Saputra, L. Simamora, and Y. Yuliawati, “Comparative analysis of competitive and comparative advantages of soybean and rice farming,” JAGRISEP, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 219–232, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• IFRS S1 and S2: A Global and Indian Perspective with Implications for Auditors
• A Study on Consumer Attitudes and Buying Behavior towards organic Food Products
• India’s Transfer Pricing Framework: Evolution, Challenges, and Future Directions
• Application of Statistical Methods in Business Administration: A Quantitative Study on Organizational Performance
• Decoding Fintech Adoption: The Role of Trust, Risks and Perceived Benefits