IMPROVING FEEDLOT EFFICIENCY AND PROFITABILITY THROUGH STRATEGIC INVESTMENT EVALUATION OF JAKARTA'S STATE-OWNED FEEDLOT
Published:
2026-07-30Downloads
Abstract
Indonesia meets only 55–60% of national beef demand through domestic production, with the remainder sourced from live feeder cattle imports. This paper assesses the financial viability of an integrated investment program to upgrade the physical and management capabilities of the Serang Feedlot of Perumda Dharma Jaya. As part of its role as a Regional State-Owned Enterprise of the DKI Jakarta Provincial Government, this feedlot is responsible for processing the majority of live feeder cattle imported into Indonesia. Due to high costs associated with importing live animals, it has become imperative for Indonesia to develop greater efficiency in utilizing these resources domestically. Despite being the first point of contact for all imported cattle prior to their entry into the human food chain, Indonesian feedlots have historically performed poorly compared to global averages when measured by such performance metrics as average daily weight gain (ADG), percent feed cost per head and space usage per head. The proposed combined investment program includes upgrading pens (pen expansion); total mixed ration (TMR) feeding systems (mechanizing TMR); and a feed inventory system (bulk feed storage). It is based on a 10 year financial projection of cash flows using historical operating data provided by the facility over a 3-year period. In addition to performing a traditional cost benefit analysis and Monte Carlo risk analysis of projected returns on investment (ROI), this research also performs PESTLE analyses and SWOT/TOWS strategic analyses. A total of 13 sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the impact of potential future changes in input prices and/or facility operating conditions. Under the base-case assumptions (including 60% equity and 40% loan financing structure; weighted average cost of capital 12.0%) the total investment outlay will generate a net present value of IDR 349.9 Billion and an internal rate of return (IRR) of approximately 83.97% over the 10 year planning period. Based upon the Monte Carlo simulation results there is 100% confidence level that the expected net present value will be positive. With respect to the sensitivity analyses, all thirteen possible combinations of either increased or decreased costs or reduced or enhanced operation efficiencies resulted in both positive expected values for ROI and rates of return on investment above the respective costs of capital. These results provide evidence that poor performance in this facility is due to a combination of avoidable internal factors rather than non-controllable external factors and that the application of a formalized process-based evaluation model can provide a basis for identifying feasible solutions, justifying those solutions and implementing them.
Keywords:
feedlot investment capital budgeting state-owned enterprise beef supply chain cost-benefit analysisReferences
Aguilar, F. J. (1967). Scanning the business environment. Macmillan.
Anjum, M., and Hussain, M. (2025). Strategic evaluation using PESTLE and SWOT frameworks: Public sector perspective. ISRG Journal of Economics, Business and Management, 3(1), 108–114. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14854362
Benzaghta, M. A., Elwalda, A., Mousa, M., Nassar, I., and Shah, M. (2021). SWOT analysis applications: An integrative literature review. Journal of Global Business and Technology, 17(1), 55–73.
Boardman, A. E., Greenberg, D. H., Vining, A. R., and Weimer, D. L. (2018). Cost-benefit analysis: Concepts and practice (5th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
BPS (Badan Pusat Statistik). (2024). Indonesian economic statistics 2024. Jakarta: BPS.
Brealey, R. A., Myers, S. C., and Allen, F. (2020). Principles of corporate finance (13th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Brigham, E. F., and Houston, J. F. (2019). Fundamentals of financial management (15th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Creswell, J. W., and Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Damodaran, A. (2012). Investment valuation: Tools and techniques for determining the value of any asset (3rd ed.). John Wiley and Sons.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). (2018). Livestock production guidelines. FAO.
FAO. (2023). World food and agriculture – Statistical yearbook 2023. FAO.
Gürel, E., and Tat, M. (2017). SWOT analysis: A theoretical review. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(11), 994–1006.
Gündoğdu, S., Kahraman, A., and Gündoğdu, H. (2023). Strategic analysis for advancing smart agriculture using SWOT/PESTLE framework. Agriculture, 13(12), 2275. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13122275
Guo, T., et al. (2025). Revisiting economies of scale: The moderating role of efficiency. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2025.1621038
Hartman, J., and Schafrick, I. (2004). The relevant internal rate of return. Economic Papers, 36(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/1759-3441.12179
Helms, M. M., and Nixon, J. (2010). Exploring SWOT analysis — where are we now? Journal of Strategy and Management, 3(3), 215–251.
Ilham, N. (2015). Structural constraints in Indonesian state-linked feedlot enterprises. Jurnal Agro Ekonomi, 33(1), 1–20.
Ladoni, M., et al. (2024). Impacts of economic factors on net returns of beef feedlot heifers. Translational Animal Science, 8, txae021. https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txae021
Lawrence, J., and Ibarburu, M. (2007). Economic analysis of feed and feeding management decisions in beef feedlots. Iowa State University Extension.
MacDonald, J., and McBride, W. (2009). The transformation of U.S. livestock agriculture: Scale, efficiency, and risks. USDA Economic Research Report No. EIB-43. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.55181
Marchioni, A., and Magni, C. A. (2018). Investment decisions and sensitivity analysis: NPV-consistency of rates of return. European Journal of Operational Research, 268(1), 361–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2018.01.007
MLA (Meat and Livestock Australia). (2020). Feedlot benchmarking report 2020. MLA.
MLA. (2023). Feedlot benchmarking report 2023. MLA.
Mutoko, M. C., Ngigi, M., and Rao, E. (2022). Cost-benefit analysis of climate-smart agricultural practices among smallholder farmers. PLOS ONE, 17(4), e0266883. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266883
OECD-FAO. (2024). OECD-FAO agricultural outlook 2024–2033. OECD.
Ohno, T. (1988). Toyota production system: Beyond large-scale production. Productivity Press.
Parsons, C. M., Chalupa, W., and Jaster, R. (2011). Effects of TMR mechanization on feedlot ADG and feed conversion efficiency. Journal of Animal Science, 89(Suppl.), 285.
Perumda Dharma Jaya. (2024). Annual report 2024. Jakarta: Perumda Dharma Jaya.
Putra, T. D., Wiyatna, M. F., and Basuki, P. (2020). Feed cost structure and performance efficiency of beef cattle feedlots in Indonesia. Jurnal Peternakan Indonesia, 22(1), 45–55.
Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Campolongo, F., and Ratto, M. (2008). Global sensitivity analysis: The primer. John Wiley and Sons.
Sammut-Bonnici, T., and Galea, D. (2015). PESTLE analysis. In C. Cooper (Ed.), Wiley encyclopedia of management (Vol. 12). John Wiley and Sons.
Swastika, D. L. S., Yusmichad, Y., Sayuti, S., and Sudana, W. (2000). Pen utilization constraints in Indonesian beef cattle feedlots. Forum Penelitian Agro Ekonomi, 18(1), 1–15.
Vardopoulos, I., et al. (2021). PESTLE and SWOT-AHP integrated model assessing sustainability. Applied Sciences, 11(15), 6773. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11156773
Vose, D. (2008). Risk analysis: A quantitative guide (3rd ed.). John Wiley and Sons.
Weihrich, H. (1982). The TOWS matrix - a tool for situational analysis. Long Range Planning, 15(2), 54–66.
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Afan Wahyu Syafii, Sylviana Maya Damayanti

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.



