Cassava farms in Gunungkidul Yogyakarta face two marketing channel choices: through food processors (marketing channel 1) and intermediaries (marketing channel 2). Each channel requires different cassava quality and offers different prices. This paper compared cassava farm incomes through marketing channels 1 and 2 using the R/C ratio and independent sample t-test. A survey was conducted to interview 26 cassava farms through marketing channel 1 and 45 cassava farms through marketing channel 2. The results demonstrate that cassava farm incomes through marketing channel 1 are greater than farm incomes through marketing channel 2. Fertilizer costs significantly contribute to a total farm cost. This paper suggests that farmers improve their cassava quality and facilitate them to engage with food processors that offer high prices. Farmers must be encouraged to use fertilizers at the right dosage to reduce farm costs.
