Prefo and Social Trust in The Du-Hope Barter System of Lamalera Community

The objectives of this study are (1) to describe the barter du-hope tradition as a traditional Lamalera exchange system of goods in a subsistence economic system, (2) to explain the barter du-hope tradition resulting in a new kinship competition (prefo) based on mutual trust between communities. This study uses ethnographic methods to be able to get emic of the du-hope barter system. The study was conducted in four villages, namely Lamalera, Wulandoni, Puor and Labalimut. The results showed two main theses. First, the barter du-hope tradition is the economic defence system of the local community. Barter du-hope became the food security system of the Lamalera coastal community and the mountain community. Secondly, duhope barter transactions create new relationships built on strong social trust. Prefo is a new kinship like family (outside of biological kinship) built on mutual trust between the people of Lamalera and other communities in the mountain area. Social trust is created by exchanging and sharing food items and building joint needs. Preference is a complete moral relationship with a sense and desire to help one another. This research provides support for the development of the local economy by providing support and space for the protected system of the barter du-hope Lamalera, which is now being threatened by the capitalist economic system and the global market.


INTRODUCTION
Economic globalization comes by managing all traditions of exchange, cultures of payment, to marketing strategies in one world economic concept. Globalization of money is an effort to unite all world commercial transactions (Cerny, 1994). Thus, traditional markets with a barter system that was once the economic power of the local community are increasingly eroded in the current of economic globalization. Barter transactions became the essential commercial transactions in the past but eventually began to disappear and follow the logic of the global economy by applying conventional market systems (Dalton, 1982).
The barter system as an economic transaction in Indonesia is not new. According to Burger (1975), until the 1950s, the barter system was still the foremost choice of people in the Flores area, such as Maumere and Ende. Barter proceeded by relying on bargaining between the seller and the buyer. The sellers themselves act as parties who can determine prices (Miksic, 1985). In its journey, traditional markets with a barter system face a threat from the development of the modern ones. The globalization of money is one of the causes of barter systems beginning to disappear (Cerny, 1994). On the island of Java, Rahmini (2015) explained that several studies, such as Dewi et al., (2012), affirmed a decrease in traditional markets' revenue due to the construction of supermarkets and hypermarts. In contrast, Suryadharma (2010) provides a different argument; the number of current markets declines due to internal problems of the markets.
Of the barter traditions in Indonesia that still survive, the barter du-hope tradition is one of the few barter traditions that still survive. This tradition began around the early 19th century with the emergence of a barter market in Doni Nusa Lela or what is now called Wulandoni (Barnes, 1989). The du-hope tradition is still carried out by the people of Lamalera by exchanging fish from Lamalera for agricultural products such as corn, rice, and sweet potatoes from the area around the slopes of Labalekan Mountain. In the morning, mothers and girls from Lamalera will walk to several villages such as Puor, Belabaja, and Labalimut to make the barter transaction. On Saturday, barter (duhope) will take place in Wulandoni (Barnes, 1989).
Du-hope barter transaction is a transaction based on a seller and buyer agreement that creates a mutual trust relationship (Kuokkanen, 2011). This relationship ultimately creates a connection called prefo. Prefo is defined as good relations (such as family) between sellers (Lamalera people) and buyers (Labalekan mountainside communities). The word prefo is interpreted as a subscription (Blikololong, 2010). Prefo is a relationship of mutual trust when the exchange (barter) is not only seen from the similarity of the value and price of the goods exchanged. Prefo also allows the free giving of products as a form of the initial agreement to become a family. Prefo is not based on a written contract. Prevo relies on one's ethical memory and attitude towards the giving of others.
Previous studies such as conducted by Barnes (1989) and Blikololong (2010) explained how the barter system was present as a support for the local community's economy. Barnes (1989) in his study describes barter (du-hope) as the exchange of local people living on the coast and those living in the mountains. Blikololong (2010) again explained barter as a subsistence economic system that has the power to provide the basic needs of the local Lamalera community. For this reason, the focus of this study is to analyze the barter system which is not only a local economic system but presents a new relationship called prefo. Prefo is proof of the presence of social trust in the barter system.
There are two fundamental theses in analyzing the du hope tradition. First, the du hope tradition is a subsistence economic system that only focuses on meeting the daily needs of traditional people, especially the Lamalera community and the remote community. The du-hope barter system does not focus on efforts to gain economic benefits. Bartering is more about exchanging goods for the typical product (Williamson & Wright, 1994). Second, the Lamaleran du-hope tradition creates a new kinship called prefo. Prefo in the tradition of Lamalera barter based on mutual trust between the people of Lamalera and the mountain people. Prefo conducted in the du hope transaction is an embodiment of altruism (Blikololong, 2010).
The following diagram illustrates how the barter du-hope system is an interrelated relationship between the people of Lamalera who carry out the tradition of exchanging fish (pnete alep) with food from garden products or rice fields of farmers who live in mountainous areas (kfele alep). The relationship of exchanging food items eventually creates a new connection called prefo. Prefo is a kinship based on trust and mutual assistance.

Defining Barter and Subsistence Economy
Barter is simply understood as a transaction to exchange goods by not using money as in other conventional operations. According to the Indonesian Dictionary (2002), barter is trade by exchanging goods. Barter exposes humans to the fact that what is produced alone is not enough to meet their needs. To get products that cannot be produced by themselves, they look for other people who want to exchange the goods they have. Barter presents everything natural, fostering the character of altruism and helpful nature (Blikololong, 2010).
In English, we use the treacherous term barter to mean two very different kinds of transactions: moneyless market etchable (marker exchange in-kind), and moneyless exchange of any sort (gift-giving, presentations, ceremonial exchanges such as black, kula, and Moka). It is essential to confine the meaning of barter to moneyless market exchanges (Kuokkanen, 2011). Summarising several discussions, Appadurai (1986: 9) says of it that, 'barter is the exchange of objects for one another without reference to money and with maximum feasible reduction of social, cultural, political or personal transaction costs' (Barnes, 1989).
Barter is the practice of a subsistence economy. Subsistence economics is different from modern economics. Subsistence economics is often connoted as a primitive economy or traditional economy. Earlier anthropological writers classified economies under a notion of uniform sequences in cultural development from primitive to civilized (Barry, Child, & Bacon, 1957). However, the subsistence economy becomes the economic system of traditional societies to survive.
Subsistence has been defined as the local production and distribution of goods and services (Lonner 1980), where the objective is not total self-sufficiency nor capital accumulation but rather a continuous flow of products and services (Sahlins 1971). Marks (1977) extends this definition by noting that subsistence, as a specialized mode of production and exchange, also entails the transmission of social norms and cultural values, or what Neale (1971) refers to as the psychic income or nonmonetary awards of wildlife harvesting. Participation in subsistence activities is fundamental in maintaining the social vitality and cultural continuity of Aboriginal communities (Freeman 1986: 29).
Traditional economy is an economy where customs, traditions, and beliefs prescribe the principles of economic organization for the production of goods and services; in other words, the traditional economy is built up around traditions, according to which a particular society lives (Mamedov, Movchan, Ishchenko-, & Grabowska, 2016). The sectors of economic activity include agriculture, hunting, fishing, and gathering; primitive barter trade is used instead of money. There is no sustainable excess (surplus) product; the social organization in a traditional economy is represented by local family-tribal communities, while mobility is determined by herd run or soil fertility depletion. The next possible development of a traditional economy is a farmer's economy centred on stable agrarian production structures (Rosser et al., 1999).
The significance of traditional economies in indigenous communities goes beyond the economic realm-they are more than just livelihoods providing subsistence and sustenance to individuals or communities. In the words of Simon Brascoupé, "it is the traditional economy, living on the land and with the territory, that brings meaning to Aboriginal peoples (Kuokkanen, 2011). Mamedov et al., 2016, explain the name of the system in question -"traditional" economy shows that here the economy is controlled through "noneconomic" regulators, which appear and exist outside the marketplace.
In the broadest outline, Scott argues that a primary concern of most peasants is avoiding the risk of going hungry. Under a principle called "safety-first," they will prefer a situation offering a low but adequate and secure income to one offering the probability of a higher income but with a risk of falling below subsistence levels (Moise & Moise, 2019). Scott feels that the markets which peasants confront are often uncertain and that the peasants quite sensibly will avoid relying on such markets for their survival. Those who could not absorb a significant loss; in other words, the poor peasants and a large proportion of the middle peasants, do not dare abandon subsistence production. They will enter the market willingly only if they can do so safely. They generally mean they want to combine subsistence farming with their market production and avoid putting so much effort and resources into market products that they become dependent on its success. One will generally find peasants committing themselves fully to the market only if they are wealthy enough to absorb significant losses (rich peasants and probably some middle peasants). They are desperate if the subsistence economy has broken down to a point where it will no longer support them (Moise & Moise, 2019).

Defining Social Trust
In social science, the definition of social trust cannot be explained separately from social capital. Social and political theorists have continuously emphasized the importance of 'social trust' (Tocqueville, J.S. Mill, Durkheim, Locke, Putnam, etc.), (Roumeliotou & Rontos, 2009). It has been known to have many social benefits (e.g., social cohesion). Most recently, trust has been identified as one of-or the main-component of social capital. Social capital is constitutes-along with economic and cultural-one of the three forms of capital distinguished by Bourdieu (1986). It refers to the combined resources (actual and potential) that are connected to possession of a durable network of institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition (Bourdieu, 1986). Fukuyama (1995) defines trust as the expectation that arises in a community on the part of its members and is based on commonly shared norms, as well as the belief that the others will act in mutually supportive ways. He also describes it as the mutual expectation that no party to exchange will exploit the vulnerability of others (Fukuyama 2000).
Relatively recent literature on trust relates and identifies it as one component-or probably the main component of social capital, which is in turn regarded as a necessary condition for social integration, economic efficiency and democratic stability (Arrow 1972;Coleman 1988;Ostrom 1990;Putnam, 1993Putnam, , 1995Putnam, , 2000Fukuyama 1995). Putnam (1993) recognizes trust as one of the features of social organization apart from norms and networks that can improve the efficiency of society by facilitating coordinated actions, or one of the features of social life that enable participants to act together more effectively to pursue shared objectives. Therefore, trust in civic relationships is based on trust in interpersonal relationships (Roumeliotou & Rontos, 2009). Roumeliotou & Rontos, 2009., stated that All the definitions of social capital offered so far by various researchers (Coleman 1988;Putnam 1993Putnam , 1995 inevitably lead to the conclusion that the fundamental prerequisite of social capital is the concept of trust and that social capital corresponds with a high prevalence of trustworthiness. Thus, social capital is widely regarded as a necessary condition of social integration, economic efficiency, and democratic stability (Arrow 1972;Coleman 1988;Ostrom 1990;Putnam 1993Putnam , 1995aPutnam & b, 2000Fukuyama 1995).
Social capital commonly refers to the stocks of social trust, norms, and networks that people can draw upon to solve everyday problems. Social scientists emphasize two UNNES JOURNALS main dimensions of social capital: social glue and social bridges (Lang & Hornburg, 2010). Social glue refers to the degree to which people take part in group life. It also concerns the amount of trust or the comfort level that people feel when participating in these groups. Social trust and group participation form a recursive relationship. The level of trust influences one's willingness to join a group. Likewise, group participation helps build trust. Social bridges are the links between groups. These links are vital because they connect groups to not only one another but also give members in any one group access to the larger world outside their social circle through a chain of affiliations.
Fathy (2019), explains that in principle, social capital talks about social cohesion or bonding. The central idea of social capital about social ties is that networks are precious assets -the basis for social cohesion because they encourage a climate of beneficial cooperation (Field, 2010). Using relationships to work together helps people improve their lives (Putnam, 2000: 19 and Woolcock, 1998in Field, 2010. Social capital is the degree of social cohesion that exists in a community. It refers to the processes between people who build networks, norms, and social trust, and facilitate mutual coordination and cooperation (Woolcock, 2015). Then Lang & Hornburg (1998) argue that social capital generally refers to the availability of mutual trust in society (stocks of social trust), norms, and networks that can be utilized by the community to resolve shared problems.

METHODS
This study uses ethnographic methods. The ethnographic approach examines behaviour that takes place within social situations, including practice that is shaped and constrained by these situations, and people's understanding and interpretation of the experiences (Wilson and Chaddha, 2009). Ethnographic methods are the choice of researchers in getting data more deep-ly and thoroughly. Ethnographic methods not only provide space for researchers to ask questions but also offer more space for the resource person to tell in more depth everything he knows about a phenomenon or reality.
Anthropologists use the term ethnography in two senses. In the first sense, ethnography is a written account of the sociocultural dynamics of an animated human particular population. In the second sense, doing ethnography (or ethnographic research) is long-term fieldwork that generates insights into socio-cultural relationships and the "native's point of view" (Adams & Adams, 2012). Ethnographic research departs from the "value" aspect of the researcher related to the object under study. The consequence is to determine research informants intentionally (purposively).
This research was conducted in four core villages, namely Lamalera, Wulandoi, Puor and Labalimut villages. The village of Lamalera became a central location where the community carried out a barter tradition by selling sea catches such as whales (koteklema) and other types of fish to mountain areas. The villages of Wulandoi, Puor, Belabaja and Labalimut are farmers' villages whose agricultural products will be exchanged or bartered with Lamalera sea products.
The data was obtained by direct observation of the implementation of the Wulandoni and Lamalera barter transactions, and also the individual barter of the Lamalera community with several villages in the mountainous area. Besides, interviews were conducted with six bartenders called pnete alep (NGT, MKD, RB, IB, BT, MB), one of the traditional leaders of the Lamalera (TD) and one of the whale spearmen /lamafa (AGT). Besides, some data was taken from book and journal sources that wrote about Lamalera and the barter tradition on Lembata island, NTT. The data obtained is then processed and analyzed within an ethnographic framework and analyzed the results of the research within the context of local economic thinking, social capital, and social trust.

Du-Hope Barter Tradition Practices
Transaski barter du-hope Lamalera has been going on since the 19th century. Although there is a tradition of buying and selling conventionally using money, barter transactions are still being carried out. Barter duhope proves that the entry of conventional transactions using money in Lamalera does not directly eliminate the barter transactions that have been made so far (Barnes, 1989). Historically, the people of Lamalera have practised bartering (du-hope) since doing an exodus from Luwu land in South Sulawesi to arriving in Lamalera (Barnes, 1989). According to AGT, a whale spearman (lamafa), ancient ancestors often said that when in the exodus they were looking for the best place to settle, the people of Lamalera always looked for a place to practice barter du-hope to get rice, sweet potatoes corn and bananas. During the exodus, the people of Lamalera ever practised fishing so they could produce fish that could later be used for personal consumption and also to practice barter du-hope.
The barter (du-hope) tradition is usually carried out with three different forms. First, the people of Lamalera will agree on Thursday and Saturday every week to carry out the culture of du-hope (barter) in a designated place (fule). On Thursday, the du-hope transaction will take place at Lamalera village. The people of Lamalera will prepare fish that will be exchanged for rice, corn, bananas, and sweet potatoes from the mountains. Usually, the people who sell agricultural products come from the villages of Imulolong, Puor, Belabaja, Lewuka and Uruor.
On Saturdays, the practice of barter du-hope is carried out in the village of Wulandoni (Barnes, 1989). The du-hope tradition in the town of Wulandoni has been done for a long time. The practice of du-hope (batter) in the Wulandoni market (fule) was attended by several villages, as mentioned above. However, usually on Saturdays, the practice of du hope is busier than what is done on Thursday. Wulandoni market is more crowded because its is which is in the middle of several communities that will carry out the tradition of barter with the people of Lamalera. The distance from Lamalera village to Wulandoni village can be reached in 20-30 minutes on foot. Usually, the people of Lamalera walk in groups by upholding baskets (kara) containing whales (koteklema) to be sold.
Upon arrival at the market (fule), the people of Lamalera immediately prepared to make a du-hope transaction. Everyone should not directly do barter transactions. Usually, the people of Lamalera will take the initiative to start seeing what items will be exchanged. Every person has an acquaintance or relative (prevo) who will carry out transactions more intensively and correctly. When all the traders are ready, especially when those from the village of the farmers have arrived with their wares, an officer will blow the whistle as a sign to start the barter transaction (du-hope). The noise is immediately welcomed by the people of Lamalera to do a du-hope deal. Fish is prepared to be swapped with corn or sweet potatoes from the mountains Second, barter transactions (du-hope) are also carried out in the Lewotobi area on the island of Flores and Dulir on the island of Alor. These two areas are exceptional for the people of Lamalera. Usually, the fishermen of Lamalera will take a boat to go to Dulir and settle there while fishing for several months. AGT, one of the senior fisherman said that according to the story of the ancestors, the two regions had been "granted" to the people of Lamalera because the king of Lamalera had once sent his troops to help the people of Lewotobi in the Paji and Demong battles, one of the well-known wars in folklore of Lamaholot, NTT. For the good of king of Lamalera, the king of Lewotobi rewarded the Lewotobi coast for being used by the Lamalera people.
Third, the du-hope tradition is carried out by visiting villages where the people work as farmers. Lamalera women will walk to neighbouring communities such as Puor, Belabaja, and Labalimut to practice du-hope (barter). Usually, women from Lamalera gather to leave in the morning around 3:00 a.m. when the sky is still dark. The distance between the Lamalera to the Puor, Belabaja and Labalimut can be reached within two to three hours by foot. They will depart by using an oil torch as a torch. They immediately made barter transaction when they reached neighbouring villages such as Puor, Belabaja and Labalimut, when the community had not yet gone to the gardens or fields. However, as stated by NGT, a practising du-hope (pnete-alep), since 2010, Lamalera women more often use passenger buses to reach the villages in question. After doing du-hope transaction, the women will walk or wait for a bus ride back to Lamalera.
When departing from Lamalera village, women usually uphold a basket of fish. The fish will be arranged so that the fish that are brought are enough to sell and get enough results for family life for a week. These baskets will become containers for filling rice, corn, sweet potatoes, and bananas when returning from the farmers' villages. Baskets made from woven palm leaves are called kara. Basket (kara) is yellowish in colour and has never been painted in a specific colour. The sellers (pnete-alep) always use the base of the head to uphold the basket (kara), commonly called knalo.
When they arrive at the destination village, the sellers (pnete-alep) will split up and be ready to practice du-hope. Usually, they already have an acquaintance (prefo) who will be visited by practising du-hope. The sellers (pnete-alep) will tour the village until noon. Before they return to Lamalea, they will come to the prevo's house. There they will be served lunch and prepared jagung titi (a type of local meal) and water before returning to Lamalera. RB, one of the senior sellers (pnete-alep) said that when it was late afternoon, they had to make sure that the fish they had brought had been sold out.
The value and unit of goods to be exchanged is called monga. One monga is worth six (1 = 6) or two monga is worth a dozen (2 = 12), meaning one medium size of fish (either whale or other type of fish) can be exchanged for 6 bananas, 6 corn, or 1 piece of dry whales that are worth 2 monga can be bartered with 12 corns, 12 sweet potatoes, and so on, following the multiple of the monga. Monga only becomes the basis of reference, then in the process of bargaining, the value of an item can also be high or low depending on the availability and demand and the bargaining process of the goods. Negotiation has always been a common thing and is always done between buyers (pnete alep) and sellers (kara fate). In the barter du hope market, the exchange mechanism as proposed by Champman (1980) such as, (1) bargaining; (2) the use of certain counting systems; (3) exchanges without certain bargaining or counting systems; (4) future exchange or credit; (5) the use of money as a measure or standard of value can be seen well (Blikololong, 2010). However, what is noted is that in the tradition of du-hope barter, money can be used if certain parties (whether the people of Lamalera or the people from the mountains) no longer have goods or things to exchange. The last method taken is to use money as a medium of exchange.

Prefo In Du Hope Barter Transactions
The du-hope sale and purchase transaction is always present in a consensus through very "intimate" communication. Researchers use the word "intimate" to explain that the process of interaction and communication in the practice of buying and selling (du-hope) is always present in the sense of family, trust, and high altruism. Thus in every method of buying and selling (duhope), a family relationship is created called prefo. Prefo can be interpreted as a kinship or family relationship, outside of biological relationships, created by buyers and sellers during a buy-sell interaction (du-hope). Not all buyers (kfele) will be pre-selected. Prefo always appears and presents itself and has never been planned before.
Prefo itself usually comes with the following conditions. First, prefo usually exists when one party (whether the seller or buyer) does not have the same value as the value of the item to be exchanged. For example, the prefo relationship occurs when fish are already available, but mountain products such as corn or rice are of insufficient value to transfer existing fish. Thus there was an agreement to keep doing the du-hope transaction, but the buyer (karafate) would still provide the remaining agricultural produce in the next buy-sell operation. The same thing can also happen otherwise when the value of agricultural products such as corn and rice is available, but the value of the fish brought does not match the property of the buyer (karafate). Besides, prefo relationship can also occur when at any time, one party (the seller or the buyer) borrows anything, such as fish from the seller (pnete alep) or agricultural products from the buyer (karafate) without any goods being exchanged. Transactions like this are the same as transactions in borrowing or borrowing with family consensus without written agreement. Coleman (1980: 50) called it delayed exchange or credit. This transaction can also be done when the people of Lamalera do not have fish to sell or vice versa when the mountain people do not have enough agricultural products to sell. This situation had happened several times, namely when the people of Lamalera did not have enough fish to sell because of the impossible weather conditions such as strong winds and storms. Besides, the situation of crop failure often occurs in mountain communities caused by minimal rainfall or rainfall that is too high.

Du Hope As a Subsistence Economy System
The exchange of du hope system is a subsistence economic system. The du hope exchange system is a subsistence economic system because it refers to two main ideas. First, the du hope system is a system of supplying and exchanging food between Laamlera people and mountainous communities such as Puor, Boto, Belabaja, Uruor, and other villages (Barnes, 1989). Subsistence has been defined as the local production and distribution of goods and services (Lonner 1980). The Lamalera community will provide marine products such as whales (koteklema) and other types of fish to meet the needs of fish for mountain communities. On the other hand, the mountain community will provide rice fields products such as rice, corn, sweet potatoes and bananas for the needs of the fishing community of Lamalera.
The people of Lamalera themselves need food from the garden or rice fields because geographically, the land of Lamalera is filled with rocks that cannot be used as land for farming (Barnes, 1989). This condition requires the people of Lamalera to exchange their fish-catch with the results of the garden or rice fields from other regions. NGT, a fish seller (pnete alep), said that the barter system is more helpful because fish do not need to be sold to get money and then buy garden products or rice fields. Also, mountain communities such as the villages of Puor, Labalimut, Belabaja, Uruor and others also need sea products. Because it is far from the sea, the people who live in the area around Labalekan Mountain need fish supplies from fishers of Lamalera.
Second, the du hope system is an effort

UNNES JOURNALS
by the people of Lamalera and the mountain community to survive. The du hope system is a barter system that aims to meet daily needs. Thus, the du hope exchange system never aims to get large profits. In a subsistence economy, people's efforts to exchange goods do not intend to obtain more significant economic capital (Sahlins, 1971). RB, one of the fish sellers (pnete alep) said that "we exchanged fish for our lives for at least two weeks. After that, we have to keep hoping that our husband will get more fish to be sold so that we can live and pay for our children's schooling ". Because it is just for the sake of survival, the du hope system is not an exchange system by exchanging two things whose values must be the same. The existence of institutional bargaining makes this system more an attempt to give and take. Thus, in the du hope tradition, moral attitudes such as honesty and a sense of mutual assistance are paramount. Besides, a strong mutual trust allows the relationship between the Lamalera community and the mountain community to be even tighter. Both groups of people put forward the attitude of mutual trust to achieve the common good (Fukyama, 1995). Mutual trust will be the basis for the formation of a new kinship system called prefo.
The du-hope exchange tradition is not an economic transaction. Chapman's thesis (1980: 35-39) about barter transaction is purely a commercial transaction, and forgetting the social and psychological aspects cannot be used to read the barter du hope tradition. The du hope exchange system does not only have economic but social and psychological aspects for the people of Lamalera (pnete alep) and the mountain community (karafate). They believe that this system is not only built in an economic framework but rather is built in an effort to help each other between coastal communities and mountain communities.

Prefo: Social Trust of the Lamalera Community and Mountain Society
There are two essential theses of kinship with the formation of prefo. First, prefo is trust and mutual assistance between the people of Lamalera and the mountain community. Prefo relationships are moral relationships based on mutual aid. The given item is an honourable gift in which a person has no compulsion to return it. However, the item is a sign of good relations in which there will be practical actions helping one another in the relationship. Prefo relationship is never considered as debt or borrowing of goods. GT, one of the fish sellers (pnete-alep) said that they never gave the products (fish) as loans. We only provide these items as assistance and we believe that one day they (the buyer / karafate) will reciprocate. The sellers (pnete alep) strongly believe that if the mountain community (karafate) experiences crop failure, then the Lamalera community has a sense of social responsibility to help mountain community. The same thing happened the other way around. NW, a widow from Labalimut village, said that the people of Lamalera are very generous with the mountain community so that when the people of Lamalera experience shortages, the mountain community will immediately help by exchanging agricultural products even though the value of the goods given exceeds the value of the goods received.
Prefo is a social relationship that can be read within the framework of social capital, as mentioned by Putnam (1990), which involves networks, norms, social trusts that encourage social collaboration together to achieve shared interests. Prefo includes systems, of the fishing communities of Lamalera and the farming communities in mountainous areas such as Puor, Belabaja, and Labalimut. Prefo explained the existence of a social network between coastal communities, namely the Lamalera community as a producer of fish and the mountain community as a producer of rice, sweet potatoes, corn, and others. Prefo relations do not aim to get more economic capital. Prefo relationships are only built based on mutual need and sharing for a better life together (Blikololong, 2010).
Prefo is always present through a variety of existing norms and rules. The norm in question is a barter system and value such as mutual trust and mutual assistance to be able to maintain each other's family life. Strong mutual trust enables prefo relations to be maintained for generations. Mutual trust in a strong society shows substantial social capital (Fukuyama, 1996). Besides that, joint responsibility shows a powerful social capital between the Lamalera coastal community and the mountain community. This attitude can be seen in prefo relationship that allows two families to care for one another and help one another continuously. Reciprocity is a dimension of social capital where people are giving benefits to others and receiving kindness from others. In principle, there is a passion for helping and altruism (Fukuyama, 1995).
Second, prefo is a form of unity of life of coastal communities (Lamalera) with mountainous districts. Prefo shows the spirit of solidarity between coastal and upland communities. Prefo comes from the local community's belief in Lamalera that mountain communities must also value marine products such as whales. Prefo relationship causes social responsibility and a sense of social solidarity between people in coastal areas and mountain areas are very close. The people of Lamalera believe that people in the mountainous regions also have a right (ume) that must be enjoyed whenever the fishermen get results. This belief is getting more reliable because the people in the mountains have the same belief that coastal communities also have the right to an abundant harvest. Blikololong, (2010), explains that prefo and whale (kotokelema) unite Lamalera society. Both of them cannot be separated because Lamalera people believe that the whale (koteklema) have a social value that must be distributed to the people in the mountains. The following poem is evidence of the relationship between the Lamalera community and the mountain community. "Tena fakahae tuba ra peno-peno, Pau ata fakahae perae lefo. Keresi, kebelek, ata kide kenuke, fakahae, Ge ata fakahae prae ile ale gole" (All boats are full of fish, To feed everyone in the village, Little children, adults, orphans and widows and everyone around the mountain).
Third, prefo will produce new social relations. Prefo creates new kinship ties outside biological family relations. This relationship resulted in several new habitus. Usually fish sellers (pnete-alep) who make barter transactions (du-hope) will stop first at the house that becomes their "new relatives" (prefo). There, they will give some of the best pieces of fish and go straight to other house to make a barter transaction (duhope). When the fish are sold out, they will return to their prefo's house to rearrange their goods before returning to Lamalera. At the prefo's house, they will be treated to lunch and given some other food and water for the trip back to Lamalera. Lunchtime is the best time for both of them to tell each other stories and share about their daily life. This is where close kinship relations are established. GT, a fish seller (pnete-alep) tells that they share with each other about their daily lives, including the joys and sorrows. By giving each other stories, they support each other and give each other a way out of their problem. This relationship will also occur when mountain people visit Lamalera to buy fish when the Lamalera fishermen catch the whale (koteklema). When they arrive at Lamalera village, people from mountain villages will look for their families (prefo) to visit. There they will be served food and fish to take home. IB, one of the mothers from the village of Labalimut said that they had never felt difficulties when visiting Lamalera to buy fish. There, they have a perfect family (prefo) and always are given enough fish when they want to go back to the village of Labalimut. Besides, when a seller (pnete alep) never reappears to make barter (duhope) transaction, their family (prefo) in the mountains will ask another seller (pnetealep) about the condition of his family (prefo). If they get the news that their family is ill, they will look for an opportunity to visit. If it is difficult to visit, they will send enough rice or corn through some other sellers (pnete-alep). The same thing will also happen otherwise when a family (prefo) in the mountainous region experiences pain. The

UNNES JOURNALS
people of Lamalera will bring or send fresh fish to eat with the hope of getting healthy soon. Until now, this habitus is still very well maintained. Habitus has even become a suitable binder between people in coastal areas, especially in Lamalera with communities in the mountains such as Puor, Belabaja, and Labalimut.