Lessons Learned from Social Forestry Policy in Java Forest: Shaping the Way Forward for New Forest Status in ex-Perhutani Forest Area

https://doi.org/10.22146/jik.52092

Andita Aulia Pratama(1*)

(1) Forest Management Department, Faculty of Forestry, Universitas Gadjah Mada
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


Forest resource control in Indonesia has progressed from stringent state control towards a more community and indigenous based. Indonesia has embarked a journey in agrarian reform and social forestry to achieve a more balanced portion of forest resource control. The social forestry has manifested in the Collaborative Forest Management Program (PHBM) by Perhutani with the establishment of Forest Community Institution (LMDH) as its core. Forest for Special Purpose (KHDTK) Getas – Ngandong was chosen as the study case since it offers striking issue in social forestry program in the past and the outlook for the new forest status. This paper attempted to identify the policy learning from the past forest resource arrangement i.e., social forestry policy for the new forest status outlook. We identified the policy prior to the social forestry program and the implementation of social forestry from Perhutani. Subsequently, we identified policy learning from that past policy and tried to formulate the policy outlook for the new forest status. The data obtained through an interview to key informants complemented with observation, study literature, and document study. We found that past policy does not incorporate the local community in the forest utilization. The social forestry by Perhutani in their PHBM also showed indifferent approach which positioned the local community unequal with the Perhutani as social forestry promised. We identified fundamental changes should be done, which should prioritize social aspect before seeking out the economic and ecological restoration of the forest. We found the new forest status might hamper the implementation for the new forest policy which driven by the social forestry ideas. If only the new forest status could enable social aspect, the new manager will require tremendous support, robust institution, and plentiful resources to implement their policy.

Pembelajaran dari Kebijakan Perhutani Sosial di Hutan Jawa: Menyusun Langkah Ke-depan untuk Status Hutan Baru di Kawasan Hutan eks-Perhutani

Intisari

Pengelolaan hutan di Indonesia yang dulunya didominasi oleh peran sentral negara saat ini telah mulai bergeser menjadi pengelolaan yang berbasis masyarakat dan adat. Program perhutanan sosial dan reforma agraria telah dijalankan untuk mendapatkan
kebermanfaatan hasil hutan secara lebih adil. Perhutanan sosial tersebut termanifestasikan dalam Pengelolaan Hutan Bersama Masyarakat (PHBM) dari Perhutani dengan pembentukan Lembaga Masyarakat Desa Hutan (LMDH). Kawasan Hutan dengan Tujuan Khusus (KHDTK) Getas – Ngandong memberikan suatu kasus yang menarik karena memperlihatkan adanya konteks perhutanan sosial di masa lampau dalam PHBM dan pengelolaan yang sedang dilakukan saat ini dengan adanya perubahan status dan pengelola. Artikel ini menggali pembelajaran dari kebijakan dari pengelolaan hutan di masa lalu (perhutanan sosial dalam PHBM) dan pandangan ke depan pengelolaan dengan konsep perhutanan sosial dengan status yang baru. Pengumpulan data dilaksanakan melalui wawancara kepada informan kunci yang dilengkapi dengan observasi langsung, studi literatur dan studi dokumen. Dari hasil penelitian tersebut, didapat hasil bahwa kebijakan di masa lampau tidak mengikutsertakan masyarakat sekitar dalam pengelolaan hutan. Kemudian dapat disimpulkan bahwa perhutanan sosial dari PHBM juga tidak menunjukkan adanya perubahan signifikan karena juga tidak menempatkan masyarakat sebagai mitra setara seperti yang dijanjikan konsep perhutanan sosial. Perubahan fundamental yang harus dilakukan mencakup perubahan fokus pembangunan hutan ke aspek sosial sebelum fokus ke aspek ekonomi dan ekologi hutan. Perubahan status yang baru juga terlihat dapat menghambat implementasi dari kebijakan perhutanan sosial yang baru. Apabila aspek sosial dapat diselesaikan maka selanjutnya akan masih ada banyak tantangan yang harus dihadapi pengelola baru. Pengelola baru akan membutuhkan dukungan yang besar dari segi sumber daya dan perlu membentuk institusi secara utuh untuk dapat mengimplementasikan kebijakannya.

  


Keywords


collaborative forest management program; community forestry; forest for special purpose; forest policy; policy learning

Full Text:

PDF


References

Alhani F, Manurung T, Darwati H. 2015. Keanekaragaman jenis vegetasi pohon di kawasan hutan dengan tujuan khusus (KHDTK) Samboja Kabupaten Kutai Kartanegara Kalimantan Timur. Jurnal Hutan Lestari 3(4): 590–598

Awang SA. 2004. Dekonstruksi social forestry: reposisi masyarakat dan keadilan lingkungan. Bigraf Pub. & Program Pustaka.

Bennet C J, Howlett M. 1992. The lessons of learning : reconciling (abgleichen) theories of policy learning and policy change. Springer. Policy Sciences 25(3): 275–294.

Böcher M, Krott M. 2014. The RIU model as an analytical framework for scientific knowledge transfer: the case of the “decision support system forest and climate change.” Biodiversity and Conservation 23(14): 3641–3656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-014-0820-5

Boomgaard P. 1992. Forest management and exploitation in colonial Java 1677-1897. Forest & Conservation History 36(1): 4-14.

De Koning J. 2014. Unpredictable outcomes in forestry—Governance institutions in practice. Society & Natural Resources 27(4): 358-371.

Djamhidri TL.2008. Comunity participation in a social forestry program in Central Java, Indonesia: the effeat incentive structure and social capital. Agroforestry System 74 (1): 83-96.

Dressler W, Büscher B, Schoon M, Brockington D, Hayes T, Kull CA, McCarthy J, Shrestha K. 2010. From hope to crisis and back again? A critical history of the global CBNRM narrative. Environmental Conservation 37(01):5–15. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892910000044

Fatem SM, Awang SA, Pudyatmoko S, Sahide MA, Pratama AA, Maryudi A. 2018. Camouflaging economic development agendas with forest conservation narratives: A strategy of lower governments for gaining authority in the re-centralising Indonesia. Land use policy 78:699-710.

Hall PA. 1993. Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in britain. Comparative Politics 25:275–296. Comparative Politics, Ph.D. Programs in Political Science, City University of New York.

Hardin G. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. science 162(3859): 1243-1248

Hidayat O. 2013. Keanekaragaman Spesies Avifauna di KHDTK Hambala, Nusa Tenggara Timur. Jurnal Penelitian Kehutanan Wallacea 2(1): 12-25.

Krott M, European Forest Institute. 2005. Forest policy analysis. Springer, Dordrecht.

Maryudi A, Citraningtyas ER, Purwanto RH, Sadono, R, Suryanto P, Riyanto S, Siswoko BD. 2016. The Emerging Power of Peasant Farmers in the Tenurial Conflicts Over the Uses of State Forestland in Central Java, Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics 67: 70–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2015.09.005

Maryudi A, Devkota RR, Schusser C, Yufanyi C, Salla M, Aurenhammer H, Rotchanaphatharawit R, Krott M. (2012). Back to basics: considerations in evaluating the outcomes of community forestry. Forest Policy and Economics 14(1): 1-5.

Maryudi A. 2011. The contesting aspirations in the forests: Actors, interests and power in community forestry in Java, Indonesia. Universitätsverlag Göttingen.

Maryudi A. 2014. An innovative policy for rural development? Rethinking barriers to rural communities earning their living from forests in Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmu Kehutanan 8(1): 50-64.

May PJ. 1992. Policy learning and failure. Journal of public policy 12(4): 331-354.

McKean M. 2000. Common property: what is it, what is it good for, and what makes it work? people and forests: communities, institutions, and governance. 

Ministry of Environment and Forestry Republic of Indonesia. 2018. The state of Indonesia’s forests 2018. Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Republic of Indonesia.

Mukadasi B. 2010. Participatory indicators of success of community forestry programs in Uganda. Jurnal Ilmu Kehutanan 2(2): 70-81.

Ostrom E, Burger J, Field CB, Norgaard RB, Policansky D. 1999. Revisiting the commons: local lessons, global challenges. Science 284(5412): 278-282.

Peluso NL. 1992. Rich Forests, Poor People: Resource control and resistance in Java. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Siswoko BD. 2009. Good Forest Governance: Sebuah keniscayaan dalam pengelolaan sumberdaya hutan lestari. Jurnal Ilmu Kehutanan 3(1): 1-12.

Sofyan A, Na’iem M, Indrioko S. 2011. Perolehan genetik pada uji klon jati (Tectona grandis Lf) Umur 3 tahun di KHDTK Kemampo, Sumatera Selatan. Jurnal Penelitian Hutan Tanaman 8(3): 179–186.

Warto. 2009. Desa hutan dalam perubahan: eksploitasi kolonial terhadap sumberdaya lokal di Keresidenan Rembang 1865-1940 (Doctoral dissertation).



DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jik.52092

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 669 | views : 519

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2019 Jurnal Ilmu Kehutanan

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


© Redaksi Jurnal Ilmu Kehutanan
Fakultas Kehutanan Universitas Gadjah Mada
Jl. Agro No 1, Bulaksumur, Sleman 55281
Telp. (0274) 512102, 550541, 6491420
Fax. (0274) 550541 E-mail : jik@ugm.ac.id
website : jurnal.ugm.ac.id/jikfkt/

 

Indexed by:

 

Jurnal Ilmu Kehutanan is under the license of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International

Creative Commons License