Reducing Deforestation by Strengthening Communal Property Rights: Forest Ownership and Management in Indonesia

Despite a moratorium by the Indonesian government rejecting new logging concessions since May 2011, Indonesia saw 840,000 hectares of forests cleared in 2012 and deforestation levels continue to increase at an alarming rate every year. International experiences have shown that chances of sustainable long-term forest management improve when the ownership and management of forest resources remain with local communities. Once they have secured long-term access to resources through property rights they become confident enough to widen their time horizon and to invest in sustainable forestry practices. However, Indonesian forests are owned by the national government, which then delegates management rights to local levels of government. The ensuing struggle over control of forest resources between all levels of government caused weak legal and regulatory frameworks and a major barrier for sustainable forest management. Considering these complexities of forest governance, there is no simple way towards sustainable forest management and to the prevention of further deforestation. Nevertheless, several case studies from Indonesia and abroad can serve to inspire the following policy recommendations in Indonesia. They are based on the existing Indonesian system of forest classification and allowable land uses. For-profit businesses should be allowed to build and manage eco-tourism facilities in conservation forests (hutan konservasi). These activities will support the preservation of ecosystems and biodiversity. Protection forests (hutan lindung) are meant to prevent floods, control erosion, and maintain soil fertility. For their sustainable management, usufructuary rights should be granted to local communities allowing them to manage these forests and giving them limited rights to access forest resources. Finally, production forests (hutan produksi), where timber and non-timber products can be extracted, should either be handed over to local communities or be privatized. The national government should move away from approaching those forest areas as a source of national state revenues. Instead, it should allow these resources to support local income generation and growth

Inequality and Child Well­Being: the Case of Indonesia

We discuss the issue of inequality in Indonesia with an emphasis on the wellbeing of the children. Inequality is surveyed in two dimensions: vertical, in the form of income and wealth inequality; and horizontal (which includes inequality in access to education, health and nutrition, sanitation, clean water, care and protection) that is presented in snapshots that apply across different age groups, gender, geographical areas and other horizontal settings. This study shows that children are still at a disadvantage in regard to increasing inequality despite national laws and policies guaranteeing specific services and interventions. A large amount of the child population is still deprived of access to birth registration, basic education, nutritional and health services. They are also still prone to a number of vulnerabilities such as falling to early marriage and unfavorable child labor. We then assess the existing, related policies

Protecting the Farmers (Improving the Quality of Social Protection Schemes for Agricultural Workers in Indonesia)

The agricultural sector covers 34% of the total employment in Indonesia in 2014, larger than those employed in services, and second only to industry sector. In estimation, this amounts to more than fifty million people - a significant share of the Indonesian workforce. Unfortunately, most of them live below the poverty line or just slightly above it. In rice-producing districts such as Indramayu in West Java, landless farm workers earn only about IDR 300,000 per month and small-scale farmers make less than IDR 600,000 per month from farm work. Limited job opportunities in the villages, poor irrigation systems, and unpredictable weather are among the factors that add to rural predicaments. Consequently, people in the villages choose to migrate into cities, indicated by the decreasing percentage of rural population compared to the total population in the country, from 50% in 2010 to just 46% in 2015. To address this situation, the government allocates funds that enable farmers to buy seeds, fertilizers, and rice at subsidized prices. However, government agencies acknowledge that this support is ineffective. Despite their hefty annual state budget of IDR 52 trillion, the subsidized products are of low quality and their poor distribution systems leading to black market activities. Only the rich, well-connected farmers take advantage of these subsidies. As poor farmers and farm workers struggle with their low-income, more targeted support programs such as conditional cash transfers (Program Keluarga Harapan/PKH) and financial assistance for healthcare (Kartu Indonesia Sehat/KIS) and education (Kartu Indonesia Pintar/KIP) are recommended. These programs can be more effective as they directly address recipients with insufficient earnings to cover their healthcare and education expenses. Meanwhile, agricultural insurance programs for rice farmers (Asuransi Usaha Tani Padi/AUTP) can help them by alleviating their income losses due to harvest failures. However, these programs are currently unable to reach their objectives due to budget restraints as their funds are less than half of the farm subsidies. There are three possible solutions: firstly, the government may reallocate funds, from ineffective and costly farm subsidies to the more targeted and effective PKH, KIS, KIP, and AUTP schemes. These programs have greater impact on people’s livelihood and reducing farmers’ risk of income losses. This approach will require a paradigm shift, in which the government must improve public awareness that the subsidies only benefit the wealthy farmers. Secondly, once the budget of PKH, KIS, KIP, and AUTP increases, their coverage can be expanded along with an improvement of their targeting efforts and the infrastructure of the support systems. Thirdly, the government may develop their insurance policy as a tool to protect the farmers of various food crops against the risk of harvest failures. The insurance benefits must be clearly communicated to the farmers, the processes involved must be simplified, and the coverage to remote areas must be expanded in partnership with private insurance firms that maintain a wide network of branches and agents

SANITATION, DRINKING WATER ACCESS AND DIARRHEA IN INDONESIA

Diarrhea remains one of the main causes of death of young children, particularly in developing countries. Poor water and sanitation are the main drivers of this disease. Indonesia still faces problems in providing improved drinking water and proper sanitation access for all communities. The Government of Indonesia has pledged to meet the target of SDGs in sanitation and clean water in 2019 with ‘universal access’. This study objective to examine whether the relationship between unimproved sanitation, unimproved water and diarrhea diseases in Indonesia and to discuss the latest development of sanitation and clean water provision in Indonesia using Indonesia’s Socio-Economic Survey (SUSENAS) data for 2011 and 2015. This research uses linear growth method and logistic regression to make projection and analysis. The study finds evidence that poor water and poor sanitation continue to cause diarrhea in Indonesia. We also predict that the Indonesian Government cannot achieve the target of SDG in 2019

Menarik Penanaman Modal Asing (PMA) Pasca Covid-19 Melalui Penyederhanaan Kerangka Kerja Peraturan Indonesia

Pemberlakuan larangan kegiatan untuk mengontrol penyebaran Covid-19 telah memberikan tekanan yang sangat besar terhadap perdagangan dan investasi internasional. Perdagangan global diprediksi akan jatuh sebesar 13 - 32%, sementara Penanaman Modal Asing (PMA) bisa terpuruk lebih dalam dengan estimasi antara 30 dan 40%. Rantai Nilai Global atau Global Value Chains (GVC) tengah diatur ulang guna mengurangi ketergantungan kepada Cina. Asia Tenggara bisa diuntungkan oleh relokasi yang tengah terjadi, tetapi Indonesia relatif tidak menarik bagi investor asing karena kondisi regulasi yang sangat rumit. Untuk menyederhanakan kondisi regulasi di Indonesia, Presiden mengajukan RUU Cipta Kerja (Omnibus Law), tetapi jangkauan RUU ini masih terbatas. Terlebih lagi, dibutuhkan 400 peraturan pelaksana baru yang harus dibuat dalam satu bulan dan masih berpotensi menghasilkan ribuan peraturan lainnya. Daripada melakukan reformasi kebijakan dengan tergesa-gesa, Presiden dan kabinetnya sebaiknya berfokus pada peningkatan kualitas peraturan pelaksana ini dengan memberikan waktu 3-6 bulan untuk penelitian dan konsultasi publik. Presiden sebaiknya juga menegakkan disiplin pembuatan peraturan oleh kementerian dengan menyertakan standar penyederhanaan dalam alokasi anggaran. Pemetaan menyeluruh kerangka kerja peraturan dapat mendukung penargetan dan pengawasan reformasi. Dalam jangka panjang, perlu dilakukan revisi terhadap Pasal 8 Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2011 tentang Pembentukan Peraturan dan Perundang-Undangan yang memberikan kewenangan penerbitan peraturan kepada berbagai institusi pemerintahan. UU tersebut sebaiknya juga mewajibkan tinjauan peraturan secara berkala untuk menghapus undang-undang dan peraturan-peraturan yang sudah tidak relevan lagi

Attracting FDI Post Covid-19 by Simplifying Indonesia’s Regulatory Framework

Restrictions to control Covid-19 spread have put immense pressure on international trade and investment. Global trade is predicted to fall by 13 – 32%, while foreign direct investment (FDI) may sink even deeper with estimates ranging between 30% and 40%. Global value chains (GVC) are reorganising to reduce dependence on China. Southeast Asia can attract a share of these relocations, but Indonesia is relatively unattractive to foreign investors due to its highly complex regulatory environment. To simplify the regulatory landscape, the President proposes an Omnibus Bill, but its reach is limited. Moreover, it requires 400 new implementing regulations, which are supposed to be drafted within an ambitious one-month deadline, and it may lead to thousands other regulations. Instead of rushing the reform, the President and his cabinet should focus on improving the quality of these implementing regulations by allowing 3-6 months for research and public consultations. The President should also exert discipline on ministers by attaching simplification standards to budget allocations. A mapping of the regulatory framework should support the targeting and monitoring of reforms. In the longer-term, it is necessary to revise Article 8 of Law 12/2011 on the establishment of laws and regulations, which bestows regulatory authority to a broad range of government agencies. The Law should also stipulate periodic regulatory reviews to abolish laws and regulations that have become irrelevant or inapplicable

Perlindungan bagi Petani - Upaya Peningkatan Kualitas Program Perlindungan Sosial bagi Para Pekerja di Sektor Pertanian di Indonesia

Sektor pertanian memperkerjakan lebih dari 50 juta orang yang mencakup 34% dari total jumlah pekerja di Indonesia pada tahun 2014, lebih besar dibandingkan sektor jasa, dan menempati peringkat kedua setelah sektor industri. Sayangnya, sebagian besar dari mereka hidup di bawah garis kemiskinan, atau hanya sedikit di atasnya. Di daerah-daerah lumbung padi seperti Indramayu di Jawa Barat, buruh tani yang tidak memiliki lahan hanya berpenghasilan sekitar Rp300.000 per bulan, dan petani kecil berpenghasilan kurang dari Rp600.000 per bulan dari hasil bertani. Terbatasnya peluang kerja di desa, sistem pengairan yang buruk, dan cuaca yang tidak dapat diprediksi turut menciptakan kondisi sulit di pedesaan. Akibatnya, penduduk desa memutuskan untuk berpindah ke kota, sebagaimana ditunjukkan oleh menurunnya persentase populasi desa jika dibandingkan dengan total populasi penduduk di Indonesia, dari 50% pada tahun 2010 menjadi hanya 46% pada tahun 2015. Untuk mengatasi situasi ini, pemerintah mengalokasikan dana yang memungkinkan petani untuk membeli benih, pupuk, dan beras dengan harga subsidi. Namun, sejumlah lembaga pemerintah mengakui bahwa bantuan ini tidaklah efektif. Meski menghabiskan alokasi Anggaran Pendapatan Belanja Negara (APBN) tahunan sebesar Rp52 triliun, produk subsidi yang tersedia berkualitas rendah dan sistem distribusi yang buruk berujung pada aktivitas pasar gelap. Hanya petani yang kaya dan memiliki koneksi yang diuntungkan oleh adanya program subsidi tersebut. Terdapat sejumlah program yang lebih tepat sasaran, seperti program bantuan tunai bersyarat (Program Keluarga Harapan/PKH) serta bantuan untuk biaya kesehatan (Kartu Indonesia Sehat/KIS) dan pendidikan (Kartu Indonesia Pintar/KIP). Program-program ini lebih efektif karena secara langsung menargetkan mereka yang kurang mampu membiayai kebutuhan kesehatan dan pendidikannya. Sementara itu, program asuransi pertanian (Asuransi Usaha Tani Padi/AUTP) dapat meringankan risiko kehilangan penghasilan akibat gagal panen. Namun, program-program tersebut sulit untuk mencapai sasarannya akibat keterbatasan anggaran, mengingat dana yang dialokasikan tak sampai separuh dari anggaran untuk subsidi pertanian. Ada tiga hal yang berpotensi untuk menjadi solusi permasalahan ini. Pertama, pemerintah dapat mengalokasikan ulang dana dari subsidi pertanian dan mengalihkannya ke skema-skema PKH, KIS, KIP, dan AUTP yang lebih efektif. Program-program ini memiliki dampak lebih besar terhadap kesejahteraan penduduk dan mengurangi risiko petani kehilangan penghasilan. Pendekatan ini memerlukan perubahan paradigma, di mana pemerintah harus menyadarkan masyarakat bahwa subsidi hanya menguntungkan para petani kaya. Kedua, setelah anggaran untuk PKH, KIS, KIP, dan AUTP meningkat, jangkauan program-program ini dapat diperluas seiring dengan perbaikan terhadap berbagai infrastruktur pendukungnya guna memastikan bantuan yang diberikan akan tepat sasaran. Ketiga, pemerintah dapat mengembangkan kebijakan asuransi sebagai alat untuk melindungi petani berbagai jenis tanaman pangan dari risiko gagal panen. Bantuan asuransi harus dikomunikasikan secara jelas kepada para petani, proses pelaksanaannya harus disederhanakan, dan jangkauan ke area-area terpencil harus diperluas dengan bermitra dengan berbagai perusahaan asuransi swasta yang memiliki jaringan cabang dan agen yang luas

Ekonomi Politik Kebijakan Beras di Indonesia: Perspektif Masyarakat Ekonomi ASEAN

The quest for Indonesia’s sustainable food security currently lies on how the country manages its most important food commodity: rice. The Indonesian government, through numerous instruments, has been involved extensively in intervening the domestic rice market as a way to navigate economic and political dynamics over the years. The combination of price stabilization and other policies related to production of rice has culminated in the current rice policy that is restrictive to international trade. However, the recent development on rice issue, such as import policies, rising rice price, and also local farmers’ welfare have forced the need for further examination of rice policy in Indonesia. We argue that getting the right rice policy will be an essential move to further achieve and maintain sustainable food security in Indonesia. This paper is intended to describe historically rice policies that have taken place and are currently implemented in Indonesia. We highlight the key problems related to data reliability and we discuss the main narratives and paradigms that underlie the policies across different periods. We then offer a discussion about the possibility of new platform of rice trade to further achieve sustainable food security in Indonesia, which should be considered in the context of regional cooperation with the other ASEAN members, i.e. ASEAN Economic Community