Restoring State Control Over Forest Resources Through Administrative Procedures: Evidence From a Community Forestry Programme in Central Java, Indonesia

In recent years, community forestry has emerged as a means to reform power constellations with regard to forest governance. Through community forestry, the central state promised to devolve several forest rights to local communities and encouraged them to get involved in decision making processes and the implementation of forest activities. However, experience in some countries indicates that the implementation of community forestry programmes is rarely followed by genuine power devolution to local forest users. Instead, these programmes may even serve as a means to retain or restore the central state’s control over forests. Using a case study of a community forestry programme implemented in Java, Indonesia, by a state forest company, this paper argues that the implementation of community forestry is also driven by the state’s interests to regain control over the forests. Research in eight villages in Central Java province reveals that the community forestry programmes are carefully structured according to numerous administrative procedures and estab- lish a mode of control through a bureaucratic design. ----- In den letzten Jahren hat sich community forestry als Mittel zur Reform von Machtkonstellationen in Bezug auf die Verwaltung von Wäldern herausgebildet. Der Zentralstaat versprach durch community forestry bestimmte Waldrechte an lokale Communities abzugeben und ermutigte sie, sich an Entscheidungsprozessen und der Implementierung von Forstaktivitäten zu beteiligen. Erfahrungen in einigen Ländern zeigen jedoch, dass die Implementierung von community forestry-Programmen selten mit einem tatsächlichen Machttransfer an lokale ForstnutzerInnen einhergeht, sondern diese Programme sogar als Mittel zur Rückgewinnung von zentralstaatlicher Kontrolle über Wälder dienen können. Anhand eines Fallbeispiels eines community forestry-Programms, das in Java, Indonesien, von einem staatlichen Forstunternehmen implementiert wird, argumentiere ich in diesem Artikel, dass die Implementierung von community forestry auch von den Interessen des Staates, Kontrolle über die Wälder zurückzugewinnen, vorangetrieben wird. Meine Forschung in acht Dörfern in der Provinz Zentral-Java zeigt, dass die community forestry-Programme sorgfältig nach zahlreichen administrativen Verfahren strukturiert sind und eine Art der Kontrolle durch bürokratisches Design etablieren

Prestasi Kerja Di Bidang Pemanenan Hasil Hutan Di Hutan Jati

One of important information for planning and controlling is productivity. Productivity is working output from the worker or a group during a certain time. The objective of this study is to investigate productivity of forest harvesting in teak forest. The study carried out at KPH Randublatung, KPH Mantingan and KPH Balapulang Forest State Enterprise Unit I Central Java in July-September 2000. Cutting in KPH Balapulang carried out in the fifth age class but in KPH Randublatung and KPH Mantingan carried out in the eighth or ninth age class. The data collected by time study method. The method use selective operating time (SOT), normal time, allowance and standard time approach. Productivity calculated with divided working result by standard time. Productivity per day of manual felling amount to 3.5 trees and manual bucking was in the range 0.38-1.84 m3. Productivity of mechan ized felling amount to six trees per day and mechanized bucking was in the range 5.208-12.853 m3 per day. Productivity per day of manual skidding was 0.985 m3 and skidding system carried out by oxen amount 3.815 m3. Productivity of hauling counts in the range 5.985-8.805 m3 per day with transport distance in the range 7.43- 37.46 kilometers. Keywords: forest harvesting, teak forest, time study, productivit

An Innovative Policy For Rural Development? Rethinking Barriers to Rural Communities Earning Their Living from Forests in Indonesia

The government of  Indonesia (GoI) has trialed a number of community forestry schemes, ranging from collaborative management to long-term forest management rights handed to local communities, and implements them in state forest land. This policy shift toward community forestry in Indonesia shows an emerging signal on acknowledgement on the ability of local forest users to manage forest resources sustainably,and gives the people opportunities to benefit from the resources and eventually improve their daily life. With so much of promises community forestry brings, this paper primarily asks why the program is yet to meet the high expectation of rural development, tackling the pervasive rural poverty. It aims to identify,analyze and address key constraints of rural communities in exercising their rights which are conside red as key factors to improve their live lihood and alleviate rural poverty. That the government-initiated community forestry schemes fall short of the initial targets in terms of the extent of state forest land areas managed by to forest communities to a large extent is explained bythe regulatory barriers of tenurial uncertainties and the complexlicensing procedures. Those coupled by the limited capacityas technical assistance rarely provided by government institutions appear to impede local people to secure better livelihood.Keywords: community forestry, livelihood, rural communities, poverty alleviation, regulatory barriers Inovasi kebijakan untuk pembangunan pedesaan? Mengulas berbagai hambatan masyarakat pedesaan untuk mendapat penghidupan dari dari hutan di IndonesiaIntisariPemerintah Indonesia telah meluncurkan berbagai program kehutanan sosial di kawasan hutan negara, mulai dari skema kemitraan sampai dengan pemberian hak kelola hutan bagi masyarakat lokal. Pergeseran paradigma kebijakan menuju kehutanan sosial memunculkan sinyal pengakuan terhadap kemampuan masyarakat lokal dalam mengelola hutan secara lestari, dan memberikan kesempatan bagi mereka untuk memanfaatkan sumberdaya hutan untuk memperbaiki kehidupan sehari-hari. Pertanyaan kunci yang diangkat dalam artikel ini adalah mengapa program kehutanan sosial belum mampu menggapai tujuan mulia untuk memerangi kemiskinan yang sangat akut di pedesaan sekitar hutan. Tujuan dari artikel ini adalah mengidentifikasi, menganalisis dan memecahkan berbagai hambatan yang dipandang sebagai faktor kunci bagi masyarakat pedesaan untuk memperbaiki tingkat penghidupan. Belum optimalnya berbagai program kehutanan sosial yang diluncurkan oleh pemerintah secara garis besar disebabkan oleh ketidakpastian tenurial dan prosedur perijinan yang sangat kompleks. Hal ini diperparah oleh terbatasnya pendampingan teknis yang pada akhirnya menghambat masyarakat pedesaan untuk menggapai penghidupan yang lebih baik

Creating New Forest Governance Structure for the 12.7 Million-Promise

In the National Mid-Term Development Plan for2014-2019, the Government of Indonesia has an ambitious plan to allocate 12.7 million ha of state forests for local communities and indigenous peoples through social forestry projects. Recently, President Joko Widodo has taken a strong step toward fulfilling the promise by handing of 13,000 ha to nine customary communities. He underlined that it is a beginning of the big thing. The policy is a strong political will; it is the first time that customary land rights are legally recognized. Over the years, uses of forest resources by local people were prevented (Maryudi 2011; Maryudi &Krott 2012a). Webb (2008: 26) argues that in many economically-developing countries, traditional forest uses are often labelled as illegal since the governments favour corporate-based/ industries forestry as development strategies. The policy breakthrough is a result of long struggles to main streaming social forestry, nearly 50 years after Jack Westoby’s anthropocentric views regarding forestry and forest management. Before his death, Westoby stated: “a clear forest policy is one condition of a truly social forestry...all forestry should be social”. His thinking seemed to repudiate the idea of forest-based industrial development (Leslie 1989). As he claimed, the enormous expansion in the utilisation of the tropical forests had limitedly done for the people that continued to live in chronic poverty. At the same time, the application of the industrial forestry in the developing world led to environmental crisis of rapid forest destruction (Westoby 1969). Westoby’s address to the 1978’s World Forestry Congress further inspired forest policy makers across the globe, including in Indonesia, to formulate strategies that can tackle both problem in one single package of forest problem (Maryudi et al. 2012). We have since witnessed experiments and pilot projects translating the alternative thinking on the ground,also as manifestation of decentralization anddevolution policy (Sahide et al. 2016a). In Indonesia,however, social forestry is often understood as only involvement of local people in forest management that generate subsistent livehood (Maryudi & Krott2012b). Numerous pilot projects and programs failed to address the central issue of power relations and decision-making authority (Maryudi 2014; Sahide etal. 2016b). In most cases, external actors remain powerful in shaping the programs; they try to skew the outcomes of decision-making processes in their direction (Schusser et al. 2015; Schusser et al. 2016;Mery et al. 2010). Local communities, who are supposedly the core actors, remain peripheral; social forestry has yet to produce the intended outcomes as a result.What does that mean in relation to the new promise by the Indonesian government to rural communities? Rights and access are two central keywords for social forestry. There might be arguments that in social forestry programs in Indonesia, local people have been granted with different types of rights so that they can benefit from the forest resources. Such is not always the case. Quite often, local communities are not able to benefit from the forests despite being given the rights (see Maryudi2014). As such, conflicts persist even in forests where social forestry is implemented (see Maryudi et al.2015). Ribot and Peluso (2003) distinguish access from property. To them, access is defined as “a bundle ofpower” whereas property is defined as “a bundle ofrights”.The new policy clearly needs new approach so that we do not repeat the same mistakes and consequences. New forest governance structure is needed. Local communities should have explicit mandate and legal authority(Krogman & Beckley2002) and power “to influence decisions regarding management of forests, including the rules of access and the disposition of products” (McDermott &Schrekenberg 2009:158). Thus, genuine social forestry entails the following characteristics (Charnley & Poe2007: 1) the degree of responsibility and authority for forest management is formally vested by the state to the local communities, 2) a central objective of forest management is to provide local communities with social and economic benefits from the forest, and 3)ecollogically sustainable forest use is a central management goal, with forest communities taking some responsibility for maintaining and restoring forest health

“We Are in a Different World”: A Reflection on Science-Policy Interface

President Joko Widodo, during a foresters’ reunion at the Faculty of Forestry-Universitas Gadjah Mada in December 2017– expressed his concerns about deforestation and forest degradation in Indonesia. Talking about the roles of scientists and academia, he was implicitly asking: “Where have you been?” He clearly expected them to show their contribution through producing “impact science”. This offers chances to channel their expertise and gain greater influence in policy-making processes. In fairness, a remarkable number of research programs, networks and collaboration across scientific disciplines have endeavoured to formulate viable strategies for wise use and responsible management of forests (Maryudi & Sahide 2017), although some (e.g. Kartodiharjo 2013) argue that a fraction of scientists may conduct scientific exploration for the sake of science itself. A paradox, there is.We may simplistically say “better science, better policy”. Research through systematic procedures is indeed highly desirable to produce more accurate policy advice (Head & Lucia 2015). But question remains how to integrate scientific results into policy decision-making and implementation processes, and what factors may facilitate or debilitate such processes. We have seen “ready-made” scientific results with great potential to contribute to improving the forest conditions under- presented and even overlooked in policy-making processes. A reality check, it is.In fact, science-based findings and advices are not ulilised, not for reasons of objectivity and truth but because of their conformity and convergence of normative ideas and beliefs of government agencies and policy-makers (Werland 2009). Their decisions are taken in certain directions in the political, social, and economic systems (see Maryudi 2015 for an example), largely by the interest of their powerful and influential constituents (Boecher & Krott 2016). What they expect from science often diverge from scientists’ estimations on what policy-makers consider relevant scientific products (Janse 2008).Political considerations may prohibit the adoption of ample strategies (Maryudi 2016). We have witnessed countless examples (see Maryudi & Krott 2012; Setiawan et al. 2016; Prabowo et al. 2017; Maryudi 2005). As a result, the political decisions often deal with minor changes and waives any comprehensive problem analysis (Krott 2005). Policymakers may use research findings, not as input in decision making, but as a political tool to justify the decisions made. Given the complex policy-making processes, it is a big ask to expect knowledge acquisition. For scientists, producing evidence is very important, but making them applicable, in accordance with the needs and logic of thinking policy makers is equally important.There are ways to improve the impact of their research, nonetheless. Thompson et al. (2011) suggest scientists to focus on public priorities in formulating the research areas. Maryudi et al. (2018) say that scientific agenda may need to balance between issue-driven and curiosity-driven science. This would bridge disconnects between scientific focus and policy priorities. They also need to communicate effectively to wider communities. Scientific information should be easily digested by the target groups; this requires a broader set of skills than the commonly used in scientific communities nonetheless (ibid.). This may well go beyond the capacity of the scientific community because they often have less influence on policy levels. To mediate this, Boecher and Krott (2016) highlight the role of intermediaries capable of transferring knowledge and mediating interests. Werland (2009) scientists may need to seek strategic coalitions with non-forestry actors in order to integrate their findings into policy

The power in the interview: A practical guide for identifying the critical role of actor interests in environment research

In policy discussions of sensitive and complex issues, particularly in the field of forestry and natural resources, interests play an integral role, but are often a challenging component to contextualize, understand, and study. For various reasons related to factors of influence and authority, actors often do not want their interests uncovered by either competitors or even by non-partisan researchers. Nevertheless, identifying such interests continue to be a critical task for the research community, particularly if we are to better understand the broader effects, effectiveness, or shortcomings of policy. In this short policy brief, we provide a practical guide for researchers to capture and incorporate actor interests as part of their empirical evidence through the interview process. Following an empirical-analytical approach, we first distinguish interests of two different types, the formal and informal. Thereafter, our guide lays out an approach consisting of four distinct phases, namely: i) deciding on the interview format, ii) creating situational settings for the interview, iii) preparing interview guides; and iv) triangulating the interview. In each phase, we underline the importance of a culture of generosity and positivity directed toward the interviewees, comfortably engaging them to describe factors and scenarios in rich detail, while also encouraging respondents to express their values and feelings toward both the area of study and other actors across policy networks.Actor interests are always a sensitive issue in policies related to the environment, which are often purposefully hidden by actors, and commonly overlooked by research;We develop a practical guide based on a set of principles for researchers to use when approaching interviews, which will help to more effectively understand and contextualize actor interests, and can ensure more robust findings about policies related to the environment and natural resources;This guide lays out four distinct phases for approaching the complex and sensitive issue of actor interests for data collection using interviews, namely through the way researchers i) structure interview formats, ii) set up situational settings, iii) approach the preparation and delivery of guiding questions, and iv) triangulate the interview

Sertifikasi (akan) Terlahir Kembali: Sisi Lain Ekspor Produk Kayu Tanpa V-Legal

Kementerian Perdagangan Republik Indonesia baru-baru ini menerbitkan Permendag No.15 Tahun 2020 tentang Ketentuan Ekspor Produk Industri Kehutanan, yang tidak lagi menyebutkan V-Legal sebagai dokumen persyaratan ekspor. Peraturan yang akan diberlakukan pada 25 Mei 2020 tersebut dimaksudkan guna memberikan kepastian berusaha, untuk menggenjot ekspor produk industri kehutanan melalui penyederhanaan perijinan. Permendag No.15 Tahun 2020 telah menuai banyak kritik, semisal: pelemahan Sistem Verifikasi Legalitas Kayu (SVLK), pelanggaran perjanjian kemitraan sukarela dengan Uni Eropa, hilangnya jalur hijau ke pasar Uni Eropa, dan potensi penurunan kinerja ekspor. Namun ada sisi lain yang tidak banyak disorot. Jika diterapkan, peraturan tersebut akan memberi angin segar bagi pelaku sertifikasi hutan/ lacak balak, seperti skema sukarela Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) dan Programme for Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC). Rival lamaIni menarik. Dari desain pranata dan tata kuasa, sertifikasi (khususnya FSC), sebenarnya adalah rival lama institusi negara. Ya, sistem pranata sertifikasi didesain oleh lembaga non-pemerintah (pegiat lingkungan internasional) untuk “menyingkirkan” negara/pemerintah. “Kalau institusi pemerintah tidak mampu lagi mendorong pengelolaan hutan yang baik, biar kami yang urus”, mungkin demikian muasal genesis sertifikasi. Selain itu, sertifikasi menggunakan mekanisme pasar (lagi-lagi bukan institusi negara) untuk mendorong adopsi sistem pranata yang telah mereka bangun (Maryudi 2015). Itulah mengapa sertifikasi sering disebut sebagai instrumen kebijakan “non-state market driven” (Cashore et al. 2004). Sangat berbeda dengan verifikasi legalitas yang merupakan instrumen kebijakan yang diluncurkan institusi pemerintah, walaupun sama-sama menggunakan mekanisme pasar.Legalitas “bunuh” sertifikasiOptimisme terhadap sertifikasi sempat membuncah sampai akhir dekade 1990an. Namun perkembanganannya ternyata tidak terlalu menggembirakan, salah satunya diduga karena problematika pengelolaan hutan yang sangat kompleks untuk dapat segera diurai (Cashore & Stone 2012). Sampai awal milenium baru, hanya sekitar 10% hutan dunia yang telah tersertifikasi. Inilah yang mendorong dimunculkannya isu legalitas, yang diwacanakan bisa menjadi kunci dan batu loncatan bagi pengelolaan berkelanjutan (Cashore & Stone 2012). Entah sengaja atau tidak, desain pranata verifikasi legalitas ternyata mengarah kembali pada peran institusi negara. Di Indonesia, SVLK merupakan instrumen kebijakan pemerintah. Melalui Permendag No.25/M-DAG/PER/10/2016, pemerintah mewajibkan pemenuhan dokumen sertifikat V-Legal untuk ekspor produk kehutanan. Peraturan ini mengunci rapat pintu ekspor; hanya dengan V-Legal sajalah produk kayu bisa meninggalkan Indonesia. Tak peduli produk kayu tersebut telah mendapatkan sertifikasi lain. Tak peduli jika end users di pasar internasional lebih bereaksi positif terhadap sertifikasi sukarela.Pintu akan dibukaDengan V-Legal produk kayu Indonesia bisa “lenggang kangkung” masuk pasar Uni Eropa. Hal ini dikarenakan V-Legal telah disetarakan dengan Lisensi FLEGT yang merupakan satu-satunya tiket untuk lewat jalur hijau ke sana. Tanpa Lisensi FLEGT (V-Legal untuk produk Indonesia), menurut European Union Timber Regulation (EUTR), produk kayu harus melewati proses uji tuntas (due diligence) terhadap asal-usulnya. Disinilah sertifikasi sukarela (FSC atau PEFC) dapat mengkapitalasi aturan ekspor yang tidak lagi mewajibkan V-Legal. Pintu yang tadinya dikunci rapat, mulai akan terbuka. Apalagi EUTR merekonignisi potensi sertifikasi sukarela sebagai alat uji tuntas. European Comission (2013) menyatakan bahwa perusahaan pelaku perdagangan “may rate credibly certified products as having negligible risk of being illegal, i.e. suitable for placing on the market with no further risk mitigation measures, provided that the rest of the information gathered and the replies to the risk assessment questions do not contradict such a conclusion.” Secara umum, skema sertifikasi sukarela telah mengimplementasikan prosedur uji asal usul yang dipersyaratkan dalam EUTR, yang mencakup: pengumpulan informasi, penilaian resiko, dan mitigasi resiko (Trishkin et al. 2015; Saunders 2014). Sertifikasi sukarela juga berpotensi untuk diakui di beberapa pasar sensitif lainnya. Beberapa negara tujuan ekspor utama produk kayu Indonesia (Amerika Serikat, Korea Selatan, Jepang dan China), juga telah menerapkan berbagai peraturan yang melarang masuknya produk ilegal. Seperti halnya di Uni Eropa, satu inti dari regulasi legalitas kayu mereka adalah skema uji dan penelusuran secara tuntas atas asal usul kayu.Siapa yang beruntung?Di Indonesia, sampai April 2020, FSC telah mengeluarkan 38 sertifikat pengelolaan hutan (sekitar 3 juta hektar, mayoritas hutan alam), dan 317 sertifikat lacak balak industri perkayuan di Indonesia. Sedangkan PEFC memberikan sertifikat pengelolaan ke 70 perusahaan (termasuk 2 perusahaan hutan tanaman terbesar) dan 47 sertifikat lacak balak, mayoritas industri pulp dan kertas (PEFC 2020). Merekalah yang berpotensi mengakapitalisasi Permendag No.15/ 2020, jika diimplementasikan

The Influence of Military Teachers Leadership on the Quality of Military Academy Cadets

The high dynamics of the Military Academy’s teacher rotation have an impact on the linearity of teaching with the subjects taught. Based on this, research on the influence of Military Teachers' leadership on the quality of cadets is essential. This study aims to determine the quality of the second level of Military Academy cadets, the learning method applied by Military Teachers, and the effect of the Military Teachers' learning method on the quality of the cadets. Research using Google Forms was conducted on 205 Level II Military Academy cadets who acted as respondents. The research objectives were answered by using quantitative methods, descriptive analysis, and linear regression analysis. The quality of cadets is measured by four indicators, namely attitudes and behavior, knowledge and skills, physical fitness, and leadership values. The results of the study are stated as follows. The cadets have good and satisfying values on attitude, behavior, knowledge, and abilities. The value of cadet leadership as measured by the cadet’s perception of self-assessment still needs to be optimized. There are cadets who are unable to make decisions correctly and quickly. Some cadets also are not willing to take risks in making decisions. These leadership values are important for a leader. During the learning process, military teachers apply a combination of supportive, participatory, directive, and achievement-oriented learning methods. The directive teaching method has the most dominant influence on the quality of cadets. The influence of supportive, participatory, and achievement-oriented methods must go through the directive method first.

Implementation of Guidance and Parenting in the Mental Preparation of Military Academy Cadet Leadership Level IV in Entering the Indonesian Army Organic Unit

The educational process at the Military Academy refers to the regulations of the Ministry of Education and Culture as well as the Ministry of Defense. Military Academy cadets are not only required to have academic abilities, but also have to have physical endurance, good attitudes, and behavior, and characters that reflect the leadership values. The Military Academy which has the task of creating the future of Indonesian Army Military Leaders is managed by combining conventional learning methods and providing guidance and parenting (Bimbingan dan Pengasuhan/Bimsuh). Bimsuh is intended to lead cadets to understand, explore, and implement the values of leadership, the character of a warrior, and the spirit of Sapta Marga by observing, examining, and imitating the Caregivers before entering the Indonesian Army Organic Unit. This study analyzes the influence of Bimsuh on the leadership mentality of Level IV cadets in entering the Indonesian Army Organic Unit. This study uses a qualitative approach with caregivers, managers, and cadets as the informants and a quick survey via google form to cadets. In addition to the primary data, the analysis also came from secondary data, such as the Military Academy roadmap, curriculum, strategic plans for the Cadets Regiment, and Military Teacher Teaching Materials. The results of the study showed that the duration of the implementation of Bimsuh was more than the Lesson Hours. This is different from the existing curriculum with 7 percent teaching hours for Bimsuh. Level IV Military Academy cadets expect to have longer hours of Bimsuh to explore the experiences of Caregivers while serving in the Army Organic Unit. Youth leadership mentality is influenced by Bimsuh which is oriented towards achievement by developing creative and innovative thinking. Guidance and parenting with pressure, sanctions, and authoritarian approaches are not effective if they are not carried out in accordance with the achievement-oriented approach. Level IV cadets feel that they have the instilled leadership values so far. However, the cadets still lack self-confidence, lack the courage to make decisions quickly, and in taking risks. This condition is also experienced by the Caregivers because they do not have experience. Knowledge, skills, and experience while in the Military Academy as capital to adapt quickly in the Indonesian Army Organic Unit