The Development of Social Forestry in Indonesia:

Abstract

The phenomenon of sustainable forest management failure in Indonesia faces the reality of incompatible economic, social, and environmental approaches. Conventional forest management always assumes that good forests are only managed by the government through concession permit policies to large capital owners that are top-down and accompanied by a minimum condition of community involvement, which should be a key factor. Learning from the experience, Indonesia began to see the concept of social forestry as one of the efforts in the progress of a more sustainable development. Social forestry positions that the party that feels the greatest success or failure from forest management is the community around the forest itself. Communities must obtain the greatest access and incentives to manage forestry businesses as a source of life while preventing damage. In recent years, the agrarian reform program through social forestry is a breakthrough government program that is becoming increasingly demanded by communities. The rights to manage their surrounding lands in accordance with ancestral local wisdom are expected to be able to answer economic and ecological challenges. This paper specifically presents the development of social forestry and its issues and recommendations in the context of national development in Indonesia. The ecological harmony between humans and nature is a consideration of the importance of social forestry as a program to be continuously supported by the government, as well as to prioritize economic aspects in the principle of sustainable development.

Melengkapi Analisa Teori Akses dengan Pendekatan Kolaboratif pada Konteks Program Perhutanan Sosial: Studi Kasus Lembaga Masyarakat Desa Hutan (LMDH) Rawa Sakti, Pemalang

“…Berbagai Pilot project yang ditemukan di beberapa negara yang mendesentralisasikan pengelolaan hutan kepada masyarakat contohnya seperti di Bangladesh, Mexico, Malaysia, termasuk juga Indonesia (Nath, Jashimuddin and Inoue, 2016;Voo, Mohammed dan Inoue, 2016;García-López and Antinori, 2018) menjadi perhatian penting dalam studi tata kelola hutan Pada konteks Indonesia pengelolaan hutan antara tahun 1967-1998 masih memiliki arah dan kecenderungan dengan penguasaan oleh para pemilik modal dengan kegiatan yang bersifat ekstraktif yang cenderung meminggirkan masyarakat lokal (Noveria et al, 2005;Hidayat, 2015;Royer, Noordwijk dan Roshetko, 2018). Sampai tahun 2015 ketimpangan pada luas pengelolaan kawasan hutan masih sangat tinggi antara pemilik modal yang menguasai 41,33 juta hektar dan masyarakat hanya menguasai 1,7 juta hektar (Kuncoro dan Cahyani, 2018;Pambudi, 2020). Padahal diperkirakan ±91 juta orang dari 83.724 desa atau kelurahan yang ada di dalam atau sekitar hutan di Indonesia merupakan komunitas yang cenderung miskin (BPS, 2020;Fisher et al, 2018;Setiajiati et al, 2019).…”

“…Dampak positif ialah kejelasan hak pengelolaan kawasan hutan (Nurrochmat et al, 2019) sampai peningkatan pendapatan (Kuncoro & Cahyani, 2018). Pada sisi lainnya, terdapat penelitian yang melihat dampak atau mengidentifikasi faktor negatif seperti permasalahan sektoral disertai buruknya partisipasi (Pambudi, 2020;Suparno et al, 2018), buruknya akuntabilitas yang diakaitkan dengan kebermanfaatan yang lebih cenderung diambil oleh elit komunitas atau kelompok atau elite capture (Moeliono et al, 2017;Essougong, Foundjem-Tita dan Minang, 2019;Qurniati et al, 2019;Rakatama dan Pandit, 2020). Lebih lanjut elite capture ini yang justru melemahkan kelompok (Essougong et al, 2019;Moeliono et al, 2017;Qurniati et al, 2019) yang perlu diatasi dengan pembagian otoritas dalam partisipasi dan komunikasi (Asmin et al, 2019).…”

Conflict transformation and collaboration in developing social forestry in Flores, Indonesia

“…Social movements advocating for social forestry (SF), aligns with communitybased forest management (CBFM) 1 and forest tenure initiatives that have become popular on the global agenda for sustainability and human rights (Pambudi, 2020;Ravindranath et al, 2006;Rout, 2018;Ashri, 2019;Salam et al, 2006). The SF movement is not free from conflict of interests, however, due to the multiple parties 1 In the current article, the concepts of CBFM and SF are written/mentioned jointly or separately depending on the elaborated contexts of space, time, and the particulars of the initiative.…”

Covid-19 and Forest Communities: Alignment and Challenges on Case Studies in Forest Community, Pemalang, Indonesia

“…The Covid-19 pandemic is predicted to push 5.2% (71 million) people to the extreme poverty gap in the Asian Continent by around 32 million people by the World Bank (Victoria, 2020) due to the lockdowns or social distancing policy that leaves people jobless (Kharas & Dooley, 2021). The number of poor people in Indonesia is predicted by the World Bank to increase due to Covid-19 (Sugianto, 2020), with approximately ±48 million poor people from ±100 million people in total live near forest areas in Indonesian context (Asmin et al, 2019;Kuncoro & Cahyani, 2018;Moeliono et al, 2017;Murti, 2018;Pambudi, 2020;Rakatama & Pandit, 2020;Royer et al, 2018;Santika et al, 2019;Wright, 2011). Thus, people around or in the forest have become a vulnerable group to the Covid-19.…”