Documentation:Open Case Studies/FRST522/2021/Define What Success is in Community Forest Management, A Case Study of Different Community Forest in Katingan-Kahayan Landscape, Indonesia

Summary

By granting title to the community through the community forest partnership plan, the Indonesian government allows the use of nontimber forest products, agroforestry, tourism enterprises, and selective logging. However, many of Indonesia's social forestry projects are in degraded areas. Despite the growing popularity of Community Forest, how well do we understand the community forest program's success? In the protection area of the State Forest, there are also various community forest initiatives administered by the community and led by state and local government.

As a result, it's essential to evaluate the partnership practices used by various types of community and leading sector organizations, as well as the role of players they play in determining tenure and sustainable management practices. These aspects have received little attention and will be the focus of this essay.

we will assess the social, economic and environmental outcomes and the conditions that enable CF to perform? to define what is success for community forest. It aims to understand the potential trade-offs in the State to find the better solution in manage tenurial conflict

Introduction

Indonesian Constitution declares that the state has absolute sovereignty over all land, sea, and airspace. The Constitutional Court's judgment No.35/PUU-X/2012 was in line with the Rio+20 Declaration on Environment and Development, which recognized that indigenous customary law, which is based on traditional knowledge and practices, plays an essential role in environmental management and development. According to recent statements by Indonesia's Minister of Environment and Forestry, up to 30% of the country's forest could be transferred or reverted to local community ownership.

Social forestry (perhutanan social), also known as community Forest in Indonesia, is defined as a sustainable forest management system carried out by local or indigenous communities in state or non-state forest areas to improve their welfare, environmental outcomes and socio-cultural dynamics. Such CF are located in the tenure of State forests (Hutan Negara), non-state forests (hutan hak), areas for other uses (areal penggunaan lain), and private and community lands. Based on their primary function, they are classified into three major groups Forests are used for production, protection, and conservation (9). There are two different types of CF in the State Forest situated in Katingan-Kahayan Landscape; Community Forest (Hutan Kemasyarakatan) functions as a protection forest managed by Provincial and District governments. The Conservation Partnership (Kemitraan Konservasi) acts as a conservation and is worked directly by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry. The scheme has different characteristics (i.e., land tenure, contract duration, allowed activities, etc.) Locals manage CF from several villages, such as farmers' associations. Livelihood activities such as farming, except for palm oil, and collecting non-timber forest products (NTFPs), and timber extraction allowed in the production zone. The maximum contract duration is 35 years and limits any further transfer of rights to ownership rights. On the other hand, CP is mainly conducted to solve a tenurial conflict managed by the local farmers association; the NTFP collection location is limited in the utilization zone and has a short five-year duration.

Case Study : Community Forest Batu Bulan and Conservation Partnership Habaring Hurung

Location

Katingan-Kahayan Landscape in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia

The Batu Bulan Community Forest/Hutan Kemasyarakatan is located in the same landscape as Conservation Partnership/Kemitraan Konservasi Habaring Hurung. Batu Bulan is situated in the Gunung Mas District, the Northern-East of the landscape, and the Habaring Hurung is lying inside the Sebangau National Park Boundaries in the southern part of this landscape.  The Katingan-Kahayan Landscape in Central Kalimantan encompasses more than 4 million hectares of deep peatland formation of Sebangau National Park and previous area of mega rice project in the districts of Katingan, Pulang Pisau, and Gunung Mas, as well as a tiny portion of Kotawaringin Timur and Palangkaraya municipality. The economic sector of this region is from Forestry, agriculture, commodities, trade, services, and mining. The area is threatened by Forest fires, illegal logging, forest degradation, conversion for oil palm plantations, habitat destruction, and biodiversity loss.  This landscape is crucial for the habitat of endangered species Orangutan, with roughly 35,000 individuals scattered across the landscape.

Historical Timeline of Community Forest Batu Bulan

• 2015: USAID Lestari had been facilitated the meeting between the local community and MOEF to discuss the new idea of CF in the Gunung Mas District, Central Kalimantan Province
• 2017: farmers association from Tumbang Barengai, Tumbang Kajuei, and Tumbang Malahoi Village proposed 1.322 ha the forested area in the production forest to become CF to avoid mining and palm oil expansion.
• 2018 : MOEF gave the permit to HKM Batu Bulan as big as 2.925 ha for 35 years to manage production forest in a different area from proposal because it was owned by PT East Point/ Timber Concession.
• 2018 : Conflict in the CF, because they got different areas from what they purposed. The villager of Tumbang Sambang and Tumbang Jutuh Was jealous because the outsider (CF Batu Bulan) who came from another village got the permit from the MOEF to acquisition their forest.
• 2018 : USAID Lestari was connecting the CF to PT. Fairventures Global is an Agroforestry company to facilitate conflict and build business.
• 2018 : The Fairventures then discussed with the CF community to add more members (the right holders) as HKM Batu Bulan got the permit in a different village.
• 2018 : The initial CF member said ok to add more members because they knew the right holders. Now there are about 200 members from 5 different villages.
• 2019: The community feels secure about their CF and got revenue from the agroforestry business.

Conservation Partnership Habaring Hurung

• 1993: Habaring Hurung is a transmigration area based on Governor regulation, and it is adjacent to Sebangau forest.
• 2004 : Sebangau National Park designated 2004 the area of peatland that protects the enormous orangutan population. The Habaring Hurung Village was still adjacent to SNP
• 2012: because of unstable tenure, the village was accidentally in the SNP area, and suddenly the local community lost their land and blamed it as encroachment. Since that, many conflicts have occurred between local and SNP institutions.
• 2020: SNP under MOEF comes with a solution to make the area of 7. 358 ha a traditional zone and build a “Conservation Partnership” to utilize the NTFP in their area.
• 2021: the CP permit is still in progress, while the SNP authorization let CP to utilize the NTFP from their previous garden. Some of the community members still wants their land back.

Tenure Arrangement

Habaring Hurung Village with public facilities, local resident and plantations that are included in the Sebangau National Park.

Referring to the Decree of the Minister of Forestry Number SK 529/Menhut-II/2012, there is an encroachment in the National Park by the village Habaring Hurung with an area of ​​± 766.20 Ha in the form of graves, yards, and settlements, farming land. The transmigration settlement and the business area are in the Special Zone, and a small part of the second business area is in the Jungle Zone of the Sebangau National Park. The settlement is already dominated by permanent physical buildings, in the form of housing, public facilities, and social facilities in the state of kindergartens, elementary schools, health centers, Mosque, Church, Village Office, and Village Community Institution Office. In the Jokowi's administration agrarian reform program, the location of the Habaring Hurung village is partially included in the indicative map. Farming lands were still recognized as National Park areas after the program in 2020. The National Park offers a solution with the Conservation Partnership program to reduce the conflict with local community. The local community in Gunung Mas District is aware of mining and palm oil expansion because they think it will bring environmental damage to their village. With support from donors and private agricultural companies, they develop partnership proposals to MOEF to manage forest production in the state forest. After three years, they got the permit, and now they have success in gaining revenue from the business. They feel secure in terms of tenure because the license has an extended period contract and hope that this collaboration will continue in the future.

Table 1. Characteristic of Community Forest/Social Forestry

Scheme characteristic	Social forestry
English name	Community Forest	Conservation Partnership
Indonesia name	Hutan kemasyarakatan (Hkm)	Kemitraan konservasi
Forest tenure	State forest	State forest
Allocated stated forest	Production and protection forest	conservation
Receiving entity	Farmers associations, local cooperatives	Individual farmers
Contract duration	35 years	5 years
Allowed activity	Collecting NTFP, harvesting timber (in production forest), farming (except palm oil), utilizing forest service	Collecting NTFP

Institutional Arrangement

USAID Lestari facilitated the institutional development of CF Batu Bulan and CP Habaring Hurung. LESTARI applies a Collaborating, Learning, and Adapting management methodology that, in conjunction with Theories of Change, regularly examines and adjusts underlying assumptions based on evidence to ensure project activities result in measurable outcomes. enhanced forest and land use governance, long-term forest management, conservation of biodiversity and critical species, and broad-based conservation constituencies. However, in the CF system, the local government (the regent) plays an essential role in deciding the CF permit Use of Community Forest because of decentralization. Indonesia is a federal country with a decentralized administration, the central government still controls the natural resources. Before the CF community get the permit, firstly, they need to get the technical recommendation from the Ministry of Environment and Forestry. The MOEF will send the verification teams to the site.

The local government forestry extension staff are not accountable to the local people to support the development of CF. Government to government program USAID supported the local in partnership with Fair ventures Global as an agroforestry company to help the three local villages. The company then supported the brainstorming, developed the CF draft proposal, and submitted it to MOEF. After getting the permit from MOEF with a different location as proposed, the CF community resolved the problem by adding two local villages members. The executive committee in the CF is the elected member responsible for managing the CF for 35 years with evaluation from MOEF. in addition to it, the company supports implementing the CF constitution and running the forest operations. At least 50% of the executive members should be women, pro-poor, ethnic, and indigenous groups. When the CF community governance is not settled yet, the company still supports the institution by facilitating the meeting, building the farmer's capacity, and marketing the product. They are the initial point of contact for the locals.

On the other hand, the Ministry of Environment and Forests of the central government is in the authority of formulating policy in CP, with input from the National Park management. The National Park authority will send the proposal from the local community to the Director of Conservation Area. These rules and laws are sent to the Director of Conservation Area Director General of Natural Resources and Ecosystem Conservation to obtain the permit. The approach to the CP in the protected area under MOEF primarily because of the tenure conflict.The types of conservation partnerships and rights vary by protected area. The MOEF establishes and maintains standards concerning zoning, forest management, and the collection of non-timber forest products. The members of the KK are based on the land right that is already problematic in the tenure. The duration of CP is five years. There is no provision of reservations for women because the membership is mainly assigned with the leader of family members in this context, which depends primarily on the patriarchal system in Indonesia.

Stakeholder

The State, Administration and Local Government.

A stakeholder is individuals, persons, organizations with an interest or a role in decision-making processes and who can influence or be influenced by an evaluation process or its conclusions are referred to as stakeholders. The government institutions involved in forestry development and policymaking are called the "state." The term "state" refers to "MOEF agencies that deal with forest policy tasks and community forestry administration of the state forestlands.". All institutions at various levels of Government make up the governmental stakeholders. The state is the ultimate authority in society and business, and it is responsible for making legally enforceable choices to define and administer common welfare. MOEF in the CP Habaring Hurung is National Park authority also play as The Forest Administration responsible for establishing a distinct structure that includes local, district, province, and state agencies and providing the technical team and doing the monitoring. Patrol teams in Sebangau National Park discovered a massive expansion of palm oil encroachment in the Habaring Hurung resort area. The encroachment could be linked to a change in the park boundaries in 2012, which led to some palm oil farms previously located outside the park being relocated within it. There is a requirement to engage with neighboring communities. Come up with an alternative answer. The situation has been brought to the attention of park officials, who are working on an action plan. Decentralization has been implemented in most developing countries to coordinate and govern local development effectively. The local Government provides a legal framework for strengthening the country's decentralized forest governance, allowing local self-determination and facilitating the application of local expertise to address local problems and difficulties. In local government bodies, political parties are crucial actors and decision-makers. However, the local Government should be the decision-maker to give the permit, but in the CF Batu Bulan, the Gunung Mas Regent gave his authority to the MOEF to give the license. KTH Bukit Bulan and KTH Habaring Hurung.

The User Group Community member (Kelompok Tani Hutan/KTH)

The farmers in CF Bukit Bulan developed their land as an agroforestry business while at the same time preventing the mining and palm oil expansion.

Batu Bulan Farmers Association is the current land managers of Batu Bulan Community Forest. The Group was initially formed based on their concern about mining companies and palm oil plantation expanse. The farmers' associations from three villages in Gunung Mas district want to protect their land from mining and palm oil expansion. There is about 200 community member who participates in the community. The user group committee is the elder or leader of the Group's village committee. The committee is responsible for managing, coordinating, and negotiating with the government and other external partners such as donors, NGO and Companies. The majority of members are mostly old because the younger generation is moving to the city and has limited farming knowledge. Gender participation is equal between men and women, as women play an essential role as nursery staff while men become responsible for doing heavy production jobs in the field. The economic crop that they plant are: Sengon (Albizia chinensis), Brazilian nut, ginger, curcumin, chili, cardamom, etc. However, Community Habaring Hurung is a village forest user group inside Sebangau National Park. The member of the community is 20 family leaders whose land is currently appointed as National Park. They become community to access the NTFP from their previous land. There is no gender equality or participation because the permit is still in the process, while the community can still benefit from accessing the fruits harvesting from their land.

The Donor, NGO and Private Sector

External assistance remains a significant source of financial support for state and civil society activities in many developing countries. Therefore donor agencies' objectives and political agendas are should not influence the sector's progress. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) works with the Indonesian government to minimize greenhouse gas emissions and maintain biodiversity in carbon-rich and biologically important forest and mangrove environments. The Ministry of Environment and Forestry Directorate of Conservation Areas was LESTARI's primary counterpart. Lestari played a crucial role as an association, whereas they facilitators and capacity builders, assisting in the reconciliation of brainstorming between community members and government authorities and facilitating the management of conflict within or among communities. Lestari also links the CF to the private sector, such as Fairventures. This company is an agribusiness company that supports the development of social forestry through a business model and implements an agroforestry system to benefit people, investors, and the environment. Fair venture supports the CF through technical expertise, finance, and market access. Nevertheless, in CP Habaring Hurung, The LESTARI team continued to work with the Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI), Sebangau National Park management authorities, and the Ministry of Environment's Directorate of Conservation Areas. The GGGI international intergovernmental organization promotes and supports strong, inclusive, and long-term economic growth in developing and emerging economies. The NGO is not profit-oriented; they focus on solving the tenurial issue within the protected area.

Outcomes

Social Outcomes

Table 2. Summaries evaluation on social outcomes

	Community Forest Batu Bulan	Conservation Partnership Habaring Hurung
Ownership right	None	None
Forest uses	Hight	Low
Decision making	Moderate	Low
Information	Moderate	Low

As shown in the table above, claims to forest ownership rights are beyond the power of direct forest users; occasional efforts to claim forest ownership rights were simply dismissed. Moreover, community forestry stimulated forest users' optimism to make such claims, but the state's ownership of the forests is further reinforced by the program's obligatory community forestry agreements and licenses, which force the users and their groups to accept the state's tenurial rights. The amount to which direct forest users have access to forest planning, information and decision-making varies amongst community forestry. In CF Batu Bulan access to the indicator is higher than CP Habaring Hurung. It is because the CF community felling more secure with the duration of collaboration, while the CP only get 5 years. They fell powerless about their status and uncertain future ahead.

Economic outcomes

Table 3. Summaries evaluation on economic outcomes

Benefits		Community Forest Batu Bulan	Conservation Partnership Habaring Hurung
Forest product	Forest crops	Hight	None
	NTFPs	Hight	Hight
Cash	Wages	Hight	None
	Shares from sales	Moderate	None
Development and Service		Moderate	None

As we assume in theory when direct users are given significant empowerment, as seen by a high degree of access to forest uses, the likelihood of them being lifted out of poverty is high. The CP implementation is less useful because the NTFP collection location is limited in the traditional zone, However, the NTFP can be spread all over the area and there is no regulation about utilization quota yet. The CP Batu Bulan memmber gain revenue about 300$ per month in the harvest time (November-Mei), while they can still get the NTFP product for their daily basis in the maintenance season. However in CP Habaring Hurung the farmers can access the fruits crops from the farming land and sell it to the market, it will need a collaboration with private sector to get better outcomes.

Ecological outcomes

CF has a wide range of outcomes, one of the outcomes is to manage the land into diverse environment through agroforestry. Environmental outcomes such as forest cover change, tree density, and carbon stock may be quantified, while environmental services such as microclimate management and water quality are more complex to define. According to the interview, both community forests rarely show a substantial signal of improvement in terms of biodiversity. We've seen clear improvements in forest conditions, such as increased greenery and forest species survival, as well as increased forest stocks.

The Way Forward

To begin with, while CF programs aim to improve the welfare of forest users, local empowerment, and forest conditions, this win-win-win solution is likely due to power imbalances between players. It's also important to think about how certain outcomes may be prioritized above others. Is social cohesion more important than economic and social outcomes? Is it true that protecting biodiversity and forests is more important than alleviating poverty? Who gets what's fair, or who gets what's not? And who gets to decide what's fair and what isn't? Social, economic, political, and environmental changes may influence people's interest, motivation, and decisions about forest and land use.

The CF is not a panacea for all of the difficulties that the forest-dependent community faces, but it can assist to alleviate some of them if well managed. While the CF in HKM is concerned about to prevent the expansion of mining and palm oil plantations, the CP in SNP is concerned about overlapping tenure and how to access the resources in their land. Policy changes by the Indonesian government can sometimes result in forestry and tenure concerns. The lack capacity of government worker and local community in Indonesia might be responsible in creating an invisible barrier to achieve the CF goals, but the support from the NGO, company and donor initiative is helpful.   The Indonesian Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MOEF) needs to make a paradigm shift by shifting from policing to facilitation, which gives users more management rights and focuses on supervision. This approach has been successful in some countries, such as China where village forest cover has increased significantly for 30 years by facilitating the local conceptions of environmental justice to improved livelihood and it is elevate the sustainable community’s forestry.

Further social forestry strategies should take into account all aspects of the opportunities and challenges (institutional, social, economic, and environmental). Resolving social and environmental concerns, on the other hand, should be emphasized. Predicting inequality and competition in the management of forest resources, which could contribute to greater social tensions among local communities. The environmental impacts of community forest should be addressed properly as demand for community forest grows rapidly. Especially, the loss of biodiversity caused by the conversion of tropical forests to agricultural or semi-agricultural areas. In addition, the economic and institutional opportunities should be explored to optimize the positive impact of community forest. To ensure poverty alleviation in rural regions, capacity building for local communities in managing their agricultural businesses under community forest is essential. Furthermore, collaboration by the government and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to develop local institutions are essential for the successful implementation of community forest management.

UBC Wiki Logo

Capacity Building for CF members