Issue

Vol. 5 No. 2 (2021): NOVEMBER

Creative Commons License

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

Institutional analysis of forest governance after the implementation of Law Number 23/2014 in North Sumatra Province, Indonesia

https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v5i2.8755
Oding Affandi
Faculty of Forestry, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia
Hariadi Kartodihardjo
Faculty of Forestry, IPB University, Bogor, Indonesia
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8001-352X
Bramasto Nugroho
Faculty of Forestry, IPB University, Bogor, Indonesia
Sulistya Ekawati
Center for Social, Economic, Policy and Climate Change Research and Development, Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Bogor, Indonesia

Corresponding Author(s) : Oding Affandi

[email protected]

Forest and Society, Vol. 5 No. 2 (2021): NOVEMBER

Abstract

After the implementation of Law Number 23/2014 on Regional Government in Indonesia, the authority for forest management rests with the central and provincial governments. This study aims to (1) assess forest governance performance after the implementation of this law, (2) analyse the institutional aspects of forest governance after the implementation of this law and (3) formulate strategies to strengthen forest governance institutions. This study finds that although Law Number 23/2014 has been implemented in North Sumatra Province, the forestry sector remains centralistic; the characteristics of forest resources have not changed (these continue to be common pool resources) and the behaviour of the actors lacks synergy. In this scenario, the performance of forest governance has not improved significantly, as indicated by the incomplete designation of forest areas; the number of Kesatuan Pengelolaan Hutan that have not implemented the Badan Layanan Umum Daerah scheme; the low rights of access and low forest utilisation by the community; and the slow service process for permits; however, the costs for obtaining permits are according to regulations. This is in line with the results of this study’s institutional analysis, which show that (1) the provincial jurisdiction boundaries have narrowed, given that only the central government has authority over the forestry planning sub-function and forestry supervision; (2) many central government regulations continue to be used in forest management, characterising the low aspect of provincial regional representation rules; and (3) despite clear forest ownership rights, there are claims from other stakeholders, which indicates the low legitimacy of the parties. This study suggests that forest governance performance can be improved by expanding the jurisdiction boundaries through the assistance task mechanism to the provincial government; ensuring provincial government participation in formulating forest policies; and increasing the status of forest permit holders and managers from claimants to proprietors.

Keywords

institutional forest governance implementation of Law Number 23/2014 North Sumatra Province
Affandi, O., Kartodihardjo, H., Nugroho, B., & Ekawati, S. (2021). Institutional analysis of forest governance after the implementation of Law Number 23/2014 in North Sumatra Province, Indonesia . Forest and Society, 5(2), 304-325. https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v5i2.8755
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. Affandi, O. (2020). Kelembagaan dan inovasi daerah dalam tata kelola hutan setelah implementasi UU No. 23/2014 di Provinsi Sumatera Utara [Institutions and regional innovation in forest governance following the implementation of Law Number 23/2014 in North Sumatra Province] [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Program Pascasarjana. IPB University.
  2. Alchian, A., & Demsetz, H. (1973). The property rights paradigm. The Journal of Economic History, 33, 16–27. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0022050700076403
  3. Alston, L. J., & Mueller, B. (2005). Property rights and the state. In C. Menard, & M. M. Shirley (Eds.), Handbook of New Institutional Economics (pp. 149–172), Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-25092-1
  4. Basyuni, M., Sulistiyono, N., Wati, R., & Hayati, R. (2018). Deforestation trend in North Sumatra over 1990-2015. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 122(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/122/1/012059
  5. Berge, E. (2003, July 11–14). Environmental protection in the theory of commons [Paper presentation]. Trans-nationalizing the commons and the politics of civil society, Chiang Mai, Thailand. http://www.sv.ntnu.no/iss/Erling.Berge/IASCP03 Chiang Mai 2003.pdf
  6. Broegaard, R. J. (2005). Land tenure insecurity and inequality: A case study from Nicaragua. Development and Change, 36(5), 845–864. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.0012-155X.2005.00438.x
  7. Colfer, C. J. P., & Capistrano, D. (Eds.). (2005). The politics of decentralization: Forests, people and power. Earthscan.
  8. Contreras-Hermosilla, A., & Fay, C. (2005). Strengthening forest management in Indonesia through land tenure reform: Issues and framework for action. World Agroforestry. https://www.forest-trends.org/publications/strengthening-forest-management-in-indonesia-through-land-tenure-reform/
  9. Corruption Eradication Commission (Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi). (2012). Integrated white paper: Semiloka menuju kawasan hutan yang berkepastian hukum dan berkeadilan [Workshop towards forest areas with legal certainty and justice] [White paper]. Author. https://auriga.or.id/related/detail/25/integrated-white-paper-semiloka-menuju-kawasan-hutan-yang-berkepastian-hukum-dan-berkeadilan?lang=id
  10. Corruption Eradication Commission (Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi). (2018). Kertas kebijakan evaluasi gerakan nasional penyelamatan sumberdaya alam [Policy paper on evaluation of the national movement to save natural resources]. Author.
  11. Fisher, M. R., Moeliono, M., Mulyana, A., Yuliani, E. L., Adriadi, A., Judda, J., & Sahide, M. A. K. (2018). Assessing the new social porestry project in Indonesia: Recognition, livelihood and conservation? International Forestry Review, 20(3), 346–361. https://doi.org/10.1505/146554818824063014
  12. Fletcher, A., Guthrie, J., Steane, P., Roos, G., & Pike, S. (2003). Mapping stakeholder perceptions for a third sector organization. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(4), 505–527. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930310504536
  13. Food and Agriculture Organization Program on Forests. (2011). Framework for assessing and monitoring forest governance. FAO PROFOR, 36. http://www.fao.org/climatechange/27526-0cc61ecc084048c7a9425f64942df70a8.pdf
  14. Forestry Service of North Sumatra Province. (2019). Rencana Strategis (Renstra) Dinas Kehutanan Provinsi Sumatra Utara Tahun 2019 – 2023 [The Strategic Plan of the Forestry Service of North Sumatra Province for 2019 – 2023]. Dinas Kehutanan Provinsi Sumatera Utara.
  15. Tata kelola multilevel dan multipelaku dalam REDD+: Partisipasi, integrasi,
  16. dan koordinasi 113
  17. Tim Forsyth
  18. Tata kelola multilevel dan multipelaku dalam REDD+: Partisipasi, integrasi,
  19. dan koordinasi 113
  20. Tim Forsyth
  21. Tata kelola multilevel dan multipelaku dalam REDD+: Partisipasi, integrasi,
  22. dan koordinasi 113
  23. Tim Forsyth
  24. Forsyth, T. (2009). Multilevel, multiactor governance in REDD+. Participation, integration and coordination. In A. Angelsen (Eds.), Realising REDD+. National strategy and policy option (pp. 113–122). Center for International Forestry Research.
  25. Handayani, M. M., Fajrini, R., & Subagiyo, H. (2019). Indeks kelola hutan dan lahan 2019: Studi endline tata kelola hutan dan lahan di 12 provinsi [Forest and land governance index 2019: Endline study of land and forest governance in 12 provinces]. Indonesian Center for Environmental Law. https://icel.or.id/hasil-penelitian/indeks-kelola-hutan-dan-lahan-2019-studi-end-line-tata-kelola-hutan-dan-lahan-di-12-provinsi/
  26. Handoyo, R. K. D., & Irawanti, S. (2013). Kebijakan [Policy]. In K. D. Raharjo, H. Dwiprabowo, S. Irawanti, & N. dan Ginting (Eds.), Pedoman analisis penelitian sosial ekonomi kehutanan [Guidelines for forestry socio-economic research analysis] (pp. 351-414). PT Kanisius
  27. Hanna, S. S., Folke, C., & Maler, K. G. (1996). Rights to nature: Ecological, economic, cultural and political principles of institutions for the environment. Island Press.
  28. Hardiyanto, G., Adnan, H., & Santosa, A. (2018). Percepatan implementasi program perhutanan sosial [Accelerating the implementation of social forestry programs]. https://fkkm.org/2018/09/27/policy-paper-percepatan-implementasi-program-perhutanan-sosial/
  29. Hernowo, B., & Ekawati, S. (2014). Operasionalisasi kesatuan pengelolaan hutan (KPH): Langkah awal menuju kemandirian [Operationalization of forest management units (FMUs): The first step towards independence]. PT. Kanisius.
  30. Indonesian Center for Environmental Law & SEKNAS FITRA. (2015). Policy brief tata kelola yang tak kunjung membaik: penilaian masyarakat sipil terhadap kinerja pemerintah daerah dalam pengelolaan hutan dan lahan di 16 kabupaten [Policy brief: governance that is not improving: civil society assessment of local government performance in forest and land management in 16 districts]. https://programsetapak.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Indeks-Tata-Kelola-Hutan-Lahan-2015.pdf
  31. Indrarto, G. B., Purba, C., Steni, B., Tresya, D., Dewantama, M., Hartati, C., Apriani, I., & Putri, A. (2012). Potret pelaksanaan tata kelola hutan. sebuah studi mendalam di Provinsi Kalimantan Tengah dan Nusa Tenggara Barat. Jaringan Tata Kelola Hutan Indonesia.
  32. Kartikasari, F. I., Priyanta, M., Tresya, D., & Kusumawardhani, W. (2012). Perizinan terpadu untuk perbaikan tata kelola hutan di Indonesia: Studi kasus Kalimantan Tengah. Indonesian Center for Environmental Law.
  33. Kartodihardjo, H. (2006). Masalah kapasitas kelembagaan dan arah kebijakan kehutanan: Studi tiga kasus [Problem of institutional capacity and direction of forestry policy: Three cases study]. Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika, 12(3), 14–25.
  34. Kartodihardjo, H. (2008). Di balik kerusakan hutan dan bencana alam: Masalah transformasi kebijakan kehutanan [Behind forest destruction and natural disasters: The problem of forest policy transformation]. Wana Aksara.
  35. Kartodihardjo, H. (2013). Kepemerintahan dan kebijakan kehutanan: Soal diskursus dan reduksi ilmu pengetahuan [Forestry governance and policy: A matter of discourse and knowledge reduction]. In H. Kartodihardjo (Ed.), Kembali ke jalan lurus: Kritik penggunaan ilmu dan praktek kehutanan Indonesia [Getting back on track: Criticism of the use of forest science and practice in Indonesia] (pp. 149–176). FORCI Development dan Tanah Air Beta.
  36. Kartodihardjo, H., Sunaryo, Situmorang, A. W., Soeprihanto, P., Hadi, J. W., Nurtjahjawilasa, & Fach, E. (2015). Kajian perizinan kehutanan online: Menuju terwujudnya perbaikan tata kelola hutan indonesia [Online forestry permit review: Towards the realization of improved Indonesian forest governance]. Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan.
  37. Kirana, K. C., & Ratnasari, R. T. (2017). Evaluasi kinerja sumberdaya manusia [Evaluation of human resource performance]. Gosyen Publishing.
  38. Maryudi, A. (2016). Arahan tata hubungan kelembagaan kesatuan pengelolaan hutan (KPH) di Indonesia [Direction of institutions and bureaucracies of forest management units (FMUs) in Indonesia]. Jurnal Ilmu Kehutanan, 10(1), 57–64. https://doi.org/10.22146/jik.12632
  39. Ministry of Environment and Forestry. (2017). Penetapan kawasan hutan menuju kawasan hutan indonesia yang mantap [The forest area gazettement towards a solid Indonesian forest area]. Author.
  40. Ministry of Home Affairs. (2011). Naskah akademik rancangan undang-undang (RUU) tentang Pemerintahan Daerah usul inisiatif pemerintah [Academic paper of the draft law on Regional Government proposed by the government].
  41. Moeliono, M., Wollenberg, E., & Limberg, G. (Eds.). (2008). The decentralization of forest governance: Politics, economics and the fight for control of forests in Indonesian Borneo. Earthscan Publications.
  42. Nagendra, H., & Ostrom, E. (2012). Polycentric governance of multifunctional forested landscapes. International Journal of the Commons, 6(2), 104–133. http://doi.org/10.18352/ijc.321
  43. Nopiansyah, F. (2017). Penguatan kelembagaan lokal pengelolaan sumber daya alam sumber penghidupan Suku Mentawai di Cagar Biosfer Pulau Siberut [Strengthening local institutions for the management of natural resources as a source of livelihood for the Mentawai Tribe in the Siberut Island Biosphere Reserve] [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Program Pascasarjana. IPB University.
  44. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808678
  45. Nugroho, B. (2013). Reformasi kelembagaan dan tata kepemerintahan: Faktor pemungkin menuju tata kelola kehutanan yang baik [Institutional reform and governance: Enabling factors for good forest governance]. In Kartodihardjo (Eds.), Kembali ke jalan lurus: Kritik penggunaan ilmu dan praktek kehutanan Indonesia [Getting back on track: Criticism of the use of forest science and practice in Indonesia] (pp. 177-224). FORCI Development dan Tanah Air Beta.
  46. Nugroho, B. (2016, 26 November). Kelembagaan, karakteristik sumberdaya, dan perilaku aktor: Analisis kritis kebijakan pengelolaan hutan Indonesia [Institutions, resource characteristics, and actor behavior: A critical analysis of Indonesia's forest management policies]. Orasi Ilmiah Guru Besar Tetap Fakulas Kehutanan Institut Pertanian Bogor. Institut Pertanian Bogor.
  47. Nugroho, B., & Soedomo, S. (2016). Panduan pola pengelolaan keuangan badan layanan umum daerah (BLUD) menuju kemandirian KPH [Guidelines for the pattern of financial management of regional public service agencies (BLUD) towards the independence of FMUs]. Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan
  48. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807763
  49. Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400831739
  50. Ostrom, E. (2008). Institutions and the environment. Economic Affairs, 28(3), 24-31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0270.2008.00840.x
  51. Pakpahan, A. (1989). Kerangka analitik untuk penelitian rekayasa sosial: Perspektif ekonomi institusi [Analytical framework for social engineering research: Institutional economic perspective]. Prosiding Patanas Evolusi Kelembagaan Pedesaan Di Tengah Perkembangan Teknologi Pertanian.
  52. Peters, B. G. (2000). Institutional theory: Problems and prospects. Political Science Series, 69(69). http://opensigle.inist.fr/handle/10068/86548
  53. Quinn, J. J. (2013). Teori prinsipal agen [Principal agent theory]. In Ishiyama, & Breuning (Eds.), Ilmu politik dalam paradigma abad kedua puluh satu. Sebuah referensi panduan praktis. Jilid 1 [21st century political science: A reference handbook. Volume 1]. Prenada Media Group.
  54. Rachman, B. (2009). Kebijakan sistem kelembagaan pengelolaan irigasi: Kasus Provinsi Banten [Policy on institutional system of irrigation management: The case of Banten Province]. Analisis Kebijakan Pertanian, 7(1), 1–19. http://pse.litbang.deptan.go.id/ind/pdffiles/ART7-1a.pdf
  55. Rahman, Y., Hartati, C., Maulana, M., Subagiyo, H., & Putra, R. A. (2013). Indeks kelola hutan dan lahan daerah: kinerja pemerintah daerah dalam pengelolaan hutan dan lahan di Indonesia: Studi kasus pada 9 kabupaten [Local forest and land management index: local government performance in forest and land management in Indonesia: Case study in 9 districts]. ICEL dan SEKNAS FITRA.
  56. Reed, M. S., Graves, A., Dandy, N., Posthumus, H., Hubacek, K., Morris, J., Prell, C., Quinn, C. H., & Stringer, L. C. (2009). Who’s in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(5), 1933–1949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.01.001
  57. Sahide, M. A. K., Supratman, S., Maryudi, A., Kim, Y.-s., & Giessen, L. (2016). Decentralisation policy as recentralisation strategy: Forest management units and community forestry in Indonesia. International Forestry Review, 18(1), 78–95. https://doi.org/10.1505/146554816818206168
  58. Schlager, E., & Ostrom, E. (1992). Property-rights regimes and natural resources: A conceptual analysis. Land Economics, 68(3), 249–262. https://doi.org/10.2307/3146375
  59. Schmid, A. A. (2004). Conflict and cooperation: Institutional and behavioral economics. Blackwell Publishing.
  60. Secco, L., Da Re, R., Pettenella, D. M., & Gatto, P. (2014). Why and how to measure forest governance at local level: A set of indicators. Forest Policy and Economics, 49, 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.07.006
  61. Setyarso, A., Djajono, A., Nugroho, B., Wulandari, C., Suwarno, E., Kartodihardjo, H., & Sardjono, M. A. (2014). Strategi pengembangan KPH dan perubahan struktur kehutanan Indonesia [KPH development strategy and changes in Indonesia’s forestry structure]. www.forclime.org
  62. Simarmata, R., & Firdaus, A. Y. (2016). Pemberlakuan UU No. 23/2014 dan desentralisasi di bidang pengelolaan sumberdaya alam [The enactment of Law No. 23/2014 and decentralization in the field of natural resource management]. Perkumpulan untuk Pembaharuan Hukum Berbasis Masyarakat dan Ekologis (HuMa).
  63. Sinabutar, P., Nugroho, B., Kartodihardjo, H., & Darusman, D. (2014). Reforming the gazettment of state forest area in Riau Province. Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika, 20(3), 179–186. https://doi.org/10.7226/jtfm.20.3.179
  64. Suharjito, D. (2017). Percepatan pencapaian target perhutanan sosial. Disampaikan pada konferensi tenurial [Accelerating the achievement of social forestry targets. Presented at the tenure conference]. Jakarta, 25-27 Oktober 2017 dengan Tema “Mewujudkan Hak-hak Rakyat: Reformasi Penguasaan Tanah dan Pengelolaan Hutan di Indonesia”. http://fkkm.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Panel-1-Perhutanan-Sosial-Tenure-Conference-2017.pdf
  65. United Nations Development Programme Indonesia. (2013). Indeks Tata Kelola Hutan, Lahan dan REDD+ 2012 di Indonesia [The 2012 Indonesia forest, land, and REDD+ governance index]. https://www.id.undp.org/content/indonesia/en/home/library/environment_energy/indeks-tata-kelola-hutan---lahan--dan-redd--2012-di-indonesia.html
  66. United Nations Development Programme Indonesia. (2015). Indeks Tata Kelola Hutan Indonesia 2014 [The 2014 Indonesia forest governance index]. http://www.menlhk.go.id/
  67. Yusdiyanto. (2012). Partisipasi masyarakat dalam pembentukan program legislasi daerah [Community participation in the establishment of regional legislation programs]. Fiat Justitia Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lampung, 5(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.25041/fiatjustisia.v5no2.66
Read More
Author biographies is not available.
Download this PDF file
PDF