Devolution and Indonesia's New Basic Forestry Law

1)evolution and Indonesia's New Basic Forestry Law

t \ n Wollenherg and Hariitdi ha\-todihnrdio

Karya Ilmiyah ini telah d i i l o k ~ m e n ~ a s ~ k a ~
di Dcp:ir:cmca IL1ana;tinin XI" tan
Fn1:vItas Kehutan;ls, I tJj3,
Ketun t'rpytcrtren RINH

Ilevolution and Indonesia's Ncw Basic Forestry L a w
Eva wollenbergt and Hariadi l o r specifical I) ~nir.\:~~i~i.trXtr/
cidui. The status o f / i ~ r / i rLI~~LII
~ i appears to confer few n e u rights. A n ~ o n e\\it11 official use rights is also
subject to tasation for forest products removed. Tlie central g o \ e r n ~ n e n tis responsible thr determining
the level and distribtltion o f ~ ~ rigt~ts.
sc

l'able 1 Forest Function, Status a n d Utilization based o n U U S o . 4111999 o n Forestry

FOREST
Ft'SCTIOS

FOREST STATUS
STATE FOKEST
~-

C'O\SFKVATIO\
IFOKEST'

LSE OPTIONS
PRIVATE FOREST

.

SOX C U S T O Y I A R Y

CCSTOYARY

FOR EST

FOREST

To be used for biodiversit>
conserbation. Other uses
possible. except in nature
reserbes. core zones and forest
zones in national parks.
Article 74

Customary communities can
use for conservation and
protectiun purposes where
these uses do not conflict
*itti the designated functions
and law. Article 37

T.he owner can use the
forest for conservation and
protection put-poses as Ion%
as these uses do not contlict
with the designated

functions. Article 36

PERMITTED
ESTERPRISE USE
O F T H E AREA
Sone

FOREST
CONVEKSIOS

Cannot be convet-red to
non forestrq use

PROTECTIOY
FOREST

T o be used for environniental
services and NTFP extraction.
Article 36

I'RODI:CTIO\
FOREST

ro be used for environmental
services. timber and S'TFP
extraction. Article 28

If changed to state forest.
the government will
co~npensateowners. Article
36
Customary commuriities can
use the custoniary forest for
dail) subsistence purposes.
Article 67

Forest use is ~iianagedby
the owner,

Cali be converted to lion

forestry use (111ining. etc.)

Can be granted to
Individual
Co-operative's

Can be converted to non
forests! use (tilining, etc.)

Private
companies
State companies
(BLVX,
BUVD)"

Customar) communities can
~lndertakeother uses as long
as these uses d o not cnliflict
with the designated function
and law. Article 37.

If forest products are traded.
the customary community
has to pay forest taxes.
Article 3 7

~-

SPECIAL
1'I;RPOSt
FORKS 1'

To be used for research.
development. education.
training. religious or culture
filrictions. Article 8

I-"rests with special purpose
are not necessarily customary
forests. but custoniary
communities can Inanage

forest with special purpose.
AI-ticle 34

s~witied

Yot specitied

S o t ipecified

S o t specified

\ot 5pecified

-

LJRBAS FORI-ST

Public urban areas designated
as forest by the governnient.
Article 9

-

\()I

relevant

h o t relevant

The table also shows tliat special purpose areas can be designated on both lalid types for religious.
cultural. educational or researcli pilrposes. and. in support o f devolntion. l~~r~.s>.r~/.oko/
ii11kl1111crcl(t/ call
have rights to manage tl~eseareas. Given tlie precedent of the special pill-pose designation (h'i111~1~rrr7
riengon Tzrjnc~~i
/ . ~ / i l ~ r ~for
~ ~communities
~rr/
~nanagingthe da~iiarazroforest\ in Krui. Sun~atra(SK.17
Kpts-Il 1998) (Fa! and Sirait 1009). it is feasible t l ~ a t l ~ especial purpose desiyation c o ~ l l dbe used to
l7lrkl1111

oclir/ status.
extend rights to conimu~iitiesineligible for ~~rir.s,l~o~.oko/
Frorn Table I. \ve can see tliat only two sets o f rights are i ~ ~ i i q associated
~ ~ e l ~ with ~~~o.sl~o~.c~hrr/
Iilrklrr~r
oclrl~. Tliese are the ~ r i ~ l i t s( I: ) to use o f tlie {'ores[ to meet dail! consu~nptiveneeds and ( 7 )to
u~~dertake
forest Iilaliazelnelit activities accordi~lgto customar! r ~ ~ l e
(as
s l o ~ as
~ gthese do not co~itlict
with state la\vs). Tlie neu law stre~igthenstliese riglits. \vliicli liad been available to customar!
communities t l i r o ~ ~decrees
gl~
~xtlierthar~laws. SK Menteri 25 1 Ic)').3 \rliicli granted use r i g l ~ t sto
nontimber forest products and timber for consumptive use. is such an esample. Some rights have not
been actualized because they were interpreted to be in conflict witli national priorities. In other cases
local people were simply not aware o f or able to claim the riglits.
According to tlie la\\. tlie most lucrative rights-those to enterprise---are to be given to co-operatives
or companies. On tlie one halid. tlie availahilit! o f enterprise rights to co-operatives is a ma.jor

milestone towards devolution. especially since local com~iiunitiescan form co-operatives. On tlie other
hand. by relying on co-operatives. the law creates a t i r ~ ndivisio~ibetween two kinds o f institutions:
those for entel-prise-oriented use o f tlie foresl and those for custolllar) use rights to local c o ~ i i ~ i i ~ ~ n i t i e s .
Presu~nabl! r~(/o/c o m m ~ ~ ~ i i t~i ei si ~ t~i >sr ~
t co-operatives
ii
if t h e \\.ant to use the forest for cash incollie
generation (although this is not clear in tlie law. as c o m ~ i i ~ ~ n i tteclinicall~~
ies
may be able to r e c e i ~ e
rights directly). Looking at h o institutions
~
for local forest management have been organized in other
countries. e.g. Foresl I!sers' Groups (Nepal). Forest Protection Con~mittees(India). E.jidos in Mexico
or Farmers' Associations (Philippines) where the rights to income are usually inteyated with
subsistence rights. one might q ~ ~ e s t i othe
n necessity o f such a di\.ision. The burden o f forming.
registering and monitoring two instit~~tions
among local c o ~ i i ~ i i ~ ~ n i let
t i c alone

s.
ensuring co-o~.dinatio~~
bet\veen tlie t\$,o ma! prove to be a~iibitioi~s.
The adrninistrati\.e burden o f dealing M itli one local
institution alone has proven to he sufticiently challenging in ~ i i o scountries
t
(Po\ 109.3).
Tlie degree o f genuine d e v o l ~ i t i owill
~ ~ depend on tlie estent co-operatives are formed primarill b ~local
.
communities and primarily benefit these communities. The current popular impression o f cooperatives \\.oi~ld~ieeclto be Inore positive for the co-operatives to be considered credible and
legiti~nateinstitutions for devolution. According to tlie vision o f co-operatives promoted during tliis
reform period. I n a n different groilps. including tlie employees o f timber companies can form local cooperatives. The implementing reg~llatio~is
o f tlie new la\\' should provide guarantees that local cooperati~esrepresent ol- benefit local com~iiunities. The current law f ~ ~ r t l i estipulates
r
that, oovernment
and private co~npaniesshould work with local co-operatives. l'his is witli tlie intention o f distributing
forest benefits to local communities. The natul-e ot'this work. I~o\\.ever.is not specitied. otl~erthan that
the companies slio~rldassist local co-operatives to heco~iiemol-e p r o f ssional. There is no p~.ovisioli
that suggests tlie for111o f tlie collaboration or how it would increase ~iiaterialbenefits to local
communities. Anecdotal evidence k - o ~ an ~iumhero f sites in I
.!.(j

*!$!i,
!

I,
2

ri.cb
i I!,
'

,;

.

,

(4) Develop inter-institutio~~al
arrangements that protect the priorit!, rights o f customarb c o m ~ l ~ u n i t i e s
t o h r r ~ ~i lr nd r r ~ .wit11 cliecks t l i r o u ~ lci i v i l society organizations for protecting custolnarj3
communities' interests ayainst those o f more po\verfirl groups.
(5) Work out institutional al-ranyements by which valuable econonlic benefirs can s o directly to
customary communities.

These measures. each b\, itself a challenge, would btrengthen devolution i n the new la\+ t o help i t meet
its o w n intended purpose o f giving rights to customark communities t o "achieve empowernlent h i t h i n
the contest o f iniproving their prosperit!" (Article 67). The ne\4 fol-estr! I a n sets out an inipressive
vision tbr the [-ole o f conlnlunities and especiall? customary co~iim~rnities.
The task no\\. is Iin\\ to
ensure that visron is acllieved

Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Marrua Sirait. Chip Fa). Mark I'offenberyer. SeffCampbell. Ida Alu Pradnja
Soekartiko. Kacliel Wranglia~ll.Davit1 t.dm~lndsand
Resosudarmo. Carol .I Pie1.c~C'olfer. Hi11l10il11y
David K a i ~ n o \ \ i t zfor livel! d i \ c u s s i o ~ ~ahout
s
past and current polic! de\lelopments. as \+.ell as theis
I ~ rliis iln;ilysis.
helpful ~ I I ~ L to

a?

Bibliographj
Edmunds. D.and Wollt.nbc.r:. 11. 1990. M ~ ~ l t i s t a k r l i o l dnegotiations
c~-and disadvantaged groups of
people. Manuscript prepared for submission to the International .lournal o f A ~ r i c u l t l ~ r a l
Resources. Governance and Ecology.
Eglientel-. C. and B. Sellato. eds. 1999. Kebudayaan dan Pelestal-ian Alam. Worldwide Fund for
Nature. Jakarta. Indonesia.
i ~ boundal.ies rislit: I ~ ~ d o n e s i au' sr 2 e n ~11eed to
Fa). C.. M . Sirait arid A. KLIS\\.OSO.2000. G e t ~ i lthe
iredefine i t \ forest estate. Pzper presented at the 8"' Conference o f t h e I n t e r n a t i o ~ ~ a l
s s o c i a t i o ~l ~i ~ tlie
r Stduy o t ' C o m ~ n o nPropert!.. .:I Ma!
4 June 2000. Bloomington. Indiana

n.

i.

~ A~ldasputra.
d
cds.. I\;ebutla!aa~~[)ask. A k t ~ ~ a l i \ a ~
si I I
Florus. P.. S. Qju\+c.rig.. .I. B a ~ l ~al ~~ aN.
Pransfor~ilasi.I.P3S-I11stitute01'Dayakolog) reseal-cli and developrnenr and P 1 Cira~iledia
Widiasarana, Jakarta. Indonesia.
Fox. J.. ed. 199.3 1.egal fra~neworksfor forest Illanagelllent in Asia: Case Studies o l ' C o m ~ i ~ u n i t )
State Kelationr. Occasional paper N o . 16. East-West Center. Honolulu. Hawaii. LISA.
Goldman. 1. 1998. Decer~tralitationand sustainable rural livelilioods. I n Sustainable Rural
L.ivelilioods: What Contribution ('a11 We Make? ( C a r l i e . C.. ed. pp. 39-5 1). Papers
National Resource .Adviser's
presented at tlie Orpal-triient o f International L~evelop~iient's
Conference. July 1998. Department o f International Development. London. U K .
Kartodihardjo. H . A~lalisasubstansi L!U I