83
Bogor, 21-22 October 2015
In many places, companies with concessions reached agreements with local communities. As a result, schemes such as kemitraan partnership between a government owned or a private
forestry company and a local community and PHBM pengelolaan hutan bersama masyarakatjoint forest management are also sharing part of benefits of forest management
with local people. Current tenure reform in Indonesia shows that the total area under social forestry schemes is
expanding over time. The data show that while the total area under community management was about 0.22 in 2002, it reached 1.05 in 2014. However, the pace of issuing permits to
local communities is extremely slow. For example, only 0.6 million ha out of a target of 5 million ha could be realized during 2009
–2014 for HTR. There are many HKm or HTR groups that have secured permits but are yet to implement the schemes.
Customary systems are also increasingly recognized by the national policy system. For example, Constitutional Court Ruling 352013 has mandated the government to recognize
customary territory and give customary forest permits to the respective communities. The subsequent regulations have defined the procedures for identifying territories and issuing
permits. However, the challenges of implementing reform and ensuring that local communities can exercise their rights are multi-faceted
– while some have more structural character such as policy provisions and institutional arrangements, others have more locally
situated problems of capacity and attitude. In this context, the Center for International Forestry Research CIFOR is conducting a study on the emergence, current implementation
status, outcomes and constraints of exercising forest rights and tenure security both in customary forest tenure regimes and in formal tenure reform regimes in Indonesia. Building
on the concept of tenure security with a specific focus on threats to tenure security and constraints to realizing tenure rights by local communities, this paper identifies the key threats
that exist in both customary and official forest tenure systems. The section that follows presents the key approaches and tools employed in collecting
empirical data, particularly the use of key informant interviews KIIs and focus group discussions FGDs with the communities. Section Three provides a brief overview of study
sites located in Maluku and Lampung provinces that represent the customary and formal tenure regimes respectively. Section Four elaborates the key constraints of exercising tenure
rights by local communities with specific reference to constraints in enjoying forest rights in customary system and formal tenure systems separately. Finally, we summarize the key
findings and suggest a way forward based on the research.
2. METHOD
The paper primarily uses the comparative case study methodology. A case study offers an unique opportunity for an in-
depth understanding of the specific case as a τcomplex social phenom
ena” Yin 2009. The comparative case study essentially involves two or more cases and aims to make comparisons across the cases possible Goodrick 2014. Supplemented by
the careful examination of the contextual factors such as socioeconomic, political and regulatory environment, case studies and cross-case comparisons offer an additional analytical
framework for a fuller and nuanced understanding of why some forest tenure regimes are more effective and efficient than others. In the research on various forest tenure regimes in
Indonesia, we selected six customary communities in Maluku province and 10 communities implementing formal forest tenure reforms in Lampung province. This paper is based on the
data collected in these communities through participatory methods such as KIIs and FGDs along with observation and document reviews. Interviews with authorities from district,
84
Bogor, 21-22 October 2015
province and national level have also substantiated the results. Similarly, two workshops organized at the sub-national level one in Maluku and another in Lampung and a workshop
organized at the national level also contributed significantly to exploring the perspectives of different actors on the constraints of exercising forest rights and the tenure security of local
communities. The practice of how local communities are exercising forest rights was assessed. For the
purpose, the interaction of the rules, institutions and actors in a specific local and external context was carefully studied. An assessment of the institutions and actors also helped us to
understand how the reform interventions are negotiated at local and sub-national level. Through in-depth interviews, we obtained information from the current and previous leaders
in the participating communities. Between two and three key informants from each group were selected. The KIIs were instrumental in gathering in-depth information on local
perceptions and knowledge of regulations, existing tenure reform implementation practices, gender disaggregated rights realization, relationship between different actors and the key
constraints of tenure reform implementation. In addition, information gathered through KIIs and FGDs was useful in understanding the
changes in rights held by women and men in relation to land and forest resources prior to reform and after reform up to the time of the interview. Similarly, in the indigenous
communities, KIIs and FGDs allowed us to explore the extent to which customary forest tenure systems have influenced management and land use practices in the villages and how
these customary regulations have changed or been formalized. They also helped us to explore the changes at the village level in terms of conflict resolution, local norms and management
practices of forestlands, how livelihoods have been affected by reforms and how the villages engaged in these processes.
The FGDs were conducted in order to gather information about the perception of men and women as separate groups in understanding the extent of the rights granted, implementation
processes of those rights, benefits they could generate, challenges in exercising the rights and strategies adopted for improving local rules and practices. The FGDs were also useful in
apprehending whether and how different tenure regimes attended the specific interests of men and women. The focus groups were identified based on gender and age, i.e. separate groups of
men and women of different ages were involved in the FGDs.
3. STUDY SITES
