TROPICAL F'OREST OF BATU KLIANG UTARA, CENTRAL LOMBOK: Last Decade Condition and Community Forest Perceptions' on it - Repository UNRAM

\\.

. i.

,-

PRlIGTTDIlIG
ISBN : 978-979-891 I -85-9

lnrcma[onal $eminar m lroRical ]lailral fiesoulcos 2015
fiToward Sustainable
Utilization of the Tropical Natural Resources

for a Better Human Prosperities"
Reviewer

:

Assoc. Prof. Lim Phaik Eem
Dr. Oni Yuliarti
Dr. Ranvir Singh

Prof. Dr. James Gannon
Prof. Taufik Fauzi
Prof. I Komang Damar Jaya
Prof. Surya Hadi
Dr. Dahlanuddin
Bambang Hari Kusumo, Ph.D

Aluh Nikmatullah, Ph.D

Editor :
drh. Made Sriasih, Ph.D
Dr. Islamul Hadi
Dr. Faturrahman
Muhsinul Ihsan, M.Sc

e
r

Rs"\

ree.

lA

University of Mataram

Ind.onesia

",.i
Mataram University Press

-s

iii

TAI}I.E OF CONTBNTS
Cover
Opening Speech

i

Table of Contents

lll

Kamaruddin A., Aep Saepul Uyun, Jombrik, Slamet Rahedi Sugeng and

I

Irna Jaya diningrat
Muhamad Ali, Sulairnan N. Depa:nede, Bagus DH Septyono, Alis

9

Mukhlis, Sahrul Alim, Muharnad Amirg and Mohammad Ashari
Suseno Amien, Arum Dani Atmojo, Neni Rostini, and Tia Setiawati

21

Lalu Panji Imam Agamawan, Kadarwan Soewardi, and Nurlisa A. Butet

30

Ansar, Satrijo Saloko, St. Rohani, and Nazaruddin

38

IGP. Muliarta Lryana, BB. Santoso,M. Zairin, N. Farid, NT. Ramdani

46

Luh Gde Sri Astiti, Lisa Praharani dan Riasari Gail

58

S.

Sri Puji Astuti

Nunik Cokrowati, Aluh

67
N i km atul

lah, Sunarpi, Zaenal Abidin

1A

t+

Nanda Diniarti, Nunik Cokrowati, Dewi Nur'aini Setyorn'ati

78

Ardiana Ekarvanti, Nurkaliwantoto, Warindi

87

Wiwik Ekyastuti and Hanna Artuti Ekamawanti

94

Elsanti SU. Sinuiingga, Arifien Yunus, Aisyah

103

Ni Made Laksmi Ernawati, Febriana Tri Wulandari,

and Bambang

t2t

Supeno

Hery Wijayanto, Tri Wahyu Pangestiningsih, Temia Twin Pangesti,

128

Kurnianti
Muhammad IzzuddinFaizal, Bagyo Yanuwiadi & Marsoedi

t36

Varian Fahmi,Idham Sumarto Pratama, Asep Ridwanudin

145

Drvi Laksmiwati and Aliefman Hakim

T54

Sitti Latifah and Taslim Sjah

165

Kurniawati Lely, Handayani Sri Seno, Kusuma Dedi Purwanto Indra

180

Yuda H Fibrianto, July, A Salam, Heru Susetya, Setyo Budhi, Ariana,

185

Gustari, Widagdo S Nugroho, Teguh Budipitojo

iv
I-zrura Flor.vrensia,

[Jllirh.luniarli Siregar, Noor Fariknan itaneaa, nma

191

Nur l;aidah
Mursal Ghazali

199

Guyup Mahardhian Dwi Putra. Surnarjan

206

Baiq Rien Handayani, Ridrvan, Syarifuddin, Oni Vutiartr, Winaryani

214

Werdiningsih and Ellok Fulkiah
Sukayat Harmoko, Arifien Yunus, Sinurat Jarnes, Aisyah

227

Dini lflakhah, and Ratna Ediati

24A

Wahyu Irawati, Adolf JN. Parhusip, and R. Nida Sopiah

249

Laswi Irmayanti, Iskandar Z.Sir egar, prij anto pamoengkii

261

Lalu Jamiludinand Lukrnan Atmaja

269

Baiq Dewi Krisnayanti, Sukartono, Ardiana Ekawanti, Christopher

281

Anderson,

Rina Kurnianingsih, Sri Suyatni, Faturrahman

289

Dlvi Liliek Kusindarta, Dervi Kania Musana, Her5, Wijavanto, Surya

297

-\eus Prihatna. AETFI wahyuni. widagdo Sri Nugroho, Heru Susetya,
':-uda Heru Fibrianto

'

-,,.i Kusnarla, Sukartono. M. Ma'shum, and Mahrup

304

:-

316

-'iLr-.urno, M.J. Hedley,

:
,-'

. --

M. Carnps Arbestain, C.B. Hedley,

o Pereira , P. Bishop and A.F. Mahrnud

> .,htva. Messaiina L. Salarnpessy, lndra G. Febryano,

.--

p. Silamon, Andi C. Ichsan
' .--:\r Tu\\.o, Rajuddin Syamsuddin, anc{ Jamaluddin Jompa

342

.-i11.-r

- :,r ff
I:.-::.
.-

352
361
aoa
JOJ

K yo*r and Asn A

Wrd"

394
407
413

),_-U].rSO

,-'

lr.r

120
Sepf ,ana

427

Seto Priyambodo, E.Hagni Wardoyo

437

Emi Roslinda, Wiwik Ekyastuti, Siti M Kartikawati

452

Rustam

461

Rustarn

469

Rahrnat Sabani and Amuddin

477

Akhmad. R. Saidy, Afiah Hayati, Meldia Septiana

488

Dewi Nur'aeni Setyowati

st2

Hasyyati Shabrina, Ulfah J. Siregar

sza

I Made Sudarma

528

I Made Sudantha dan Suwardji

541

Febi Wahyu Sulistyadi, Bagyo Yanuwiadi and Marsoedi

552

Surya Hadi, Lalu lrfan Hadimi, Siti Raudhatul Kamali, Baiq Desy

559

Ratnasari, and Surayyal Hizmi

Liana Suryaningsih and John K. Fellman

568

Lolita E Susilowati,Zaenal Arifin and Bambang Hari Kusumo

582

Muhamma d Zaenudin, Zaenal Abidin, Bagus Dwi Hari Setyono

597

Zainuri, Abbas Zaini, Wilrar,vani Werdiningsih, Taslim Sjahdan Hadijah

605

I
I

T

HTIMffiOti[t$TffiiAA
O[

i

TI1S TROTICAL

xrsouncnl

il.{lTRAT
?015

TROPICAL F'OREST OF BATU KLIANG UTARA,
CENTRAL LOMBOK:
Last Decade Condition and Community Forest Perceptions' on it
Siti Latifatrr and Taslim Sjuh'

,studyprogram"liH*r"ff ;li:rfl;rYilffi H,flffi r,ffi

ahz@s,ur.com)

Abstract
Tropicalforests such as one in the District of BatuKliang Utara, Central Lombok Regency,
oe useful in terms of economic, environment, and social. Yet, forest must be used in balance mix of
tlw tlree aspects, to achieve sustainable development. Management can Qe the key in achieving
this ptrpnse, and management needs appropriate inforntation, including the current condition and,
nnst importantly how the surrounding community perceive about the forest. This paper reports on
tlpse two issues.
The study tookplace in the area of communityforest (HutanKemasyarakatan, HKm) of Aik
Berih and coveredfour villages of Karang Sidemen, Lantan, Aik Berih dan Setiling, (in the district
of BatuHiong Utara, Central Lombok Regency). There were 200 persons (2.5 % of the population
of thefour villages) were sampledfor structured interviews, and 40 key informants were in-depth
interviewed. The 200 community members consisted of 16A persons of HKmfarmers and 40 persons
wln are not HKmfarmers, while the 40 informants are those of governments (ofregency, district,
odvillages), Nan Government Organizations (NGOs), andprivate businesses. Collected datawere
wtalyz e d de s ipt iv e ly.
Results of this study revealed that respondents and informants perceived that the
erwironment, including theforest, scenery, water resource, andfauna, were improvtng in this last
decade. Maintaining and improving this condition requires that forest must be managed by the
country, but by permitting someforest products to be utilized by comrnunity, with cautious of tight
control in maintaining ecosystem balance to support the live of the community. It is also reported
here that forest degradation occurring now days was eaused by illegal loggtns and so forth. Forest
management requires certain institution, who are able to avoid direct and indirect degradation of
the forest.

t

Key Words: Tropical forest, Community forest, Community perception, Forest management
Cental Lombok

Introduction
Indonesia is situated in tropical areas at which rainfalls are

high. The rainfalls are then

caught naturally in many locations and become springs. However, recent forest degradation causes
decreased amount of water available for many uses(8e11 2000; Hamilton, Rai et al.

springs dried, for example

20Ar. This coqdition
consumption.

2000). Some of

in Lombok(Arsyad 2005; Transform, Department of Forestry et al.

is weakened by the increased population as well as increased per capita water

I

t
I

T

t
I
I
I

t
I
I
I
I
I

I

Forests are perceived as serving Beveral functions

in terms of

economic, social, and

environment. These three fi,rnctions must be utilized in such way that is balance and for the purpose

of sustainable development. Put it in another way, forest should provide economic benefit, yet this
benefit should notin long term cause harm for the environment and be acceptable for the community

(Maikfiuri, Senwal et

aL. 1997; Bontkes and van

Keulen 2003).To maintain forest having useful for

the several aspects then proper management is required. Proper management needs accurate
information, and therefore forest condition need to be monitor from time to time.
Furthermore, Indonesia produces glass house gas emission at the third highest in the world.

This large gas emission relates to forest deforestation and land degradation. On the other hand,
Indonesia has very large area of forest (Sunderlin, Angelsen et al. 2001). Thus, forest degradation

in Indonesia can subskntially contribute to global wanning, a concern of most people worldwide.
Indonesia's forest condition improvement is foreseen very important. There have been

many efforts for improving global environment, one of which is improving forest condition in
Indonesia. Indonesian government has been collaborating with several parties who care with forest
conservation, such as the governments of United States, Korea Republic, etc.

One

of important

Djuharsa and Mulyadin

aspects

in forest

management

is the human(Arsyad 20A5; Asdak 2005;

2A0r. In this concern, human perception

on forest is important to consider

in forest management. The human or community can relate or be in touch directly or indirectly to
forest, and therefore they will have certain perception about the forest. This paper reports on
conditions of the forest of the district of Batu Kliang Utaru Central Lombok Regency, as well as
perception of the people surrounding the forest.

Methodology
This study was carried in the forest community (HutanKemasayarataq HKm) Aik Berik.
Locations of research included the villages of Karang Sidemen, Lantan, Aik Berih and Setiling, in

I

the district of Batukliang Utara, the regency of Central Lombok. Research respondents are
community in those locations, and virtually all respondent are farmers, either community famrers

I

farmers) or non HKm farmers. Total respondents were 200 persons Q.S%of the household
population in the four researched villages), and these were proportionally disfiibuted in the four

I
!t

Gilfu

mentioned villages (Table

1).

The number of Hlon farmers (160 persons) was more than &e
I

number of non Hkm fanners (40 farmers), and this group distibution was justified on the ground

I

tr2
I.
I

]I

I
t
I
I
!I
I

T

!
T
i
T

I

t

I
T
t
T

it

!t

that Hkm communities are those who have direct contact with the foresto so more insightful
- forest
perceptions can be gained for more appropriate management than outsiders' perceptions.
Table

and sample distribution in

Village

Population

vil

Karang Sidemen
Lantan

5.383

Total
Household
6.135

4.6t7

1.442

Aik Berik

6.634

2.05r

Setiline
6.135
Total
22.769
Source: BPS Lombok Tengah

1.774

(Person)

6.926

(2012),exCt@

in the District of BatuKlians Utara
Hkm
Respondent (person)

Household
741
520
r.100
426
2.787

Hkm

Non Hkm

38

9

32
47
43

t2
11

160

40

8

This study collected data through three methods, including structured interviews, in-depth
interviews, and secondary data collection(Cooper and Schindler 2003; Babbie 2004; Sjah 2011).
160 Hkm farmers and 40 non Hkm farmers were interviewed

in structured designed questionnaires.

In addition, interviews were also conducted to 40 key infonnants from governments (of regency,
district, and villages), non government organizations (NGOs), and private enterprises. This study
also collected supplementary data from related offices through secondary data collection method.
Collected data were analyzed in accordance with the need to gain descriptions and understandings
about topics under investigation, and the analyses included descriptive analysis, such as percentage,
means, and so forth(Moore 2000).

Results and Discussions
Results presented here are started

with introduction to the location and respondent
characteristic. This information is important for understanding the situation and why people
perceive the forest in the way in descriptions that are reported. This followed by presentation
of the
current condition of the forest, and finally perceptions of the forest community to the forest

of

BatuKliang Utara.

Location description
BatuKliang Utara is a distict in Central Lombolg and located in the northern part of the
regency (Figwe 1). The district has high proportion of forest (hopical forest). There are many
kinds of perennial and seasonal plants that $ow in the location. The wide forest coverage and
many kinds of flora bring this location to attention to become an area that need protection or
conservation, and has been managed in the form of forest community
3

(I{Km). The essential of this

t
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I

ll

I

I

I
t
t

t

T
T

h

type of forest in that community are allowed to grow several crops of their own choices for their

own uses {well known as Non Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) or HasilHutanBukanKayu
(HIIBK)), while they are mandated to conserve the forest (i.e. not to harvest timbers).

Figure 1: Map of Central Lombok

Figure 2: Forest in BatuKliang Utara

Characteristics of Respondents
Respondents of this research are 160 faimers who participate in the program of the progfirm

of so called forest community (HutanKemasyarakatan, HKm), and 40 farmers who do not
participate. The family size of the respondents are4 persons (usually a couple with two children).
On average, the respondents aged about 45 years, with 15 years of farming experience (for HKm
farmers) and22 years (for non Hkm farmers). They have low education, averaging 4 years (Grade

4 of elementary school). The characteristics of HKm and non HKm are similar in terms of family
size, age, and education. Farming experience of HKm farmers are shorter than non HKm farmers
(Table 2).
Table 2. Characteistictsk of respondents

Item

HKm farmers

Family size (person)
Age (years)
Education (year)
Farming experience (year)

3.7
45.0
4.5

l5.l

Non HKm farmers
3.6
44.8

4.2
22.4

HKm and non HKm farmers have sirriilar jobs, both in main and secondary jobs (Table3 and

4).

Their jobs are farming, laboring (on farm or on building, trading, raising animal, and providing

services of several kinds). Farming is a job of all HKm farmers, and is a job of majority of non

HKm farmers. thus is important job for almost all the community around the forest area. However,

or additional jobs need is also important, e.g. running trading or business, and this
"hernatir.e
alpears to be promising given there is only about 7%o of the respondents who do this while the area
:1a5 a

ne*

I

potential in providing several kinds of raw or processed products of the forest. This relatively

business activity needs intervention, to improve their business capacity.

Table3. Distribution of respondents by main jobs

\ame of job

I
I
T

I

I

I

Farmer
Labor
Trader
Livestock raiser
Teacher
Village officer

HKm farmers
N

o/
/o

126

79
9

15
11

6

J

8

6

4

1

I

0
0

I

1

0
0
0

0

J

8

0
0

0

1

2

160

100

40

100

Building
orofessional

Driver
Total

Non HKm farmers
o/"
N
24
60
22
9

0

Table 4. Distribution of resfondentsby secondary jobs

Name of job

HKm farmers
35

t4

9

9

22

8

5

5

7

4

2
0
0

0

N
Farmer
Labor
Trader
Livestock raiser
Transportation
provider

Non HKm farmers

o/
/o
22

2

N

o/o

t
J

8

0

J

Teacher

J

2

0

0

Buildine professional
Casual worker
Driver
Total

2
2

0
0

0
0

I

I
I
I

0

0

75

47

t6

40

Respondents possessed several assets that are important for maintaining their living, they are

mainly land and livestock. Land includes forest, wet cropping land, garden, and house yard.

A11

HKm farmers have forest land (as the consequence of having HKm farmer selection), while non
Hlfufarmers posses no forest but have other types of land as the case of HKm farmers, and in

5

general the possession is of low size. In addition, several respondents have livestock which is also

limited (Table 5).
Table5. Respondents asset possession

HKm farmer

Type of asset
Forest land
West
cropping land
Garden
Yard
Chicken
Duck
Cattle
Goat
Machinery
Note: 'are' is a size

Non HKm farmer
o,/
to
Volume

N

o/
to

Yolume

N

160

100

0

0

l3

0.40 ha
0.27 ha

0

2t

18

45

0.14 ha

22

t4

105

66

20

13

J

2

0
0
0

0
0
0

0.42ha
4arc

0

0

0

7

18

10 are

4 head
8 head
0
0

0
0

0

0
0

15

0
38

1

J

1

J

0

t
I

head
head

lunit

of 100 m

Respondents' evaluation on environment
Respondents expressed their perceptions on changes on environment that occurred within

last 10 yeaxs, and changes were expressed in improve, constant, or decrease. The environment is
referred to forest, scenery, water resource, and fauna. HKm and non HKmrespondents revealed

different results (Table6a and

b). Majority of respondents (more than 50%) stated that the

conditions of forest, scenery, and fauna have been increasing in the last 10 years. Similarly, water
condition is thought to be improving bay 43o/o IlKm farmers

alaLd

33Yo non

HKm farmers. If this

evaluation result is true, then this is a happy condition, and this can be an indicator of successful
forest and environment development.

On the other hand, the number of respondents who considered deterioration condition is

relatively small, i.e. about 30

o/o

or less. An aspect of environment that is considered

most

degrading in the last decade is water resource, and an aspect considered least degrading is scenery.
Stronger image of water degradation is expressed by key informants (more than half proportion

of

the infonnants stated so in Table 6c). This different image may be related to their residents, where
some key informants reside relatively far from the forest area and experience water lacking in their

home places, while respondents (HKm and non HKm) reside within or around the forest and
experience relatively abundance of water

i" +"ir daily life.

6

I

t
I

t
I
T

t
I
I

I
I

I

Table6a. Result of evaluation on environmdnt changes in the last 10 years (by HKm farmers)

Environment
N

o/
/o

Change
No change
o/
N
./o

123
123
68
86

78

10

6

77
43
54

22

t4

4A
52

Improving
Forest
Scenery
Water resource
Fauna

Decreasing

N

o,/

t6

25

25
40
52

32

J)

2t

13

/o
9

Table6b. Result of evaluation on environment changes inthe last 10 years (by non HKm farrners)

Environment

Change

Improving
o/
N
/o
Forest
Scenery
Water resource
Fauna

Improving

Improvinq

N

o,f

/o

N

o/
,/o

29
30

73
75

6

15

5

r2

7

t8

J

7

t3
2t

JJ

t6
l5

40

11

27

3t

4

10

53

Table6c. Result of evaluation on environment changes in the last l0 years (by key informants)

Environment

Change

Improving
o/
N
,/o
Forest
Scenery
Water resource
Fauna

28
18

t4
15

70
45
35
38

Imnrovins
N

Improving

o

N

3

8

9

14

35

8

5

13

21

10

25

15

o/
/o
22
20
52
38

Achieving better forest requires forest management by county according to rules or
regulations that support public interest. However, understanding about public interest varies. The
survey indicated that about 40o/o of farmers
terrn (Table

7).

(Iil(m

and non HKm) could not give meaning to the

Another 60 % could do, yet varied. One of the meanings given was that public

interest is an interest of community of local, national, or intemational. In particular relation to
forest, public interest is prioritized to local community who live around the forest. Farer community
is considered as having less interest, despite they still are part of the public.

T

I
t
T

t
I
T
T

I
t
t

T ableT .

Meaning of public interest according to respondent

Understandini-

HKm farmer

Do not know
(rtrcfnma*,
nn**,,-i
vsulvruqJ vu,urruulJ/
rsu oy a rlgure wno gets
appointed local cuslglq sgglgggy._
at around ro.erTureaT
^^**--Lvv.rr
^^-t vvurururur.y
wflo fivg at a"round 1orest areaand
w,ho live in West Nusa Tenggara province
:omTuniJy

@rrolive
T

^^^t

.

..+:^-^l
r
-.-_:--.--_-_--_]
^.. '|
, rralrurtar. ancr
rruernatlonal communiqv

farmer
N

o/
/o

57

ot
/o
36

t6

4A

N

i

Non HKm

J

2

0

0

31

19

2

5

26

t6

l3

JJ

13

8

7

18

30

19

2

5

I

I

Due to forest as public interest then forest need
to be possessed and managed by the country
to ensure its conservation. This appears to be understood
by respondents as apparent from reasons
in forest management' The most mentioned reason was
that forest relates to living of people in
general (public)' other reasons, such as
vital resource and income source are less mentioned,
i.e.
less than 10% (Table 8).
TableS' Reason for forest to be managed by country
and with conservation principle

I
T

I
t
I
I
I
I
I

Forest relates io

life of

Forestisavitalsoffi
Forest in a s
community

Although requires to be managed by coun@, some
forest products considered important can
be utilized by community or public. Table 9
shows that forest products which can be utilized
are
those of non timber products, but timber products
can be utilized only for fire wood. This is only
mentioned by 2% HKm farmers and ao/oby non
HKm farmers. Most mentioned forest products that
can be utilized are of food crops, fruits, and herbs (mentioned
by 67%HKm farmers and g5% by
non Hkm farmers)' second most mentioned forest products
that can be utilized are water reso,rce.
In daily life, water is indeed needed and thus conlmunity
has a right to use, including water from the
forest.

8

T

I
I
I
l
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t

Table9. Important forest products that may be
utilized by community

Type offorest product

HKm farmer

Food crops, fruits, and herb;
r [9 wt (r(l
II/^r^--^ - ,
YY
'LLi,I

TEDUUIUti

'I-^---: ^--

r\+L^-^

-- - _ rsJUuI(ig

o/
/o

t25

N

o/
/o

78

35

88

7
43

4

1

J

6

l5

7

27
4

0

0

J

2

0

0

xd

Tablel0. Understanding of good forest
Understanding

HKm farmer

Lots of big trees with lots ofGaves

Densewithpim
IsPastoralforhffi

Non HKm

farmer

N

o/
/o

N

o/
,/o

11

7

4

IJJ
4

l0

83

73

J

t2

29
4

7

J

7

0

0

0

0

10

whether the current forest in this area is good
or bad was answered in the survey, and
answers were good or very good (Table l1).
78% of rKrnfarmers and gg%of non HKm farmers
perceived that current forest as very good
and large. This condition was indicated by dense
population' The table also shows a small number
of respondents who perceived the current forest
as less than good (or degraded).

I

t

farmer

N

The question of what good forest is was answered
as forest that have many big trees with
lots of leaves' This is a dominant understanding
with 83% HKm farmers
73%non HKm
farmers (Table 10). That condition is good
for the forest because in such condition forest can
conserve water and provide oxygen (fresh air).
Some other respondents stated good forest as
one
that is dense with trees regardless ofhee size,
and as one having large area.

l
l

Non HKm

9

forest (HKm), while several other reasons were unclear or reluctant to be mentioned. Furthermore,

almost l00o/o key informants are in opinion that all types of forest can be utilized, including
production forest, limited forest production, community forest, conservation forest, industry plant

forest, and protected forest. However, types of uses must be in principles of wisdom and be
appropriated with type of the forest.

The use of forest must be wise for all things, including for water, timber products, non
timber products, environmental service, and so on. Unwise use of forest will destroy the forest and
bring loss to all directly or directly, as stated by nearly all respondents (tIKm or non HKm). Losses

from forest destruction or degradation mentioned by farmer respondents (HKm and non HKm) and

key informants are listed in Table 13. The main losses are reduced water supply and lack of

comfort (lack

of fresh air and increased temperature). The mentioned losses from

forest

degradation are in accordance with benefits gained when good forest condition is maintained or

conserved. The good forest
subsequent

will

ensure water supply, sustain the environment, many more

benefits. From identified losses from bad forest and benefits from good forest, come

suggestions to improve the

forest. Improving the forest requires many activities related not only to

foresty technology but also to the aspect of management by person or instifution. Some of these
includereboisation (forest greening), involving many stakeholders such as community, government,
other related parties.

Tablel3. Reasons related losses from degraded forest
Type of loss

HKm farmer
N

Reduced water supply
Reduced comfort (un-fresh afu, high

temperature)
Flood
Reduced tourist visit
Forest bushfire
Decreased income
Natural disaster (flood,erosion, land slide)
Reduced natural resources (flora, faunq
water)
Threatened human life
Required reboisation
Disturbed ecosystem

l4t

Non HKm

Key

o/
/o

farmer
o/
to
N

Informant

88

35

88

28

18

45

l4

60
37

38
23

l3

JJ

1

I

1

J

J

2

2

5

N

o/,

70
35

10

25

24

60

2
5
I

1L

5

13

I

J

8

20

1

The main causes of forest degradation are illegal logging (mentioned at least by 70%
respondents or key inforrnants), and other illegal activities such as illegal land
uses for plants or
livestock (Table 14). Logical consequence for this is to improve forest confiol. Apparently,
there is
insufficient capacity to do the controlling and therefore will need more in the future, while
also

consider intervening with regulation and its enforcement.
Table14. Factors causing forest degradation
Cause

HKm farmer

Do not know
Use of fire
Illegal logging
lllegal livestock pastoral
Illegal land cultivation
!qqy" cutting for livestock feed
Surface erosion from water run off
Nature
Human
Lack of regulation
Shift land use
Weak law enforcement
Lack of controlling
Economic interest
!4qk of supervision

Non HKm

farmer

N
t6

o/
/o

N

o,/

l0

9

23

1

1

1

94
28

59

28

18

I

24

15

3

7

0

J

4
2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0
0

0
0

/o

Key
informant
o/
N
/o

J

0
0

0
0

70

29

t)

J

J

8

8

5

13

0

0

0
0

0
0

7
7

18

0

0
0

0

0

7

l8

0

0

4

10

0

0

0

2

5

0

0

4

10

0

0
0

0

J

8

0

0

0

1

3

a

18

Conclusion and Recommendation
This study concludes that respondents are characterized by average family size of persons,
age of 45 years, farming experience of 15 years (for HKm farmers) and 22 years (for non
HKm
farmers), educated to year 4, work in agricultural sector, with main asset of land.HKm and
non
Hkm farmers and key informants provided their evaluation that in general in the last 10 years there
has been improving environment in BatuKliang Utara, and these include improvement on forest,

I

I

I

I

I

scenery, water resource, and

fauna. Maintaining and improving this condition will need a

management to be run by the country, and by allowing use of some products particularly those that
related to many people's life. However, the use must be in control to maintain balance ecosystem
and forest supporting capacity to avoid loss to c6mmunity as a whole. The main causes of forest
degradation are illegal uses such illegal logging and so forth. Avoiding forest degradation will
require integrated activities involving many stakeholders.
L2

t
t
I
I
I
I

Acknowledgments
we express our sincere thank to:.KoICA project
fol funding this research; respondents and
informants for sharing information *ala"*,
otrr"ir *rt" i.r,
study in one way or another.

*,

References
Arsyad,

air di
fffi*:i:::p:i,u:.rrv
iLffi
io,o by water
I*::Xt'l*:::::,ll**i1,".;*,s;;ffi;#Hf
t conservation area), eogo., bepartment -fr;rd' ffil"Tff
pt"S";if, & wwF

I
I

I. (2005).

i::r"H;,
Indonesia.

"?

Asdak, C. (2005).

*::*f

;ffii"JJi,,"p,ooiH.o
resource rn
i '::::,1,fj,,1,::,;t;ufi"gro.;ffi
conservatiron area), Bogor, Department
pSp-USatD,
of Forestry,

Indonesia.

by

di
water

& wwF

!a!ui-e E. Q004). The prgcticg of social research. Belmont, wadsworth.
Bell' M' (2000)' 'tt'"-rn@Tr*:
Approaching
systems - a chareng_e_for agricultural

agroforestry and competing knowledge

extension.';@

166:37r-37r.
and
*:u1en"rzo9:tiM;;A;;aioy.u*i"s of agriculrural
development ar
_faq and regronal l"u"-l. "Agrirult oul i],rt"rir?il l, : zq-: go.

Bontkes'

T' s'

BPS Lombok

I

I' ':l

Tneuh

(20
ro*uo@

BadanPusatstatistik
cooper' D' R' and P' S' Schindl*t

Djuharsa,

E.

(2005).

I

.

praya,
Lombok).
york, McGraw-Hill.
r\r,,1_,^r.:*
Mulyadin

ffi
(2003).@.New
/': ----^-:vs r:Yevqv!
and

I
I

"

::Hj,

"f

fi
Indonesia.
Hamilton'

I
I

c;

i;I^H;il*

!T:?:.:,ylllrvisions:

qxperienCes in narficinrtnnr
J. Gaventa and R.

*

mnair^-;^* ^-r ^---r-

sustainahle dewelnnmo-+ :- Lr:*^r^--Intemationel Tnrr-o! nf Q,,-+^i-^r-r^ ^-Sjah, T.

"r"ro:.

ffi

,Ii"JiT;

& wwF

gsrr-monitoring and
evaruation processes

ffi:?.ffil:T#:"?,H::"'ff;

ronMEstrell4l.@
rri.E"r"jl?r]

;"""ffiilrij;
1

communiry rands for
;"4;;;J"ffi#;ill,llr
3):192-2A3.

eWt

COVef
cover Chanoe
change

!.Mataram, Mataram University press.

tilffiiffi*J:f:iilr:ilil

in Indonesia.
fnrlnnooio rt" \r/^-rr
worrd r\^--^r
Development2 g 6t- ) ;;-7 g2.
13

L

di
by water

n"rr,ur";;il;;;i"l#i",p,ouil'Ja
*:::*,":."":::i1*1il.;f
r" conservation area), nogor, beparrment f

and rore st

Transform, Department

of Forestry, et al. (ZOOS).

Matararn, Transform, o.pu.t*ffi
Government, & WWF Indonesia Nusa Teng gara.

1,4

I

Government, Lombok Timur