Conflict Variety and the Facilitation Role of Forest Managemen Unit (FMU) on Resolution of Tenurial Conflict

Article Sidebar

Download this PDF file
Published: Jun 30, 2022
Keywords:
tenure conflict, collaborative, FMU, social forestry
View citations in Google Scholar

Main Article Content

Golar Golar
Fakultas Kehutanan Universitas Tadulako
Hasriani Muis
Fakultas Kehutanan Universitas Tadulako
Wahyu Syahputra Simorangkir
Fakultas Kehutanan Universitas Tadulako

Abstract

In this study, tenure conflict is interpreted as various forms of claims related to mastery, management, utilization, and land use at  FMU areas of Dampelas Tinombo. In this context, the FMU will be directly and responsibly involved in addressing disputes in its territory. This research aims to identify and analyze the variety of land-use conflicts and how the role of FMU in resolving conflict resolution in its managed areas. This study was conducted in 2020 at FMU of Dampelas Tinombo using the Rapid Land Tenure Assessment (RA-TA) method. Data collection techniques with a Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) approach through in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. The study sample was established by purposive sampling. The results showed that the variety of conflicts in FMU was land clearing, threats of illegal logging activities, and low public trust in programs derived from FMU. The role of KPH is needed in the resolution of tenure conflicts, significantly facilitating in optimizing collaborative management of forest resources and reducing the implementation of social forestry in the form of empowerment schemes and forestry partnerships.

Article Details

Golar , G. G., Hasriani, H. M., & Wahyu , W. S. S. (2022). Conflict Variety and the Facilitation Role of Forest Managemen Unit (FMU) on Resolution of Tenurial Conflict. Jurnal Wasian, 9(1), 30-47. https://doi.org/10.62142/96h0sa84
Articles

Copyright (c) 2022 Jurnal Wasian

Creative Commons License

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

Copyright and License

All articles published in Wasian Journal are the property of the authors. By submitting an article to Wasian Journal, authors agree to the following terms:

  1. Copyright Ownership: The author(s) retain copyright and full publishing rights without restrictions. Authors grant the journal the right to publish the work first and to distribute it as open access under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).

  2. Licensing: Articles published in Wasian Journal are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows others to share, copy, and redistribute the material in any medium or format, and adapt, remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially, provided that proper credit is given to the original author(s) and the source of the material

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

  3. Author's Rights: Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges and greater citation of published work.

  4. Third-Party Content: If your article contains material (e.g., images, tables, or figures) for which you do not hold copyright, you must obtain permission from the copyright holder to use the material in your article. This permission must include the right for you to grant the journal the rights described above.

  5. Reprints and Distribution: Authors have the right to distribute the final published version of their work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), provided that the original publication in Wasian Journal is acknowledged.

For the reader you are free to:

  1. Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
  2. Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
  3. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.

Under the following terms:

  1. Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
  2. No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Notices:

You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .

No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rightsmay limit how you use the material.

Ackermann, F., & Eden, C. (2011). Strategic management of stakeholders: Theory and practice. Long Range Planning, 44(3), 179–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2010.08.001

Allen, C., Metternicht, G., Verburg, P., Akhtar-Schuster, M., Inacio da Cunha, M., & Sanchez Santivañez, M. (2020). Delivering an enabling environment and multiple benefits for land degradation neutrality: Stakeholder perceptions and progress. Environmental Science & Policy, 114, 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.07.029

Alusiola, R. A., Schilling, J., & Klär, P. (2021). REDD+ Conflict: Understanding the pathways between forest projects and social conflict. Forests, 12(6), 748. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12060748

Ambarwati, M. E., Gatot, S., & Wilson, M. A. T. (2018). Dynamics of the tenurial conflict in state forest area (Case in BKPH Tanggung KPH Semarang). Sodality: Jurnal Sosiologi Pedesaan, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.22500/sodality.v6i2.23228

Anderson, N. M., Williams, K. J. H., & Ford, R. M. (2013). Community perceptions of plantation forestry: The association between place meanings and social representations of a contentious rural land use. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.02.001

Anugrahsari, I., Sardjono, M. A., Fitriyah, N., & Golar, G. (2020). Social Contracts: Pillars of community conservation partnerships in Lore Lindu National Park, Indonesia. Forest and Society, 4(1), 115. https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v4i1.8682

Arsyad, M., Nuddin, A., Fahmid, I. M., Salman, D., Pulubuhu, D. A. T., Unde, A. A., & Djufry, F. (2020). Agricultural development: poverty, conflict and strategic programs in country border. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 575(1), 12091.

Baral, S., Meilby, H., Khanal Chettri, B. B., Basnyat, B., Rayamajhi, S., & Awale, S. (2018). Politics of getting the numbers right: Community forest inventory of Nepal. Forest Policy and Economics,

, 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.10.007

Batunacun, Wieland, R., Lakes, T., Yunfeng, H., & Nendel, C. (2019). Identifying drivers of land degradation in Xilingol, China, between 1975 and 2015. Land Use Policy, 83, 543–559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.02.013

Baynes, J., Herbohn, J., Smith, C., Fisher, R., & Bray, D. (2015). Key factors which influence the success of community forestry in developing countries. Global Environmental Change, 35, 226–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.09.011

Bellandi, M., Donati, L., & Cataneo, A. (2021). Social innovation governance and the role of universities: Cases of quadruple helix partnerships in Italy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 164, 120518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120518

Bergius, M., Benjaminsen, T. A., Maganga, F., & Buhaug, H. (2020). Green economy, degradation narratives, and land-use conflicts in Tanzania. World Development, 129, 104850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104850

Bhugeloo, A., Peerbhay, K., Ramdhani, S., & Sershen. (2019). Tracking indigenous forest cover within an urban matrix through land use analysis: The case of a rapidly developing African city. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment, 13, 328–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2018.12.003

Bluffstone, R., Dannenberg, A., Martinsson, P., Jha, P., & Bista, R. (2020). Cooperative behavior and common

pool resources: Experimental evidence from community forest user groups in Nepal. World Development, 129, 104889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.104889

Cai, M., Liu, P., & Wang, H. (2020). Political trust, risk preferences, and policy support: A study of land-dispossessed villagers in China. World Development, 125, 104687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104687

Ece, M., Murombedzi, J., & Ribot, J. (2017). Disempowering Democracy: Local Representation in Community and Carbon Forestry in Africa. Conservation and Society. https://doi.org/10.4103/cs.cs_16_103

Fauziyah, E., & Sanudin, S. (2017). The Effectiveness of Private Forest Institutional and Policy in Banjarnegara and Banyumas Regency.Jurnal Wasian, 4(2), 79. https://doi.org/10.20886/jwas.v4i2.2987

Fisher, L. A., Kim, Y.-S., Latifah, S., & Mukarom, M. (2017). Managing forest conflicts: Perspectives of Indonesia’s forest management unit directors. Forest and Society, 1(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v1i1.772

Gamin, G, Kartodihardjo, H., Kolopaking, L. M., & Boer, R. (2014). Menyelesaikan konflik penguasaan kawasan hutan melalui pendekatan gaya sengketa para pihak di Kesatuan Pengelolaan Hutan Lakitan (Resolving forest land tenure conflict by actor’s conflict style approach in Forest Management Unit of Lakitan). Analisis Kebijakan Kehutanan, 11(1), 71–90.

Golar, G., Malik, A., Muis, H., Herman, A., Nurudin, N., & Lukman, L. (2020). The social-economic impact of COVID-19 pandemic: Implications for potential forest degradation. Heliyon, 6(10), e05354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05354

Golar, G., Massiri, S. D., Rauf, R. A., Muis, H., & Paingi, S. (2021). Participatory land use conflict resolution: efforts towards community collaborative management. The Agricultural Sciences Journal

(e-Journal), 8(1), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.22487/agroland.v8i1.801

Golar, G., Muis, H., Massiri, S. D., Rahman, A., Maiwa, A., Pratama, F., Baharuddin, R. F., & Simorangkir, W. S. (2021). Can forest management units improve community access to the forest? International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics, 16(5), 565–571. https://doi.org/10.18280/ijdne.160511

Golar, Mahfudz, Malik, A., Muis, H., Khairil, M., Ali, S. S. S., Razman, M. R., & Awang, A. (2019). The adaptive-collaborative as a strategy comunications for conflict resolution on the National Park. Ecology, EM International, 25(4), 352–359.

Harun, M. K., & Dwiprabowo, H. (2014). Model resolusi konflik lahan di Kesatuan Pemangkuan Hutan Produksi Model Banjar. Jurnal Penelitian Sosial Dan Ekonomi Kehutanan, 11(4), 265–280. https://doi.org/10.20886/jpsek.2014.11.4.265-280

He, J., Martin, A., Lang, R., & Gross-Camp, N. (2021). Explaining success on community forestry through a lens of environmental justice: Local justice norms and practices in China. World Development, 142, 105450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105450

Helmi, H., Djafri, D., Mutiani, C., Abd Halim, N., Badri, M., & Yefni, Y. (2021). Indigenous people in the dynamics of land use changes, forest fires, and haze in Riau Province, Indonesia. In Natural Resource Governance in Asia (pp. 291–308). Elsevier.https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-85729-1.00023-2

Ilham, Q. P., Purnomo, H., & Nugroho, T. (2016). Stakeholder and social network analyses towards multistakeholder forest management in Solok District, West Sumatera. Jurnal Ilmu Pertanian Indonesia, 21(2), 114–119. https://doi.org/10.18343/jipi.21.2.114

Irawan, A., Mairi, K., & Ekawati, S. (2016). Analisis konflik tenurial di Kesatuan Pengelolaan Hutan Produksi (KPHP) Model Poigar (Analysis of tenurial conflict in Produsction Forest Management Unit (PFMU) Model Poigar). Jurnal Wasian, 3(2), 79–90.

Islam, K., Nath, T. K., Jashimuddin, M., & Rahman, Md. F. (2019). Forest dependency, co-management and improvement of peoples’ livelihood capital: Evidence from Chunati Wildlife Sanctuary, Bangladesh. Environmental Development, 32, 100456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2019.100456

Iswahyudi, I. (2017). Pengelolaan lahan kritis hutan lindung bukit batabuh berkelanjutan. Jurnal Penelitian Agrosamudra, 4(1), 91–99.

Luo, Y., Liu, J., Zhang, D., & Dong, J. (2015). Actor, Customary regulation and case study of collective forest tenure reform intervention in China. Small-Scale Forestry, 14(2), 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11842-014-9279-1

Maryudi, A. (2016). Arahan tata hubungan kelembagaan kesatuan pengelolaan hutan (KPH) di Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmu Kehutanan, 10(1), 57–64.

McGrath, D. G., Peters, C. M., & Bentes, A. J. M. (2004). 11. Community forestry for small-scale furniture production in the Brazilian Amazon. In Working Forests in the Neotropics (pp. 200-h). Columbia University Press, New York.

Myers, R., Intarini, D., Sirait, M. T., & Maryudi, A. (2017). Claiming the forest: Inclusions and exclusions under Indonesia’s ‘new’ forest policies on customary forests. Land Use Policy, 66, 205–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.04.039

Ribeiro, J. R., Azevedo-Ramos, C., & Nascimento dos Santos, R. B. (2020). Impact of forest concessions on local jobs in central amazon. Trees, Forests and People, 2, 100021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2020.100021

Riggs, R. A., Sayer, J., Margules, C., Boedhihartono, A. K., Langston, J. D., & Sutanto, H. (2016). Forest tenure and conflict in Indonesia: Contested rights in Rempek Village, Lombok. Land Use Policy, 57, 241–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.06.002

Rijal, B., Raulier, F., & Martell, D. L. (2018). A value-added forest management policy reduces the impact of fire on timber production in Canadian boreal forests. Forest Policy and Economics, 97, 21–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.09.002

Rout, S. (2018). Gendered participation in community forest governance in India. Contemporary Social Science, 13(1), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/21582041.2017.1393555

Ruhimat, I. P. (2013). Model peningkatan partisipasi masyarakat dalam implementasi kebijakan KPH: Studi kasus di KPH Model Kabupaten Banjar, Kalimantan Selatan. Jurnal Analisis Kebijakan Kehutanan, 10(3), 255–267.

Sahide, M. A. K., Fisher, M. R., Supratman, S., Yusran, Y., Pratama, A. A., Maryudi, A., Runtubei, Y., Sabar, A., Verheijen, B., Wong, G. Y., & Kim, Y.-S. (2020). Prophets and profits in Indonesia’s social forestry partnership schemes: Introducing a sequential power analysis. Forest Policy and Economics, 115, 102160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102160

Sonnhoff, M., & Selter, A. (2021). Symbolic interaction and its influence on cooperation between private forest owners. Forest Policy and Economics, 130, 102535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102535

Uddin, M., & Anjuman, N. (2014). Participatory rural appraisal approaches: An overview and an exemplary application of focus group discussion in climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies. International Journal of Agricultural Research, Innovation and Technology, 3(2), 72–78. https://doi.org/10.3329/ijarit.v3i2.17848