Policy in Community-Based Environmental Conservation and Protection: A Comparative Study Between Brazil and Indonesia

Diah Fitri Ekarini; Raldi H. S. Koestoer

doi:10.14710/jwl.10.1.1-14

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/jwl.10.1.1-14

Policy in Community-Based Environmental Conservation and Protection: A Comparative Study Between Brazil and Indonesia

*Diah Fitri Ekarini - Sekolah Ilmu Lingkungan, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia

Raldi H. S. Koestoer

- Sekolah Ilmu Lingkungan, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia

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

BibTex Citation Data :

@article{JWL11679,
    author = {Diah Fitri Ekarini and Raldi H. S. Koestoer},
    title = {Policy in Community-Based Environmental Conservation and Protection: A Comparative Study Between Brazil and Indonesia},
    journal = {Jurnal Wilayah dan Lingkungan},
  volume = {10},
    number = {1},
    year = {2022},
    keywords = {community-based; conservation; environmental protection; social forestry; Voluntary Environmental Agents},
    abstract = {Community-based environmental conservation and protection is one form of decentralization in the management of an area. Community-based initiatives are considered a sustainable collaborative alternative. The implementation of community-based initiatives can be found in various countries, such as the Voluntary Environmental Agents (VEA) in Amazon, Brazil and Social Forestry (SF) in Indonesia. This study aims to review the lessons learned from the CBC successful practice of VEA Program in Amazon, Brazil; determine whether these lessons can be adapted to enhance the positive impact of SF implementation in Indonesia, and; formulate relevant recommendations for SF implementation in Indonesia. A qualitative approach with descriptive-comparative method on references that are relevant to VEA and SF implementation was used in this study. There are several conditions that contribute to the successful VEA implementation: strengthening of local community initiatives, institutions, and capacities; formalization of community-based conservation schemes with supportive regulations; effective control system of the state; continuous support from external institutions, and; continuous and independent financing of activities. These conditions are relevant to be implemented in Indonesia. There is a fundamental difference between the implementation of VEA in Brazil and SF in Indonesia. Community-based initiatives in Brazil prioritized environmental sustainability to be able to “leverage” community’s economic and social sustainability in long term, while practices in Indonesia did not reflect this. This is illustrated by: lack of public awareness and concern for long-term environmental sustainability; negative impacts on the environment from SF implementation, and; vision of SF implementation which tends to be based on short-term targets.},
   issn = {2407-8751},   pages = {1--14}  doi = {10.14710/jwl.10.1.1-14},
    url = {https://ejournal2.undip.ac.id/index.php/jwl/article/view/11679}
}

Citation Format:

Abstract

Community-based environmental conservation and protection is one form of decentralization in the management of an area. Community-based initiatives are considered a sustainable collaborative alternative. The implementation of community-based initiatives can be found in various countries, such as the Voluntary Environmental Agents (VEA) in Amazon, Brazil and Social Forestry (SF) in Indonesia. This study aims to review the lessons learned from the CBC successful practice of VEA Program in Amazon, Brazil; determine whether these lessons can be adapted to enhance the positive impact of SF implementation in Indonesia, and; formulate relevant recommendations for SF implementation in Indonesia. A qualitative approach with descriptive-comparative method on references that are relevant to VEA and SF implementation was used in this study. There are several conditions that contribute to the successful VEA implementation: strengthening of local community initiatives, institutions, and capacities; formalization of community-based conservation schemes with supportive regulations; effective control system of the state; continuous support from external institutions, and; continuous and independent financing of activities. These conditions are relevant to be implemented in Indonesia. There is a fundamental difference between the implementation of VEA in Brazil and SF in Indonesia. Community-based initiatives in Brazil prioritized environmental sustainability to be able to “leverage” community’s economic and social sustainability in long term, while practices in Indonesia did not reflect this. This is illustrated by: lack of public awareness and concern for long-term environmental sustainability; negative impacts on the environment from SF implementation, and; vision of SF implementation which tends to be based on short-term targets.

Note: This article has supplementary file(s).

Fulltext View|Download | Copyright Transfer Agreement

Copyright Transfer Agreement

Subject
Type	Copyright Transfer Agreement
	Download (687KB) Indexing metadata

common.other

Letter to Editor / Erratum / Corrigendum

Subject
Type	Other
	Download (61KB) Indexing metadata

Keywords: community-based; conservation; environmental protection; social forestry; Voluntary Environmental Agents

Article Metrics:

Article Info

Section: Research Articles

Language : EN

In Vol 10, No 1 (2022): April 2022

Recent articles

Policy in Community-Based Environmental Conservation and Protection: A Comparative Study Between Brazil and Indonesia Kajian dan Evaluasi Bencana Tanah Longsor di Kecamatan Tanjungsari terhadap RTRW Kabupaten Bogor Analisis Tingkat Bahaya Karhutla (Kebakaran Hutan dan Lahan) di Kabupaten Ogan Ilir Provinsi Sumatera Selatan More recent articles

Arifin, B., Swallow, B. M., Suyanto, S., & Coe, R. D. (2009). A conjoint analysis of farmer preferences for community forestry contracts in the Sumber Jaya Watershed, Indonesia. Ecological Economics, 68(7), 2040–2050. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.12.007
Berkes, F. (2004). Rethinking community-based conservation. Conservation Biology, 18(3), 621–630. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00077.x
De Royer, S., Van Noordwijk, M., & Roshetko, J. M. (2018). Does community-based forest management in Indonesia devolve social justice or social costs? International Forestry Review, 20(2), 167–180. doi: 10.1505/146554818823767609
Ekawati, S., Suharti, S., & Anwar, S. (Eds.). (2020). Bersama membangun perhutanan sosial. Bogor: IPB Press
Fisher, M. R., Moeliono, M., Mulyana, A., Yuliani, E. L., Adriadi, A., Kamaluddin, … Sahide, M. A. K. (2018). Assessing the new social forestry project in Indonesia: recognition, livelihood and conservation? International Forestry Review, 20(3), 346–361. doi: 10.1505/146554818824063014
Franco, C. L. B., El Bizri, H. R., Souza, P. R. e., Fa, J. E., Valsecchi, J., Sousa, I. S. de, & Queiroz, H. L. de. (2021). Community-based environmental protection in the Brazilian Amazon: Recent history, legal landmarks and expansion across protected areas. Journal of Environmental Management, 287(March), 112314. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112314
Harada, K., & Wiyono. (2014). Certification of a community-based forest enterprise for improving institutional management and household income: a case from Southeast Sulawesi, Indonesia. Small-Scale Forestry, 13(1), 47–64. doi: 10.1007/s11842-013-9240-8
Herawati, T., Liswanti, N., Banjade, M. R., & Mwangi, E. (2017). Merancang masa depan perhutanan sosial di Provinsi Lampung: dari skenario menuju aksi. Bogor: Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR). doi: 10.17528/cifor/006558
Hockings, M., Stolton, S., Leverington, F., Dudley, N., & Courrau, J. (2006). Evaluating effectiveness: a framework for assessing management effectiveness of protected areas (P. Valentine, ed.). IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature. doi: 10.2305/IUCN.CH.2005.PAG.14.en
Irawanti, S., Ginoga, K. L., Prawestisuka, A., & Race, D. (2014). Commercialising community forestry in Indonesia: Lessons about the barriers and opportunities in Central Java. Small-Scale Forestry, 13(4), 515–526. doi: 10.1007/s11842-014-9268-4
Kaskoyo, H., Mohammed, A., & Inoue, M. (2017). Impact of community forest program in protection forest on livelihood outcomes: A case study of Lampung Province, Indonesia. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 36(3), 250–263. doi: 10.1080/10549811.2017.1296774
Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan. (2021). Laporan kinerja 2020 Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan. Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan
Koziell, I., & Inoue, C. Y. A. (2006). Mamirauà sustainable development reserve, Brazil: Lessons learnt in integrating conservation with poverty reduction. London
Kuncoro, M., & Cahyani, D. (2018). Performance of social forestry on farmers’ revenues: Lessons from Yogyakarta and Lampung, Indonesia. The Business & Management Review, 9(4), 275–289
Maryudi, A. (2015). An innovative policy for rural development rethinking barriers to rural communities earning their living from forests in Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmu Kehutanan, 8(1), 50–64. doi: 10.22146/jik.8575
Maryudi, A., Devkota, R. R., Schusser, C., Yufanyi, C., Salla, M., Aurenhammer, H., … Krott, M. (2012). Back to basics: Considerations in evaluating the outcomes of community forestry. Forest Policy and Economics, 14(1), 1–5. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2011.07.017
Maryudi, A., & Krott, M. (2012). Local struggle for accessing state forest property in a montane forest village in Java, Indonesia. Journal of Sustainable Development, 5(7), 62–68. doi: 10.5539/jsd.v5n7p62
Puspasari, E., Wulandari, C., Darmawan, A., & Banuwa, I. S. (2017). Aspek sosial ekonomi pada sistem agroforestri di areal kerja hutan kemasyarakatan (HKm) Kabupaten Lampung Barat, Provinsi Lampung. Jurnal Sylva Lestari, 5(3), 95. doi: 10.23960/jsl3595-103
Putraditama, A., Kim, Y.-S., & Sánchez Meador, A. J. (2019). Community forest management and forest cover change in Lampung, Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics, 106(July), 101976. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2019.101976
Rakatama, A., & Pandit, R. (2020). Reviewing social forestry schemes in Indonesia: Opportunities and challenges. Forest Policy and Economics, 111(1), 102052. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102052
Ruchyansyah, Y., Wulandari, C., & Riniarti, M. (2018). Pengaruh pola budidaya pada hutan kemasyarakatan di areal kelola KPH VIII Batutegi terhadap pendapatan petani dan kesuburan tanah. Jurnal Sylva Lestari, 6(1), 100. doi: 10.23960/jsl16100-106
Ruiz-Mallén, I., & Corbera, E. (2013). Community-based conservation and traditional ecological knowledge: implications for social-ecological resilience. Ecology and Society, 18(4), art12. doi: 10.5751/ES-05867-180412
Safe’i, R., Gumay Febryano, I., & Nur Aminah, L. (2018). Pengaruh keberadaan gapoktan terhadap pendapatan petani dan perubahan tutupan lahan di hutan kemasyarakatan. Sosiohumaniora, 20(2), 109–114. doi: 10.24198/sosiohumaniora.v20i2.14349
Sahide, M. A. K., Fisher, M., Nasri, N., Dharmiasih, W., Verheijen, B., & Maryudi, A. (2020). Anticipating a new conservation bureaucracy? Land and power in Indonesia’s Essential Ecosystem Area policy. Land Use Policy, 97(December 2019), 104789. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104789
Sanudin, S., Awang, S. A., Sadono, R., & Purwanto, R. H. (2016). Perkembangan hutan kemasyarakatan di Provinsi Lampung. Jurnal Manusia dan Lingkungan, 23(2), 276. doi: 10.22146/jml.725
Setiahadi, R., Pratiwi, D., & Ratnaningtyas, D. (2017). Deliberation process analysis of community based forest management policies implementation in Indonesia. International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology, 7(3), 1076. doi: 10.18517/ijaseit.7.3.2127
Sumanto, S. E. (2009). Kebijakan pengembangan perhutanan sosial dalam perspektif resolusi konflik. Forestry Policy Analysis Journal, 6(1), 13–25
Syam, T., Nishide, H., Salam, A. K., Utomo, M., Mahi, A. K., Lumbanraja, J., … Kimura, M. (1997). Land use and cover changes in a Hilly Area of South Sumatra, Indonesia (from 1970 to 1990). Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 43(3), 587–599. doi: 10.1080/00380768.1997.10414785
van Noordwijk, M., Rahayu, S., Hairiah, K., Wulan, Y. C., Farida, A., & Verbist, B. (2002). Carbon stock assessment for a forest-to-coffee conversion landscape in Sumber-Jaya (Lampung, Indonesia): from allometric equations to land use change analysis. Science in China Series C-Life Sciences, 45(October), 75–86
Verbist, B., Dinata Putra, A. E., & Budidarsono, S. (2005). Factors driving land use change: Effects on watershed functions in a coffee agroforestry system in Lampung, Sumatra. Agricultural Systems, 85(3), 254–270. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2005.06.010
Wibowo, L. R., Race, D. H., & Curtis, A. L. (2013). Policy under pressure: policy analysis of community-based forest management in Indonesia. International Forestry Review, 15(3), 398–405. doi: 10.1505/146554813807700065
Winarni, B., Lahjie, A. M., Simarangkir, B. D. A. S., Yusuf, S., & Ruslim, Y. (2017). Tengkawang cultivation model in community forest using agroforestry systems in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Biodiversitas, 18(2), 765–772. doi: 10.13057/biodiv/d180246
Wulandari, C., & Inoue, M. (2018). The importance of social learning for the development of community based forest management in Indonesia: The Case of Community Forestry in Lampung Province. Small-Scale Forestry, 17(3), 361–376. doi: 10.1007/s11842-018-9392-7
Yustika, R. D., Somura, H., Yuwono, S. B., Arifin, B., Ismono, H., & Masunaga, T. (2019). Assessment of soil erosion in social forest-dominated watersheds in Lampung, Indonesia. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 191(12), 726. doi: 10.1007/s10661-019-7890-5

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update:

No citation recorded.

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

As an article writer, the author has the right to use their articles for various purposes, including use by institutions that employ authors or institutions that provide funding for research. Author rights are granted without special permission.

Author who publishes a paper at JWL has the broad right to use their work for teaching and scientific purposes without the need to ask permission, including: used for (i) teaching in the author's class or institution, (ii) presentation at meetings or conferences and distributing copies to participants ; (iii) training conducted by the author or author's institution; (iv) distribution to colleagues for research use; (v) use in the compilation of subsequent authors' works; (vi) inclusion in a thesis or dissertation; (vi) reuse of part of the article in another work (with citation); (vii) preparation of derivative works (with citation); (viii) voluntary posting on open websites operated by authors or author institutions for scientific purposes (follow the CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 License).

Authors and readers can copy and redistribute material in any media or format, and mix, modify, and build material for any purpose but they must provide appropriate credit (provide article citation or content), providing links to the license, and indicate if there are changes.

The authors submitting a manuscript do so on the understanding that if accepted for publication, copyright of the article shall be assigned to Jurnal Wilayah dan Lingkungan (JWL). Copyright encompasses rights to reproduce and deliver the article in all form and media, including reprints, photographs, microfilms and any other similar reproductions, as well as translations.

Reproduce any part of this journal, its storage in the database or its transmission by all forms or media is permitted does not need for written permission from JWL. However, it should be cited as an honor in academic manners

JWL and the Department of Urban and Regional Planning of Diponegoro University and the Editor make every effort to ensure that there are no data, opinions, or false or misleading statements published in JWL. However, the content of the article is the sole and exclusive responsibility of each author.

The Copyright Transfer Form can be downloaded here: [Copyright Transfer Form - Indonesian] [Copyright Transfer Form - English]. The copyright form should be signed originally and send to the Editor in the form of printed letters, scanned documents sent via email or fax.