Enhancing the Role of the District Government in Decentralized Forest Management

Abstract

Following the enactment of Law Number 23 of 2014 on the Regional Government, which superseded Law Number 22 of 1999 and Law Number 32 of 2004, now the local government has no longer holds an authority to manage state forest areas, except "grand forest park" (Taman Hutan Raya) located in their respective administrative areas. The management of production forests and protected forests (located at state forest areas) is the authority and responsibility of the provincial government, while the management of conservation forests is the authority of the central government. The success of forest management and management program activities is determined, among others, by government and local government policies and their implementation at the site level. By considering ntthe complexity of forest management, the context of decentralization, and available resources as well as constrained authority, this study aims to identify the level of importance, priorities, and main roles of district governments in forest management by applying the analytic network process (ANP) method. This study suggests that the district government could play a significant role in building social capital, which serves as a first step in developing collaborative forest management by promoting the optimization of multipurpose forests to preserve forests.

Transformation of Agro-Forest Management Policy under the Dynamic Circumstances of a Two-Decade Regional Autonomy in Indonesia

“…Some issues regarding the distribution of authority and budget between central and local governments, the lack of local institutions' capacity to implement the decentralization agenda, issues with sustainability in forest use and the livelihoods of the nearby local communities, and the importance of clarity in governance and legal structure of decentralized forest management are widely covered by previous studies. However, the results from analyses of forest management decentralization outcomes vary between previous studies [4,[6][7][8][9][10]. Therefore, further empirical studies that take into account local contexts, including governance and resource availability, are required.…”

“…Regional autonomy is one of the most important topics on the agenda of political reform following the collapse of Soeharto's New Order regime in May 1998 [4]. After regional autonomy, some administrative, fiscal, and political authorities were transferred from the central government level in Jakarta to the local level, i.e., provincial, regency (kabupaten) or municipal (kota), and village level.…”

“…The term "regional government" involves all levels of local government, i.e., province, regency or municipal, and village (other than central government)). With regard to decentralization in the agro-forest management, the issuance of a large number of smallscale logging and forest conversion licenses by the Regency Head and the imposition of taxes and regulatory restrictions on timber concessions by the regency governments at the early stage of regional autonomy two decades ago marked the onset of the decentralization era [4,5].…”

The potential, wetlands utilization through the social forestry program in Kayan Sembakung Delta, North Kalimantan, Indonesia

“…Local government support is very crucial in the SF implementation. District governments have a higher level of interest than companies or NGOs because they can play a role in implementing several development strategies, such as business development, stakeholder involvement, and area management [18]. Moreover, the existence of business and agricultural development is most frequently reported as a driver of change in SF in the literature relative to socio-cultural and demographic factors [19].…”

Devolution of forest management to local communities and its impacts on livelihoods and deforestation in Berau, Indonesia

“…Since transitioning to democracy in 1998, the Government of Indonesia (GoI) has implemented many programs for collaborative, decentralized, and devolved forest management [ 11 ]. Though these policies demonstrate an enhanced commitment to conserving forest areas [ 12 ], they have failed to resolve some disputes over forest property rights [ 13 ].…”