Policy Adoption of Forest Management Unit: A Knowledge Diffusion Analysis

Abstract

Within the policy adoption process of Forest Management Unit (FMU) concept, there has been disagreement of stakeholders on FMUs concept. This disagreement is caused by the exchange of knowledge, information, and perception among stakeholders involved. The results of these interactions could speed up, slow down, and prevent the adoption process of FMU policy. The study objective was analyzing process of knowledge diffusion of FMUs development policy and stakeholders interaction in PFMU Batutegi and PFMU Kotaagung Utara, Indonesia. Adoption process was analyzed by the logical diffusion technique based on knowledge time of FMUs concept received and its interaction space. Social interaction among stakeholders was analyzed using method developed by International Development Studies analysis, i.e. interaction among discourse/narrative, actors/networks and politics/interests. The results showed that knowledge diffusion of FMUs concept in both PFMU tends to cascade diffusion. Factors was affecting of it process were network, role of opinion leaders, willingness to know, and understand on FMUs concept. Indicative strategy is needed as anticipating and overcoming an obstacle in its internalization process, i.e. harmonization of legislative and executive relationship, building an opinion the importance of FMU, and optimalizing network for bureaucratic problems.

Scientific Forest Management Practice in Nepal: Critical Reflections from Stakeholders’ Perspectives

“…In the context of encouraging global results from community-based forest management (CBFM) [34,35], the involvement of stakeholders is critically important for assessing resource problems and reaching agreement on the objectives, options and strategies for an effective forest management governance framework [36]. Differences in stakeholders' understandings and conceptualisations of appropriate forest management policies challenge the forest management efforts [13,14]. Nepal, renowned as one of the most successful examples of CBFM, despite the country's diverse societal, cultural and environmental contexts [37], has multiple stakeholders at numerous levels who need to be satisfied by any forest management interventions.…”

“…Neither of the stakeholders has considered the flexibility in the modality based on the forest condition, species and type of forest management regime. Because management modality needs to respond to the diversity in forest management objectives, forest types and ownership [14,69], rigid perspectives of stakeholders on the current modality reduce the effectiveness of SciFM. As highlighted by Shindler, Brunson and Stankey [61], a lack of social acceptability of any practices makes them vulnerable to public rejection.…”

“…Since SFM primarily aims to serve the needs of society, stakeholders' involvement in the design and application of forest management policies is the key to enhancing social, economic and ecological outcomes for people, the economy and the environment. Nevertheless, key forestry stakeholders may have different, and sometimes conflicting, societal expectations in relation to forest management policies and management objectives [10][11][12]; these differing expectations have often challenged the success of forest management efforts [13,14]. Hence, assessment of stakeholders' perspectives is important.…”

Institutional Capacity of Forest Management Unit in Promoting Sustainable Community-Based Forest Management. Case Study of Forest Management Unit in Central Sulawesi Province, Indonesia

“…Previous research revealed that the institutional capacity of FMU's in Indonesia is still relatively weak due to the lack of resources (Setiajiati et al, 2017;Santoso et al 2019). The institutional problems of FMU are related to the rule in use and government bureaucracy issues (Julijanti et al, 2014;Suwarno et al, 2014;Sahide et al, 2016). Referring to the institutional framework (Schmid, 2004), institutional performance determined by the situation and structure.…”

Policy Adoption of Forest Management Unit: A Knowledge Diffusion Analysis

“…Innovation can take form an idea, practice, and object (Rogers 2003), knowledge (Signorini 2001;Rogers 2003;Cowan & Jonard 2004;Lambiotte & Panzarasa 2009;Kimura 2011), technology (Signorini 2001;Spilsbury & Nasi 2004;Kimura 2011), information (Lambiotte & Panzarasa 2009), perception, and mindframe. According to Rogers (2003), there are 5 steps in the innovation decision process by individuals (decision-making unit) i.e.…”