Testing and Enhancing the 8R Framework of Responsible Land Management with Documented Strategies and Effects of Land Reclamation Projects in Indonesia

Abstract

Whereas most contemporary frameworks evaluating land management aspects focus on institutional settings at a national level, the 8R framework of responsible land management aims at evaluating individual land management projects or interventions. This 8R framework is, however, still under development and needs testing, validation and further detailing, such that specific operational characteristics and internal and external effects can be included in the evaluation. This article addresses this need by demonstrating how the 8R framework could improve when knowing both the operational details and external effects of a land management intervention. By reviewing the documented implementation strategies and effects of eight different types of land reclamation cases in Indonesia, the article derives adaptations and extensions of the 8R framework assessment, such that the framework can better detect whether a specific project is sufficiently responsible in any of the 8R aspects. The induction shows that the number of types of systematic prompts needs to be extended and further detailed if it aims to capture and detect specific problems of structures, processes and impacts. Zooming in to documented reclamation projects in Indonesia shows that there are various types of such projects, which are oftentimes contested, yet each requires integrated land management and development strategies. Furthermore, they draw on dissimilar, mostly contextual, justifications and legal frameworks, which makes it difficult to compare the generic relevancy and sustainability of reclamation as a land management intervention tool. Nevertheless, testing the 8R framework for reclamation cases in Indonesia can improve its methodology and extent or specify the use of the systematic prompts designed to qualify and quantify the respective aspects.

Land Administration Systems and Legal Framework Reform Focussing on Constitutional Principles in Sub-Saharan Africa

“…They are indicators of RLM that also address the structural and operational principles of human rights (See Section 3 of this chapter) [1]. The indicators of RLM are explained thus [19,20]:…”

“…• Responsive: Including needs, requests, long-term views of stakeholders addressing urgency of need [20].…”

Digital Twin for Active Stakeholder Participation in Land-Use Planning

“…The term "responsible land-use planning" has therefore been adopted to bring new meaning to the approach, methods, and processes of land-use planning. "Responsible land-use planning" can therefore be defined as land-use planning that ensures the best use of land; that is responsive to the needs of the stakeholders; that ensures accountable decision-making; and that guarantees that all stakeholders can identify and recognise themselves in the decisions [31]. For example, Johnson [32] described how responsible land-use planning could improve stormwater management and water quality by using a geographic information system.…”

“…For example, Johnson [32] described how responsible land-use planning could improve stormwater management and water quality by using a geographic information system. Responsible land-use planning, therefore, goes beyond the preparation and execution of land-use planning to also include elements of responsibilities and accountabilities [31]. In the same way, it should be aligned with societal demands, should respond to the needs of the people, should reinforce sustainable development initiatives, and should improve peoples' lives [29].…”

How to Know if Land Management is Responsible? Evaluating the 8R Framework of Responsible Land Management

“…

The article of de Vries & Chigbu (2017) presented for the first time a design of a generic methodological framework to evaluate responsible land management, later referred to as the 8R framework of responsible land management. Whilst a number of subsequent publications (Babalola et al, 2022;de Vries & Rudiarto, 2023) have since used this framework in different ways, a main critique of this original paper is that the article does not specify the practical procedure and the associated empirical measures or indicators for each of the 8 Rs to derive a conclusive and concrete finding and judgment if a land management project would be sufficiently or appropriately responsible. Instead, the methodology in the article only provides suggestions on starting with the framework and then defining it using your own qualitative or quantitative indicators, which collectively should lead to some judgment.

…”