Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Open access Jurnal

A reflection of Social Forestry in 2019: Towards inclusive and collaborative government approaches

Forest and Society · Vol. 3 No. 1 (2019) · pp. 137–140

DOI
10.24259/fs.v3i1.6099
ISSN
2549-4333, 2549-4724
Published
2019-04-23
Publisher
Forestry Faculty, Universitas Hasanuddin
Language
en
License
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

Abstract

In this policy forum, we seek to engage in a discussion related to the acceleration of social forestry approaches, foremost led by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MOEF), and supported by civil society actors. This article thus points to three key areas of reflection being raised among forums at different governing scales at the end of 2018. The first is a reflection of the national level issues discussed in a forum convened by MOEF in partnership with the media organization Tempo Magazine. The second is part of a reflection on a forum conducted by the Lampung province, which was convened by a coalition of NGOs. Finally, the third forum for reflection involved a public consultation about a study on the impacts of social forestry in South Sulawesi. These three forums highlighted that there is a sharp increase in formal social forestry designations by bureaucratically requiring regions to submit proposals, which are then followed up by verification of sites. This has resulted in a large increase in the number of social forestry permits and has also had the consequence of opening up bureaucratic access (in this case by MOEF) to civil society organizations in more inclusive and collaborative ways. However, on the other hand, we also found that amidst these discussions, there was also a strong element of recentralization emerging in the forestry sector related to permits, in which decision-making powers were being redirected to the central government. Another finding that emerged involves the weakening of capacity among communities themselves to benefit from social forestry designations. Therefore, although there are indications of positive engagement by government towards the principles of collaboration, concerns also emerge about the ways community engagement is unfolding. Overall, this highlights important considerations for improving social forestry policy and implementation for the future.

Keywords

Collaboration network of the authors

21 authors · 49 co-authorship links

Hover or tap a name to highlight its co-authors. Double-click to open the author's page.

  • Affiliation unknown
  • Different organisations
  • Same organisation
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Thicker line = more joint articles · bigger circle = more articles
Show as table
Co-authorOrganisationJoint articles
Rahmat Safe'iAffiliation unknown2
Dian Nova YantiAffiliation unknown1
Irwan Sukri BanuwaAffiliation unknown1
Indra Gumay FebryanoAffiliation unknown1
Teguh EndaryantoAffiliation unknown1
Suprihatin AliAffiliation unknown1
Pitojo BudionoAffiliation unknown1
Tugiono TugionoAffiliation unknown1
Hari KaskoyoAffiliation unknown1
Hasbiyan ErlyAffiliation unknown1
Dudung DarusmanAffiliation unknown1
Iin IchwandiAffiliation unknown1
Ferdinal AsminAffiliation unknown1
Heni KurniasihAffiliation unknown1
Rinekso SoekmadiAffiliation unknown1
Novriyanti NovriyantiAffiliation unknown1
Burhanuddin Masy’udAffiliation unknown1
Damayanti BuchoriAffiliation unknown1
Ismanto IsmantoAffiliation unknown1

Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.

Metadata source: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) https://journal.unhas.ac.id/index.php/fs/oai, first harvested 5 Nov 2026, last seen 5 Nov 2026.
Original metadata (oai_dc) 
<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en">A reflection of Social Forestry in 2019: Towards inclusive and collaborative government approaches</dc:title>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Suharjito, Didik</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator xml:lang="en">Wulandari, Christine</dc:creator>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Social Forestry</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Ministerial Regulation P.83 of 2016</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Policy implementation debate</dc:subject>
	<dc:subject xml:lang="en">Indonesia</dc:subject>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en">In this policy forum, we seek to engage in a discussion related to the acceleration of social forestry approaches, foremost led by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MOEF), and supported by civil society actors. This article thus points to three key areas of reflection being raised among forums at different governing scales at the end of 2018. The first is a reflection of the national level issues discussed in a forum convened by MOEF in partnership with the media organization Tempo Magazine. The second is part of a reflection on a forum conducted by the Lampung province, which was convened by a coalition of NGOs. Finally, the third forum for reflection involved a public consultation about a study on the impacts of social forestry in South Sulawesi. These three forums highlighted that there is a sharp increase in formal social forestry designations by bureaucratically requiring regions to submit proposals, which are then followed up by verification of sites. This has resulted in a large increase in the number of social forestry permits and has also had the consequence of opening up bureaucratic access (in this case by MOEF) to civil society organizations in more inclusive and collaborative ways. However, on the other hand, we also found that amidst these discussions, there was also a strong element of recentralization emerging in the forestry sector related to permits, in which decision-making powers were being redirected to the central government. Another finding that emerged involves the weakening of capacity among communities themselves to benefit from social forestry designations. Therefore, although there are indications of positive engagement by government towards the principles of collaboration, concerns also emerge about the ways community engagement is unfolding. Overall, this highlights important considerations for improving social forestry policy and implementation for the future.</dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en">Forestry Faculty, Universitas Hasanuddin</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2019-04-23</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:format>text/xml</dc:format>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>https://journal.unhas.ac.id/index.php/fs/article/view/6099</dc:identifier>
	<dc:identifier>10.24259/fs.v3i1.6099</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en">Forest and Society; Vol. 3 No. 1 (2019): APRIL; 137-140</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2549-4333</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2549-4724</dc:source>
	<dc:language>en</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>https://journal.unhas.ac.id/index.php/fs/article/view/6099/5923</dc:relation>
	<dc:relation>https://journal.unhas.ac.id/index.php/fs/article/view/6099/pdf</dc:relation>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en">Copyright (c) 2019 Forest and Society</dc:rights>
	<dc:rights xml:lang="en">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>