AN OVERVIEW OF LAND AND FOREST GOVERNANCE IN INDONESIA

Deforestation and forests and peatlands degradation has occured largely as a result of logging and land clearing for palm oil and wood fibre plantations mainly in Kalimantan and Sumatera islands and Islands of Riau. In a study by Asia Foundation, analyses of experts’ opinions identified drivers of degradation in descending order: palm oil, industrial timber plantations, coal mining, and actors who benefit financially from forest exploitation. The provinces of Papua and West Papua are now becoming the focal point for the Indonesia's government palm oil development.  The Merauke region of Papua is now dominated by concessions, where land use dynamics are driven by the government's Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate (MIFEE), while Sorong and Manokwari regencies in West Papua province have become the palm oil hotspots (Mongabay). Although the situation may be hard to definitively gauge given spotty information, deforestation in Indonesian New Guinea may be more widespread than any published data purport (Mongabay).

Presentely land and forest governance in Indonesia is a very challenging field with main issues on the improvement of transparency in decision making and increased communities' participation--in order to make the government more accountable to the needs and interests of forest dependent communities. The strengthening of the national and local land and forest governance is required in addressing deforestation and degradation and destruction of forests and peatlands in the Country.

In the context of forest dependent communities, gaps identified in an Asia Foundation study were, unclear land tenure and uncertain land classifications, the influence of business and political interests in policy and regulation, and ineffective land use planning. Key strategies in inclusive sustainable forest management that were identified were securing community land tenure and its integration into spatial planning. To improve land and forest governance, the study recommends governmental, researchers, donors and civil society to avail supports to communities to, accelerate land classifications/tenure, integrate participatory maps into spatial plans, monitor forests, conduct action research of land/forest stakeholders, address financing, engage political economy analysis.

There were generally a nexus of causes and effects of poor land and forest governance in Indonesia. Decentralised governance since 2001 has caused local governments to be unprepared in terms of technical and financial resources to implement effective governance.  Those are further combined with unclear and overlapping regulations, culminates in consequence—low level of enforcement, and subsequently low level of compliance/illegal activities—at times, occurred as results of collusions of extraction enterprises and officials. Consequently there have been great losses downstream, of/in income, employment opportunities, government revenue, such as royalties and taxes, and local as well as global environmental services. Illegal forest activities also undermine legitimate forest enterprises by subjecting them to unfair competition from under-priced products and by discouraging socially and environmentally responsible long-term investments.   

Poorly Excecuted Spatial Planning

Present poorly executed spatial plans in the country is notably due to absence of a single map as a reference to be used across different ministries and agencies in implementing geospatial thematic works. There are on-going efforts to compile and synchronise data which will be the basis for developing a single map for development in the country.

Greenpeace's interactive maps have highlighted the vast scale of overlap of forest concessions--licences for the same concessions in areas of 7 million hectares have been allocated to four different companies. The Agency for Geospatial Information has also identified a great number of overlaps of land uses and classifications, among forest zones, mining concessions, transmigration area, borders, use permit, and others. This overlap predominately  occurs when  different  agencies  issue  licenses  for the  same  area  but  in  separate jurisdictions, for instance  protected areas,  customary land, and  resource extraction  concessions. (Shahab, 2016; Forest Watch Indonesia, 2017, In: Indonesia's One Map Policy: A Critical Look at the Social Implications of a 'Mess' (PDF Download Available). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319501418_Indonesia%27s_One_Map_Policy_A_Critical_Look_at_the_Social_Implications_of_a_%27Mess%27 [accessed Jan 15 2018].

Existing land and forest maps have been widely known to cause disputes due to the overlap of land uses  issue. According to data collected by KPA (Agrarian Renewal Commission), a number of trends regarding land use conflicts have risen since 2004. Over the past eleven years, the number of land-use conflicts has increased 1,300% (Figure 2), the area of disputed land grew exponentially (Figure 3), and the number of

injuries and arrests increased 3,975% and 3,871%, respectively (Figure 4). When you classify land

use conflicts (2004 through 2016) by industrial sector, plantation and infrastructure cause the most

conflicts (43% and 31% respectively), followed by forestry (7.3%) and mining (6.2%) (Figure 5).

For context, Indonesia’s national elections occurred in 2004, 2009, and 2014. There have been

recent spikes in reported conflicts with a drop between 2014 and 2015; however, conflicts quickly

rose back to 2014-levels in 2016 (Indonesia's One Map Policy: A Critical Look at the Social Implications of a 'Mess' (PDF Download Available). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319501418_Indonesia%27s_One_Map_Policy_A_Critical_Look_at_the_Social_Implications_of_a_%27Mess%27 [accessed Jan 15 2018].

The report issued by the Consortium for Agrarian Reform demonstrates that in 2013 alone there were 369 agrarian conflicts involving lands with an area reaching around 1.28m ha. Divided into sectors these conflicts comprised:

• Plantation sector, 180 conflicts (48.78%);

• Infrastructure sector, 105 conflicts (28.46%);

• Mining sector, 38 conflicts (10.3%);

• Forestry sector, 31 conflicts (8.4%);

• Coastal sector/marine, nine conflicts (2.44%); and

• Other sectors, six conflicts (1.63%). On average, almost every day there is more than one agrarian conflict occurring in the country. And if we take a closer look at the data, most of the conflicts happened due to problems with land overlapping. (https://oxfordbusinessgroup.com/overview/indonesia-introduces-one-map-policy-solution-overlapping-land-claims)

The government has endeavored to accelerate efforts to correct the map through the One Map Policy (OMP), with the main reference on basic geospatial map which is then synchronised thematically with relevant ministries/agencies to produce a single national geospatial reference. OMP is also a move to make drawing  boundaries  a  more  democratic  process  by  including  local  input  and community  land claims. The map development has been scheduled for completion by 2019.   

In the course of the map development, government agencies have slowly withdrawn their promise of community participation/transparency in order to speed up the process of collecting data. As of late 2016, most involved government agencies have submitted their existing thematic maps and BIG is in the process of verifying the data and integrating it into their base geospatial information map, published in 20144 (Jong, 2016). (Indonesia's One Map Policy: A Critical Look at the Social Implications of a 'Mess' (PDF Download Available). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319501418_Indonesia%27s_One_Map_Policy_A_Critical_Look_at_the_Social_Implications_of_a_%27Mess%27 [accessed Jan 15 2018].

WRI has close ties with the national government and has worked with ministry officials

for some time. Their current director was even the leader of UKP4 when the OMP was first

proposed. The maps produced by WRI in partner with local communities are strong candidates for

incorporation into the OMP.

Indonesia's One Map Policy: A Critical Look at the Social Implications of a 'Mess' (PDF Download Available). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319501418_Indonesia%27s_One_Map_Policy_A_Critical_Look_at_the_Social_Implications_of_a_%27Mess%27 [accessed Jan 15 2018].

Other than the technical aspect issue of existing map, there have been cases of the lack of political will to adhere to spatial plans.  For example, SEKALA, a geospatial consulting company which worked with the community, published a report in 2008 that stated “[in Bali], government officials do not adhere to spatial plans and issue land to villa developments when it has been categorized for conservation or watershed management” (SEKALA, Nordic Consulting Group & Papuan Civil Society Strengthening Foundation, 2008). (Indonesia's One Map Policy: A Critical Look at the Social Implications of a 'Mess' (PDF Download Available). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319501418_Indonesia%27s_One_Map_Policy_A_Critical_Look_at_the_Social_Implications_of_a_%27Mess%27 [accessed Jan 15 2018].

Lack Of Transparency On Key Processes

The lack of political will to adhere to spatial plan which have been consulted to community stakeholders is an example of the lack of transparency in geospatial related activities. Political will for spatial planning can be insecure, especially concerning economic development and foreign investment. This issue could provide incentive for officials implementing the OMP to work directly with the Corruption Eradication Commission to  maintain  the  integrity  of  spatial  data  while  also identifying corruption from local governments.

The Indonesian government acknowledges the lack of transparency linked to corruption, such as corrupt individuals selling concession concession licenses, use-rights, and resources that otherwise may have not been available (i.e. been claimed by a different stakeholder). KPK is actively involved in the issue of land disputes in Indonesia and is currently entered into a ‘Joint Agreement’ with agencies (including the Ministry of Forestry and Environment and the Ministry of Agriculture) that promotes the collaboration between these various agencies when granting land claims and land ownership (Astuti, personal communication, 22 Feb 2017).

Organizations with dominant information and the authority to draw boundaries for

land use policies and business concessions are the actors benefiting the most from mapping’s

inconsistencies. By using the broad array of overlapping policies to their advantage, policy makers

and businessmen can claim resources and access-rights to land without worrying about any

meaningful opposition from local communities. (Indonesia's One Map Policy: A Critical Look at the Social Implications of a 'Mess' (PDF Download Available). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319501418_Indonesia%27s_One_Map_Policy_A_Critical_Look_at_the_Social_Implications_of_a_%27Mess%27 [accessed Jan 15 2018].

Failure to Comply With Land And Forest Laws And Regulations

ON one hand, the big corporations have paved the way to more sustainable practices, e.g. the zero deforestation policy, on the other is the “opaque” firms that continue to work in ecologically sensitive areas. The failure of the Indonesian government to reciprocate progressive reforms within palm oil industry is allowing other smaller, more opaque firms to step in and start working in ecologically sensitive areas that many larger firms avoid. While GAR’s failings undoubtedly represent a step backwards, it is arguably the actions of the sections of the industry not subject to the same reputational pressure that now pose the gravest threat to Indonesia’s forests.

Several such companies were featured in the report Permitting Crime, released by the Environmental Investigation Agency in December 2014. This documents how these opaque companies continued to illegally destroy large swaths of biodiverse, carbon-rich forests against the wishes of local communities. The evidence indicates there are more than enough of these companies to undermine the impact of the zero-deforestation commitments. (https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/jun/11/palm-oil-industry-indonesia-corruption-communities-forests)

Collusion Between Local Officials And Business Interests

The statement that actors who benefit financially play a role in causing deforestation and

peatlands degradation, received 35% agreement. Literature on forest governance suggests that

vested interests affect forest and land governance in a number of ways, such as by profiting

from the expansion of oil palm and industrial plantations for pulp and paper (Hunt 2010) (quoted from Asia Foundation’s Study)

Poor governance contribute significantly to occurrence of official and business interests collusions. Presently, land use and classification attributes in maps and land use regulations are significantly desynchronized —due to lack of coordination of different regulating and sector entities at national, provincial and district levels. Thematic maps are also often developed without availabilities of relevant biophysical attributes of the areas. Such inconsistencies provide opportunities for making “flexible discretions and interpretations” especially the administration of use permits.

Poor governance processes were identified to result in different licenses being

allocated for the same land area. This occurs when one or more local and central authorities

issue licenses for an area of land that conflicts or overlaps with an existing land title. There

are a number of reasons for this. Decentralisation devolved authority to local governments to

issue land use regulations. Local regulations are not however always aligned with national

regulations. Another complication is that different land use types can have different, and often

conflicting, regulations and license obligations. Inaccurate or conflicting maps is another

causal factor. Land use planning processes rely on complete and accurate maps to provide

information about actual forest conditions, including forest cover, land type and tenure

boundaries. Yet a lack of coordination across horizontal and vertical levels of government,

unclear forest and land allocations (KPK 2010), and a lack of clarity around land tenure

including for recognizing adat tenure (McCarthy 2009) is resulting in inaccurate maps. The

implications of overlapping licenses for land activities are, in some regions, resulting in more than the total area of land being allocated for industry activities, leaving no land for

community use.

Lack Of Community Consultation And Participation

In an interview at SEKALA

headquarters, Pak Ketut mentioned that several local NGOs and communities have mapped areas

and presented their data to the government, only to be rejected (sometimes multiple times)

(personal communication, 29 Nov 2016).

Indonesia's One Map Policy: A Critical Look at the Social Implications of a 'Mess' (PDF Download Available). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319501418_Indonesia%27s_One_Map_Policy_A_Critical_Look_at_the_Social_Implications_of_a_%27Mess%27 [accessed Jan 15 2018].

The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) has also found that Golden Agri-Resources (GAR), the biggest palm oil producer in Indonesia, has failed to respect the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous communities.

Issues on One Map Policy

On the other hand, by making spatial data legible to everyone in Indonesia – including

individual citizens – mapping could be efficient and effective at the grassroots level. As long as

the data itself is correct, the spatial organization of an area can be used to defend land claims. A

population with access to official spatial data can more easily defend their land, as long as their

previous claims were recognized. Within this authority however, lies another level of political

power. Communities are often spoken of as distinct, unified entities when in reality they are

anything but. Conflict within and between communities is quite common and whoever represents

these communities has the most power when it comes to making claims to certain lands. Those

with more information, influence, and a higher political position within the community are more

likely to have their voices heard than other members of the community. This puts certain people

at a distinct disadvantage.

In their respective interviews, Dr. Astuti and Dr. Kurniawan have argued that the

government will be the one to benefit the most from the OMP. Dr. Astuti went so far as to say that

the government “will have a very powerful surveillance mechanism to govern not only the private

sector, but also the indigenous communities…and citizens of Indonesia” and that the “One Map

Policy, in a way...can be good in terms of providing clarification for all the questions, but it also

provides a very powerful weapon for the government” (Astuti, personal communication, 22 Feb

2017). The reason that the government will claim more power from the OMP is because

communities are not able to use spatial data as is: the “communities require support and resources

from the NGOs and the NGOs have limited capacity because they rely on donor support” (Astuti,

personal communication, 22 Feb 2017). Dr. Kurniawan further states that the OMP “is intended to 35

strengthen the national government’s power in order to control for land use development”

(Kurniawan, personal communication, 7 Feb 2017).

Dr. Astuti and Dr. Kurniawan are likely correct in their assertions and the Indonesian

government will, in the end, benefit the most from the OMP when it is implemented. Dr. Astuti

brings up a good point when she mentions that communities rely entirely on NGOs in order to

process spatial data. Funding sources for NGOs are low and the more communities that want to

use the data provided by the OMP, the more pressure will be placed on these NGOs.

Indonesia's One Map Policy: A Critical Look at the Social Implications of a 'Mess' (PDF Download Available). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319501418_Indonesia%27s_One_Map_Policy_A_Critical_Look_at_the_Social_Implications_of_a_%27Mess%27 [accessed Jan 15 2018].

Indonesia's One Map Policy: A Critical Look at the Social Implications of a 'Mess' (PDF Download Available). Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319501418_Indonesia%27s_One_Map_Policy_A_Critical_Look_at_the_Social_Implications_of_a_%27Mess%27 [accessed Jan 15 2018].

Land Tenure Security and Improved Land Classification

In the study which analysed exoperts’ opinions on drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, Asia Foundation found that tenure security and sustainable management approach are interrelated—as unsecure property rights and land tenure results in a lack of regulation and subjects forest to predatory use.

‘When local communities perceive they will lose access to local resources… traditional land use controls

are often ignored, and smallholders’ clearing and land grabbing often exacerbates the

corporate and government ones.’

Conversely, when property rights are secure, local communities or other stakeholders are

more likely to manage forests sustainably (Agrawal & Ostrom 2001; Contreras-Hermosilla &

Fay 2005). Providing forest communities with secure forest tenure therefore becomes a

necessary condition for enhancing their participation in forest protection (Safitri 2010).

Consequently, an intervention identified to respond to this issue was the revision of land

tenure laws and property rights to integrate adat (customary) and local community forest and

land management systems in Indonesian law (Quoted from: Asia Foundation’s study).

Another issue is with regards to desynchronized land use/land classification maps among government agencies, various levels of government jurisdictions and ministries. Interventions to respond to these issues include creating transparency in the allocation of land and forest use permits by making land permit data publicly available (47%).

Transparency in the issuing of permits will ensure that information on permits for logging,

mining, palm oil expansion and other forest uses is publicly available, reducing instances of

overlapping permits.