JURNAL ILMU PEMERINTAHAN WIDYA PRAJA p-ISSN 0216-4019 Vol. 44, No. 2, Oktober 2018 : 107 - 124 e-ISSN 2614-025X

Governing on Implementation of REDD+ Project: Case Study of Berbak Landscape

Teis Nuraini, Yeremias T. Keban, and Jafar Suryomenggolo

Universitas Gadjah Mada, Jl. Bulaksumur, , 55281, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies (GRIPS) 7-22-1 Roppongi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 106-8677, Japan

Email: [email protected]

Abstract

Following the result of the UNFCCC in 2007, Indonesia implemented reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, conserving and enhancing forest carbon stocks and sustainably managing forests (REDD+). One of the collaborative REDD+ projects in Indonesia is the Berbak landscape REDD+ Program, initiated by the Zoological Society of London (ZSL). The project is divided into two phases of implementation, as of 2018, has gone through both phases. However, the project has only fulfilled 20% of its targeted program despite being in the final year of implementation because of budgeting problem. Addressing this issue, this study attempts to look at the governance in the project to understand what constitutes the governance of Berbak landscape REDD+ program and how governance determines its implementation landscape. The study employs a qualitative approach. In addition, it follows four governance indicators developed by Ostrom (1990): coordination, reporting, bureaucracy, and monitoring. Based on the data analysis, it is found that the project has diverse stakeholders with different connections and authority and good governance plays a big role in determining the successful implementation of the project. Thus, it is important to develop good governance to find a better solution for the challenges faced by the project.

Keywords: Berbak landscape; Governance; REDD+

Introduction Managing Forests in developing countries (REDD+). REDD+ gives an alternative of Climate change is a global concern as the low budget yet long process in order to it is part of life in the 21st century. The respond to climate change (Collins et al., International Panel on Climate Change 2011). (1990) reported that if people follow a Indonesia cannot be separated from business-as-usual scenario regarding world climate change mitigation. Indonesia emissions to overcome climate change, the became the host of the United Nations global temperature was predicted to Framework Convention on Climate Change increase 0.3°C / decade (Watson, Rodhe, (UNFCCC) conference in 2007. The Oeschger, & Siegenthaler, 1990). This conference issued the Bali Action Plan and phenomenon will bring various disasters on Joint Implementation mechanism, where earth, such as the spread of infectious the carbon accounting mechanism was diseases, the rise of sea level, and so on. brought to attention. This agreement was One of the quite compromising mechanisms the starting point of the Indonesian to deal with climate change is Reducing government’s attempt to deal with matters Emissions from Deforestation and Forest of climate change, particularly the REDD+ Degradation Conserving and Enhancing issue. After the conference issued the Forest Carbon Stocks and Sustainably agreement, Indonesia, in 2008, established

107 Terakreditasi Kemenristek Dikti Nomor 21/E/KPT/2018, Tanggal 9 Juli 2018 JURNAL ILMU PEMERINTAHAN WIDYA PRAJA Vol. 44, No. 2, Oktober 2018 : 107 - 124

The National Council on Climate Change performed well. The methodology did not (Dewan Nasional Perubahan Iklim / DNPI) get the validation from the Verified Carbon to formulate strategies and strengthen the Standard (VCS) and the Climate position of Indonesia in the international Community and Biodiversity Standard climate change forum. Moreover, since it (CCBS). has the third largest area of tropical forest Based on the performances and after Brazil and Congo (Enrici & Hubacek, challenges in the first phase, the Ministry 2018), Indonesia is seen as a potential site and ZSL agreed to continue the project to for conducting the REDD+ project in the its second phase (2015-2018) and the name scheme of joint implementation of the project has been changed to Berbak mechanism. The Berbak Carbon Initiative landscape based REDD+ program. project is one of the collaborative REDD+ Different from the first phase, the second projects in Indonesia. phase covers a wider area where the scope Berbak Carbon Initiative is a project of the project is the Berbak landscape initiated by Zoological Society of London (237.424 Ha), which landscape included the (ZSL), an international NGO that has been Berbak and , Air operating some projects related to Hitam Dalam-Air Hitam Laut Protected environmental issues in Indonesia, Forest and the Sungai Kumpeh Limited especially on the carbon project. In the Production Forest. Furthermore, the project beginning, the project was only conducted is conducted in different forest so as to in Berbak and Sembilang National Park involve more actors. On June 17, 2015, the (142,750 Ha). Under the two-party Ministry of Environment and Forestry, agreement between Ministry of Provincial Forestry Office, and ZSL Environment and Forestry and ZSL, the signed a memorandum of understanding project initially was a part of Indonesian (MoU) to continue the Berbak Carbon National Action Plan for reducing Initiative project. greenhouse gasses. The second phase implementation is During the first phase of based on what was achieved in the previous implementation (2011–2014), the project phase. Some programs considered as a basis was able to achieve 70% of its targeted of REDD+ readiness implementation were components. The first phase activities were built in the first phase. However, the second focused on preparing for REDD+ readiness project should complete the most crucial implementation such as preparing a component of REDD+ readiness document of REDD+ potency, establishing implementation, which is methodology carbon / non-carbon base-line, designing recognition. The project needs the and issuing REDD+ action plan, and so on. recognition to move forward in developing During the implementation, the project program design document as the next step successfully proposed Berbak and of REDD+ readiness implementation Sembilang National Park as a REDD+ project. The year 2018 will be the final year Demonstration Activity (DA) site, legalized of the second phase's implementation, but by Ministry of Forestry Decree No. 549/ surprisingly until nearly the end of the Menhut-II/2013. Nevertheless, the period, the project does not show a methodology of the project for reducing satisfying result. Based on the executive emission was not really recognized to have 108

Governing on Implementation of REDD+.....[ Teis Nuraini, Jeremias T. Keban, and Jafar Suryomenggolo] summary of the project, it only fulfills 20% from previous studies. Second, the project of the targeted program components. is initiated by an international NGO and has Besides those technical matters, the become one of the important objectives of Berbak landscape REDD+ program has an the Indonesian government. The Indonesian important meaning in terms of its effect on Ministry of Environment and Forestry aims the measurement of the Ministry of to protect the Berbak's biodiversity as a Environment and Forestry work swamp forest. performance. The project was listed as one of the strategic programs of the Ministry of Literature Review Environment and Forestry in the 2015– 2019 program plan in the context of climate “REDD+ is policy approaches and change reduction and mitigation positives on issues relating to reducing mechanism. Subsequently, the Ministry of emissions from deforestation and forest Environment and Forestry has two degradation in developing countries; and conservation areas targeted as REDD+ the role of conservation, sustainable sites: Sebangau National park and Berbak management of forests and enhancement of National Park (part of the Berbak forest carbon stocks in developing landscape)1. The Berbak landscape REDD+ countries” program is also important as one of the -UNFCCC Decision 2 / CP.13-11 as efforts of Indonesian Government’s cited in (Angelsen, 2009) commitment in reducing greenhouse gasses In general, REDD+ implementation is (up to 41 percent by 2020) by any scheme divided into three phases: readiness, as stated in the 20th G-20 meeting in transition, and contribution on reducing Pittsburgh2. emission phase (Ekawati, Subarudi, Thus, this present study will attempt Budiningsih, & Mutaqin, 2016). All the to look at the governance in the project. It phases require some procedures that will answer the following two questions: involve various stakeholders. Due to a long 1. What constitutes the governance of the process mechanism, REDD+ Berbak landscape REDD+ program? implementation is influenced by some 2. How does governance determine the factors. Pasgaard, Sun, Müller, and Mertz implementation of the Berbak (2016) mentioned that clear procedure, landscape REDD+ program? political motivation, and involvement of the In addition, there are two strong actors are some factors that determine reasons to take the Berbak landscape as a REDD+ implementation. Corbera and case study. First, the REDD+ project is Schroeder (2011) added a statement that currently in the readiness phase. The project coordination among institutions (actors) in will be evaluated by conducted by a REDD+ project could impact its modifying some indicators and frameworks effectiveness. They also mentioned that the variety of institutional arrangements, the diversity of actors, the difference of 1 The Strategic Plan of Directorate General of participants’ condition and the diversity of Natural Resources and Ecosystem Conservation (2015–2019) power relations across geography play an 2 Presidential Regulation Number 61 Year 2011 important role in influencing the REDD+ about National Action Plan of Reducing Green House Gases Emission project in its preparation phase.

109 JURNAL ILMU PEMERINTAHAN WIDYA PRAJA Vol. 44, No. 2, Oktober 2018 : 107 - 124

In addition, studies on REDD+ will run successfully or not. Pierre (2000) implementation have led to a number of defined governance as supporting important findings. One study by Sills et al., coordination and integrating relationships (2017) tried to capture how REDD+ among actors with various purposes and implemented was in 16 REDD+ sites goals. Moreover, Pierre mentioned that project across tropical countries. Using the development that has been conducted with BACI (Before-After-Control-Intervention)– governance is facing coordination GCS (Global Comparative Study) problems. Such problems reveal the need to framework method, the research focused on synchronize the objectives and equalize the the evaluation of REDD+ implementation interest among the actors. Based on the on the local community. The research assumption, if more actors are involved, showed several significant results including more processes should be passed in order to an increase in the income of the local deal with everything in the project. community. However, these results need to Based on Ostrom's concept, managing be further clarified due to the existence of the natural resources as common-pool- somewhat similar government conservation resources (CPR) which are divided into projects in these sites prior to the REDD+ resource system and resource unit. Both program. Another study by Collins et al., resource system and resource unit are (2011) looked at how domestic institutions accessible to every actor, although the influenced REDD+ implementation in the access should be limited by regulations. Nantu Wildlife Reserve, Southern , Resource system is something that accessed Indonesia. The research showed that freely by every actor as long as they somehow the existing domestic involve in the project, while resource unit is conservation institutions and frameworks possible to access by the actors who only played a significant role in the success and have the authority in the resource system. failure of the project. On the Ostrom’s study actor’s involvement REDD+ project implementation also is very crucial aspect in governance. By faces challenges: issues that arise from the that reasons and by looking at to the preparation phase and obstacles that appear background the study that in Berbak during the implementation phase. A study Landscape Project, involvement of another conducted by Enrici and Hubacek, (2018) actors was forecasted as one of obstacles of in three REDD+ project sites in Indonesia the project this study limited in four founds that lack of monitoring, minimum Ostrom’s indicators that directly related to involvement of stakeholders, incapability the actors’ roles which are coordination, for boundary enforcement, and insufficient monitoring, bureaucracy and leadership. funding for the project are the main obstacles for its implementation. The Method implementation of the REDD+ project in Berbak landscape is facing the same A. Study Area challenge; lack of budget is seen as the This study is conducted in the main factor that hampers the Berbak landscape, Jambi Province, implementation in the second phase. In Indonesia. The landscape covers addition, governance is also suspected to conservation areas such as the Berbak give impacts regarding whether the project and Sembilang National Park and 110

Governing on Implementation of REDD+.....[ Teis Nuraini, Jeremias T. Keban, and Jafar Suryomenggolo]

Sekitar Tanjung Forest Park. Moreover, Not only a landscape for tiger it also includes two buffer zones named conservation, the Berbak and the Gambut Air Hitam Dalam-Air Sembilang National Park is also home Hitam Laut Protected Forest and the to 44 reptile species, 22 Mollusca Sungai Kumpeh Limited Production species, 95 fish species, and 53 rare Forest. The total width of the landscape mammal species such as Tapir Asia is 237.424 Ha and it is dominated by (Tapirus indicus), Sinyulong Crocodile peatland area (as cited in project (Tomistoma schlegelii), alligator guidelines of the Berbak Carbon (Crocodylus porosus), and Initiative project, 2015). Balantiocheilos melanopterus, one of Administratively, as regulated in the the endangered fish species (as cited in Indonesia Forestry Act No. 23 / 2014, the project guidelines of the Berbak the implementation of the carbon Carbon Initiative project, 2015). project in National Park is under the Twenty-three species in the National Ministry of Environment and Forestry Park belong to the International Union (Central Government) while in Forest for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) red Park, Protected Forest, and the Limited list and other 50 species are grouped Production Forest the project is under the Convention on International conducted under the Jambi Provincial Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Forest Office (Local Government). Fauna and Flora (CITES) (Appendix I The Berbak National Park has the and II4). As a Ramsar site, the National largest area of the landscape, Park has a diverse species of birds: 56 accounting to 142.750 Ha. In 2014, the species of them are registered in the nomenclature of the national park was Indonesian Government Regulation no changed to Berbak and Sembilang 9 / 1999 as protected species. National Park along with the merger of Beside its rich biodiversity, the the Ministry of Forestry and the Berbak landscape is dominated by a Ministry of the Environment. The peatland area that has a significant Berbak and Sembilang National Park is ecological contribution for the climate stated as a priority landscape for tiger change mitigation process. The (Panthera tigris) conservation. landscape is predicted to store 45.5 Moreover, based on the Indonesian million ton carbon with the total of Government Regulation No. 28 / 2008, carbon emission 44.031.265 ton the Berbak and Sembilang National Park was appointed as a national strategic area. Globally, in 1992, Ramsar Convention designated Berbak rich biological diversity. Retrieved May 29, 2018 and Sembilang National Park as the from https://www.ramsar.org/sites-countries/the- 3 ramsar-sites first Ramsar site in Indonesia. 4 Appendix I includes species threatened with extinction. Trade in specimens of these species is permitted only in exceptional circumstances. 3 Ramsar Sites are locations that meet the Criteria Appendix II includes species not necessarily for identifying of International Importance. threatened with extinction, but in which trade must One of the most important criteria that make a be controlled in order to avoid utilization location designated as a Ramsar site is the site has incompatible with their survival. Retrieved May 30 an uncommon type and also it should have 2018. From https://www.cites.org/eng/disc/how.php

111 JURNAL ILMU PEMERINTAHAN WIDYA PRAJA Vol. 44, No. 2, Oktober 2018 : 107 - 124

CO2e 5 . However, the landscape is Based on the importance of the facing issues such as deforestation and landscape in terms of mitigating forest degradation. The damages are climate change, some projects are run caused by intention actions such as in the area. One such project is the forest conversion or un-intention Berbak Carbon Initiative Project, a actions such as land fire, peatland collaborative project between the decomposing, and peat land drying. Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Furthermore, it emits carbon that is Jambi Provincial Forest Office, and stored in the landscape. The ZSL ZSL. The project has been running conducted a study in 2010 and found since 2011, and it was divided into two that the rate of deforestation in the phases of implementation. The first one landscape was -2% per year. If there is was between 2011–2014, while the no intervention to prevent such issues, second phase is still on-going until it is estimated that 164.034.572 ton of 2018. CO2e will be released from the landscape in the next 30 years.

Figure 1. Location map of the Berbak landscape Source: Program guidelines of the Berbak Carbon

5 Carbon dioxideInitiative equivalent Project (CO2e) Phase is II.a name used to explain the various greenhouse gases in a universal unit. CO2e signifies the amount of CO2 that would have the equivalent global warming impact. (Brander, 2012) 112

Governing on Implementation of REDD+.....[ Teis Nuraini, Jeremias T. Keban, and Jafar Suryomenggolo]

B. Data were purposively chosen to represent the Both primary and secondary data three main actor components: Central were used in this research. To get insight on Government, Local Government, and NGO. how governance determines the The interviews were conducted in August implementation of the Berbak landscape 2017 in Bogor, Jakarta, and Jambi. The list REDD+ Program, in-depth interviews were of the key informants is provided in Table. held with seven key informants. All of them 1.

Table 1. List of Key Informants of the Study

No Agency Key Informant Remarks 1. Central Government Staff Senior of Secretariat of The person in charge to Directorate General of Natural review the project's Resources and Ecosystem implementation report and Conservation also part of monitoring and evaluating team Staff Senior of Directorate of The person in charge to Environmental Services for review the project's Conservation Forest Utilization implementation report and also part of monitoring and evaluating team Field Coordinators from Berbak The person who involved and Sembilang National Park in the implementation project in site level

Head of Section of Non- Clearinghouse member Governmental Organization for international Cooperation, Bureau of cooperation in the International Cooperation Ministry 2. Local Government Senior Staff of Jambi Provincial The person who was Forest Office involved in the implementation of project at the site level 3. NGO Carbon Project coordinator of The person who was ZSL-Indonesia Program involved in the implementation of project at the site level

Some secondary data was used to project. In addition, some policies and support the analysis of the study. The data regulations of Indonesian Government were includes reports of the project also used to cross-check the secondary data. implementation, project design documents, project guidelines, and the MoU of the

113 JURNAL ILMU PEMERINTAHAN WIDYA PRAJA Vol. 44, No. 2, Oktober 2018 : 107 - 124

environmental services as a resource unit C. Analysis Approach are clearly distinguished. Both resource This study follows a qualitative system and resource unit are accessible to approach based on the Miles and Huberman every actor, although the access should be model (Ryan & Bernard, 2000) to analyze limited by regulations. the data. The first step of the analysis One way to limit the access of actors process is data reduction: field data is is by designing, implementing, and recorded carefully and in detail to be enforcing a set of rules to coordinate reduced to gain important data. This paper provision activities (Ostrom, 1990). The uses goals (objectives) as a guideline to rule could be interpreted as applicable for narrow the data analysis. To make all project documents, which include the correlations and provide a structure to the rights and obligations of each actor. In this data, so that it would be easier to be project, the process was established within analyzed, the next process is data display. two levels: designing documents was done The final step of the qualitative analysis is at the institutional level while the to draw the conclusion. implementing and enforcing the rules was run at the grass-root level. Both at the Result and Discussion institutional level and grass-root level, the actors involved are the same yet different in A. Actors and their Beneficiaries from the terms of the representatives of Ministry of Project Environment and Forestry. The Ministry There are three main actors who appointed a Secretariat of Directorate conduct the project: Central Government, General of Natural Resources and Local Government, and NGO. The Ministry Ecosystem Conservation, a Directorate of of Environment and Forestry is the unit of Environmental Services for Conservation Central Government, while the Local Forest Utilization, and a Bureau of Government is represented by the Jambi International Cooperation and Berbak and Provincial Forestry Office and the NGO by Sembilang National Park for designing the the ZSL. If every actor has their own power MoU and project guidelines together with to control different areas of the project the Jambi Provincial Forestry Office and (Berbak landscape), it might cause a the ZSL. However, only the Berbak and conflict of interest among them. Therefore, Sembilang National Park was delegated by it is important to analyze the project the Ministry as an implementing agency at beneficiaries for each actor. Other than that the site level with other two actors. as (Ostrom, 1990) explains managing Besides regulating the rights and natural resources as a common-pool- obligations, project documents also resources (CPR). In Berbak landscape as a describe the beneficiaries of the project for resource system while carbon stock and the actors as provided in Table 2.

114

Governing on Implementation of REDD+.....[ Teis Nuraini, Jeremias T. Keban, and Jafar Suryomenggolo]

Table 2. The Matrix of Project Incentive for Each Actor Based on the Authority of REDD+ Management.

No Authority for Area Carbon Expected impact of the REDD+ stock project management 6 (ton C)7 1. Central Berbak and ~ 25,988,500 1. Restoration of degraded Government (The Sembilang National peatlands in a Ministry of Park sustainable and Environment and (140,198 ha) hydrological balance Forestry) 2. Increasing of the population of flagship species 2. Local Government Raya Sekitar ~ 4,129,680 Increasing of the (Jambi Provincial Tanjung Forest population of flagship Forestry Office) Park species (17,599 ha) Air Hitam Dalam- ~ 3,377,990 1. Restoration of degraded Air Hitam Laut peatlands in a Protected Peat sustainable and Forest hydrological balance (18,795 ha) 2. Increasing of the population of flagship species 3. Expanding of high and medium carbon stock peatland area Sungai Kumpeh ~ 11,977,620 1. Identification of high Limited Production conservation value area Forest 2. Developing and (62,214 ha) promoting of management of high conservation value area 3. Expanding of high and medium carbon stock peatland area Total carbon stock from the area under ~ 19,485,290 Local Government authority

6 Based on Indonesian Regulation on Decentralization No 23/2014 7 Calculated by ZSL in 2010

115 JURNAL ILMU PEMERINTAHAN WIDYA PRAJA Vol. 44, No. 2, Oktober 2018 : 107 - 124

Sources: 1. Proposal of Berbak National Park DA REDD+ design document revised version, September 2012 2. Berbak landscape REDD+ program implementation guidelines 2015-2018

Based on Table 2, it is clear that in the national park, do not have any the project was designed in such a way access to it. It is important to maintain that all the actors could gain equal the good condition in upstream because benefit from the project's it will affect to the downstream implementation. Interestingly, the ZSL location, which is under National Park as project initiator is not mentioned as a authority. By this project, that project beneficiary. Such a thing is integrates conservation activities from possible to happen, referring to the upstream to downstream; makes concept of managing natural resources National Park duty to conserve as a CPR. As Ostrom (1990) explained downstream area is a little bit easier. that the resource system could be (Rini, Senior Staff of Berbak and jointly provided or used, in contrast the Sembilang National Park. Berbak resource unit is subject to be used or National Park office, Jambi. August 3, provided separately. The ZSL has 2017) access to the Berbak landscape since it However, since the project is is a location of the project. However, still at the readiness stage, the project benefits such as carbon stock and beneficiaries to the community cannot environmental services do not come to not be counted yet. Therefore, the the ZSL because the resource unit only actors who are involved in the project belongs to its owner. are those who have the authority in This project brought another terms of designing and concepts. positive impact to the conservation area. It is already mentioned that the B. Connection among Actors Berbak landscape is a conservation The connection among actors can area, which means that the landscape is be seen through an actor-centered already conserved by the National Park power framework. This study adapts and Forestry Office even with or Krott's framework to identify the most without the project. Even so, the powerful actor in the project. Krott et project includes those two actors who al., (2014) mention three elements of have different authorities in certain power: coercion, dis (incentives) and areas of the landscape, and it then dominant information. integrates the conservation system in - Coercion is altering behavior by the whole landscape. force As one stakeholder puts it: - Dis (incentives) is altering behavior The project allows all by dis (advantage) stakeholders to contribute to the - Dominant information is altering conservation activities in the behavior by unverified information landscape. The upstream location is Based on the reports, the MoU, under local government authority. We, and the project implementation 116

Governing on Implementation of REDD+.....[ Teis Nuraini, Jeremias T. Keban, and Jafar Suryomenggolo]

guidelines, the actor-centered power REDD+ Program is shown in Table 3. distribution in the Berbak landscape

Table 3. Power of Each Actor to Alter the Behavior of another Actor Secretariat of Directorate of Directorate General Environmental Berbak and Bureau of Jambi ZSL-Indonesia Actor in the Power to of Natural Resources Services for Sembilang International Provincial Program. implementation of project alter and Ecosystem Conservation National Park Cooperation Forestry Office Carbon Project Conservation Forest Utilization Secretariat of Directorate General of Natural Resources - - C D - I 3 and Ecosystem Conservation Directorate of Environmental Services for Conservation D - C,D - - C,I 5 Forest Utilization Berbak and Sembilang D D - - I C,I,D 6 National Park Bureau of International I - - - - I 2 Cooperation Jambi Provincial Forestry - - I - - C,I,D 4 Office ZSL-Indonesia Program. - D I,D D I,D - 6 Carbon Project Impacted by other actor’s 3 2 6 2 3 10 power

Note: Actor-centered power based on Krott et.al. 2013 (C = coercion; I = incentives / disincentives; D = dominant information) Source: Memorandum of Understanding of REDD+ Berbak landscape project

The score is given based on the actor can alter other actors using their connection among actors that stated in authorities in terms of project project design document, MoU, project implementation. For instance, if the guidelines and some regulations. Using National Park might not deliver the required those documents author analyzes the information (D) to other actors, then it connection among actors. Every relation of might affect the project implementation. one actor to the other actors is scored as 1 Based on the MoU and the technical (one), wheatear is C, I, D. After that the implementation guidelines, the Berbak and scores are calculated as total score of each Sembilang National Park, the Jambi actor relation in the project. Provincial Forestry Office, and the ZSL are Based on the analysis, the ZSL and the main implementers in the field who the Berbak and Sembilang National Park have the power to intervene in the actions are two of the most powerful actors in the of other actors. However, based on Table 3, project (both of the actors scored 6). it Jambi Provincial Forestry Office has less Surprisingly, the ZSL and the National Park power compared to the National Park and are also the actors who get the biggest the ZSL. This shows that there is a missing pressure from other actors. The analysis is link between the Jambi Provincial Forestry based on the authority of each actor. Each Office as a representative of the Local

117 JURNAL ILMU PEMERINTAHAN WIDYA PRAJA Vol. 44, No. 2, Oktober 2018 : 107 - 124

Government with the several agencies in relationship link of each actor in the the Ministry of Environment and Forestry REDD+ carbon project implementation in that became the representative of the the Berbak landscape. Central Government. Figure 2 explains the

Central Government (the Ministry of Environment NGO Local Government and Forestry)

Secretariat of Directorate Directorate of Bureau of International General of Natural Environmental Services for Cooperation Resources and Ecosystem Conservation Forest

Berbak and Sembilang ZSL-Indonesia Program Jambi Provincial National Park Carbon Project Forestry Office

Legend: : Coordination : Indirect correlation : Reporting

Figure 2. Correlation among actors in REDD+ Berbak landscape project Source: Memorandum of Understanding of REDD+ landscape Berbak landscape project

According to Figure 2, even though government was done at the time of drafting the National Park and the Jambi Provincial the MoU and work plan, but there was Forestry Office has the same position in never any meeting or coordination to project implementation, the two have no discuss project implementation. coordination relationship. The correlation (Berbak and Sembilang National Park between the two actors is only linked by the office, Jambi. August 3, 2017). ZSL as its second partner. Based on the As a Jambi Province Forestry officer puts it: interview results, there is a different There is a joint secretariat consisting coordination understanding between the of several NGOs that have programs in National Park and the Jambi Provincial Berbak landscape. The secretariat is used Forestry Office. as a tool of communication between all As Bobbi, Senior Staff Berbak, and stakeholders. Sembilang National Park puts it: (Wahyu, Senior Staff of Jambi Provincial We never have coordination with the Forestry Office. Jambi Provincial Forestry local government regarding implementation Office, Jambi. August 2, 2017). of the project. Communication with local 118

Governing on Implementation of REDD+.....[ Teis Nuraini, Jeremias T. Keban, and Jafar Suryomenggolo]

This difference in perception is the ZSL for further discussion with the possible because of different understanding National Park and the Jambi Provincial of coordination. The National Park Forestry Office. The ZSL reports were not considers that coordination is not just a orderly and only fulfilled yearly reports. forum to deliver programs only at the As Eka, Staff from Directorate of beginning, yet it must be done more Environmental Services for Conservation intensely and thoroughly. Monitoring and Forest Utilization informant puts it: evaluation are also important and have to be ZSL has never submitted a semester done jointly by all actors involved. As what report, we only received some annual was said by Enrici and Hubacek (2018), reports yet it is still too late. Submission of good monitoring conducted by all involved reports that should be the responsibility of actors in the project can ensure its success. ZSL should be asked first and then In addition, the first phase of the project submitted to our agency. (Directorate of was done only in the area of the National Environmental Services for Conservation Park, while its second phase expanded the Forest Utilization Office, Bogor. August 7, scope of the project to include the Berbak 2017) landscape. Therefore, this expansion could The delay in submitting the report is be one of the possibilities as to why a sense suspected to be one of the causes of delayed of belonging for the Local Government to achievement of activities in the field. this project is not as large as the National However, a tiered report is expected to Park. control and observe the implementation In addition, in terms of coordination, progress of in the field so that problems can another interesting relationship to be be identified and solutions can be found discussed is the reporting. The ZSL quickly. becomes the only actor who has the responsibility to report all activities to other C. Governance of the Berbak Landscape stakeholders. The MoU states that the ZSL REDD+ Program has an obligation to submit a semester and Holloway and Giandomenico (2009) an annual report to all actors involved, and Enrici and Hubacek (2018) stated that including the Ministry of Environment and forest cover, governance scenario, actors’ forestry agencies. In contrast, in the connection, and budgeting contexts declaration of the ZSL activity plan, it is influence the process of designing and obligatory to submit the reports only to the implementing REDD+ projects. This study National Park and the Jambi Provincial is focused on seeing how governance Forestry Office. Furthermore, the National affects the implementation of the Berbak Park is obliged to disseminate the reports to landscape REDD+ program. Moreover, this internal agencies in the Ministry of study applies four indicators of governance Environment and Forestry. that are developed by Ostrom (1990). Those This component slightly affects the four indicators are coordination, reporting, implementation of the project. The ZSL bureaucracy, and monitoring8. should prepare all reports to be disseminated to all stakeholders, making the ZSL-made report unilateral. While in the 8 Ostrom mentions eight indicators of governance which are: Clearly defined boundaries; Coordination reported agreement, reports are prepared by includes reporting; Collective choice arrangement;

119 JURNAL ILMU PEMERINTAHAN WIDYA PRAJA Vol. 44, No. 2, Oktober 2018 : 107 - 124

Coordination and reporting, as bureaucracy creates a complicated discussed earlier, are parts of governance background for forest conservation that affect the implementation of the Berbak activities including the REDD + project. A landscape REDD+ program. The inadequate similar case also took place in the Berbak coordination between the main actors in the landscape REDD+ program. The ZSL field implementation indicates why the encountered a number of obstacles related project did not achieve its targets. The to state’s bureaucracy in government Berbak and Sembilang National Park share agencies, especially the central government the opinion that the Jambi Provincial in implementing projects in the field. Forestry Office did not know the progress Galudra et al., (2011) also mentioned of the project because there was no that a carbon right, which is a part of information sharing process during its REDD+ context, is a complex issue. It implementation. consists of a set of actors and bureaucracy Bobby, a senior staff of the Berbak and that are involved in the whole process. The Sembilang National Park, stated: case is the same in the Berbak landscape … Forestry office does not seem REDD+ program, and it requires a long really care and do not have any bureaucratic system. The long bureaucratic involvement in the project implementation. process is developed as one of the control (Berbak and Sembilang National Park systems of the project. Office, Jambi. August 3, 2017) A key informant from the Centre for Inadequate coordination also occurs if International Cooperation stated: every actor assumes the same power and We developed stage by stage does not want to be governed. This is bureaucracy in order to let every strengthened by the statement from one of stakeholder knows what the project have the key informants from Directorate been done. This kind of system also as the General of Natural Resources and multilayers monitor for the project. Ecosystem Conservation: (Trijatmiko, Ministry of Environment and Egocentricity of every agency is a Forestry Office, Jakarta. August 7, 2017) difficult thing to avoid and become one of Nevertheless, somehow it is the causes of why the coordination is not considered less flexible. This is because all going well. (Singgih, Senior Staff of the activities carried out in the field should Secretariat of Directorate General of be reported in detail and submitted to the Natural Resources and Ecosystem Jakarta Central Government. Conservation. Ministry of Environment and In addition, the changes in the Forestry Office, Jakarta. August 8, 2017). organizational structure in the Ministry of Environment and Forestry 2014 also affect Another governance indicator that is the bureaucratic system, thereby creating noticeable in the implementation of the more complications for the ZSL in program is bureaucracy. The study conducting activities in the field. The conducted by Galudra et al., (2011) on Ministry merged the Berbak National Park Central found that Indonesia’s with the Sembilang National Park. Both were initially two different national parks

Monitoring; Graduated sanction; Conflict resolution; that had respective regulations on Minimum recognition of rights; and Bureaucracy. management area. In practice, the merging 120

Governing on Implementation of REDD+.....[ Teis Nuraini, Jeremias T. Keban, and Jafar Suryomenggolo] of the national parks has not been demand the ZSL to provide a report and accompanied by the incorporation of the less review the results. We, as the executing prevailing management system. Thus, there agency of this project, have never made an is a fairly complicated management annual meeting aimed at monitoring the dualism. The ZSL must take care of the ongoing activities. (Singgih, Senior Staff of letters and retribution if they want to do Secretariat of Directorate General of activities in the Berbak area. In contrast, Natural Resources and Ecosystem they don’t need it in the Sembilang region Conservation. Ministry of Environment and because it has been considered as a right of Forestry Office, Jakarta. August 8, 2017) ZSL. As such, the ZSL admits that it faces If monitoring and other governance difficulties regarding their internal reporting indicators are well conducted, the issue of documents, since it would be considered a the lack of budget might not occur at all. deviation of how the components of the The REDD+ program is a priority program activities are the same but the financial of the Indonesian government, and for the mechanisms are different. Ministry of Environment and Forestry, the As a ZSL field coordinator mentioned: Berbak landscape REDD+ program is one We have no problem if we should pay of the two locations where they target to or do registration before we visit the field enhance their performance. There is also an as long as the regulation is applied in the opportunity for additional funding from the whole area of the national park. The Indonesian government to complete the dualism policy sometimes confuses us and it program. However, the submission process is time consuming because we have to for the funding requires a long bureaucratic confirm what policy we should obey. process9. (Yoan Dinata, ZSL Office, Jambi. August 2, 2017) Conclusion The last governance indicator by Ostrom (1990) used to evaluate the project The Berbak landscape REDD+ implementation is monitoring. It has an program is a collaborative program between important role in determining the success of the Government of Indonesia (Central this project. The involvement of many Government and Local Government) with actors as well as the differences of regional the Zoological Society of London (one of authorities made the integrated monitoring the NGO partners of the Indonesian an essential aspect. Through monitoring, the government). This project has been done constraints faced during implementation since 2010 and will end in 2018. The can be identified earlier so that the solution project is divided into two phases: the first will be more targeted. The ZSL admitted phase was done in the location of Berbak that they are constrained on budget, and and Sembilang National Park while the therefore the activities are not achieved in second phase is implemented in the larger accordance with the expected outcomes. area of the Berbak landscape. The This identification came quite late because the monitoring was not done properly. 9 Ministry of Finance Regulation No. As one of the key informants puts it: 143/PMK.02/2015 about Guideline for Designing I admit that we are not fully carrying and Reviewing Work and Budget Planning of Ministry and State Agency and Legalization on List out our responsibilities well. We only of Budget Allocation

121 JURNAL ILMU PEMERINTAHAN WIDYA PRAJA Vol. 44, No. 2, Oktober 2018 : 107 - 124 landscape consists of several functional crucial role in this project. Monitoring that areas with different designations and is not well prepared causes a late authorities. The Berbak landscape is not identification of the main problem in only under the authority of the National project implementation. Park as a representative of Central The ZSL claims lack of funds as the Government, but there are also Production main cause of unsuccessful implementation Forest, Conservation Forest and Forest Park of the project in the second phase. The under the Jambi Provincial Forestry problem of limited budget should be Office’s authority. identified earlier so that the government Governance plays an important role in would be able to propose a possibility of determining the success or failure of a funding mechanism. That would be possible project implementation. Therefore, the if there was a well-functioning governance involvement of several actors in project system that included: a well-established implementation requires a good governance monitoring system, regular reporting by the system to avoid constraints. In the first ZSL, good coordination among actors, and phase of the project, the division of also a responsive bureaucracy. In that way, authority and benefits, which is one of the it would help to find some alternative ways components of governance, was well and possible solutions. constructed at the time of preparation of cooperation documents. Based on the Implication and Recommendation agreement documents and program referrals, each actor had a fairly balanced Based on the case of the Berbak section. In other words, the initial process REDD+ project, we can identify a couple of of project preparation was done well and policy implications: involved all the parties. 1. The ZSL may need to find other However, project achievements in the mechanisms to secure funding. For second phase do not show encouraging example, through consortium mechanism. If results. Only 20 percent of the total that is the case, the government will need to activities are completed by the ZSL. Based accommodate some changes and establish a on the results of interviews and document different mechanism. reviews, several indicators of governance 2. There are some funding possibilities to this that affect the implementation of projects in project. If the Ministry of Environment and the field appears. The first one is Forestry (through the Directorate General of coordination; there is an inadequate Nature Resources and Ecosystem coordination between the Central and the Conservation) is willing to partially fund Local Government. The consistency of the essential components in phase II, it will reporting also influences the achievement of need to propose additional budget from the the project. In addition, the bureaucratic National Budget in form of a new working system, which is quite long and program for the next year. The rest of the complicated, also becomes a challenge to project will be funded by the ZSL through achieve the desired target. The last aspect of the NGO’s own mechanism. governance that hampers the success of the Berbak landscape REDD+ Program is monitoring. Monitoring takes on a very 122

Governing on Implementation of REDD+.....[ Teis Nuraini, Jeremias T. Keban, and Jafar Suryomenggolo]

References

Angelsen, A. (Eds). (2009). Realising REDD+ (National Strategy and Policy Options). Africa. Retrieved from http://webstaging.cifor.cgiar.org/Knowledge/Publications/Detail.htm?&pid=2871 &pf=1 Brander, M. (2012). Greenhouse Gases, CO2, CO2e, and Carbon: What do all these terms mean? Ecometrica. Collins, M., Macdonald, E. A., Clayton, L., Dunggio, I., Macdonald, D. W., & Milner-gulland, E. J. (2011). Wildlife conservation and reduced emissions from deforestation in a case study of Nantu Wildlife Reserve, Sulawesi: 2. An institutional framework for REDD implementation. Environmental Science and Policy, 14(6), 709–718. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2011.03.002 Corbera, E., & Schroeder, H. (2011). Governing and implementing REDD+. Environmental Science and Policy, 14(2), 89–99. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2010.11.002 Ekawati, S., Subarudi, Budiningsih, K., & Mutaqin, Z. (2016). Mendorong Kesiapan Implementasi REDD + di Indonesia, (June 2017). Enrici, A. M., & Hubacek, K. (2018). Challenges for REDD+ in Indonesia: A case study of three project sites. Ecology and Society, 23(2), art7. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09805-230207

Galudra, G., Van Noordwijk, M., Suyanto, S., Sardi, I., Pradhan, U., & Catacutan, D. (2011). Hot spots of confusion: Contested policies and competing carbon claims in the peatlands of Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. International Forestry Review, 13(4), 431–441.Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1505/146554811798811380 Krott, M., Bader, A., Schusser, C., Devkota, R., Maryudi, A., Giessen, L., & Aurenhammer, H. (2014). Actor-centred power: The driving force in decentralised community based forest governance. Forest Policy and Economics, 49, 34–42. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.04.012

Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316423936 Pasgaard, M., Sun, Z., Müller, D., & Mertz, O. (2016). Challenges and opportunities for REDD + : A reality check from perspectives of effectiveness, efficiency and equity. Environmental Science and Policy, 63, 161–169. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.05.021 Pierre, J. (2000). Debating governance. In Debating governance: Authority, steering, and democracy. (pp. 1–10). Retrieved from http://books.google.de/books?id=qa6cm4K- nygC

123 JURNAL ILMU PEMERINTAHAN WIDYA PRAJA Vol. 44, No. 2, Oktober 2018 : 107 - 124

Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. (2000). Data management and analysis methods. In Handbook of Qualitative Research, 769–802. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2307/2076551 Sills, E. O., Sassi, C. De, Jagger, P., Lawlor, K., Miteva, D. A., Pattanayak, S. K., & Sunderlin, W. D. (2017). Building the evidence base for REDD + : Study design and methods for evaluating the impacts of conservation interventions on local. Global Environmental Change, 43, 148–160. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.02.002 Watson, R. T., Rodhe, H., Oeschger, H., & Siegenthaler, U. (1990). Greenhouse gases and aerosols. Climate Change: The IPCC Scientific Assessment, 1–40. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0- 0025587274&partnerID=40&md5=5d3e969d5d655f48f55e679627df52ab

124