National Park Management in Local Autonomy

National Park Management in Local Autonomy: from The Viepoint of Political Conservation in Biology: A Case Study of Tanjung Puting- Central Kalimantan

Herman Hidayat

Researcher at Research Center for Society and Culture (PMB), Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI).

ABSTRAK

Pengelolaan Taman Nasional dalam Era Otonomi Daerah Dilihat dari Perspektif Politik Konservasi Biology: Studi Kasus Tanjung Puting -Kalimantan Tengah. Paper ini menganalisis pengelolaan taman nasional dilihat dari perspektif politik ekologi yang menekankan atas peran dan persepsi ‘stakeholders’. Peran taman nasional adalah sangat penting sebagai benteng terakhir dalam menjaga keberadaan hutan alam. Tetapi, kondisi riil Taman Nasional Tanjung Puting sekarang ini menghadapi suatu ancaman, karena dua faktor penting yakni adanya praktek aktivitas illegal logging dan penggalian untuk usaha tambang, yang dilakukan oleh para pedagang kayu dan investor lokal dari luar dengan menyuruh masyarakat lokal untuk memotong pohon dan menggali tanah. Dengan demikian, untuk mengantisipasi masalah yang kritis tersebut, diperlukan aksi afirmatif seperti pengelolaan kolaborasi dengan berbagai stakeholders (pemerintah daerah baik propinsi dan kabupaten, LSM, masyarakat lokal) atas program reboisasi berbagai pohon, penegakkan hukum, sanksi yang keras, dan pemberdayaan ekonomi dan sosial bagi masyarakat lokal. Terjadi juga konflik kepentingan antara pemerintah pusat dan daerah dalam pengelolaan sumber daya hutan, khususnya taman nasional. Pemerintah pusat berpendapat, berdasarkan UU No.5/1990, pasal 14, yang menekankan ‘taman nasional sebagai sarana preservasi hutan alam yang memilki kehidupan ekosistem yang unik dan dikelola berdasarkan sistem zonasi (inti, rimba dan riset). Kewenangan pengelolaan taman nasional tersebut diberikan kepada pemerintah pusat, karena misi utamanya ialah ialah untuk menjaga keanekaragaman hayati, memproteksi dan mengembangkannya. Sebaliknya pemerintah daerah (Propinsi dan Kabupaten) berpendapat, bahwa keberadaan taman nasional di daerahnya, dapat digunakan sebagai income PAD (Pendapatan Asli Daerah), untuk membangun infrastruktur daerah dan meningkatkan kesejahteraan masyarakat, khususnya dalam masa Otda. Sejalan dengan misi pemerintah daerah, masyarakat lokal juga melihat ‘taman nasional’ dari keuntungan nilai ekonomi langsung, sehingga sering terjadi praktek aktivitas illegal lgging dan tambang di kawasan taman nasional Tanjung Puting yang pada akhirnya berakibat terhadap rusaknya hutan. Dalam konteks ini, baik kepentingan konflik antara dua aktor stakeholders yang utama baik pemerintah pusat dan daerah sangat menarik untuk dikaji.

Kata kunci: Pengelolaan taman nasional, kolaborasi, stakeholders, kepentingan konflik pemerintah pusat dan daerah.

135 Herman Hidayat

Introduction in this Summit meeting. Although countries adopted Agenda 21, which Forest is one of the renewable called actions to prevent ‘world natural resources that could provide deforestation’, and the Forest Principles, elements for human being to produce and the Earth Summit failed to conclude with consume. Yet, forest has limited the creation of a Forest Convention. Af- regeneration ability and limited assimila- ter the Earth Summit, a number of tion. However during its exploitation international initiatives emerged, such as under the limited assimilation, forest the Intergovernmental Panel on Forest resources could be utilized on sustainable. (IPF), the World Commission of Forests In contrast, if it is exceeded, forest and Sustainable development (WCFSD), resources could be degraded and forest and others; in order to find ways to halt resources’ function as production and worldwide deforestation and degradation consumption factors will be threaten of all types of forestlands. And its (Soemarwoto 2001: 59). Therefore as development at the Special Session of the potential resources, forest are important, General Assembly of the United Nations not just for the production of the timber, to Review and Appraise the but also for many social and ecological Implementation of Agenda 21, in June functions such as conservation of 1997, was agreed that work should be biodiversity, the supply of water, and the continued in order to reach an prevention of global warming (M.Inoue international consensus on forest & H.Isozaki 2003). On the other hand, conservation. forest resources often become a capital Obviously, in the past, most debates that could be utilized for national regarding various aspects of forests development in any country, as done for tended to focus on the forest sector and timber industries (plywood, sawn wood, the direct causes of deforestation and pulp and paper, etc.) in New Order forest degradation and not on the cross- (Soeharto regime) period and became the sectoral aspects of the underlying causes second largest foreign exchange earnings linked to them, such as the connection after of oil boom in 1980s-1990s. between forests and societies. However, National parks in Indonesia which after the UN Special Session, non- are currently (2007) accounted more than governmental organizations took the fifty units (at least 23,5 million hectares) initiative on one of the most pressing is one of the last resort for forest agendas and started researching the conservation to prevent forest degrada- underlying causes of deforestation and tion and to keep sustainable natural forest forest degradation. which their specific ecosystem and In recent years, the world’s forests biodiversity on flora and fauna. have been affected by over exploitation, It was well-known in Earth Summit over harvesting, over grazing, pests and June, 1992 in Rio de Janeiro that ‘forest diseases, climate changes, global conservation’ was one of the key issues warming, floods, soil erosion, droughts,

136 National Park Management in Local Autonomy

storms, air pollution, forest fires, as well (Figure 1).1 Now we must clarify, what as economic crisis in Asia and other political ecology means. Many scientists regions-all leading to an overall decrease (Paterson 2000; Bryant 1992; Vayda on world’s forest cover. Forestry in Asia, 1983; Blaikie & Brookfield 1987; Abe particularly in Southeast Asia which Ken-ichi 2003) define it differently. traditionally as timber supply to forest Paterson (2000) notes that “political industries in Japan and others, have been ecology as an approach that combines strongly impacted. A number of initiatives the concerns of ecology and political have suggested forest policy reforms, economy to represent an ever-changing reforestation program, against illegal dynamic tension between ecology logging actors, and the need for the biological and human change, and sustainable managements of forest has between diverse groups within society at been widely recognized and encouraged. scales from the local individual to But since implementation of reforms at transnational as a whole.” Other the local level has been insufficient, it is scientists define it as, “political ecology” imperative that local people begin to a framework to understand the complex effectively participate in forest planning interrelations between local people, and management as well as in protected- national and global political economies, area management. and ecosystems” (Blaikie & Brookfield This paper discusses the role of 1987). The concept has been adapted in Tanjung Puting National Park in Central a various of ways, such as Third-World Kalimantan from political ecology political ecology, where (Bryant, 1992) biology perspective which emphasizes notes that: “political ecology may be the role stakeholders/actors in the defined as the attempt to understand the collaborative management and its political sources, conditions and implication on various biological issues. ramifications of environmental change.” This paper also will analyze conflict of Most current political ecology tends to interest between central and local overlook ecological dynamics and focus government on the policies of natural upon the structure of human systems forest resources particularly on national (Rocheleau et al. 1996). Abe Ken-ichi park management. (2003) defines political ecology, as “a collective name for all intellectual efforts Theoretical Review to analyze critically the problems of This study uses “political ecology” natural resource appropriation and as an analytical framework which political economic origins of resource emphasizes on stakeholders movement degradation, be they for the purpose of

1 See Bryant, R & Bailey, S (1997). Third World Political Ecology. London: Routledge Press. Further the implementation for political Ecology concept, see Yoshiki Seki, “The Political Ecology of the Philippine Restoration Program: ODA, Government, and Local People”, in Philippine Political Science Journal, Vol 22, Number 45, 2001, pp. 79-93. 1 Abe, Kei-ichi (et.al). The Political Ecology of Tropical Forests in Southeast Asia ; Historical Perspectives, Kyoto University Press, Japan, 2003, pp. 3-4

137 Herman Hidayat academic study or practical applica- management for three decades. Second, tions”.2 In other words, political ecology the implication of political and economic is concerned with the political dimensions pressure upon ‘biological’ perspective of natural resource use and subtleties of was ignoring by forestry bureaucrats, those politics. Apparently, the scope of which subsequently affect into forest political ecology has been referred to as degradation and deforestation. ‘ a method of analysis’, rather than a ‘Political ecology’ is a framework to unified scientific discipline or sub- approach to the subjects mentioned. It is discipline, which is usually characterized a generic term used for the field research by a set of related ideas, premises, and connecting two types of studying by theories. Meanwhile, (Vayda 1983) bringing the point of view politics into the commen-ted: political ecology is similar study of environmental disruption. It to a method applied by human ecologists includes a small-scaled study centered analyzing policy-relevant environmental on local society (e.g., cultural anthro- questions that is ‘progressive contex- pology, applied anthropology) and a large- tualization’. This approach starts with scaled study from national and actors, in this case direct resource users, worldwide standpoint (e.g., political and considers the contexts within which economy). they act or do not act in a particular way towards a resource. This approach also Description of Tanjung Puting Area intends to explain why people use the Administratively, Tanjung Puting environment in particular ways, some National Park initially established and times causing resource decline or consisted of two conservation areas, degradation detrimental to their own and namely Kotawaringin areas of 100,000 others’ uses of the resources (Peluso ha based on Zelfbestuur van Kotawa- 1992). ringin number 24 June 13, 1936 and From the above definitions, Sampit conservation areas of 205,000 Ha apparently, Bryant’s definition, which based on letter decision by Governor emphasizes ‘putting politics first’ on the General of Dutch colonial number 39 political ecology of sustainable develop- August 18, 1937. Both conservation ment aspects is more operational on areas in Kotawaringin and Sampit, reviewed Tanjung Puting National Park. eventually merged to become Tanjung There are two reasons for this condition. Puting, with totally covered 305,000 ha.3 First, that ‘political and economic This national park is very rich in flora pressure’ from the Soeharto government and fauna, etc. It categorized fauna such was predominantly colored on forest as twelve various birds and 38

3 See Book two on Planning and Tanjung Puting Management: 1999-2024, published by Department of Forestry and Plantation, Directorate General of Protection and Forest Conservation, Tanjung Puting National Park Institute, p. 5-10.

138 National Park Management in Local Autonomy

mammalian. Four among famous Ramin (Gonystylus), Rattan Damar mammalian are Orangutan (Pongo Batu, etc. pygmaeus), Owa-Owa (Hylobates agilis), In 1978 through the decision from Beruang Madu (Helarctos malayanus) Ministry of Agriculture number 698/ , and Bekantan (Nasalis larvatus). In Kpts/Um/II/1978 on November 13, case of birds such as Sindanglawe (Storm 1978, which excluded 30,000 ha areas Stork, Ciconia stormil), etc. From the between River Serimbang and vegetation perspective, Tanjung Puting Segintung. Then, total width of Tanjung areas is the center for biodiversity storage. Puting National Park was reduced to For example Dipteocarpus forest type become 270,040 ha. In its development covers 50-60 percent and wet forest (10 in 1981 Tanjung Puting National Park percent) from all areas. It contains declared as ‘world heritage’for valuable trees such as Meranti (Shorea Biosphere Conservation by UNESCO. spp), Gaharu (Aquilaria malaccensis), It means that from the management Kayu Ulin (Eusideroxy-lon Zwageri)), perspective, the responsibility of Tanjung

Stakeholders: National Park in Autonomy Era: Direct actors: Ecological base Socio-Economic base Central Government Collaborative Management (Forestry Department) Local Government (Province & District)

Indirect Actors:

NGOs Degradation (Local/International) Deforestation Private Company Donor Agencies Local Society Ecological Implication: Soil Erosion Flood Drought Climate Changes Global Warming

Figure 1: Stakeholders on National Park Management and its Implication (Source: improvement from Bryant and Bailey’s Concept of Political Ecology 1997)

139 Herman Hidayat

Puting maintenance not just by Indonesia by good access to the location, government through Department of infrastructure, security, safety and social Forestry (Directorate General of Forest and political stability in the district level. Protection and Natural Conservation) but Some eco-tourism areas which also international community which mostly visited by visitors: actively involved on NGOs formation 1) Tanjung Harapan area which has such as Orangutan Foundation been designated as utilization and International (OFI) and World Education research and it well equipped with (WE) that sponsored by UNESCO and resort home for tourist, location for Illegal Logging Response Centre (ILCR) Orangutan Rehabilitation Center, which sponsored by European tracking and Orangutan Meal Community (EC).4 Exhibition in certain time every morning at 8.00 o’clock and afternoon at 14.30. Ecotourism Potential 2) Tanggui Camp for specific utilization Besides, as storage of flora and for tracking in night visiting and fauna, National Park Tanjung Puting Orangutan rehabilitation activities well-known as recreation resort for and might to see to feed up at 8.00 domestic and foreign tourist. There are o’clock. This location is the habitat three driving factors Tanjung Puting for deer, forest pig, various bird such appointed destination by visitors: (1) the as Rangkong, Paruh Bangau, and status of Tanjung Puting National Park others. as ‘world heritage’ for the biggest 3) Leaky Camp which was designated Orangutan habitat in Kalimantan since as specific utilization zone since 1970 the middle of 1990s; (2) it was occurred for research and protection of in a film about Orangutan condition. This Orangutan. This camp could find out film told the bad condition of Orangutan wild Orangutan (Pongo Pygmaeus) because of some factors such as forest rehabilitation and Owa-Owa ( fires, deforestation, catches up by hunters (Hylobates Agilis). In the upstream and sold them by traders to the third of Sekonyer river in Leaky camp parties (black market). This film was ones could find out Buaya Muara used as campaign tools to change (Crocodilus Porosusu) and Buaya international views on Orangutan as an Senyulong/Sapit (Tomistoma extinguishing animal in Kalimantan; (3) Schlegelli) which was well-know as the positive support by local and central very wild. government because it has been provided There are visitors as well domestic and foreign in 2004 (Table 1). For

4 Hidayat, Herman (eds.) (2006). Conflict Potential between Central and Local Government on National Park management in Local Autonomy (A Case Study of Tanjung Puting and Kutai), Jakarta: LIPI Press, p.44.

140 National Park Management in Local Autonomy

example visitors based on their nationality and micro climate, and as educational derived from United States 115, United and research facilities, eco-tourism and Kingdom 101; Australia 51, Germany, 50, biology ecological services, etc.6 There Japan 12. Mostly foreign visitors visited are three main purposes of national park in September and October and domestic management: 1) to protect ecological in tourists in July and September. From the biology process in order to guarantee incomes perspective, totally received in sustainability its function and role as 2004 Rp. 226.922.000 and slowly reduced insurance life system; 2) to preserve in 2005 to become Rp. 178.827.000. The various of natural resources and its factors of income reduction related to the ecosystem in order to maintain genetic national security in terms terrorism issue preservations; 3) and to generate and boom in Indonesia in 2000s. sustainable benefits for improvement of After the realization of local social welfare for society who live in and autonomy since January 2001 the income around national park particularly and from visitors’ fees US$ 5/one day for society at large in general.7 Obviously, foreign visitors and domestic Rp. 5,000/ three purposes of national park day/person.5 The distribution of income established is appropriate with the law divided 80 percent for local government number 5, 1990 about “Natural and Tanjung Puting National Park Office Conservation and its Ecosystem “which received 20 percent. highlighted that central government has responsibility to manage the national Stockholder’s Perception on National park. In line with these purposes, national Park park management in any districts in Indonesia, the National Park Officers (as Central Government representative of Directorate General of National Park (such as Tanjung Forest Protection and Natural Puting) has the significant role and Conservation) must always pay attention strategic function for conservation and of three dimensions namely ecological in protection for biodiversity, flora and biology aspect, economic and social. fauna. To achieve this role, central Hopefully this dimension has positive government and other stakeholders have implication to other stakeholders’ task strategic function to maintain for especially local people. Therefore to catchments area, hydrology resources, realize this dimension it should be made watershed, to produce O2 (carbon sink) strategic step by establishing internal

5 The decision of ticket fee to Tanjung Puting National Park based on PERDA (Local Government Regulation) number 11, 2002 and Head of District (Bupati) Kotawaringin Barat, July 2002. 6 See Wiratno, et.al (2004). Berkaca di Cermin Retak: Refleksi Konservasi dan Implikasi bagi Pengelolaan Taman Nasional. Dephut dan Gibbon Foundation, hal. 200-202. 7 Interview with Ady Susmianto, Director of Conservation area, Directorate General of Forest Protection and Natural Conservation (Department of Forestry), May 27, 2005, in Jakarta.

141 Herman Hidayat zone (core zone, forest zone and research had been established four (4) resort zone) and external zone, so called “buffer homes for tourist in Sekonyer village. The zone” as the border line with society’s management of resort home was land. organized by local people. The charge In fact to prevent national park of average room Rp. 120,000/per day, management illegal logging and plus breakfast for foreign and Rp.80,000 mining activities, the active role of local per day for domestic tourist. While this government (province and district) in research carried out in May 2006, 4 autonomy era on establishing “Buffer persons tourist from Belgium came and zone” (zona penyanggah) is very spent for tow days. The distribution of necessary. The function of this zone that income divided, respectively 80 percent used by Agro-forestry program could be for local people and 20 percent for local facilitated by local government and government. National Park Officer. The role of Agro- On the other hand, in crushing illegal forestry such as Potatoes, Kayu Manis, logging activities such as Balak Telabang Albazia, Durian, Rambutan, Kemiri, Operation One was held on December Jengkol, etc.) could be a positive 5-24, 2000 and continuously launched implication of income generating of local with Balak Telabang Operation Two from people. But, the reality until now none of January 22 until February 10, 2001. The ‘buffer zone’ was established by local synergic operation between local government cooperated with national government, National Park Officer and park officer. local people captured 50 men in jail and more 1.500 M3 mix forest trees and Local Government 1.176 M3 Ramin trees. There were six Although local government has not driving factors caused deforestation in been a real ‘authority’ to manage national Tanjung Puting areas: 1) economic crisis park, based on the law (number 5/1990), occurred in 1998-2001; (2) the change but the co-management with central of political order from central power to government is very necessary. As told decentralization (local autonomy) since by head of forest agency in local January 2001; 3) the weakness of government (district) that the function of coordination between law officers and Tanjung Puting National Park is very the function of court in central and local strategic and significant for hydrology as well; 4) the KKN practices resources, watershed, catchments area (corruption, collusion and nepotism) for the purposes of agricultural water happened between government officers supply. Therefore, in order to maintain and private business); 5) the weakness this national park, local government has of forest security system and the moral obligation to cooperate with inspection of forest products; 6) and the National Park Office. For example, to price of illegal logging is cheaper than increase local people’s income the formal wood from HPH (Logging generating, local government (districts) Forest Concession) holders.8

142 National Park Management in Local Autonomy

from national and international agencies Collaborative Management such as Gibbon foundation and local There were shift paradigms from private companies who has responsibility government based management to on forest and environmental conservation become collaborative management and empowering on social economic of which involve other stakeholders.9 It local people. Actually FNPF in means there is an indication to effective Kotawaringin is branch office and the management realization on protection head office is located in Denpasar, Bali. area, social justice and democratize on In realizing the program FNPF supported natural resources management. by other volunteer staff and local people Moreover, because Indonesia has ratified worker. As previously told that 65% Biological Diversity Convention. It must Tanjung Puting areas forest degradation realize this convention related with because of illegal logging practices and biodiversity conservation. NGOs’s forest fires in 1990s and the early 2000s. perception on national park is very FNPF seriously involved for conducting strategic function for conservation areas, rehabilitation and land conservation and it should be maintained on the program in many areas by planting trees principles of sustainable forest which seeds provided by self preparation management. of local trees seeding such as Meranti Related with Tanjung Puting (Shorea sp), Gaharu, Ulin (Eusideroxylon National Park have been carried out Zwageri), Keruing (Dipterocarpus sp), collaborative management with other Jatimas, Jelutung, Tengkawang, Ramin NGOs such as OFI (Orangutan Foun- (Gonystylus), etc. In 2004 was carried dation Indonesia), FNPF (Friends of out rehabilitation or reforestation program National Park Foundation), WE about 24 ha width and slowly reduced to (World Education), Yayorin (Yayasan become 16 ha in 2005, and in 2006 Orangutan Indonesia) and ILRC (Ille- increased to become 29 ha in Camp gal Logging Response Center) on Pesalat and Beguruh. According to establishing of journal about program Basuki, alumni of Mulawarman and national park activities. University, Samarinda, Head of Rehabilitation program, that he is very Friends of National Park Foundation optimistic on acceleration of reforestation (FNPF) program with provided by local trees FNPF was made cooperation with seed and actively supported by other Tanjung Puting Office in 1997. The volunteers from high school pupils and fundation established from rising came local people, etc. Mostly pupils who

8 Interview with Tanjung Puting National Park Officer was held on May 4, 2006. And Forester, staff of Forest Agency in District, West Kotawaringin, May 11. 2006. 9The practice of collaborative management among stakeholders on national park management program especially on forest rehabilitation and empowering socio-economic program of local people was familiarly carried out in 1990s.

143 Herman Hidayat actively engage on reforestation program such as Orangutan statue, garment campaign and previously taught products (kaos/sport clothes) and kitchen conservation subject as extra curriculum tools- made by local people as souvenirs in High Scholl (SMA 2) in West and sold to tourist. The income generating Kotawaringin. But, a critical problem from these activities such as souvenirs regarding the limited fund from other to become best selling for domestic and parties (international and local agencies) foreign tourists as well and could improve to carry out reforestation program in their social welfare. large areas. World Education (WE) Meanwhile FNPF cooperated with The WE is categorized as internatio- local people to carry out empowering nal NGO, because it has some programs socio-economic program. This NGO on conservation and empowering local launched on buying 6 female cows and socio economic in many countries. The two goats for breeding program in 2005- head office of WE is located in Boston, 2006. The target of these breeding United States of America. The WE has activities after several years will be MOU (Memoran-dum of Understanding) fruitful. Other activities, FNPF also with Doctorate General of Forest established Demplot (agricultural and Protection and Natural Conservation fishery practices demonstration) area. (PHKA) and it represented by Balai This training of Demplot invited local Taman Nasional (National Park Office). people to train their capacity and There are two principles aims for knowledge in order be able to increase developing WE on the promotion of ICDP fishery and agricultural products by using (Integrated Conservation and Develop- technical and mechanical tools, and ment Project) namely: 1) to improve excellent seeds. As told by FNPF field process of planning and decision making officer that actually agricultural was very from stakeholders movement in terms of potential sector from the viewpoint of forest conservation, reforestation width area, quality of land, irrigation from program in Tanjung Puting National Park; Sekonyer River and manpower. On the and 2) to launch empowering socio other hand, on the improvement of skill, economic program through improving FNPF officer gave facilities among 2 agricultural and poultry products. persons from Sekonyer village to attend In general the achievements target training of curving statue and Batik in period October 2003 and February printing about one month (2003) in Bali. 2006, among of them: Hoping, after returned home, they 1) The fix establishment of WE actively involved teaching statue and operational office in Pangkalan Bun Batik on technical knowledge to local for Tanjung Puting Integrated people. Based on the village report Conservation and Development (2006), eventually obtained about 20 Project (TPICDP); persons who practiced as statue and 2) Intensively cooperate with Tanjung Batik trainees. Mostly their products Puting National Park Office and

144 National Park Management in Local Autonomy

other stakeholders on synergic as told by informan (Yd) that cooperation constructing program; between NGOs (such as WE, FNPF, 3) The food endurance and empowering etc.) and National Park Officer and local economic program through imple- people to promote socio-economic and menting of paddy rice, poultry, ecological environments could impact on fishery, agro-forestry products; increasing benefits for their incomes 4) And improvement of Group generating. organization. We could realize about fifty up sixty Conflict of Interest Central and Local percent the above program. For example, Government the endurance of food in twelve villages The spirit of reformation (1998- to give service about 1.000 poor farmers, 2005) in autonomy era was strongly namely 5 villages located in East demand on positive values such as Kotawaringin (Seruyan) and 7 villages democratization, accountability and located in Pangkalan Bun (Figure 2). As transparency. As we know that told by WE symbol: “because we learn ‘democratization’ is characterized by together and produce excellent “conflict interest among stakeholders. products.” WE develop leading program Therefore, freedoms of expression such as fishery (fish pool, breeding), eventually cause freedom to criticize agricultural products (paddy rice, fruits, other parties who has different ideas.11 vegetables, etc.), poultry (hen, a leading In context the relationship between chicken/ayam buras) in some villages in central and local government have been 10 Kumai sub-district. For example, in occurred ‘conflict interest’ particularly on terms of agricultural products, the forest resources and natural resources intensification of mechanism through in general. Centralization which had been using various leading seeds (punggur, carried of by central government in mendawa, martapura, etc.), technical Soeharto regime has been shifted into a instructions, participation of local people new paradigm of ‘decentralization’. It is eventually produce good results. In 2005 because local autonomy is one of the the production of rice increased to formations of the real practice of become 4,5 ton/per ha, which previously democracy to guarantee individual, produced average 2 ton/per ha in 2004. group, community rights and freedom in This condition has positive impacts to society. In line with central and local improve social benefits for local people, government relation, democracy particularly to provide their food demands freedom for local government sustainability stock in the future. The to manage their affairs in many aspects. response from local people also positive, On the other hand, autonomy era hoped

10 See Quarterly report of WE program Period October 2003 to February 2006, Pangkalan Bun. 11 Maswadi Rauf, “Local Government and Horizontal Conflict” in Syamsuddin Haris (eds.), Decentraliza- tion, Democratization and Accountability: Local Government, Jakarta: AIPI and Partnership for Government Reform in Indonesia, 2002, p. 145.

145 Herman Hidayat

Fishery Empowering Agro-forestry community Technical Agriculture aspects Poultry

ICDP Education Civil society Group Endurance Networking

National Laws regulation Department Regulation Local Regulation/Perda Policy Implementation

Figure 2: Grand Operational Program of World Education Source: Booklet of WE (World Education), 2005. by local government to develop self half, it is worth to ask “Special reliance and independence and to Compensation Fees” (DAK) from promote many things to be more progress central government. This DAK can be and subsequently drive local people to be used to establish infrastructure and more welfare and prosperity. Related empowering socio-economic of local with “national park management” community who live in and around the happened” conflict of interest. border of national park (Figure 3). From Local government sees national park this point, actually there is a plan to is very potential resources, minus manage national park by their authorities. conservation, economic orientation and But, because of the real condition could be exploited from timber and non- suffered by local government namely timber exploitation in order to expand their limited of manpower and allocation of PAD (original income of local people). But local budget beyond their capacities. As so far this planning just reach into a result, local government (Kotawaringin intellectual discourse among political Barat) just want to cooperate with elites and still not yet publish Perda (local central government (through National government regulation) as regulation Park Officer) and other stakeholders for from the association decision of executive this areas, based on consideration as (head of district) and legislative institutes follows: (1) strategic function of Tanjung (local parliament). This condition based Puting National Park as asset for local, on interpretation on law No. 32/2004 national and international and its function about “Local Autonomy”. Even if local for bio-diversity conservation, protection government’s land occupied more than of fauna and flora especially Orangutan

146 National Park Management in Local Autonomy

and other animals; (2) it is as ecotourism November 19, 2007). Underlying factors area for domestic and foreign tourists; of Kyoto Protocol fail, because of three and (3) to improve socio-economic critical rationales. First, United States of program for local people. America (USA) and Australia which Central government’s perspective considered significant contribution on gas highlighted that conservation in national emission do not agree to make signature. park areas is very significant.12 Because Second, the concept of CDM (Clean this area categorized as its strategic Development Mechanism) which function as catchments area, hydrology highlighted on reforestation program resources, bio-diversity storage, flora and among developing countries who fauna conservation, eco-tourism, etc. especially own ‘tropical forest’ reluctant Therefore any illegal activities such as to perform this program. The concept of illegal logging and mining, land CDM is unrealistic which emphasizes that encroachment, land cultivation by local critical forest land before 1960s must be people and others s intolerable and actors carried out for reforestation program. must be captured in jail. For this purpose, Even the practice of logging industries the authority rights to manage still belong (HPH) among developing countries, to ‘central government’, based on Law including Indonesia began in the end of No. 5/1999 about “Natural resources 1960s. The consequence of HPH’s conservation and Its Ecosystem”). practice emerged forest degradation and Currently happened that increasing deforestation mostly occurred in 1980s, of global warming which eventually which do not properly perform a affect into climate changes as indication sustainable forest management. Third, of fail the ‘Kyoto Protocol’ agreement the emerging of China, Brazil and India in 1997. There are many affects of global as industrialized countries which greatly warming: (1) from 1974-2004 the effect contribute carbon dioxide must ratified of green house (rumah kaca) CO2 ‘KyotoProtocol’ agreement on reduction increases 70 percent (from 28,7 billion of gas emission. ton to 49 billion ton CO2); (2) the sea Then, what is the role on national level increases about 18 cm until the end parks Indonesia which own about 23,5 of 21 century; (3) the provided clean million ha? It’s role is very significant for water decreased in Asia; (4) in Africa production carbon sink to protect global until 2020 about 75-250 million of people warming. Actually the real challenge how suffer the lack of water; (5) and intensity central government which represented by of heating wave as the affect of climate Department of Forestry encourages with change happened in South Europe and international foundation agencies whether other part of Europe (Kompas, among advanced countries, OPEC

12 Interview with Bappeda staff (Local Planning Agency) in Kotawaringin Barat, on May 4, 2007. See, Hidayat, Herman (ed.) (2006). Op cit. p. 77.

147 Herman Hidayat

Central Gov: Local Gov: Conservation (+) Conservation (-) Conflict of Total Economic Original Local income - interest on Value (TEV) (PAD) National Park Direct economic value Management (DEV) Special Fund International Allocation (DAK) Cooperation with NGOs and other International Forest Implication: Agency under Intensive oppression on national Buffer scheme: park (Illegal logging, plantation, zone CDM mining, shifting cultivation, etc. REDD -forest degradation and deforestation VCM (Voluntary - Forest recovery Carbon market)

Figure 3 Conflict of interest on National Park and Other Co operations Source: Data improvement (2006).

(Organization of Petroleum Exporting to spend their budgets. Meanwhile, oil for Countries) international NGOs forest related to environmental issue, (Greenpeace, World Education, WWF, because oil is the greater part to produce etc.), United Nations institute on climate (fossil elements) that eventually cause to changes, etc., cooperate for maintaining global warming. The Conference national park management. In contrast subsequently agreed the idea and finally advanced countries (include G-8) which established ‘fund rising’ to take US$ 50 mastering science, technology and wealth cent/per barrel from OPEC members. must cooperate with developing This fund intends to sustainable forest countries, especially who own tropical development and to overcome global forest for realizing reforestation program climate change and educational program and empowering of socio-economic local in developing countries (Kompas, people. November 19, 2007). And even King Vice President, M. Jusuf Kalla Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz in closing of launched idea that oil for education and summit OPEC meeting gave donation oil for forest in Summit OPEC meeting about US$ 300 million for carrying out on November 17-18, 2007 in Riyadh. Oil an initial energy research, environment for education considered to become and climate change issue to developing significant, issue, because oil consumer countries (Media Indonesia, November countries (include Indonesia) really 19, 2007). suffered heavy burden as oil’s price up

148 National Park Management in Local Autonomy

Currently, Department of Forestry to voluntary carbon market (Kompas, launches concept of REDD13 (Reduction November 9, 2007). The cooperation of Emission on forest degradation and three parties initiates by Borneo Tropical deforestation) on November 6, 2007 Forest Rain Forest Foundation (BTRF) while held national workshop on reduction with Malino district and Global Eco ‘gas emission’ in Jakarta. This concept Rescue (Ecological Service Company) highlights to maintain a sustainable forest from Nassau, Bahamas Caribbean and could continuously contribute its Archipelago. This cooperation for forest benefits to local people and other parties. utilization under schema of voluntary But, global responsibility must be carbon market (VCM) to protect forest performed by advanced country’s areas and maximalize its benefits to contributions for giving ‘incentives’ as improve social welfare of people. The fund raising scheme to this program. In VCM schema is one of carbon trade fact this concept will be adopted in scheme out of CDM (Clean Develop- UNFCCC (on climate change) in Bali on ment of Mechanism). According to John December 3-14, 2007. But in case of Alexander Embiricos, CEO of Global Indonesia, REDD concept schema has Eco Rescue (GER) said that economic examined in three areas. First, it has done values considered uncertain from this on ‘forest hope’ areas 101,000 hectares project cooperation for two years. But (Hutan Harapan) as forest production the GER will give 1 Euro/per ha of forest restoration project that located in the land which covers of its agreement. That border of Jambi Province and South amount of money will be utilized to Sumatra in 2006. Actually allocation of identification process of carbon sink concession from Department Forestry production from this forest absorption. for 100 years to restore the forest areas On the other hand, Marthin Billa, head done by Restorasi Ekosistem Indonesia of Malino district said that carbon trade Company (Kompas, November 7, 2007). scheme could not get benefits anymore. According to Sukianto Rusli, Director of But at least, he is very optimism, that this Wild Bird Conservation that “forest project could elevate social welfare of hope (Hutan Harapan) is tropical forest his people and maintain of forest areas. in low land which a final rest areas about Third, to prevent global climate change 500, 000 ha and previously existed 3 until 2025, Emmy Hafild, Executive million hectares. This forest land contains Director of Greenpeace Southeast Asia rich of mammalian species in Sumatra.” cooperates with Local government Riau Second, Malino district in East to protect peat swamp forest (Hutan Kalimantan efforts to categorize its Rawa Gambut). As known that Riau protected forest areas about 325,0416 ha owns 4 million ha from 22 million ha of

13 See Wahyudi Wardojo, “about Forest and Climate Change Anticipation”, in Tempo, Edisi Khusus 3 Tahun SBY-JK. 29 Oktober-4 November 2007. Wahyudi Wardojo, “about Forest and Climate Change Anticipation”, pp.137.

149 Herman Hidayat peat swamp forest Indonesia could protecting rain water in catchment’s produce 14,6 billion ton carbon dioxide areas. which currently saved in 4 million ha. This cooperation between both parties (local Its Implication government of Riau and Greenpeace), if There are two ecological impacts Riau could manage 4 million peat swamp which eventually affect on Tanjung forest ha from forest fires and conversion Puting areas in the near future. First, forest land into plantation will be paid illegal logging practice by local people and US$ 5 until 20 per ton/carbon dioxide big wood traders who own company for Another example of ‘carbon wood trading in local and export to emission reduction’ scheme trade overseas. Second, illegal mining which between Japan and Indonesia Power and affect on water contamination. Fajar Futura Company with supported by Illegal logging means as exploitation BPPT Agency (Technology Assessment forest products (timber) from forest and Application Agency) highlights of five product, conservation and protected project of micro hydro in Indonesia areas), through illegal log cutting and its (Cilencak, West Java with 1megawatt/ wood process networks.15 The intensive MW, Siteki and Blumbungan in illegal logging occurred in 1998 and the Banjarnegara, Middle Java 1,2 MW and early 2000s in reformation era. While 1,6 MW, Ketenger in Purwokerto 0,5 happened economic crisis in Indonesia MW and Rante Bala, South Sulawesi 2,4 which seriously affect in hard difficulties MW) (Kompas, November 10, 2007). of life among local people, unstable of This cooperation to reduce carbon social and politics, less of security and emission bought by Japan about 30,000 law sanction. This condition cause driving ton carbon dioxide per year under the factors on illegal logging in Tanjung scheme of CDM (Clean Development Puting National Park. The protected of Mechanism) under the Protocol Kyoto trees such as Ramin (Gonystylus mandatory.14 According to Irhan bancanus), Ulin (Eusideraxylon Febijanto, Coordinator of CDM Team in Zwageri), Meranti (Shorea sp), Keruing BPPT that “electric power Engine by (Dipterocarpus sp), etc., were seriously using micro-hydro energy is well know cut by local people and new comers. The ecological friendship and low investment big wood trader as well-known from compared with other renewable energy Tanjung Lingga Group, which leaded by resources”. But this scheme is actively Abdul Rasyid, actively involved as actor engage local people on managing of of illegal logging. The illegal logging electric distribution and get benefits of products after shipping from Seknyer energy and encourage local people to River to Kumai port subsequently maintain ecological conservation by exported to Singapore, Malaysia, China,

14 The estimation of carbon emission reduction market currently cost US $ 5-20 per ton.

150 National Park Management in Local Autonomy

Hongkong, and Taiwan.16 Obviously, pollution also affect into local people illegal logging practice in field, could be which previously use water for their identified actively by six main actors:(1) needs such as agricultural, take bath, wood traders (cukong), capital holders, kitchen water utilization, clothes washing, and bureaucrats and military); (2) local etc. The effect of mining activities which people and new comers; (3) factory produce Pasir Zirkon (Zirko sand) and holders (plywood, sawmill, molding, pulp Pasir Puya’ (Puya sand) as raw material and paper, etc.); (4) HPH holders or for ceramic and asbes. According to IPKH as thief and timber collectors; (5) Bappeda staf in Kotawaringin, there was government officers from forest agency; no legal ‘permission’ on mining and (6) and foreign businessmen. exploration. Obviously this mining The six actors above eventually exploration which carried out by migrant support in the operation by various parties workers from Java, Banjar, Bugis, such as Indonesian bureaucrat, soft Madura and some local people seriously sanction and regulation, and collusion affect local government income loss, between bureaucrats and businessmen. biological: soil erosion, forest degradation, The ecological impact from serious illegal water pollution, etc. This condition logging eventually affect into forest fires encourages biological and tourist cost in 1998-1999, flood in Sekonyer River in because of water pollution toward local rainy, drought in summer season, soil people from their primary and secondary erosion, loss of biodiversity, extinction of subsistent, supply water for their flora and fauna such as Orangutan and households affairs (take bath, clothes other animals. washing, etc.)-which finally obliged local On the other hand it happened people to buy water for their needs. ‘water pollution’ in Sekonyer River Focusing on tourism section income’s loss because of Indo Turba factory company happened in the resort places surrounding with previously running for CPO of oil in Kumai and Sekonyer village. The palm. This factory initially process CPO domestic and foreign tourists that usually from oil palm plantation which is located visited in July and September annually in upper Sekonyer River and eventually decreased just reached 865 persons for got damage on water treatment. It foreign and 393 for domestic in 2002, if happened ‘water pollution that seriously compared with tourist visited in 2001 affects animals in river such as Crocodile, reached fantastic 2.380 foreign and 506 turtle, various fishes in Sekonyer River- domestic. The income from ticket fees were among them died. The water reached Rp. 7.144.000,-.

15 Riza Suarga, Pemberantasan Illegal Logging: Optimisme di Tengah Praktek Premanisme Global, Tangerang: Wana Akasara Press, 2005, p. 6-7. 16 See Illegal Logging in Tanjung Putting National Park: And Update on the Final Cut Report, by Telapak and Ela NGOs (ELA: Environmental Investigation Agency), 2000, p. 13-19.

151 Herman Hidayat

Conclusion forest conservation through huge reforestation program and empowering The impacts of human activities on socio-economic program for local utilizing of fossils (oil and gas) species people. As told by Susilo Bambang and land changes (forest land Yudoyono, Indonesian President in the conservation into plantation areas) have seminar on ‘Climate Change Convention’ been causing ‘global warming’. This in New York, in September 2007 that he phenomenon currently happened on launched positive idea which supported ‘climate change’ which eventually affects by other developing countries ‘on the on reducing food products, water necessary to cooperate between distribution constraint, flood, drought, sea developing and advanced countries on water tide, and plantation diseases, etc. managing environmental issues’. According to Stem Review report that Therefore, this cooperation will be deforestation in developing countries established on forest sustainable such as Indonesia, Brazil, India, etc.’ management and even to formulate contributed gas emission (CO2) about 20 developing countries position together percent from global gas emission. who own tropical forest to realize Meanwhile, carbon sink which currently affirmative action on forest conservation. saved in forest ecosystem considered to Hopefully the ‘financial mechanism produce greater amount compared with scheme on RADD’ eventually agreed by saved in the atmosphere. From this participants in the COP-13 in the perspective, in order to establish international seminar on UNFCCC conducive sphere, international support (Convention Work Scheme United is very significant to protect existed Nations on Climate Change) in Bali forest areas. December 3-14, 2007. Actually Indonesia owns 23,5 million Currently forest degradation and hectares of forest conservation (national deforestation which causing by illegal park, Suaka Alam/natural forest for flora logging, forest land conservation to and fauna, etc), from total Indonesian plantation and mining activities, etc., forest areas 123,4 million hectares. This occurred in many districts in Indonesia. condition, actually contribute to produce Based on the report from Department carbon sink (O2) to protect ‘global Forestry officer that deforestation warming’. Therefore, implementation of reached 1,5 million ha annually. Certainly gas emission reduction through concept the real phenomenon of flood, drought, of REDD (reduction on forest soil erosion, climate changes, global degradation and deforestation) could warming, etc., provide us as serious eventually give positive ‘incentive’ into impacts on ecological disaster from developing countries who own ‘tropical forest degradation and deforestation. forest’. This incentive from advanced Therefore to overcome this serious threat countries by paying REDD (per ha/1 ‘political ecology’ concept that actively Euro) could be intensively utilized for engaged stakeholders’ movement from

152 National Park Management in Local Autonomy

central and local government and private Perspective. Japan. Kyoto sector as direct actors and NGOs University Press. whether local and international as well, Blaikie, P & Brookfield, H. 1987. Land academician, and local people as indirect Degradation and Society. London. actors are very significant to be involved Methuen Press. as integrated solution for national park Brookfield, H & Byron, Y. 1993. South- management. East Asia’s Environ-mental ‘Collaborative management’ which Future: The Search of currently promoted in reformation era as Sustainability. Singapore. Oxford alternative concept to be implemented University Press. on national park management is very Bryant, R. 1993. “ Forest Transfor- fascinating. It occurred on conflict of mations and Political Ecology in interest of national park management South-East Asia”, Global Ecology between central and local government. and Biogeography Letters. 3: 101- This concept highlights among 103. stakeholders role on promoting Bryant, R. 1991. “Putting Politics First: rehabilitation or reforestation program The Political Ecology of Sustainable and empowering socio-economic local Development”, Global Ecology people, apparently looked at as ‘positive and Biogeography Letters, 1: 164- solution’ to recover forest degradation 166. and deforestation in the near future. Bryant, R. 1998. “Power, Knowledge Therefore the commitment and and Political Ecology in the Third consistency to perform ‘affirmative World: A Review”, Progress in program’ among stakeholders such as the Physical Geography, 22 (1): 79- central government on encouraging 94. international donation agencies Bryant, Raymond. 2000. “Politicized cooperation, National Park Office and Moral Geographies: Debating NGOs which invited local people and the Biodiversity serious attention to establish “buffer Conservation and Ancestral Domain in zone” for agro-forestry program by local the Philippines”, Political government as means of ‘incomes Geography, 19 (6): 673-705. generating’ for local people is very Bryant, R & Bailey, Sinead. 1997. Third necessary to be realized in autonomy era. World Political Ecology. London. Routledge Press. Hidayat, H (ed.) (2006).Potensi Konflik REFERENCES Pemerintah Pusat dan Daerah dalam Pengelolaan Taman Abe, Ken-ichi. 2003.The Political Nasional (Studi Kasus Taman Ecology of Tropical Forests in Nasional Tanjung Puting, Kalteng Southeast Asia: Historical dan Kutai, Kaltim). Jakarta. LIPI Press.

153 Herman Hidayat

Inoue, Makoto & Isozaki, H. 2003. Conflict” in Syamsuddin Haris People and Forest Policy and (eds.), Decentralization, Demo- Local Reality in Southeast Asia, cratization and Accountability: the Russian Far East, and Japan. Local Government, Jakarta: AIPI London. Kluwer Academic and Partnership for Government Publishers. Reform in Indonesia. Kompas, , November 7,9,10, 14,and 19, Riza Suarga, Pemberantasan Illegal 2007. Media Indonesia, November Logging: Optimisme di Tengah 19, 2007. Praktek Premanisme Global, Peterson, Garry. 2000. “Political Ecology Tangerang: Wana Akasara Press, and Ecological Resilience: An 2005. Integration of Human and Ecolo- Soemarwoto,O.2001.Ekologi, gical Dynamics”, in Ecological Lingkungan Hidup dan Pemba- Economics, 35 (3): 323-336. ngunan.Jakarta. Djambatan. Peluso, Nancy Lee. 1992. “The Political Tempo, Edisi Khusus 3 Tahun SBY-JK. Ecology of Extraction and 29 Oktober-4 November 2007. Extractive Reserves In East Wahyudi Wardojo, “about Forest Kalimantan. Indonesia”, in Develop- and Climate Change Anticipation”, ment and Change, 23, (4), October. pp.137. Rocheleau (eds.). 1996. Feminist Yoshiki Seki, 2001 “The Political Ecology Political Ecology: Global Issues of the Philippine Restoration and Local Experiences.London. Program: ODA, Government and Routledge Press. Local People”, in Philippine Rauf, Maswadi. 2002. “Local Political Science Journal, 22 (45). Government and Horizontal

154