Transition from Native Forest Rubbers to Hevea Brasiliensis (Euphorbiaceae) Among Tribal Smallholders in Borneo Author(S): Michael R
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Transition from Native Forest Rubbers to Hevea brasiliensis (Euphorbiaceae) among Tribal Smallholders in Borneo Author(s): Michael R. Dove Source: Economic Botany, Vol. 48, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1994), pp. 382-396 Published by: Springer on behalf of New York Botanical Garden Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4255664 . Accessed: 14/09/2011 03:49 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. New York Botanical Garden Press and Springer are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic Botany. http://www.jstor.org TRANSITION FROM NATIVE FOREST RUBBERS TO HEVEA BRAsILIENSIS (EUPHORBIACEAE) AMONG TRIBAL SMALLHOLDERS IN BORNEO' MICHAEL R. DOVE Dove, Michael R. (East-West Center, Honolulu, HA 96848). TRANSmONFROM NATIVE FOREsT RUBBERS TO HEVEA BRASILIENSISAMONG TRIBAL SMALLHOLDERSIN BoRNEo. EconomicBotany 48(4):382-396. 1994. This is a study of the historictransition in SoutheastAsia, in particular Borneo,from the exploitationof nativeforest rubbersto Para rubber(Hevea brasiliensis,Eu- phorbiaceae).During the second half of the nineteenthcentury, booming international markets subjectedforest rubbersto more intensiveand competitiveexploitation. At the same time, the settlementpatterns of tribalrubber gatherers were becoming more sedentary and theiragriculture more intensive.Hevea spp. was bettersuited to these changed circumstancesthan the native forest rubbers,largely because it was cultivatednot naturallygrown. The status of Hevea spp. in SoutheastAsia as a cultigen,as opposedto a naturalforestproduct, and thepolitical-economic implicationsof this helps to explain the contrastinghistories of smallholderrubber producers in the New and Old Worlds.This study offers an historicalperspective on currentdebates regarding relationsbetween forest resources,forest peoples,and the state. PERALiAN KARET HUTAN ALAw MENJADI PERKEBUNANKARET RAKYAT OLEH/DALAM PETANI- PETANISUKU DI KALIMANTAN.Penelitian ini mempelajarisejarah peralihan di Asia Tenggara, khususnyaKalimantan, dari eksploitasikaret hutan menjadipenanaman karet Para (Hevea brasiliensis, Euphorbiaceae).Selama pertengahankedua abad ke sembilanbelas,melonjaknya pasar internasionalmenyebabkan karet hutandi eksploitasilebih intensifdan kompetitif Pada saat yang sama, pola pemukimanpemulung-pemulung karet hutan menjadilebih menetapdan sistem pertanian mereka menjadilebih intensif Penanaman Hevea spp. lebih sesuai terhadap peralihan ini dibandingdengan karet hutan, terutama karena Hevea spp. tersebutditanam bukantumbuh secara alami. Status Hevea spp. di Asia Tenggarasebagai suatu tanamanyang diusahakan(kultigen) yang berlawanandengan pohon hutan alam, dan akibatekonomi-politik untuk ini, menerangkanperbandingan sejarah pengelolahan Hevea spp. di Asia dan Amerika Selatan. Penelitian ini juga memberikansuatu pandangan sejarahpada perdebatansaat ini tentang hubungansumberdaya hutan, suku terasingyang hidupdi dalam hutan, dan kebijak- sanaan pemerintah. Key Words: rubber/latex; jelutong; non-timber forest products; Dayak; Kalimantan; Southeast Asia. The adoption early in the twentieth century of dustry's early years in the second decade of the Para rubber [Hevea brasiliensis (Willd. ex Adr. twentieth century, smallholders have gained de Juss.) Muell.-Arg.] by the interior, tribal peo- ground ever since and now-with 2.6 million ples of Indonesia is one of the century's signal hectares held by over 1 million households- examples of spontaneous diffusion and adoption they are responsible for three-fourths of total of technological innovation in agriculture. It has production (CPIS 1993:3; Government of In- been called "one of the most remarkable periods donesia 1992:230-232). This success is all the of development in the history of agriculture" (Al- more notable because it occurred among people len and Donnithorne 1957, cited in Geertz 1963: who have been labeled as resistant to innovation 1 13). Whereas estates held a commanding share and development by both colonial and post-co- of Indonesia's rubber production during the in- lonial governments, and because these govern- ments did nothing to support this adoption and a great deal to hinder it. Why was rubber adopted ' Received 7 May 1993; accepted 14 June 1994. with such alacrity and against such odds? Part Economic Botany 48(4) pp. 382-396. 1994 ? 1994, by The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY 10458 U.S.A. 1994] DOVE: RUBBER AMONG BORNEOSMALLHOLDERS 383 of the answer involves the complementarity of Species: Native II* Exotic rubber with swidden agriculture, which I have Exploitation:Gathering ll* Planting analyzed in a separate study (Dove 1993a); but the rest of the answer, and my concern here, lies Control: European Il* Dayak in the historical antecedents of rubber and the Terminology: Gutta "'. Getah political-economic context of the transition from Fig. 1. The transition from native forest rubbers them to rubber. to Hevea spp. Most analysts of the development of small- holder cultivation of rubber (and other export naturally, Hevea spp. (an exotic) had to be plant- crops) look to comparatively recent historical ed. The act of planting greatly the events for its explanation. For example, Booth strengthened position of tribal rubber vis-a-vis the (1988:205) attributed this development to the producers state, during a period when the focus of contest expansion of Indonesia's trade with Europe (be- was shifting from inter-tribal to tribal-state. This fore which, she concluded, the land and labor offers an historical on involved must have been "under-utilized"). study perspective current non-tim- Cramb (1988:107) suggested that the develop- debates regarding the development of ment of cash-cropping in Sarawak was stimulat- ber forest products, and relations between forest the ed by the exhaustion of primary forest at the turn resources, forest peoples, and state. The data upon of the century, leading to inadequate swidden which this analysis is based harvests. Dillon (1985:116) argued that the de- were gathered during several periods of research velopment of smallholder rubber cultivation in in West and South Kalimantan, which included tandem with rice cultivation was due to the wide- an extended stay with the Kantu', an Ibanic- spread abundance of land in Indonesia at the turn speaking tribe of swidden agriculturalists. Hevea of the century. A shortcoming common to all of spp. is one of the Kantu's major sources of cash these analyses is that they assume commodity or tradable commodities. production was without precedent in the tribal and peasant economies that adopted it. In fact HISTORY there was a precedent: the gathering of natural forest latexes, which was one element in a tra- TRIBAL TRADE dition of trade in non-timber forest products that The once-widespread idea that monetary re- is of great antiquity in Southeast Asia and was lations are foreign to traditional, tribal societies an important factor in the development of its is increasingly questioned today, with the linkage societies. of tribal peoples to broader capitalist relations I suggest that Hevea spp. was adopted so readi- of production and exchange increasingly seen as ly in Indonesia because it filled a niche that pre- the rule rather than the exception (Parry and viously was filled by the native forest rubbers Bloch 1989). As Padoch and Vayda (1983:311) (Fig. 1). The forest rubbers were subjected to wrote some time ago, "A long-standing and ac- great pressure during the second half of the nine- tive involvement in trade is not at all atypical teenth century, when booming international among the supposedly isolated and self-sufficient markets brought new players and more intensive groups of the world's humid tropics." In South- systems of exploitation to bear on them. At the east Asia, as in most parts of the humid tropics, same time, the gradual evolution of the tribal this involvement historically focused on non- rubber gatherers toward more sedentary settle- timber forest products. Although merchants, local ment patterns and more intensive agriculture was courts, and international trading powers all played transforming the niche into which the forest rub- key roles in trade of these products, the initial bers had formerly fitted. Hevea spp. suited the gathering was usually done by forest-dwelling transformed niche better than the forest rubbers, tribesmen. This was a key role, with critical im- and it was protected against some of the pressures plications for the development of both the trade being applied to the forest rubber resource. and the tribesmen themselves. As Cleary and Whereas the forest rubbers were associated with Eaton (1992:59-60) wrote, "To conceptualize the a mobile settlement pattern, Hevea spp. was bet- important jungle trade as an unsophisticated and ter associated with a sedentary pattern; and, of anachronistic part of the 'traditional' economy great importance, whereas the forest rubbers grew is both misleading and inaccurate ... the trade 384 ECONOMICBOTANY [VOL. 48 was economically and socially sophisticated, as swidden cultivation and trade-oriented com-