The Impact of Community Forestry schemes on rural livelihoods Evidence from Gunung Kidul regency, Java, Indonesia Master thesis Written by Leontien Kraaijeveld Sustainable Development - International Development Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University Utrecht, the Netherlands Supervisor: Dr. Paul Burgers 1 The Impact of Community Forestry schemes on rural livelihoods Evidence from Gunung Kidul regency, Java, Indonesia Written by Leontien Kraaijeveld Student Nr: 3138003 Email address: [email protected] Master thesis Sustainable Development - International Development Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University Supervisor: Dr. Paul Burgers Host University: Universitas Gadjah Mada Faculty of Forestry Yogyakarta, Indonesia Supervisor: Dr. Oka Karyanto Date: 12-07-2013 2 3 Acknowledgements This report is the result of a graduation research for the research master Sustainable Development of the Utrecht University. Furthermore, it is the successful ending of a field work period carried out in collaboration with University of Gadjah Mada (UGM) in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Conducting this research would not have been possible without the great support of a number of people. To begin with, I would like to express my gratitude to Professor Paul Burgers of Utrecht University, for his exceptional enthusiasm and motivation on forestry topics. His expertise and constructive feedback have been very valuable during this research. Next, many thanks are rewarded to Professor Oka Karyanto from UGM. Beside the useful feedback he provided on the research, he has been very cooperative and hospitable during my stay in Yogyakarta. Then, I would like to thank Ari Susanti whose expertise on forestry matters in Indonesia have been of great support. Next to that, I would like to give special thanks to Miss Ais and Miss Sari from the forestry department of UGM. I am most grateful for their hospitality, generous assistance, and moments of laughter during working hours. Many thanks to Lely Puspita and Citra Gilang Qur’ani who did an outstanding job in translating during the field work in Gunung Kidul regency. Their great motivation and interest have been very helpful. Last but not least, I would like to thank Inggrid Ernesia and Lely Puspita who greatly contributed to an unforgettable stay in Indonesia. Leontien Kraaijeveld Utrecht, The Netherlands 4 5 Executive Summary Community Forestry (CF) has received much attention from academic scholars and policy-makers as a method to tackle the widespread forest degradation and related poverty issues in forest villages. Worldwide, Community Forestry, which is defined as a situation where communities intensively manage forest resources, still has to meet its high expectations. Enhanced knowledge on the effectiveness of CF-schemes is vital for improved policy and implementation of the CF-schemes. This research focuses on two different types of CF-schemes in Gunung Kidul regency on Java, Indonesia. These are Hutan Rakyat (HR), which is Privately Owned Forests (POF) and Hutan Kemasyarakatan (HKm), which is a state-led Community Forestry Managment (CFM). Hutan Rakyat is tree cultivation on private farmland. Trees are planted and managed by the farmer or community and harvested when the farmer is in need of money. In HKm-programs, farmers are involved in the state forest management for a period of 35 years. The profit-sharing arrangements of the produced wood are 60% for the farmer, and 40% for the state. In addition to this, HKm-members are allowed to grow crops in between the tree stands for their own needs. The first research aim is to further investigate the impact of CF-programs on rural livelihoods, including both CF-members and non-members. The second aim is to understand the threats and opportunities that lie ahead in reaching poverty alleviation through CF-schemes. Special attention is paid to the impact of community forestry programs on the food production in the research area. To serve the first research aim, the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) has been applied in the form of a comparative livelihood analysis. This model implies that human well-being can be measured by means of 5 forms of capital, namely human, social, natural, physical and financial capital. All these forms of capital are defined by a set of indicators, as explained in this research. The comparative livelihood analysis is applied to indicate the differences in capital between CF-members and non-members. Data gathering has been conducted in 4 villages by means of a household survey comprising 80 households; 4 Focus Group Discussions; and 5 interviews with key informants. The second research aim has been attained by conducting a literature study and through a set of 8 interviews with experts in forestry or agriculture related topics. The results of the comparative livelihood analysis showed that non-members have less access to livelihood capital than members. This particularly counts for HR-members and non-members. The difference in access to land, which is an element of natural capital, is the main contributor. In fact, more access to land results in higher agricultural revenues and, through this, higher access to financial capital. In turn, the higher financial capital explains that members are better represented in secondary schooling, which is an element of human capital, and have better access to agricultural equipment, which partly determines physical capital. As for HKm- members and non-members, the difference in access to land is less distinct. For these reasons, no significant differences are found with respect to financial capital. The only remarkable difference between HKm-members and non- members refers to social capital, determined by the access to social networks. HKm-members are better represented in social organizations thanks to their involvement in HKm. On the contrary, non-members concentrate their livelihoods more carefully on off-farm activities and hence generate higher income from it. Furthermore, it is found that although non-members have less access to most types of livelihood capitals, non-members are not disadvantaged by the CF-schemes. Rather, it is seen that CF-schemes have enhanced the livelihood capital of members and that this mere fact explains the difference between members and non-members. Due to the high level of mutual respect between members and non-members, it is concluded that the introduction of CF- schemes does not disturb the social cohesion within the villages. 6 So far, forest rehabilitation objectives are largely achieved. However, the potential of both CF- schemes in alleviating poverty is far from being reached. Hutan Rakyat has led to socio-economic development into a certain extent, however, not to the extent in which it has reached its potential. The main problem in HR is the practice of immature cutting of trees that is applied by the local farmers in order to meet financial needs. This practice deteriorates the growth process of the tree and results in the production of low-quality timber. Although the smallholders of Gunung Kidul regency have the potential to provide for large supply good quality teak to meet the needs of large scale certified timber industries, there is a lack of organization and financial means to realize this. Therefore, HR-farmers need a financial support to produce sustainable and good quality timber to gain higher market prices. Effective measures would be to create joint management of smallholders and wood certification schemes. Next to that, the principal reason for immature cutting is the need for financial means and the lack of alternatives to acquire an income. Therefore, HR-farmers need financial support from other stakeholders to overcome the depletion of tree stocks for financial needs. With respect to HKm, it appears difficult to conclude whether the poverty alleviation objective will be obtained before the end of the program. First, there is evidence of HKm-programs affecting the local farming opportunities. Crop cultivation alternatives and other forms of livelihood support are necessary in order to compensate for those negative effects. Other challenges involved in reaching the poverty alleviation objective are first, to create more security in profit-sharing arrangements. Farmers are uncertain whether profits will eventually be distributed. They fear that changes in political colour might change the state’s aspirations to benefit the local population. Second, the lack of genuine transfer of power and rights for forest resources do not realize local empowerment, which is crucial in poverty alleviation. 7 Content Executive Summary.................................................................................................................................. 6 List of Abbreviations .............................................................................................................................. 12 List of Figures ......................................................................................................................................... 13 List of Tables .......................................................................................................................................... 14 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 16 1. Theoretical Framework ...................................................................................................................... 20 1.1 Introduction