Acceleration of Customary Boundary Mapping for the Revision of West Papua Province Spatial Plan

Keys messages: 

1. It is crucial for the government both province and district level to established the regulation that recognize and protect the rights of Papuan IPs and their assets in West Papua. 
2. Sets up mechanism, procedures and system of integrating rights into official land use and forests development are crucial in West Papua to enable administrative security and arrangement towards right of IPs and their mission to manage their resources. 
3. A multi stakeholder platform is urgently needed in province to works on acceleration customary boundary mapping (at tribes and clan level) and continues mentoring and capacity building to customary community organisation/assembly to be able to take parts in the current development demand.

Coalition of CSO/NGO in West Papua whose works for IPs Land Right issue on their last meeting has criticized the development and implementation of West Papua spatial plan that not transparent and ignores the participation of the public as mandated in National Spatial Plan Law - law no 26 of 2007. This plan also considered has ignore the existance of Papuan IPs and their legal right as regulated in Special Autonomy Law - Law No 21 of 2001 and it doesn't clearly regulate about the position, roles and benefits to the IPs. They also criticized that the plan are tend to reflect the interests of policy makers and natural resources extractor concession without build proper safeguard system to the community and environment. By the time according to them massive social and environmental destruction will happen if the government not doing quick revision, evaluation with this facts.

The conversion of Forests for the Residences Building in Manokwari 

West Papua Province Government is been challenged and called to re-build the proper spatial plan development that reflect both economic growth interests with the protection of IPs right and environmental function. This should works in participatory approaches by enggaging different stakeholder includes IPs in the development. Now days problem in poverty and inequity of benefit can become the starting points to reflects on the revision process. Stakeholder needs to come with the same understanding that "forests is about us, sustainability is about future and benefits is about community". In this dilemma, of course both NGO/CSO Coalition and government needs to seats in one table to discuss and formulates what tools do they use and apply to ensure the revision of spatial plan are reflected the worries about social and environmental collapse in the province.

CSO/NGO should also be brave to says that integration and acceleration of customary boundary maps can helps government get the information about community, their land uses practices and their vision of management. So land allocation, protection and production zone in the spatial plan also reflect to the community interest and their long term management vision. Customary boundary mapping has widely applied in West Papua for about 15 years with several key results. From my data, about 8 organization have worked for in the last 8 years and produced 1,2 million ha of tribes customary boundary maps or about 12% of total west Papua Province administrative area. As addition about 11 clans boundaries have also been mapped. Some of them in the cases of Sira and Manggroholo village in South Sorong, were used by the communities to get legal access to manage the resources in their customary territory. Of course the homework now is about mainstreaming and integrate mapping in the government agenda for spatial plan and the detail land uses plan implementation.

See: https://tapakbatas.blogspot.co.id/2017/09/ingin-tahu-apa-saja-pendekatan-pemetaan.html


Spatial Plan and Demand on Land For The Development 

As the poor and backward region in Indonesia, the government has putting a lot of attention and funding to speed up the growth and access of benefit to the people. Infrastructure building, providing of public facilities and establishing of new autonomy region are came of as the priorities for Papua. Direct implication of this policy and priorities program are definitely in increasing demand to land and resources that support the the acceleration of the development and target of economic growth. Here the spatial plan playing it crucial roles to frame and regulate extent to which are land allocation can be applied but not create new social and environmental problem.

West Papua spatial plan has moved with the official judgement by the approval of Provincial Regulation No 4 of 2013. No proper consultation, public assessment and landscape check had been criticized as the act against the big spatial plan law. the exclusion of IPs participation for the Papua People Assembly (MRP) was the ignorance of the the right if Papua IPs. No information about IPs right was emphasized that government is not serious see Papuan as the land lord and owner of the resources - express the MRP representative in the CSO/NGO Meeting, 2014. This ignorance will lead to serious impact especially social conflict that may easily to appear when there is any development that applied in one particular areas with out proper FPIC and negotiation to the appropriate right holder.

It was an ironic; by the time IPs land right information are missing, the government prioritized the allocation of land and forests to the attractive concession by inviting them in putting their data and information. Allocation of forests function (protection, production and no forests allocation) are highly influenced by the active plan and on going demand from private concession. As reported by Forests Designation Body (BPKH) on their 2015 report that there are 18 active logging concession in the areas of 2,595,940 ha and allocation for non forests uses (plantation) in the areas of  356,436.10 belong to 23 concession.

By the time Provincial Government conducted the public assessment there was not any intend to seats with keys government leader and stakholder whose working on the ground to create project of forests allocation for community. Gaps between village development units, protection of communities assets and simple thinking of big concession driven on economic growth seem has putted aside the willing to to analysis on how pro community forestry or pro community land uses program must be included in the provincial development plan.

As addition to that the decentralize and village development priorities has emerge as another layers of spatial development challenge. Establishment of new village, sub districts and even demand of new province have and will directly implicates to the forests reserve and the rights assets of IPs. In the last 10 years at leas there about about 5 new districts established in West Papua of of which hundreds of new villages and thousand KM of roads are build to connect the region. Tablod Jubi.com article of 26 February 2016 mentioned another new plan in the national government to establish 10 new autonomy region (District and provinces).

Process of Developing Customary Boundary Maps in Baliem Valley - PAPUA

Customary Boundary Mapping Can Be a Tool To Help Putting Community Land Right and The Resources Management Vision In The Official Land Use and Forests Development Plan

Papua Special Autonomy Law No 21 of 2001 word no 43 has straightly note that Papua and West Papua Provincial Government must recognize, protect, empower and promote the the right of IPs and legally access to manage the resources within their territorial right. So putting customary right and and the resources management vision of Papuan IPs in West Papua Province become the core part of implementing special autonomy law. Maps with all detail information it can presented has been acknowledge as the best tools to realize this. Proper customary boundary maps can provide at least information about : (1) who are the right holder, (2) local traditional community zoning, (3) important place for community both social and economic, (4) vision of long term resources management and (5) agreement from surrounding community to prevent land right conflict. In many cases maps and mapping process has become a vehicle to build the social unity and consolidation within customary community.

Until today, from my inventories there are 6 tribes and sub-tribes in west Papua those who territories have been mapped - of which they cover are of 1,2 million ha and cross over all forests function regulates by the government. One of which is Maps of Knasaimos Tribe in South Sorong where community in the tribes had long experienced with massive illegal logging and become a victim of forests concession. Mapping was initiated to protect their territories and puts sustainable vision to manage it. Until today two clan in Two villages: Sira and Manggroholo have moving with they 3,800 ha of Social Forestry Sites designated in 2014.

What NGO/NGO are learning from Knasimos is maps has lead to bring community engage in official forests development agenda has helps community to sets the sustainable use plan to generate economic and social benefit.

Integration of IPs maps into official forests and land use development plan in cases of Papua Province have helps government to control the allocation of land, optimizing the role of community to monitor the implementation of any particular forest and land uses concession and a reference to assess the division of forests function. Village development, security of land right assets have emerging as the new discources that the province government will do by using the customary boundary maps been developed so far.



Reference

• Pusaka, 2014. Papua Damai: Lindungi Ruang Hidup Masyarakat Adat Papua
• 2 Reghi Perdana, 2016. IMPLIKASI PERUBAHAN PEMBAGIAN URUSAN PEMERINTAHAN BERDASARKAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 23 TAHUN 2014 TENTANG PEMERINTAHAN DAERAH. Biro Hukum Kementerian PPN/Bappenas
• http://pusaka.or.id/2014/03/mrp-papua-baratmenyesalkan-rtrwp-tidak-mengakomodir-ruang-adat/
• 6 BPKH Wilayah XVII Papua Barat, PENGGUNAAN, PEMANFAATAN DAN PERUBAHAN PERUNTUKAN KAWASAN HUTAN UNTUK PENGEMBANGAN SEKTOR LAIN. Bahan Presentasi. Disampaikan pada Rapat Koordinasi Pemantapan Kawasan Hutan Sorong – 30 November 2015 
• http://www.cahayapapua.com/tahun-ini-sengketa-tapalbatas-antar-kabupatenkota-diselesaikan/
• http://tabloidjubi.com/2016/02/23/ruu-sepuluh-dob-papua-barat-sedang-digodok/
• Menurut BPS – Provinsi Papua Barat Tahun 2015, angka kemiskinan di Papua Barat adalah 25,82% atau sekitar 225.463 jiwa. Dan sekitar 211.402 jiwa diantaranya adalah masyarakat Papua yang hidup di kampung-kampung.
• http://www.mongabay.co.id/2017/03/09/cerita-dari-kampung-sira-manggroholo-upaya-warga-bentengi-hutan-papua-dari-serbuan-sawit/
• Yumte Yunus, 2013. Mendorong Pengelolaan Hutan Bersama Masyarakat di Papua Barat. Catatan Progress, Rencana Pekerjaan, Pembelajaran, dan Tantangan di Lapangan Untuk Menjadi Perhatian Semua Pihak. The Samdhana Institute. Bogor – Indonesia.
• Wibowo Agung, Erwin.K.Dwi, et.all. 2015. PENETAPAN HUTAN ADAT MENUJU PENGAKUAN HAK MASYARAKAT ADAT. Kertas Kebijakan. Perkumpulan HuMa Indonesia dan Pusat Studi Hukum Adat Djojodigoeno-FH UGM

Read More

Social Forestry Task Forces of West Papua Province, Established

One day workshop on Social Forestry in Billy Jaya Hotel Manokwari, 8 November 2016 has established the Provincial Task Forces to works facilitating the Social Forestry program in the Province. As confirmed by Mr Sahala Simanjutak - the Head of Social Forestry and Environmental Partnership Maluku and Papua Regional Body – following the national indicative maps they targeting to reach 254,581 ha of social forestry areas by the end of 2019. The social forestry program here are cover 5 programs: village forests (Hutan Desa), Community Plantation Forests (Hutan Tanaman Rakyat), Community Forestry (Hutan Kemasyarakatan), Customary Forests (Hutan Adat) and Partnership forests management scheme (Kemitraan) though empowerment block in the Forests Management Units (KPH). On his opening remarks he then noted that the task force (pokja) that designed as multi-stakeholder and cross actor forum to works with the responsibility since preparation, verification, capacity building until other technical supports that relevant to the business development of social forestry program. The establishment of this task force is legally regulated on the Regulation of Social Forestry and Environmental Partnership director no P.01/PKPS/PP/PSKL.0/5/2016 about the Implementation Guidance of Social Forestry Task Force.

In further, Mr Runaweri Hendrik – The head of West Papua Province Forestry Department emphasized that we have to seriously push this task forces and make it works to facilitate the target on Social Forestry. All forester in Papua been challenging to show forests are still exist and contribute a lot to development growth and the positive increasing of community livelihood changes. “Our role is to protect and manage the forests sustainably. In the relation to climate changes, forests hold crucial role counting by it covers. The social forestry program should also able to works under this clear targets in maintaining the forests reserve and covers” he added before formally opened the event.

There is no clear information about number of units that targeted to be built in West Papua Province but the social forestry units on its indicative maps has putting targets 254,581 ha spreads in 10 district. Of which about 14,550 of units has got the villages forests licenses. In detail the following matrix show the overall targets of Social forests sites in West Papua Province until the end of 2019:

No	District	Area (Ha)	Legal Approval (ha)	Village/Units
1	Fak Fak	27.062	-
2	Kaimana	35.788	11,005	Esania
3	Manokwari	23.037	-
4	Manokwari Selatan	2.727	-
5	Maybrat	1.840	-
6	Sorong	333	-
7	Sorong Selatan	18.901	3,545	Sira and Manggroholo
8	Tambrauw	12.403	-
9	Teluk Bintuni	122.045	-
10	Teluk Wondama	10.444	-
	Jumlah	254.581	14,550	3 Units

Participant that in total about 26 representing Government, NGO/CSO, university and private were agreed that the task forces should be the multistakeholder units that bring all key forestry actor into the loop of developing social forests program. Follow the Regulation of Social Forestry and Environmental Partnership director the composition of the task forces are not longer than 20 people, with head of the Forestry Department as the leader. During an hour discussion, the workshop has came up with list of recommendation and peoples who are appointing to join the task forces. From NGO in West Papua, there are Paradisea Foundation, Bentara Papua, Greenpeace, Samdhana Institute and AMAN Sorong Raya. The discussion also identifies about keys major issues that the task should pay an attention on:

1. Review and update the current indicative maps into existing potential social forests maps should become the early steps the Task Force should do. Because the current social forestry maps are developed based on the criteria and indicators that not yet considered number of units that still progressing to apply for the licenses. So assessment in to capture the tabular and spatial information is the keys activities in this partReview and update the current indicative maps into existing potential social forests maps should become the early steps the Task Force should do. Because the current social forestry maps are developed based on the criteria and indicators that not yet considered number of units that still progressing to apply for the licenses. So assessment in to capture the tabular and spatial information is the keys activities in this part
2. One of the challenges that influence the slow progress of social forestry program is on local government and community awareness and understanding of this policy and its technical regulation. The task force is responsible to conducts this awareness and socialization down to the districts government
3. Technical data base of social province in the provinces is crucial so developing a data base that include data of customary boundary territories and putting it into government system is the steps that we should do
4. Social forestry in the new regulation is cross forests function in which not only in production and protection forests are the licenses is applied but also in conservation area. Zoning and land uses spatial plan of the community together with their spatial territories maps is needs to understand extent to which are social forests sites in West Papua are potentially to be build
5. FMU/KPH is strongly recommended to cover all the social forestry initiative. They will provide capacity building to the community whose social forestry initiative are working
6. Bringing in private sector and commercial forests product players to become the co-partners of community would help them in product marketing and helps in setup stable markets flows include capacity supports
7. Customary Forests/Hutan Adat in west Papua context needs to be discussed further so the task forces based on Regulation will have a technical verification guideline to helps local government/community or NGO who are initiating customary forests licenses

Indicative areas of Social Forestry in West Papua delineated with white polygon in the Map

Read More

Preparing Sira - Manggroholo Village Forests Facilitator

Training Participant, Bentara Papua, Province Department and Community from Sira-Manggroholo. Photo: Bentara Papua

In Manokwari, 18 - 20 August 2016 Bentara Papua (local NGO based in Manokwari) in collaboration with Samdhana Institute and supported by Good Energies Foundation facilitated intensive training to understand A - Z of village forests policy and facilitation requirement. The overall objective of this 3 days training was to build a complete understanding and knowledge about village forests scheme and sets up collaborative ways forward of field activities in Sira and Manggroholo - South Sorong. Eko Dharmawan the village forests facilitator whose been working in this policy and facilitation since 2010 with Flora and Fauna International (FFI) taking a lead of all the process and discussion in Bentara Office. Join in this training the representation from Sira and Manggroholo - the two villages in West Papua that continuously working with Bentara Papua, Green Peace and Samdhana Institute on village forests facilitation. They includes: the head of two villages, the field facilitator Mr Arkilaus Kladit, chief of village forests management body (LPHD) of both villages.  

Both Sira and Manggroholo have got the legal designation areas through Ministry of Forestry Regulation (SK Menhut) in 18 September 2014 that cover total areas of 3,545 ha. Recently they are waiting for the governor Decree about forests management licenses that submitted in May 2016 to secure the legally of Long Term Village Forests Management and its implementation.  Mr. Herman Remetwa the head of Community Development units at Forestry Department of West Papua Province in his session mentioned that it licenses is now in the table of legal unit at Government office and expected to be released by September before the ministry of forestry decree ended. In addition he added that it is a time to build a productive collaboration to help community in Sira and Manggroholo as model for West Papua. Forestry Department at provinces level will puts on program and their budgets to co-partnering in supports this initiative so this bridge of activities are a positive momentum to connecting the program.

Eko was comprehensively shared the knowledge that written in the village regulation and experience he and FFI gots from Kalimantan. Some keys component he was presented were:

• Definition and principle values of villages forests and it relevant to Sira and Manggroholo contexts. He summarizing the detail norms with keys prerequisites that each facilitator should understand about village forests. 
• Long term management plan of village forests (RPHD) includes the ways how village management body (LPHD) how take a lead of the process in the ground. Making sure that the plans are properly developed based on specific potential products in the villages are the core. The plan should also clearly describe the business plans and detail land zoning arrangement. 
• Forests products uses, marketing and their legal contexts in village forests scheme 
• Social consolidation by the community - taking case from Kapuas Hulu that he facilitating. It is going well because community is doing this policy seriously and lead the process on the ground 
• Collaboration with keys government units. Specifically the roles of Ministry of Forests, Forestry Department at Province/District and Village development units at provinces and district. Eko is also shared the possibilities of access fund through village fund that since last year have been distributed. 

All the training was closed with a reflection by each participant. Yunus Yumte, the Samdhana Papua Program coordinator joined in the last day shared his knowledge and organization reflection they learned from the project in Kaimana that closed in 2014 that basically about commitment and active participation of all keys village forests actor. He also reminding the community that they are in the front line to determine whether this initiative would works progressively of not and advised both Bentara and Village forests management body to putting high attention of creating new facilitator from the villages. As addition Mr. Arkilaus kladit raised their expectation to see these two village could works well with active facilitation by Bentara Papua, Green Peace and Samdhana Institute. 

Read More

Opini : Sago in Papua and Their Current Investment

Natural Sago Plots in Kais South Sorong, West Papua

In the new Year of 2016, Indonesia President Mr. Joko Widodo (JOKOWI) visited and officially opened the biggest modern Sago Factory in Indonesia belong to PT. Perhutani Persero. Eventhough there is no clear info who is the owners and legal manager of the concession now but since 2013 about 40,000 ha of Sago plots in Kais, Metamani and Kokoda of South Sorong District has been granted for big commercial sago industry. As confirmed by the the General Manager PT Perhutani in Kompas January 1/2016 that they targeting to manages 30,000 Ton of sago starch every year. The total 150billion rupiah investment is targeted to gets the annual revenue up to 100 billion rupiah from their overall annual production. Japan, chine and Taiwan become the targets of investment markets that PT Perhutani has putting.

But there are big question appearing here at the customary community those in de facto claim the sago plots as their land rights about the benefits and cost of impacts they would gets from the investment. Jokowi on his opening speech pointed out his wishes to the industry could bring social changes at the community level. Despite of their positive targets in bringing up economic growth and revenues to the state the high targets of exploitation of natural sago could creates ecological problems or event raw material scarcity. West Papua provinces actually has experienced with sago Industry in Arandai Teluk Bintuni about 12 year ago ran by PT Jayanti Group that exploited large number of sago trunk without proper replanting or sustainable plantation plan. The overcapacity of Industry and in consistent calculation of natural sago production make the quick scarcity from the initial planned. 

Papua is the mother of Sago and become the most richest sago plots in the world with total about 1,25 million ha as confirmed by Bakorsurtanal in 1996 and remain validated by Flach, Karafir et all  in 2006. Jayapura, Waropen, South Sorong, Bintuni Bay and Merauke are the major place with larges sago plots. Not only large in areas the sago in Papua is also richest in species or variety. 2006 International sago symposium in Jayapura on their report showing surprising number which are more that 30 sago specifies in Papua with Metroxylon Sagu and Metroxylon rumphii as the two famous species and their spread from the coast line to 700 m above sea level. When Yunus Yumte did his research in South Sorong 8 years ago he found that mature sago trees could reach the diameter of 64 cm and tall without leave up to 27 m within he calculated that total sago powder that community could produce from one mature sago tree up to 800kg. This mostly harvested and extracted in 2 weeks using traditional technique.

Ecologically sago plots/forests are part of the vulnerable ecosystem because it is the natural wall for sea water infiltration, abrasion because of gradual wave, and regulator of fresh water to the people. Sago is also home of big number of biodiversity includes birds, swamp snake and wild pigs. Socially sago is the symbol of culture for Papuan, natural building material and source of foods for people. Which means changing sago purposes into industry will enormously changes its social and ecological functions. So expanding sago plantation in Papua is about understanding the social and ecological vulnerability of changes.

Sago for local Foods, Traditional extraction by IPs in Kais, South Sorong - West Papua

From my perspective and understanding the natural sago behavior that have limited lifetime the concept and designing of sustainable sago plantation with social orientation may needs to be putted as the key principle on its investment protocol before expanding the licenses. The correlation of community livelihood, rights and claim to sago plots should also aknowledge important to meets what Jokowi has wished. At least several early steps should be build includes:

1. Clearly understanding the ecological behavior and function of sago plots in each targeted investment sites. Place like Kais, Kokoda and Metamani for me is high vulnerable with floods because of theirs geographic position and waters that stored in sago plots. The plots that also in unity with swamp forest includes nipah palm trees is a home of large number of biodiversity. 
2. Sago for sustainable local foods stock. Delineating and secure the community foods plots at the beginning is crucial to provide a guaranty for sustainable local foods. large scale sago plantation should able to maintain the values and cultures of social assets includes local food security for generation. Not captured all the plots for industry and transform people consumption patterns into other non sago foods
3. Sago for mitigate the impact of climate changes to secure carbon in big amount. Even though only few study available about the carbon stock in Sago but sago that growth wildly in the swamp forests secure big amount of carbon. Transforming sago to other land uses purposes would directly realize amount of carbon to the air.

As addition to the since Sago is one of Papua symbol so having a regulation that protects and monitor the uses of sago for industry and legally binding to apply sustainable management plantation approaches are crucial to maintain the social, ecological and cultural value of Sago to Papuan. Further understanding the rights of IPs and their dependency to sago production are crucial to appropriately develop a partnership management mechanism and agreeing on benefit sharing of the rights to land and sago plant.

Read More

FMU in Biak Shaping Up the Basic Concept of Forests Development Partnership

The establishment of Eco-Tourism Management Body in Sebse – Village of Eastern Biak, Papua Province of Indonesia has shown how FMU in Biak gradually developed a good pathway on creating partnership scheme with customary community whose claim the rights over land, forests and resource inside the FMU designated areas. Founding of partnership scheme is an effort to acknowledging the specific Papua natural resources management problem in the appropriately positioning community rights in the official natural resources governance.

Making forests benefit to people and government within good governance are the main objective of the FMU Biak establishment. “Through KPH, I have vision to turn the current public paradigm that forests governance in Indonesia are far from good because it full of conflict, not sustainable, lack of community participation and lack of contribution to local economic development.” said Mr. Ariestoteles Ap – the Head of Forests Management Unit (KPHL) Biak Numfor on his welcoming words to the NORAD and Samdhana team visited KPH on January 2016. Holding the responsibilities to manage 206,016 ha of forests in Biak and Numfor Island he acknowledged that community are the main actors since customary right claim are strong in the islands.  

Eco-Tourism management body in Sebse with assisting by FMU and MNUKWAR (local Ngo based in Manokwari) will working on technical, social, business and legal components on managing the potency in the east coast of the Biak Island. From the full forests inventory that the FMU and Papua State University did in 2015, it’s found that this region is the home of 18 species of birds - 3 of which are the endemic paradise bird, 114 species of plants from 43 order, 10 different orchids and 8 mammals. The forest has also preserve the water and in harmony with karts stone creates beautiful lake “Opersnondi” that has high value for eco-tourism. Community and government on the Inauguration ceremony of the eco-tourism management body are welcoming this initiative and commits to move forward with concrete social-business concept/action of eco-tourism development.

Sharpening the partnership concept of legal management of eco-tourism within FMU has been putting as the priority intervention. Testing effective institutional development and professional community based business development that enable the creation of good benefit sharing mechanism are another big output that the supports in Sebse targeted by Biak FMU and MNUKWAR. Andi Saragih, the Director of MNUKWAR realized that this is just the beginning and there are a lot of challenges are waiting to be dealing to achieve what been built. Making sure that the communities are actively engage and lead the managerial activities until control and running the business are the attention that MNUKWAR is putting. Because he acknowledges that the pure partnership concepts of forests development partnership will working then the community are ready to engage and lead the process. But he believes that FMU and the community in Sebse has on track to get it. Emphasize this, the head of FMU noted that the works in Sebse are valuable for them to implement the long term management plan they have within an appropriate local partnership approaches. 

Read More

Building Synergies to Develop Community Primary Forests Enterprise in Indonesia

Timber harvesting by Esania Community in Kaimana - West Papua Province. Photo: Mnukwar Papua

March 15^th 2016, one full day workshop and round table discussion in Hotel Orie Jakarta was organized by Samdhana Institute, AMAN and Rainforests Alliance talked about finding the ways to creates community forests enterprise in Indonesia Natural Forests. Taking cases from Messo-Amarica region such as Guatemala, Mexico and Peru where indigenous community have moving on sustainable, legal and benefits management of their forests resources. The meeting has brought together NGO, Facilitator, community forestry right holders, keys forestry officers and one representative from private sector. They presented three scheme of Indonesia forests management with their progress and challenges. These three schemes are: (1) customary community based timber management in Papua, (2) private forests management - cases from Lampung and (3) village forests- a social forestry program in Riau. Highlighting the importance of community participation in managing their forests resources, mainstreaming business perspective and advocating legal regulation are the cores issues the discussion had.

On his opening speech Abdon Nababan, General Secretary of Indigenous People Archipelago Alliance (AMAN) says that this is remain the big home works for us to show the cases where customary community raise and organize them self to managing their natural forests. He then emphasized that self-reviving means all the projects are getting approval and legal certification not because of money from charity donors but from the money they get from managing their forests resources. Learning from almost 25 years experiences working on this community forestry issues he noted that there are 4 major issues that we should preparing to make the community forests enterprise are working: (1) clarity of land tenure rights over the forests, (2) how institutional development and arrangement are working properly, (3) how to makes sure the current living forests community products are remain a core priority and attention and (4) capacity of the manager and all community member of the economic body on the ground. With currents change in the forests development pathway which taking social forestry as the national development target he encourages all the facilitator, donors and community to strategically looking at this opportunity to bridge the gaps in natural forests community enterprises. Supported Abdon points, Nonette Royo the director of Samdhana Institute says that current changes in Indonesia politics and policies orientation are the opportunity but also the challenges to us. So having a collaboration work to sharing knowledge, skill and resources are the steps we have to counting soon.

Complexity challenges and problems of the community forests enterprises in Indonesia are varying in each region. The participant and resources person pointed out them as follow:

• Papua is now having a problem in the legal approval of their norms, standard, criteria and indication of customary community based forests management. As addition the limited capacity of the community in understanding the robust technical and business requirement in the CFE and social problem to clarifying and social consolidation among community have put the huge challenges for all forestry actor in the island to make the schemes is working properly. 
• Sumatera, Sulawesi, Papua and Kalimantan with their social forestry program such as Village Forests, Community Plantation Forests and Community Forestry are facing the problem in local government commitment and supports from the preparation to the implementation of the scheme. The conflicts of claim and interest on huge money driven development are another issues they been fighting for. Technical capacity and social issues are also emerged together with a markets for forests products they produce from these legal social forestry program.

• Private forests management. The example from South Konawe in Sulawesi, Kulon Progo in Central Java and GMWT in Lampung have shown that bringing community into real business room is another challenges after a licenses. Institutional arrangement and strong capital to compete with current big business power. They emphasized that working on timber/ forestry business is beyond having a sustainable certificate. Many ghost riders across the long chain of timbers transport and supply are influencing the amount of benefits they received

Despite their complexity of challenges and problems it is acknowledging that demand in timber from community concession are increasing. In Lampung, about 70% of total timber been supplied in the town are harvested from community concession. With it legal problem the un-planned logging in the Biak Island has contribute to 90% of timber needs in the city. These facts have previously confirmed in the 2006 report by Dudung Darusman (Forests Economic Professor in IPB) that the contribution of community forests industry are enormous high in the total timber supply in the country. Where about 39,4million m³ on 1,5 million ha are records as the potency of community timber industry.

Globally there are increasing number of community managed their forests resources. And it mostly successfully maintaining the functions, ensuring the benefit flows and has successfully reducing poverty lines. Indonesia government are also now aware that make forests valuable for the people are by giving them rights and access to manages it. The long history of big logging concession capture the forests resources has left the negative impact from high deforestation and degradation to social conflict in the community. 12,7 million ha for social forestry for example are part of the shift steps to balancing the allocation to community controlled and managed forests resources. Wiratno – the director of social forestry area preparation at the Ministry of Environment and Forestry on his presentation highlighted the current concern on pushing high allocation to community. PIAPS (social forestry indicative maps) are then developed to sets up national optimistic targets for community forestry. Funding, technical capacity and legal support are parts of the efforts the government is consistently will do in the presidential periods. He added there are many challenges needs to be answered to achieve those targets particularly with the increasing demand on non-forestry investment plan such as oil palm and mining that more often influenced policy makers not to support the development of social forestry program in their regions.

Cases from Latin America where local communities in country like Mexixo and Guatemalla have successfully manage their natural forests provides a good learning sites for Indigenous communities in Indonesia. In the Maya Biosphere Reserve of Guatemala, for example, nine community concessions co-manage more than 400,000 hectares of highly commercially valuable forest. Development of enterprises among these concessions has resulted in timber and non-timber forest product sales of around $10 million annually, generating thousands of jobs and financing investment in local infrastructure and social development. Significantly, over the last 15 years, deforestation rates in concessions have been significantly lower than in adjacent “core zone” protected forest says Ben Hodgdon – from Rain Forests Alliance. He underlying the challenges been facing in Indonesia are also same with what they have in latin America. Having a community consensus and consolidation to works together within good institutional arrangement are the keys in community forests enterprises.

Connecting resources and facilitator across the archipelago to supports emerge initiative at the community to take control over their forests are an important step to take. Focusing on create one good models on primary forests should be emphasized now. Learning from other country experiences with the same cases are to fulfill the gaps we don’t have in Indonesia. Bani Susilo as a representative of private sector in Papua noted that in cases like Papua, the challenge is to make sure that in the beginning of 2 – 3 years, community forests enterprises program are survives and could do good business arrangement even though they only reach local markets.

Timber measurement by the community in Esania - Kaimana West Papua. Photo: Mnukwar-Papua

Read More