Kelembagaan DAS

Iman Santoso

ZONING AREAL HUTAN DAN KONFLIKNYA

(Forest area zoning and related conflicts)

Oleh : Iman Santoso

Pusat Penelitian Sosial Ekonomi danKebijakanKehutanan

JURNAL Penelitian Sosial dan Ekonomi Kehutanan Vol. 5 No. 3 September 2008, Hal. 143 – 153

ABSTRAK

Sejak tahun 1970 an pemanfaatan lahan untuk berbagai tujuan pembangunan telah mengalami percepatan dengan pelaksanaan program-program pengembangan tanaman pangan, transmigrasi, pemukiman penduduk dan pemberian konsesi untuk pengusahaan hutan yang hampir menyebar diseluruh kepulauan Indonesia. Menindaklanjuti situasi ini Menteri Pertanian menekankan kepada Gubernur untuk tetap mempertahankan kawasan hutan untuk berbagai fungsi seperti pengaturan tata air, koservasi keanekaragaman hayati dan untuk produksi kayu dan jasa lainnya secara lestari. Untuk tujuan di atas sesuai dengan kondisi biofisik, setiap propinsi harus menyediakan kawasan untuk hutan lindung, hutan konservasi, hutan produksi dan hutan konversi untuk kebutuhan lain jika diperlukan. Pada tahun 1980 an berbagai peruntukan di atas ditetapkan dalam suatu kesepakatan yang disebut dengan Tata Guna Hutan Kesepakatan (TGHK). Dengan hanya berdasarkan peta TGHK, konversi lahan untuk kebutuhan diluar sektor kehutanan telah menimbulkan berbagai ketidak puasan di daerah. Kemudian untuk merespon ketidak puasan tersebut pemerintah mengeluarkan Rencana Tata RuangWilayah per Propinsi yang disusun berdasarkan kebutuhan berbagai sektor. Tetapi dalam pelaksanaannya, keberadaan masyarakat yang tinggal dan hidup didalam kawasan hutan belum dapat diakomodasi secara jelas dalam Tata Ruang Wilayah tersebut. Tulisan ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji permasahan tesebut di atas dengan mengumpulkan bahan-bahan dari lapangan, mereview berbagai peraturan perundangan dan merekomendasikan berbagai solusi. Untuk mengakomodasikan kebutuhan masyarakat yang terkait dengan penggunaan kawasan/lahan untuk memenuhi kebutuhan hidupnya sebaiknya pemerintah segera menyempurnakan rencana tataruang yang memasukkan unsur masyarakat sebagai salah satu faktor yang dapat memanfaatkan kawasan/lahan/hutan untuk menopang kehidupan mereka yang sesuai dengan fungsi kawasan yang ada.

Kata kunci : Penggunaan lahan, konflik, masyarakat, hak pemilikan tanah

ABSTRACT

In the 1970s land use for various development activities was sharply accelerated by the implementation of food crop expansion programs, transmigration and resettlement  projects, and large scale timber concession operations in almost all of the main islands of Indonesia.Realizing this situation, the Minister ofAgriculture urged provincial governments to set aside sufficient areas of permanent forest to maintain crucial land and water systems, conserve bio-diversity, and for the sustainable production of forest products and services. Based on the existing bio-physical condition each province had to set aside areas for Protection Forest (PtF), Strict Nature Reserves (SNR), Conservation Forest (CF)2 , Production Forest (PrF) 3, while forested areas that could be converted to other uses were categorized as a Convertible Production Forest (CPrF). Through consensus among provincial agencies using the best available data the allocation of those forest categories were made in 1980s, and forest zoneswere depicted in so-called Consensus Forest Land Allocation Maps (CFLAM). The map was widely used as reference tool for allocating land for various investments and land-based activities, at least until 1990s, with the result that unplanned conversion of forests for other uses was sufficiently restrained. However, with the accelerating rate of land-based development by other sectors, the existence of permanent forest zones was criticized as a barrier to regional development, and CFLAM was characterised as merely a forest sector plan that blocked other sectors from developing unmanaged land better suited to other uses.There was a strong call to replace CFLAM with a more comprehensive and rational spatial plan to accommodate various land-based developments. The map was widely used as reference tool for allocating land for various investments and land-based activities, at least until 1990s, with the result that unplanned conversion of forests for other uses was sufficiently restrained. However, with the accelerating rate of land-based development by other sectors, the existence of permanent forest zones was criticized as a barrier to regional development, and CFLAM was characterised as merely a forest sector plan that blocked other sectors from developing unmanaged land better suited to other uses. There was a strong call to replace CFLAM with a more comprehensive and rational spatial plan to accommodate various land-based developments.While the plan does allocate protection and utilization zones for various land uses, it does not mention the existence of communities that have long been in forested areas, this shortcoming has generated conflicts between the communities and the government; and between the communities and forest enterprises, on the use of the land and the utilization of timber and other forest products. This paper is intended to discuss these conflicts by reviewing the state control over forest land according to existing regulations, the existence of communities with their traditional knowledge, and the conflicts caused by the existing controls of both the government and the communities. Lessons learned from this review are expected to be of use in improving forestry law and regulation which are the communities are taken into account as one of the actors in the management of the zones.

Keywords : Land uses, conflict, utilization,communities, land rights.

———-

2) The two types of Conservation Forest areRecreation Parks and National Parks
3) The two types of Production Forest areRegular Production Forests and Limited Production Forests

I . INTRODUCTION

In the 1970s land use for various development activities was sharply accelerated by the implementation of food crop expansion programs, transmigration and resettlement projects, and large scale timber concession operations in almost all of the main islands of Indonesia. New plantation areas were established in the outer island of Java along with development of new settlements for transmigration from the populated island of Java, and timber extraction executed in productive forests for plywood industries. There was no comprehensive spatial plan to be referred to in order to give direction to land based developments at either provincial or district levels, so that millions of hectares of forest areas on these islands were ‘victimized’ for the sake of economic and regional development. Unfortunately most of these forest conversions were not successful in terms of their suitability and accessibility for food crops or human settlement. The remaining areas were then abandoned as degraded and unproductive land, except those with forests that were selectively cut for timber production.

Realizing this situation, the Minister of Agriculture urged provincial governments to set aside sufficient areas of permanent forest to maintain crucial land and water systems, conserve bio-diversity, and for the sustainable production of forest products and services. Based on the existing bio-physical condition each province had to set aside areas for Protection Forest (PtF), Strict NatureReserves (SNR), Conservation Forest (CF), Production Forest (PrF) , and Hunting Parks (HP), while forested areas that could be converted to other uses were categorized as a Convertible Production Forest (CPrF). Through consensus among provincial agencies using the best available data the allocation of those forest categories were made in 1980s, and forest zones were depicted in so-called Consensus Forest Land Allocation Maps (CFLAM).

The map was widely used as reference tool for allocating land for various investments and land-based activities, at least until 1990s, with the result that unplanned conversion of forests for other useswas sufficiently restrained. However, with the accelerating rate of land-based development by other sectors, the existence of permanent forest zoneswas criticized as a barrier to regional development, and CFLAM was characterised as merely a forest sector plan that blocked other sectors from developing unmanaged land better suited to other uses. There was a strong call to replace CFLAM with a more comprehensive and rational spatial plan to accommodate various land-based developments.

In response to that appeal, in 1992 the Government issued Spatial Plan Act No.24/1992 which requires each province and district to formulate an inter-sectoral, spatial plan setting out which areas are to be allocated for Protection Zones (PZ) with the rest opened up as Utilization Zones (UZ). Under these broad categories, Protection Forests, Strict Nature Reserves, and Conservation Forests (under CFLAM) are grouped as Protection Zones, while Production Forests and Convertible Production Forests are grouped in Utilization Zone. By careful review of the new field data in 1990s, a Provincial Spatial Plan (PSP) was then elaborated and mapped for each province. Within the PSP some forest zones have been reallocated to other land uses from those were ascribed under CFLAM, or re- categorized to new types of forest with different functions. There are also some cases where non-forest land has nowbeen allocated as forest zones in the PSP map.

Although the PSP was designed to accommodate inter-sector needs for land, it lacks detail concerning the position of the communities living in these areas. While the plan does allocate protection and utilization zones for various land uses, it does not mention the existence of communities that have long been in forested areas, with traditional practices for managing land and forest resources. This shortcoming has generated conflicts between the communities and the government; and between the communities and forest enterprises, on the use of the land and the utilization of timber and other forest products.

This paper is intended to discuss these conflicts by reviewing the state’s control over forest land according to existing regulations, the existence of communities with their traditional knowledge, and the conflicts caused by the existing controls of both the government and the communities. Lessons learned from this review are expected to be of use in improving forestry lawand regulation.

II. STUDYMETHODOLOGY

This paper is the result of studies done by desk study, review of forestry regulations (in national, regional and regency levels) , field study in several conflict area such as in West Lampung District,West Sumba District and discussions with stakeholders

III. RESULTSANDDISCUSSION

A. State Control overForest Land

Since the existence of forests has both benefits for and impacts on the nation, all forest areas in Indonesia and all resources therein are controlled by the state. Therefore, article 4 of the Forestry Act No.41/1999 states that all forests are under control of the state for the maximum benefit of the people. With this control, the state has the obligation to assign and maintain certain areas as permanent forest zones for protection, conservation and utilization purposes. Implementation of this control is conducted by the Government based on a mandate given to it by the state to: i) regulate and manage the nation’s forest resources in a sustainable way, ii) arrange the most appropriate legal relationship between people and the forest, and iii) regulate all practices related to existing forest.

Based on this mandate, the government has designated 123.5 million hectares of land to be maintained as the state permanent forests consisting of 31.8 million hectares of Protection Forests, 20.1 million hectares of Conservation Forests, 57.5 million hectares of Production Forests, and 14.1 million hectares of Convertible Production Forests. All these forest zones are allocated in the Provincial Spatial Plans (PSP). The government, within existing laws and regulations, has granted concessions to private and state forest enterprises to manage and derive benefits from Production Forests mainly through timber extraction; and has issued permits for nature tourism operations in some forest parks to eligible recreation operators. The Government has also set out rules to regulate forest management operations, and plantation and timber harvests in Production Forests managed by concession holders. For Recreational Parks, National Park and Hunting Parks, rules have also been set out for wise use and restricted utilization in order to get optimal benefits from these Conservation Forests.

Communities who live on the fringes of, and within, forest zones are granted rights to utilize timber and other products from the forest for daily consumption and livelihood. These rights are considered to be marginal compared to those given to the concession holders, since the community only gets their subsistence from the forests while the greater benefits from the forests are enjoyed by concession holders. Legally, a community would get similar benefits only if it establishes an eligible cooperative to operate a forest concession. Unfortunately, most communities lack sufficient capital to prove their eligibility and to comply with the requirements set out for competent forest operators. Therefore, conflicts between communities and government and concession holders in the Production Forest zones always begin when the communities are restricted from cutting timber for commercial use, and in using the land they believe is their inheritance from their ancestors. In other zones, i.e. in Protection Forest, Strict Nature Reserves, Conservation Forest, conflicts also occur when they infringe the rights of communities to utilize their land for their homes and farming, and for harvesting forest products. In some cases, Government officials have taken excessive action and have expelled communities from zones that have been unilaterally assigned as restricted forest zones.

B. The Existence of Communities in theForest Zones

Communities living on the fringes and within the forest are estimated to number about 48.8 million people, and about 10.2 million of them are categorized as poor people who are depended on forest resources for the daily living. Communities perceive the forest as their home and a place that produces the goods and services needed for their survival and livelihoods. According to their beliefs, some places in the forest are also treated as sacred sites where the souls of their ancestors rest. In the zones of Production Forest, as well as in Conservation Forest, job opportunities such as in timber management and in the recreation business are also offered to thecommunities.

Based on the history of their existence and their occupation of forest areas, and the norms and rules they apply in their daily life, communities can be grouped into three main categories as follows:

1. Customary Community

Such communities are comprised of people holding customary land (tanah ulayat ) as their territory on which they maintain their sovereignty. They are native to the forest land where they live and use their own norms and rules to regulate their communications and relationships within their community and with others. They live in harmony with the forest by applying their traditional knowledge and local wisdom to manage natural resources and environment.

Based on Agrarian Minister Regulation No.5/1999 their existence and their associated land (tanah ulayat) should be identified and legalized through district-level Regulations (Perda5). Once the existence is legally acknowledged by Perda , the community has the right to hold and manage its forest land as customary forest land within the state forest.  Unfortunately, only a few District Governments have yet issued such  Perda 4, This is partly caused by the complicated criteria used in identifying the existence of the community, and the potential conflicts which may arise among communities in determining the boundaries of their tanah ulayat . In addition, community’s rights acknowledged by Forestry Act have not been spelled out in detailed regulations. As yet, these communities’ rights over forest land are still uncertain.

——–

4) The only Perda that has been issued is for Seko community at Luwuk Utara District, while for communities of Kasepuhan Cibedug at Lebak District, and of Namblong at Jayapura District are still in the formulation process.

From the government’s perspective the rights to be granted to CustomaryCommunity over forest land should include rights to:

  • Manage and utilize forest resources by using traditional knowledge and local wisdom taking into account the main function assigned to the forest zone where the tanah ulayat is situated. In this case, the knowledge and wisdom applied by the community should comply with technical or silvicultural techniques required by the government;
  • Bequeath its tanah ulayat to its descendants as long as they still belong to the customary community. However, the community is not allowed to transfer the tanah ulayat and related rights to any party outside thecommunity;
  • Get information about and be involved in any development plan that relates to community’s  tanah ulayat

2. Local Community

Such communities are comprised of people that have been living in the forest for some generations, but no longer hold to strictly traditional norms and rules in regulating their communications and relationship within their community and with others. They are not committed to applying their traditional knowledge and local wisdom in utilizing natural resources and maintaining the environment. Some of the family members of such communities have migrated to the cities to get jobs and make a better living, but they still have an emotional link with their land.

This type of community can be found in almost all parts of Indonesia, within Production Forests, Protection Forests and even in Conservation Forests. Ideally the government registers and maps their existence in order to recognize their rights and control their land uses. In some cases their existence is legally recognized by the government of the District; however such communities hold only limited rights compared to those held by customary communities. Some rights and restrictions, as set out below, are normally applied to land utilization in forest zones by members of such LocalCommunities:

  1. They are not given rights to manage the forest but are granted permits to access and utilize land and resources in the forest zone in accordance with agro-forestry principles set by the government. Even though they could bequeath the land to their descendants, they are not allowed to expand their occupation nor to transfer their rights to other people;
  2. Rights to be informed of any development plan related to the land where they live on, and to participate actively in the formulation of the plan;
  3. Rights to be involved in any development program and other economic activity around their neighbourhood;
  4. Rights to apply local norms and traditional knowledge in utilizing land resources of the forest where they live, as long as they meet the terms of sustainable forest management. In addition, they could get technical assistance for their participation in any forest program implemented by the government.
  5. They could form a cooperative to get small concession to manage and utilize forest resources using the existing government regulation

3. Newly Arrived Community

This type of community is comprised of people who have no history of settlement in forest zones. Many used to live in urban areas but possess no legal land or secure employment so they move to the fringes of, or within, the forest zone. Some are people who intentionally expand their land ‘ownership’ by clearing forest and settling on land that has not been intensively managed and/or developed by the government. They have no rights over forest land and any of the resources thereon since their occupation of forest land is considered to be illegal. However, in many cases, the government has legalized their existence, has developed their neighbourhood into a kampung/desa or hamlet/village and has built public facilities such as a mosque and/or a church, puskesmas or community health centre, and others, to be managed by the kampung under leadership of the chief of the village. In such cases these lands have then been excised from the forest zone as an enclave.

Since the community still depends on the forest products from the forest zones the government gives them very limited rights over forest land and the resources thereon as follows:

  1. They are not given rights to manage the forest, but are only allowed to utilize non-timber forest products from the forest zones where they live,
  2. Rights to be informed on any development related to their neighbourhood,
  3. Rights to be involved in any forestry development program or economic activities being carried out on the fringes of or within the forest,
  4. They could form a cooperative to get a small concession to manage and utilize forest resources under existing government regulations.

C.The conflicts

Conflicts between communities and the government or between community and forest concession holders are mainly triggered by overlapping uses of forest land and/or utilization of timber and other forest products from the forest. Based on observations made by government and NGOs, the conflicts can be categorized as: i) forest land use conflicts, ii) conflicts related to forest management and utilization, iii) conflict over activities and, iv) conservation conflicts.

1. Forest land use conflicts

Conflicts related to land use occur in almost all provinces outside Java where community lands have been included in the forest zone. This is mostly caused by the absence of community participation in the forest delineation and forest boundary making when the provincial government made forest zone allocation on the Consensus Forest Land Allocation Map (CFLAM) without considering the existing land uses, as happened in West Lampung District. Other cases also occur when the Ministry of Forestry has extended the area of National Parks to include community lands surrounding the parks, as happened with the enlargement of Gunung Halimun National Park.

In these cases the community suffers in two ways. Firstly, the community, especially a local community, suffers from a loss of opportunities to get land title to own the land, since the land has been included in forest zone. With no ownership title, the community only has the right to use the land for housing and farming, but it can not be transferred to other party. For a customary community, such a situation does not affect its opportunity to get recognition from local government (district); while for a newly arrived community the delineation of the forest zone makes it clearer that its existence is illegal. Secondly, the delineation and boundary marking of the forest zone forces the community to use the land in accordance with rules applied to forest zone according to their specific function e.g. for protection of soil and water system or for conservation of genetic resources. In such cases a community is not allowed to cut trees nor till the land (ie it is not allowed to plow nor to harrowthe land).

Conflicts between communities and the government occur when the communities clear the forest or practice various forms of shifting cultivation or use the forest zones for permanent agricultural expansion. Other forest clearing may also be executed by a community to extend its hamlet to accommodate the growing population. In past times, the government responded to what it perceived as violations by conducting evictions of such communities from the forest zone, actions that in almost all cases provoked turmoil. Therefore, to improve its policy and action, in the 1990s the government conducted resettlement projects, within the framework of the transmigration program, to develop land as new settlements for forest encroachers, particularly in Sumatera and Kalimantan. Unfortunately due to the financial and technical problems these projects were terminated in 1998.

2. Conflicts related to forest management and utilization

This type of conflict occurs mostly in Production Forests that have been granted to concession holders for timber management. Conflict is caused by overriding a community’s rights over timber and other forest products by the issuance of a timber concession. Conflicts are also caused by the different schemes of forest management, between those applied according to the traditional knowledge held by the community and those imposed by government to be applied by concession holders.

Customary and local communities suffer from this type of conflict. Under the management of the concession holders, the forest is scheduled to be cut in consecutive blocks for timber production over 20 years in accordance with the procedures set by the government. On the other hand, the communities are only given very limited rights to utilize timber and other forest products for their subsistence. The different values and norms held by the communities and the concession holder have also triggered conflicts. In most cases, concession holders, in maximizing their operations, have to harvest all marketable species of timber found in the forest, while the communities with their traditional norms and values seek to conserve some timbers and keep some places intact.

Conflicts between these parties very often take the form of protests followed by acts of destroying forest infrastructure (e.g. roads, bridges, camps, etc) and the seizure of logging vehicles by community members. This has happened in almost all parts of Sumatera, Kalimantan and Papua, where logging operations often face protests from, and confrontations by, customary and local communities. Unfortunately these conflicts are often resolved only in ad hoc ways, such as by paying compensation or by involving some members of the community in the logging operations. For such reasons, and with the aim of seeking a better resolution of such conflicts, since 1980s, the government has made it compulsory for concession holders to implement community development programs within theirworking area during their tenancy.

3. Conflicts of Activities

Environmental disturbances often result from all kinds of forestry activities which may also cause inconvenience to communities living in the forest zone. The construction of logging roads, cutting trees in the forest and timber hauling on the road are some examples of disturbances to the community’s life. Such disturbances may never have been experienced by the community members before the forests were allocated as production forest and were given to investors for timber extraction. To customary communities, these activities are not merely a disturbance; they are to some extent perceived as violations against the norms held by the community on its ancestral land. In some cases where such logging activities have been conducted, communities could only protect their land by trying to stop the activities, such as by blocking road that lead to sacred sites. In other cases, communities protest against the logging plans which are to be implemented on their land.

On the other hand, however, the existence of the community and its activities to some extent disrupts the operation of forest exploitation. There are some traditional events that have to be celebrated and people are not allowed to work. These often bring to a halt all activities in the forest and logging operations may stop for the whole day. In addition, there are beliefs that some species of trees are not allowed to be cut, while certain place have to be maintained intact as sacred sites. This may oblige logging operators to change their plans and redesign their skidding and hauling systems.

4. Conservation conflicts

Conflicts between traditional rules with formal restriction on the utilization of some species of flora and fauna are the cause of the so-called conservation conflicts. Based on beliefs held by the communities, some species of flora and fauna are believed to have special meaning for their life or in their rituals and special events; while those same species are considered by law to be endangered species. People who living in the fringe of Manupeu-Tanadaru National Park, West Sumba District, believe that by using mayela timber for the pillars of their traditional houses their families will be protected from any disturbances and diseases. They also believe that the sacred pillar will bring prosperity to their families. As a matter of fact, mayela timber is the only hardwood that can be found in the park. The timber has mechanical properties suitable for building and construction while other species can be best used as furniture and fuel wood. As a hardwood species the mayela tree grows very slowly in the savanna-like ecosystem, while the population living in surrounding the park is growing faster, so that demand for mayela timber is know higher than the growth of that species. The government has categorized  mayela tress as an endangered species that should be protected from any utilization that leads to extinction. The community, however, will not stop using the timber until it no longer found in the park. As long as it is available, the community still believes that the timber can not be substituted by other timber outside the park.

IV. CONCLUSIONSANDRECOMMENDATIONS

Conflicts related to forest zoning in Indonesia are basically caused by the absence of formal acknowledgement from the government side of the existence of communities living in the forest zones. The problems started with the designation of forest zones in each province, followed by the management and allocation of these resources in ways that are overly controlled by government. Such control by the government over the forest zone and of forest resources, has been criticized for not paying sufficient attention to the community’s existence and their related rights. Specifically, controls implemented by the government usually generate conflicts in the following situations:

  1. The government with its mandate to designate the state’s permanent forest did not involve communities in assigning forest zones and delineating them on the spatial plan map.Therewere no common (agreed) criteria used by the government and the people for categorizing lands falling in the forest zone. In addition, the government failed to involve people in delineating forest boundaries and in identifying communities’ lands as enclaves. As a result, communities’ land are included into state’s permanent forest implying that the communities have limited rights over lands that have long been their ‘own land‘ 5. However, this situation could be corrected in the process of formulating district spatial plan and in the process of forest boundary marking, by involving representatives of the communities.
  2. Until recently, no local government has issued Regent Regulations recognising the existence of a Customary Community and its Associated Land (CCAL), therefore the position of CCALin the forest zone is still uncertain and communities’ rights over forest land and the resources therein are restricted and under control of the Ministry of Forestry as part of the government system. In this situation, the community is treated as local community that only has access to use the land and utilize the resources thereon under strict supervision and according to procedures set by the government, without the rights to manage the land and resources according to their own knowledge. It is recommended, therefore that the criteria used in determining CCAL be simplified to enable District Governments to issue District Regulations recognizing the existence of CCAL.
  3. So far the Government does not recognize traditional knowledge in the management of forest resources. A strict procedure is required in planning and operating forest concession without considering traditional wisdom that has long been practised by communities. In addition, the Government has no procedure to regulate and appropriately control the role of customary communities in the management of the forest resource and in timber harvesting operations. This will be a potential problem once the existence of CCAL is determined by District Regulations. An immediate effort should be conducted to formulate such regulations involving all related stakeholder and local governments.
  4. The existence of Customary Communities, Local Communities, and Newly Arrived Communities in the forest zones are facts that can not be denied. While the government lacks sufficient means to exclude them from the forests, it will be appropriate if the communities are taken into account as one of the actors in the management of the zones, whatever rights are then accorded to the communities. In addition, as forest land has a social function, such as in maintaining soil stability and protecting genetic resources, the government should issue appropriate types of land rights to ensure that lands held by communities cannot be transferred to other parties.
  5. As the spatial plan established directives on the potential uses of forest zones, without mentioning ownership of the land, it would be more appropriate for the government to focus its efforts on maintaining and enhancing forest functions, taken into account the existing land occupancies. In this context, the government has to control and secure forest areas that are under its jurisdiction and that should not be utilized other than as forest, regardless of who occupies the land.
  6. Overall, there is a need to review and redefine the terms of state control over forest land to clearly include the government’s obligation to : i) involve people in all decision making which potentially has impacts on people, ii) give technical assistances to people in managing forest land and resources, iii) assist people in building connections with other parties in managing their forest lands and resources.

———-

5) In formal land administration, ownership of the land is proven by the grant of Land Ownership Title by the National Land Agency. In almost all cases, communities have no such titles, since they cannot afford to comply with complicated procedures and costs involved in getting them.

REFERENCES

Harsono, B. 1997. Hukum Agrarian Indonesia. Sejarah Pembentukan Undang-Undang Pokok Agraria, Isi dan Pelaksanaannya. Jilid 1, Hukum Tanah Nasional. Penerbit Djambatan. Jakarta

Machmur, A.S (ed). 1999. Dinamika Proses Lahirnya Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia No.41/1999 tentangKehutanan. DepartmenKehutanan dan Perkebunan. Jakarta

Ross, M.S. 1984. Forestry in Land Use Policy for Indonesia. Thesis for Degree of Doctor of  Philosophy. University of Oxford.

Santoso, I. 2004. Participatory forest Land Use Planning in Manupeu-Tadaru National Park. RI EUForest Inventory and Monitoring Project. Jakarta.

Sumardjani, L. 2006. Konflik Sosial Kehutanan. Mencari Pemahaman untuk Penyelesaian Terbaik. Forest LandTenureWorking Group. Jakarta

Suwito. 2006. Sallombengang Sekko: “Untaian Pernik Manikam” di Tanah Seko. Seputar KasusTenure.WartaTenure Edisi Khusus,No.1-Januari 2006.

Leave a Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: