Autor(s): Ja Posman Napitu, Aceng Hidayat, Sambas Basuni, Sofyan Sjaf
DOI: 10.20886/ijfr.2019.6.1.43-60


Perspective difference of users related to forest area utilization has caused tenurial conflicts, as well as, possible utilization conflicts. This study aimed to understand stakeholders’ interests and influences as exogenic factors that caused the non-optimal institutional performance. This study used an institutional diagnostic approach to understand how the situation and action arena is from inter-influencing institutional entities. Data collection used the convergent parallel mixed method (CPMM) approach, while analysis used the rapid land tenure assessment (RaTA) method. Further, this study used the Institutional Analysis Development (IAD) method to explain how the exogenic factors influence each other. The results showed that the characteristics of biophysical attributes, community attributes, as well as, rule in use were inter-influencing within the action arena. Besides, based on the post-prospective analysis result, policy decision opted by the government tend to not consider the community existence, who have been using the land for their livelihood. This situation has caused utilization conflicts between communities and concession holders. Thus, this study recommends: 1) the stakeholders to establish a communication forum for all parties to obtain clear information about forest utilization and to support institutional performance; 2) institutionalizing local community to govern forest utilization, and 3) determining management and concept of sustainable forest, as well as, policy making.


institutional diagnosis; exogenous factor; policy effectiveness; outcome

Full Text:



Agrawal, A. (2001). Common property institutions and sustainable governance of resources. World Development, 29(10), 1649–1672. doi://10.1016/S0305-750X(01)00063-8.

Andersson, K. P. (2004). Who talks with whom? The role of repeated interactions in decentralized forest governance. World Development, 32(2), 233–249. doi://10.1016/j.worlddev.2003.07.007.

Budiningsih, K., Ekawati, S., Gamin, Sylviani, Suryandari, E.Y., & Salaka, F. (2015). Tipologi dan strategi pengembangan Kesatuan Pengelolaan Hutan di Indonesia. Jurnal Analisis Kebijakan Kehutanan, 13(1), 283–298.

Cantiani, M. (2012). Forest planning and public participation: A possible methodological approach. iForest - Biogeosciences and Forestry, 5(2), 72–82. doi.10.3832/ifor0602-009.

Chakravarty, S., Ghosh, S., Suresh, C., Dey, A., & Shukla, G. (2012). Deforestation: Causes, effects and control strategies. In Okia, C.A. (Ed.), Global Perspectives on Sustainable Forest Management (pp. 3–28). Rijeka, Croatia: Intechopen. doi.10.5772/2634

Colfer, CJP. Sheil, D. Kaimowitz D., & Kishi, M. (2006). Forest and human health in the tropics: Some important connections. Unasylva, 57(224), 20–23.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. research design qualitative quantitative and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Los Angeles. USA, London. UK: SAGE. doi://10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2

Daily, Getchen C. Alexander, Susan. Ehrlich, Paul R. Goulder, Larry. Lubchenco, Jane. Matson, Pamela A. Monney, Harold A. Postel, Sandra. Schneider, Stephen H. Tillman, David. Woodwell, G. M. (1999). Ecosystem services: Benefits supplied to human societies by natural ecosystems. Issues in Ecology, 4(4), 1–12. doi.1092-8987.

Dolšak, N., & Ostrom, E. (2003). The commons in the new millennium: Challenges and adaptation. (Nives Dolsak dan Elinor Ostrom, Ed.), Politics, science, and the environment. London, England: The MIT Press. doi://10.1007/s11077-005-2857-5.

Ekawati, S. (2013). Evaluasi implementasi kebijakan desentralisasi pengelolaan hutan produksi. Journal of Forestry Policy Analysis, 10(3), 187–202.

FAO. (2015). Global forest resources assessment 2015 Desk reference. (Report). Rome. doi.10.1002/2014GB005021

Fleischman, F. D., Loken, B., Garcia-Lopez, G. A., & Villamayor-Tomas, S. (2014). Evaluating the utility of common-pool resource theory for understanding forest governance and outcomes in Indonesia between 1965 - 2012. International Journal of the Commons, 8(2), 304–336.

Galudra, G., Sirait, M., Pasya, G., Fay, C., Suyanto, Noordwijk, M. van, & Pradhan, U. (2010). RaTA : A Rapid land tenure assessment manual for identifying the nature of land tenure conflicts. Bogor, Indonesia: World Agroforestry Centre.

Gamin, G., Nugroho, B. Kartodihardjo, H., Kolopaking, L.M. & Boer, R. (2014). Menyelesaikan konflik penguasaan kawasan hutan melalui pendekatan gaya sengketa para pihak di Kesatuan Pengelolaan Hutan Lakitan. Jurnal Analisis Kebijakan Kehutanan, 11(1), 53–64.

Gregersen, H. M., Contreras-Hermosilla, A., White, A., & Phillips, L. (2005). Forest governance in federal systems: An overview of experiences and implications for decentralization. the politics of decentralization: forest, power and people. Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor. doi://10.4324/9781849773218.

Gulbrandsen, L. H. (2004). Overlapping public and private governance: can forest certification fill the gaps in the global forest regime. Global Environmental Politics, 4(2),75–99. doi.10.1162/152638004323074200.

Hendartin, E., Nugroho, B., & Kartodihardjo, H. (2011). Institutional analysis of revolving fund loan (RFL) for the development of community forest plantations (CFP). Journal of Forestry Research, 8(2), 158–169.

Hermosilla, A.C & Fay, C. (2005). Strengthening forest management in Indonesia through land tenure reform: Issues and framework for action. Bogor, Indonesia: Collaborating Institutions Forest Trends and World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF).

Hidayat, A. (2007). How distributional conflicts theory explain factors affecting institutional changes in coral reef governance ? Lessons learned from Gili Indah Village, West Lombok Indonesia. Development, 10(2), 73–88.

Holmes A Derek. (2002). Indonesia where have all the forests gone? Washington DC: The World Bank.

Jagger, P., Luckert, M. M. K., Duchelle, A. E., Lund, J. F., & Sunderlin, W. D. (2014). Tenure and forest income: observations from a global study on forests and poverty. World Development, 64(S1), S43–S55. doi://10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.03.004.

Kartodihardjo, H. (1998). Peningkatan kinerja pengusahaan hutan alam produksi melalui kebijaksanaan penataan institusi. (Doctoral dissertation). Bogor Agricultural University, Bogor.

Kartodihardjo, H. (2008). Diskursus dan aktor dalam pembuatan dan implementasi kebijakan kehutanan : masalah kerangka pendekatan rasional. Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika. XIV(1), 19–27.

Kartodihardjo, H. (2013a). Challenges for interdisciplinary use in forest management prompts of coalition of forest management, economic and institutional sciences. Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika, 19(3), 208–210. doi.10.7226/jtfm.19.3.208

Kartodihardjo, H. (2013). Challenges for interdisciplinary use in forest management prompts of coalition of forest management, economic and institutional sciences. Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika, 19(3), 208–210. doi://10.7226/jtfm.19.3.208.

Kartodihardjo, H. (2013b). Masalah cara pikir dan praktek kehutanan: Refleksi dan evaluasi II. In Kartodihardjo H (Ed.), Kembali ke jalan lurus: Kritik penggunaan ilmu dan praktek kehutanan. Bogor: Forci Development.

Kartodiharjo, H. (2016). Diskursus dan kebijakan institusi – politik kawasan hutan: Menelusuri studi kebijakan dan gerakan sosial sumber daya alam di Indonesia. Bogor Agricultural University, Bogor.

Koalisi Anti Mafia Hutan. (2014). Catatan kritis koalisi LSM terhadap legalitas dan kelestarian hutan Indonesia : Studi independen terhadap sertifikasi SVLK. Bogor, Indonesia. KAMH.

Kesatuan Pengelolaan Hutan Produksi Meranti. (2015). Rencana pengeloaan hutan jangka panjang kesatuan pengelolaan hutan produksi unit iv Meranti tahun 2015-2024. Paninggalan. KPHP Meranti.(Unpublished)

Larson, A. M., & Ribot, J. C. (2007). The poverty of forestry policy: Double standards on an uneven playing field. Sustainability Science, 2(2), 189–204. doi://10.1007/s11625-007-0030-0.

Lingkungan, P. S. dan K. (2015). Rencana strategis Direkrorat Jenderal Perhutanan Sosial dan Kemitraan Lingkungan. Jakarta.

Nurtjahjawilasa, N., Kartodihardjo, H., Nurrochmat, D. R., & Justianto, A. (2015). The performance of forestry human resources in licensing forest utilization, the lease of forest area, and the release of forest area. Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika, 21(2), 76–82. doi.10.7226/jtfm.21.2.76.

Ostrom, E. (1990). An institution approach to the study of self-organization and self-governance CPR situations. In E. Ostrom (Ed.), Governing the commns: The evolution of istitutions for collective action (pp. 29–57). New York, Melbourne: Cambridge University Press. doi.10.2307/133271.

Ostrom, E. (2005). Doing Institutional Analysis: Digging Deeper Than Markets and Hierarchies. Handbook of New Institutional Economics, 819–848. doi://10.1007/978-3-540-69305-5_31.

Ostrom, E., & Basurto, X. (2011). Crafting analytical tools to study institutional change. Journal of Institutional Economics, 7(3),317–343. doi.10.1017/s1744137410000305.

Ostrom, E., Gardner, R., & Walker, J. (1994). Rules, games, and common-pool resources. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press. doi://10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.

Ostrom, E., & Hess, C. (2007). A framework for analyzing the knowledge commons. In C. Hess & E. Ostrom (Eds.), Understanding knowledge as a commons (pp. 41–82). Cambridge and London: The MIT Press. doi://10.1002/asi.

Pilgrim, S. E., Cullen, L., Smith, D., & Pretty, J. (2007). Hidden harvest or hidden revenue - A local resource use in a remote region of Southeast Sulawesi, Indonesia. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 6(1), 150–159.

Sheil, D., & Wunder, S. (2002). The value of tropical forest to local communities: Complication caveats, and cautions. Ecology And Society, 6(2), 1–16.

Sinabutar, P., Nugroho, B., Kartodihardjo, H., & Darusman, D. (2015). Kepastian hukum dan pengakuan para pihak hasil pengukuhan kawasan hutan negara di Provinsi Riau. Jurnal Analisis Kebijakan Kehutanan, 12(1), 27–40.

Suhendang E. (2013). Perkembangan paradigma kehutanan. (Makalah) Diskusi pengelolaan hutan berbasis ekosistem sebagai pendekatan untuk pengelolaan hutan Indonesia dalam paradigma kehutanan Indonesia baru. Diselenggarakan dalam rangka ulang tahun emas Fakultas Kehutanan IPB (1963-2013). Bogor, Agustus 2013). Bogor.

Sunderlin, W. D., Belcher, B., Santoso, L., Angelsen, A., Burgers, P., Nasi, R., & Wunder, S. (2005). Livelihoods, forests, and conservation in developing countries: An overview. World Development, 33(9 SPEC. ISS.), 1383–1402. doi://10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.10.004.

Suwarno, E. (2014). Analisis kelembagaan proses operasionalisasi KPH: Studi kasus KPHP Tasik Besar Serkap di Provinsi Riau. (Doctoral dissertation). Bogor Agricultural University, Bogor.

Suwarno, E., Kartodihardjo, H., Kolopaking, L. M., & Soedomo, S. (2015). Penggunaan konsep rules in Use Ostrom dalam analisis peraturan pembentukan organisasi Kesatuan Pengelolaan Hutan. Jurnal Analisis Kebijakan Kehutanan, 12(1), 13–27.

Tacconi, L. (2007). Illegal logging and the future of the forest. In L. (Ed. . Sayer, Jeffrey A. ( Eds) Tacconi (Ed.), Illegal logging: Law enforcement, livelihoods and the timber trade (pp. 275–290). London and Sterling, VA: Earthscan. doi://10.4324/9781849771672.

Tsujino, R., Yumoto, T., Kitamura, S., Djamaluddin, I., & Darnaedi, D. (2016). History of forest loss and degradation in Indonesia. Land Use Policy, 57, 335–347. doi://10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.05.034.

Tucker, C.M., & Ostrom, E. (2005). Multidisciplinary research relating institutions and forest transformations. In E. Moran, Emilio F. Ostrom (Ed.), Seeing the forest and the trees: Human-environment interactions in forest ecosystems (pp. 81–103). Michigan: MIT Press.

Tucker, C. M. (1999). Private versus common property forests: forest conditions and tenure in a honduran community. Human Ecology, 27(2), 201–230. doi://10.1023/A:1018721826964.

Wibowo, L. R., Race, D., & Curtis, A. (2013). Communicating REDD+ issues at local level : Creating latent and manifest conflict. Indonesian Journal of Forestry Research, 10(2), 67–78. doi://10.20886/ijfr.2013.10.2.67-78.


  • There are currently no refbacks.