Iis Alviya, Muhammad Zahrul Muttaqin, Mimi Salminah, Faridh Almuhayat Uhib Hamdani


Protection forests have the potential to contribute to reducing emission. Management of a protection forest would be effective when local community gets involved in decision-making process. This paper aims to investigate roles of the local community in forest emission reduction program. The analysis includes community’s perception to REDD+, institutional preparedness in site level, potentials and impediments in utilising environmental services, as well as schemes for community-based REDD+. The study shows that the community’s perception to REDD+ is varied from high to moderate. The perception categorized “high” is stimulated by support from NGOs. Meanwhile, preparedness of the community to implement REDD+ has been well developed since they have developed a particular institution including a strategic plan to manage the forest. Nevertheless, the implementation has not been optimum due to complexity of institutional challenges. For instance, carbon, ecotourism and water are potential to be developed but funding has become a major handicap so that it is necessary to find an incentive scheme to support their development. Considering such condition, Plan Vivo scheme is likely to be appropriate in the Customary Forests of Rumbio and Yapase, while Verified Carbon Standard is appropriate to support the Katimpun Village Forest in developing incentive for REDD+.


Community based forest management; REDD+; environmental services.

Full Text:



Angelsen, A. (2008). Moving ahead with REDD+: Issues options and implications. Bogor Indonesia: CIFOR.

Apriwan, & Afriani, S. A. (2015). Local readiness towards REDD+ UNFCCC scheme (Study in Province of West Sumatera Indonesia). Procedia - Environmental Sciences, 28, 649656.

Bappeda Kabupaten Kampar. (2013). Masterplan Hutan Adat Kenegerian Rumbio dan Hutan Adat Buluh Cina Kabupaten Kampar Provinsi Riau. (Laporan). Bogor: Institut Pertanian Bogor.

Bappeda Kabupaten Kampar. (2015). Pemetaan batas Hutan Larangan Adat Kenegerian Rumbio. (Laporan). Bogor: Institut Pertanian Bogor.

Barber, C. P., Cochrane, M. A., Souza, C. J., & Verissimo, A. (2011). Dynamic performance assessment of protected areas. Biological Conservation, 149, 6-14.

Bottazzi, P., Cattaneo, A., Rocha, D. C., & Rist, S. (2013). Assessing sustainable forest management under REDD+: A communitybased labour perspective. Ecological Economics, 93, 94--103.

Brandon, K., & Wells, M. (1992). Planning for people and parks: Design dilemmas. World Development, 20(4), 557-570.

Brockhaus, M., Obidzinski, K., Dermawan, A., Laumonier, Y., & Luttrell, C. (2012). An overview of forest and land allocation policies in Indonesia: Is the current framework sufficient to meet the needs of REDD+? Forest Policy and Economics, 18, 30-37.

Chomba, S., Treue, T., & Sinclair, F. (2015). The political economy of forest entitlements: Can community based forest management reduce vulnerability at the forest margin? Forest Policy and Economics, 58, 37--46.

Corbera, E., & Schroeder, H. (2011). Governing and implementating REDD+. Environmental Science & Policy, 14(2), 89-99.

Cox, M., Arnold, G., & Tomas, S. V. (2010). A review of design principles for community-based natural resource managemet. Ecology and Society, 15(4), 38.

DeFries, R., Hansen, A. J., Newton, A. C., & Hansen, M. C. (2005). Increasing isolation of protected areas in tropical forests over the past twenty years. Ecological Applications, 15, 19-26.

DeFries, R., Karanth, K. K., & Sajid, P. (2010). Interactions between protected areas and their surroundings in human-dominated tropical landscapes. Biological Conservation, 143, 2870-2880.

DNPI. (2011). Mari berdagang karbon! Pengantar pasar karbon untuk pengendalian perubahan iklim. Jakarta: DNPI.

Fauzi, A., & Anna, Z. (2013). The complexity of the institution of payment for environmental services: A case study of two Indonesian PES schemes. Ecosystem Services, 6, 54-64.

Gbedomon, R. A., Floquet, A., Mongbo, R., Salako, V. K., Fandohan, A. B., Assogbadjo, A. E., & Kakai, R. G. (2016). Socio-economic and ecological outcomes of community based forest management: A case study from TobeKpbidon forest in Benin, Western Africa. Forest Policy and Economics, 64, 46-55.

Gibson, C., Lehoucq, F., & Wlliams, J. (2002). Does privatization protect natural resources? Property rights and forests in Guatemala. Social Science Quarterly, 83(1), 206-225.

Ginoga, K. L., Djaenudin, D., & Lugina, M. (2005). Analisis kebijakan pengelolaan hutan lindung. Jurnal Sosial Ekonomi Kehutanan, 2(2), 203231.

Hansen, A. J., & DeFries, R. (2007). Ecological mechanisms linking protected areas to surrounding lands. Ecological Applications, 17, 974-988.

Hayes, T. M. (2006). Parks, people, and forest protection: An institutional assessment of the effectiveness of protected areas. World Development, 34(12), 2064-2075.

Joppa, L. N., Loaria, S. R., & Pimm, S. L. (2008). On the protection of "protected areas". Paper presented at the National Academy of Sciences.

Kim, Y. S., Bae, J. S., Fisher, L. A., Latifah, S., Afifi, M., Lee, S. M., & Kim, I. (2016). Indonesia's forest management units: Effective intermediaries in REDD+ implementation. Forest Policy and Economics, 62, 69-77.

Lee, E., & Mahanty, S. (2009). Payments for environmental services and poverty reduction: Risk and opportunities. Bangkok: The Center for People and Forest.

Leventon, J., Kalaba, F. K., Dyer, J. C., Stringer, L. C., & Dougill, A. J. (2014). Delivering community benefits through REDD +: Lessons from joint forest management in Zambia. Forest Policy and Economics, 44 (July), 10-17.

Luttrell, C., Resosudarmo, I. A. P., Muharrom, E., Brockhaus, M., & Seymour, F. (2014). The political context of REDD+ in Indonesia: Constituencies for change. Environmental Science & Policy, 35, 67-75.

Mahanty, S., Suich, H., & Tacconi, L. (2013). Acces and benefits in payments for environmental services and implications for REDD+: Lessons from seven PES schemes. Land Use Policy, 31, 38-47.

Moktan, M. R., Norbu, L., & Choden, K. (2016). Can community forestry contribute to household income and sustainable forstry practices in rural area? A case study from Tshaoey and Zariphenum in Bhutan. Forest Policy and Economics, 62, 149-157.

Mudaca, J. D., Tsuchiya, T., Yamada, M., & OnwonaAgyeman, S. (2015). Household participation in payments for ecosystem services: A case study from Mozambique. Forest Policy and Economics, 55, 21 - 27.

Nepstad, D., Schwartzman, S., Bamberger, B., Santili, M., Ray, D., Schlesinger, P., . . . Rolla, A. (2006). Inhibition of Amazon deforestation and fire by parks and indigenous lands. Conservation Biology, 20, 65-73.

Nurtjahjawilasa, Duryat, K., Yasman, I., Septiani, Y., & Lasmini. (2013). Konsep REDD+ dan implementasinya. (Modul). Jakarta: The Natur Conservacy Program Terestrial Indonesia.

Ostrom, E. (1999). Self-governance and forest resources. In P.J. Shah & V. Maitra. (Eds.). Terracotta reader. A market approach to

the environment. (pp 131-154). New Delhi, Academic Foundation in Association with Centre for Civil Society.

Ostrom, E. (2002). Reformulating the commons. Ambiente & Sociedade - Ano V - No 10, 1-22

Pagiola, S., Arcenas, A., & Platais, G. (2005). Can payments for environmental services help reduce poverty? An exploration of the issues and the evidence to date from Latin America. World Development, 33(2), 237-253.

Rasolofoson, R. A., Ferraro, P. J., Jenkins, C. N., & Jones, J. P. G. (2015). Effectiveness of community forest management at reducing deforestation in Madagascar. Biological Conservation, 184, 271-277.

Redford, K., & Richter, B. (1999). Conservation of biodiversity in a world of use. Conservation Biology, 13(6), 1246-1256.

Reed, M. S., Graves, A., Dandy, N., Posthumus, H., Hubacek, K., Morris, J., . . . Quinn, C. H. (2009 ). Who’s in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 1933–1949.

Resosudarmo, I. A. P., Admadja, S., Ekaputri, A. D., Intarini, D. Y., & Indriatmoko, Y. (2014). Does tenure security lead to REDD+ project effectiveness? Reflections from five emerging sites in Indonesia. World Development, 55, 68-83.

Ridha, D. M., Purbo, A., Wibowo, A., Tobing, L. B., Widyaningtyas, N., Widayati, T., . . . Farid, M. (2016). Perubahan iklim, perjanjian Paris, dan nationally determined contribution. Jakarta: Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan.

Ritonga, A., Mardhiansyah, M., & Kausar. (2014). Identifikasi kearifan lokal masyarakat hutan larangan adat Rumbio, Kabupaten Kampar terhadap perlindungan hutan. (Laporan). Pekanbaru: Departement of Forestry, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Riau.

Rochmayanto, Y. (2013). Analisis risiko kegagalan implementasi REDD+ di Provinsi Riau. Jurnal Analisis Kebijakan Kehutanan, 10(2), 149-165.

Suich, H., Lugina, M., Muttaqin, M. Z., Alviya, I., & Sari, G. K. (2016). Payments for ecosystem ervices in Indonesia. Oryx International Journal of Conservation, 1,1-9.

Sunderlin, W. D., & Atmadja, S. (2004). Is REDD+ an idea whose time has come, or gone? In A. Angelsen. Realising REDD+ national stratey and policy option (pp 45-53). Bogor: CIFOR. Terborgh, J. (1999). Requiem for nature. Washington DC: Island Press.

UNEP-WCMC. (2004). Defining protected area management categories. Retrieved 20 September 2017 from http://www.unep-cmc. org/index.html? protected_areas/categories/~main.

Western, D. (1997). In the dust of Kilimanjaro. Washington DC: Island Press.

Wunder, S. (2008). Payments for environmental services and the poor: Concepts and preliminary evidence. Environmental Development Economic, 13(3), 279-297.

Zhou, M. (2015). Adapting sustainable forest management to climate policy uncertainty: A conceptual framework. Forest Policy and Economics, 59, 66-74.


Copyright (c) 2018 Jurnal Analisis Kebijakan Kehutanan

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.