Abstrak
Keaneka ragaman kelompok masyarakat bergabung dalam kerjasama resmi dengan dinas kehutanan untuk mengelola kehutanan pada perkebunan jati, termasuk di dalamnya kabupaten Sumbawa dan Bima di propinsi Nusa Tenggara Barat. Pada masing-masing kasus penandatangan memorandum of understanding (MOU) telah di lakukan untuk menciptakan kesepakatan antara masyarakat dengan dinas kehutanan di kabupaten. Akan tetapi, panduan tehnis dan implementasinya termasuk kesepakatan pembagian hasil pada masing-masing pihak belum jelas. Panduan seperti yang di maksud sangat penting sebagai jaminan komitmen masyarakat dalam pengelolaan daerah secara berkelanjutan. Tiap kesepakatan kerjasama harus mencakup perhitungan ekonomi kerja. Sasaran dari studi ini adalah untuk memperhitungkan financial dan perkiraan ekonomi dalam skema kerjasama, untuk menidentifikasi dan memperhitungkan aspek social ekonomi serta dampaknya pada skema kerjasama kehutanan jangka panjang dan perkiraan hasil pembagian keuntungan pada beberapa kerjasama.
Hasil dari analisa keuangan menunjukkan program kerjasama pengelolaan kehutanan berbasis masyarakat berpotensi untuk dapat dilaksanakan sebagai program jangka panjang yang dapat menggerakkan net present value (NPV). Hasil dari analisa ekonomi yang lebih luas yang memerlukan lingkungan, biaya social dan keuntungan dalam pertimbangan, menunjukkan NPV negative, itu berarti biaya kesempatan social tinggi. Dengan mempertimbangkan biaya serta keuntungan pada lingkungan dan aspek social memenuhi proporsi lebih tinggi pada lanjut kehidupan masyarakat dibawah perjanjian kerjasama usaha. Kerjasama tersebut telah meningkatkan tanggung jawab pada masyarakat dalam menjaga dan mengendalikan perkebunan serta persediaan. Akan tetapi, hal ini juga telah meningkatkan harapan pada masyarakat atas jaminan pembagian atas hasil tanaman. Beberapa tantangan yang dihadapi pada pengelolaan hutan masyarakat di Nusa Tenggara barat termasuk keterbatasan jaminan akan hak panen pada perkebunan jati di hutan daerah; institusi masyarakat tertinggal di tingkat desa; potensi tinggi dalam pengexplotasian hutan (pada waktu adanya kenaikan permintaan dari luar);serta kemampuan pemerintah dalam memimpin pelaksanaan lapangan tidak memadai.
1aCIFOR, PO Box 6596 JKPWB Jakarta 10065,
Indonesia, Email address: <[email protected]>.
2aWWF Indonesia Nusa Tenggara, PO Box 0054 Pos RSU
Mataram 83121, Nusa Tenggara Barat, Indonesia. Email: <[email protected]>.
3aDinas Kehutanan dan Perkebunan Sumbawa, Jl. Garuda
108, Sumbawa, Nusa Tenggara Barat, Indonesia. Email: <[email protected]>.
4aDinas Kehutanan Bima, Jl. Soekarno-Hatta No. 139 Raba
Bima, Nusa Tenggara Barat, Indonesia. Email: <[email protected]>.
5aFakultas Kehutanan, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Email
Background
Forestry management in Indonesia has shifted grad- ually from state-based forest management to commu- nity-based forest management. This has mainly happened since the reformation era began and with implementation of the decentralisation policy in 1998. Social forestry has become the main umbrella approach for Indonesia’s five forestry strategic pro- grams covering the period 2001–04. Social forestry arrangements are developed under a partnership or co-management approach. Under such arrangements local people are the main actors in decision-making regarding management of state forests (Suharjito 2005).
Smallholder timber production on mainly private and/or communal land under a partnership agreement between a community and a second party, such as the local forestry district agency (Dinas Kehutanan Kabupaten), has increasingly become an alternative to meeting economic, social and ecological objec- tives, such as rehabilitating degraded forest areas. Partnerships between the community and companies/ forest industries are important mechanisms for trans- ferring the benefits from forestry plantation develop- ment to local people (Figure 1).
Despite a good number of partnership programs initiated by the Ministry of Forestry, there are not many examples of successful partnerships for the fol-
lowing reasons (Nawir et al. 2003; Nawir and
Santoso 2005):
• Most partnership programs have been developed from the top down (government-initiated partnerships).
• Principles of a mutually beneficial partnership, embracing social, economic and management aspects have not been applied.
• There has been a lack of careful consideration of the long-term financial and economic feasibility and the capacity to ensure shared benefits for the parties involved in the partnerships.
• There has been a lack of fair valuation of inputs invested by both parties as the basis for defining the contractual agreement
• Mutual economic and social objectives have not been discussed and negotiated between the parties involved.
• Parties involved in the partnerships have not clearly understood the social and economic risks involved in a partnership.
Understanding the economic feasibility and social implications of a range of partnership schemes is an important basis for negotiating agreement on revenue sharing and for securing commitment from the com- munity’s partner to a long-term partnership arrange- ment. Given this situation, a study focusing on assessment of the economic feasibility of community forestry managed under partnership was conducted in the districts of Sumbawa and Bima in West Nusa Tenggara. The aim of the study was to assist the local forestry district agency to design efficient and effec- tive revenue-sharing agreements for partnerships
with tree grower groups (Koperasi Tani Hutan).
Objectives
In the District of Sumbawa the government endorsed
a local regulation, Perda-Peraturan Daerah no. 25,
2002, on community-based forest resources manage-
ment, or Pengelolaan Sumber Daya Hutan Berbasis
Masyarakat (PSDHBM), with reference to the Min- istry of Forestry (MoF) decree no. 622, 1997, on community forestry. Under this Perda, communities are now an important part of sharing the responsibil- ities of forest management with other stakeholders such as government and NGOs. Sharing responsibil- ities is relevant to overcoming the limitations of the forestry district agencies in handling forest manage- ment and its problems, mainly due to limited human resources and funding. Following this Perda as the umbrella law, the forestry district agency determined six priority locations on former state company (Per- hutani) land within production forests to implement PSDHBM models. The MoF responded very well to this initiative by assigning the Social Forestry Program to some of these locations. All these initia- tives implemented under partnership schemes are included in a memorandum of understanding (MoU). However, technical and implementation guidelines have not been drafted due to the lack of a clear basis for defining profit sharing, which is critical to securing the commitment of communities to a MoU. In contrast to Sumbawa, forestry development in the District of Bima remains focused on technical aspects instead of putting priority on community par- ticipation and institutional development. The lack of
a local regulation to provide an umbrella law (payung
hukum) has been an impediment to accelerating progress on community-based forestry management (CBFM) initiatives under partnerships.
Figure 1. Partnership programs initiated by government and companies
Notes:
a Government programs since 1970s under the control of Directorate General of Social Forestry and Land Rehabilitation and/or
Directorate of Forestry Plantation Development within the Directorate General of Forest Production Development Program (Direktur Jenderal Bina Produksi Kehutanan).
b Inhutani is a state company with the responsibility to manage production forests in outer islands and to rehabilitate logged-
over forests.
c HTI, Hutan Tanaman Industri, is a timber plantation concession granted by the Ministry of Forestry to the companies. d Participatory land rehabilitation program was still at preliminary formation and there were no complete guidelines during the
period of former Minister Nur Mahmudi (early 2000).
e Perhutani is a state company with the main responsibility of managing teak plantations on Java.
f The social forestry program during the 1970s–1980s mainly focused on providing opportunities for local people to practice
Taungya inside teak plantations.
g Managing the forest with the community or PHBM, Pengelolaan Hutan Bersama Masyarakat, was initiated (early 2000) by
Perhutani which focuses on providing revenue sharing from harvested teaks.
h Integrated HTI system, which is not a common practice in timber plantation development in Indonesia, focuses on
developing timber plantation under partnership schemes (Potter and Lee 1998).
i Social Forestry Program called PMDHT (Pembinaan Masyarakat Desa Hutan Terpadu).
j Farm Forestry Credit Scheme or Kredit Hutan Rakyat was mainly provided from reforestation funds and stopped in 1998.
The credit was provided to the community with a competent business partner, such as a timber plantation company, both concession and non-concession holders.
Source: Revised from Nawir et al.(2003)
Inhutanib Perhutanie
Community
Social Forestry Programf HTIc transmigration•
HTIc transmigration and reforestation•
Participatory Land Rehabilitation ProgramdPMDHTi
(Pembinaan Masyarakat Desa Hutan Terpadu)
Integrated HTI systemh
Program of managing the forest with the community (PHBM)g