Bukti Korespondensi Prosiding Internasional
Judul : The Agroforestry System in Local Communities Near Lore Lindu National Park
Prosiding : The International Seminar on the ASEAN Economic Community 2015, Palu, Indonesia, 25 May 2015, ISBN: 978-602-8824-62-0.
Published by School of Postgraduate Studies Tadulako University Penulis : Golar Golar
No Perihal Tanggal
1 Bukti Artikel yang telah disubmit Rabu, 20 Mei 2015 2 Bukti Registration form dan pembayaran Kamis, 21 Mei 2015 3 Bukti perbaikan format artikel Rabu, 03 Juni 2015
1. Artikel yang telah disubmit
File Pendukung
THE AGROFORESTRY SYSTEMS IN LOCAL COMMUNITIES
NEAR LORE LINDU NATIONAL PARK
Golar
1,
1 Tadulako University, Dept. of Forestry, Indonesia golar_untad@yahoo.co.id
ABSTRACT
This research aims at finding out the typology of Agroforestry of the community near Lore Lindu National Park in Central Sulawesi. The method of analysis used was landscape approach (landscape approach) using SIG analysis, and New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) Analysis, in order to find out the orientation of agroforestry farming land used in each of the community typology. The result shows that are two dominant agroforestry typologies in the research area: home garden and mixed garden. It is found that the mixed garden is dominant. According to the NEP analysis, it is also found that individual attitudes in Salua villagers are more dominant than in Simoro counterparts.
The orientation in Salua is dominated by economic value. In contrast, Simoro has an altruistic value, that is, the Land Use System is not only for the economic orientation, but also for the socio-cultural value.
Keyword: Agroforestry, land use system, NEP, Lore Lindu National Park
I. INTRODUCTION
Agroforestry practices have been long undertaken in villages (local traditional agroforestry). In some villages, agroforestry plays an important role, particularly in the social-cultural aspects within the community. This is due to the fact that traditional agroforestry practices are the product of thought and experience within the community and even are maintained long within the community civilisation in the effort to satify their needs. Furthermore, the product and functions initiated by the structuring component of traditional agroforestry provide advantages for the implementation of social and cultural activities within the community such as the fulfilment of daily need, relegion, and other social-cultural aspects (Pei, S and Huai, H., 2007; Golar 2007). The agroforestri pattern used generally accounts for sustainability.
Those traditional patterns are often considered unproductive and tend to be short-term, as well as do not provide good planning so that they are not able to support the need of the owners for a long time (Pascal et al. 2007; ). In another side, the migrant, who mostly buy the lands of the local villagers for intensive farming, are able to show higher productivities. These opinion and argument are crucial to further investigate, particularly in agroforesty-based landscape scale.
The study within the agroforesty-based landscape scale context as well as farming orientation is rarely found. If any, not the study on the agroforesty-based landscape scale, but plot-based micro scale (Arifin, 2009; Arifin et. al, 2008). To large extent, there is very few comprehensive information which fundamentally explains the characteristics of agroforestry landscape within the two tipologies of local community and migrant . Based on this, the research problem under investigation are (a) what are the characteritics of the agroforestry landscape within the local community and the migrant
; (b) what is their agroferestry farming orientation?
II. METHODOLOGY
The Study Area
This research was conducted in two sites: Salua and Simoro Village (figure 1) where these sites are the representation for the research purpose. This research was undertaken from April to August 2014.
Figure -1 Research Site
The unit of analysis in this research was the local community and the migrant by using criteria: (a) they use farming land around the Lore Lindu National Park (LLNP); (b) the farming land uses agroforestry pattern. The data collection used was purposive sampling technique employing some criteria: (a) the selected respondents were the community members who used agroforestry pattern; (b) they were local villagers and migrant ; (c) the farming land was in the forest area.
Interview Design and Analysis
This research was conducted open interview, oral interviews based on the observation results and field observations. Interview questions were developed based on the typology of land use systems. On the first section of the guideline was aimed at identifying reasons for doing agroforestry, and considered the interviewees the land use orientations by NEP instruments. The second section referred to related between the NEP orientations and the agroforestry land use systems. Interviews were predominantly conducted face-to-face and FGD (Focus Group Discussion). All interviews were taped and transcribed. To analysis the interview results, we applied a qualitative analysis approach based on Berg, B.L. (2007). This incorporated the technique of structuring interview material with regard to content.
The method of analysis used was landscape approach (landscape approach) using GIS. This method using to identify and compare the system and the agroforestry pattern of the two typologies of the community; and New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) Analysis, in order to find out the
orientation of agroforestry farming land used in each of the community typology, including biospheric (environment orientations); egoistic (economy orientations), and altruistic (social orientations) aspects.
Data analysis can be defined as consisting of three concurrent flows of action: data reduction, data display, and conclusions and verifications. Data reduction using for focusing, simplifying, and transforming raw data into a more manageable form. Data display is intended to convey the idea that data are presented as an organized, compressed assembly of information that permits conclusions to be analytical drawn. After the data have been collected, reduced, and displayed, analytic conclusions begin to emerge and define themselves more clearly and definitively. After that, we was verification the data to assure that they are real and valid.
III. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
3.1. Land Cover
Based on the land cover, the two sites were dominantly forest cover, respectively Salua Village has 8,685.95 ha (± 78.21%) and Simoro Village has 641.01 ha (±44.8%). For the area of mixed garden which is mostly agroforestry pattern, respectively Salua Village has 1,361.08 ha (12.26%) and Simoro Village has 536 ha (37.31%). The map of land cover is presented in Figure 2 and 3.
Figure 2. Map of Land Cover and Land Use in So Village
3.2 Agroforestry Landscape
Agroforestry landscape refers to a natural space area or object in which the land is used for agroforestry. In Salua and Simoro Village, mixed garden pattern is dominant. However, there has been some differences of the two, particularly the composition of the plant types in the garden and the point of the agroforestry land.
In Salua Village, the agroforestry land is situated outside the forest area (70%), while in Simoro Village, most land is located in the forest area (75%). With limited land of APL in Simoro Village, the community’s culture tending to cultivate the forest area, this causes most agroforestry land uses in this village is in the National Park.
In these two sites, the agroforestry land use is the combination of forest plant types (palapi and nyatoh) and agricultural plants. In Salua Village, the plant types of non-forest remain dominant, and commercial types such as cacao, coconuts, and fruit plants (duria and advocado). In Simoro, the villagers tend to mix forest plants (palapi and nyatoh) and agricultural plants (cacao) particularly palawija types (corns and peanuts) in their agroforestry land. The comparison of the composition of forest plants, agriculture, and “semusim (short term) plants is presented in Figure 4.
kakao tanaman kehutanan semusim
60 27.5
12.5
45 35 20
Salua Simoro
Figure 4 The Comparison of Composition of the Respondent’s Plant Types in Two Research Sites
Figure 4 above indicates that the comparison of the composition of the respondent’s plant types in the research sites remains different, where the composition of short term plants and forest plants in Simoro Village is dominant while more cacao in Salua Village is. The landscape of the two sites can be seen in Figure 5 below.
Figure 3. Map of Land Cover and Land Use in Simoro Village
Forest Plants Short terms
Cacao plans
LLNP
Mix Gardens
Mix Gardens
River
Villages
Forest Areas
Figure 5. Landscape of Land Use System in the Two Research Sites
The Orientation of Individual Value
A number of studies focusing on the driving factor for change in the landscape includes Fisher (1989); Geist and Lambin (2002); Hutapea (2005) found that the dominant factor which drives deforestation is connected with the social fundamental process including the dynamics of population or agricultural policy bringing about the causes in the local context. The typology of agroforestry landscape in the two villages is dominated with mixed garden pattern, and this can be differentiated based on the mix garden types developed. The use of agroforestry pattern in Salua Village puts the emphasis on the orientation of Egoistic value, tending to focus on the economic aspect of the land use. In Simoro Village, however, Altruististic value is more concerned, where the land use is not only on the economic aspect, but it is also concerned with socio-cultural aspect. The comparison of the individual orientation value in the two sites can be seen in Figure 6,7, and 8.
Indikator 1 indikator 2 indikator 3 indikator 4 indikator 5 indikator 6 indikator 7 indikator 8
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Simoro salua
Figure 6. Comparative Diagram of the Respondent’s Egoistic Value in Simoro and Salua Village
Indikator 1 indikator 2 indikator 3 indikator 4 indikator 5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Figure 7. Comparative Diagram of the Respondent’s Altruistic Value in Simoro and Salua Village
Indikator 1 indikator 2 indikator 3 indikator 4 indikator 5 indikator 6
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Simoro salua
Figure 8. Comparative Diagram of the Respondent’s Biosferic Value in Simoro and Salua Village
To Simoro community, the meaning of ownership and land use authority is not limited with the economic asset. It is, however, concerned with the social asset as the representation of their own self both individual and collective(Wyatt et.al. 2013). This could drive them to use land in forest area, opening farming under their power. It is different from their counterpart in Salua Village, the land is dominantly as the economic asset which can be used maximally in order to cater for their family’s needs. Their land is intensively used through mixed garden for the commercial purposes.
Furthermore, these two agroforestry typologies depict adaptation or various responses within the community and they are shown through interaction with natural resources. Golar (2010; 2008;
2007); Golar and Hasriani (2009); Golar (2014) explain the process of interaction between the local community and the natural resources around the National Park of Lore Lindu. It is clear that
institutionally how the local community is able to adapt and use agroforestry-based land use pattern as the actualization of adaptive strategy in order to cater for their daily needs.
In line with this study, Sitorus (2006) describes the fundamental faster change in the village landscape as a consequence of cacao farming development. This indicates that there has been a local social forming of radical change which facilitates the shift in the system of land owner of common resources into individual ownership, where land distribution satisfies the market power (land selling prices).
Interestingly, it is explained that this condition enables the local ethnics to particularly get land resources and sell them to the migrant . Consequently, this causes a fundamental change in the local agricultural structure, where the local villagers have put their position from “having land” into
“having no land” (Schmit et. al. 2012; McGregor 2011; Kelso and Jacobson 2010). Meanwhile, the migrant have got higher position from “having no land” into “having land”. The change in the agricultural structure indicates the decrease in the local villagers’ social economic power. In contrast, there has been an increase for the migrant ’ safety. This condition has driven the local villagers to try to overcome this social economic problem by cultivating land in the forest. According to Gunatilleke et al., 1993; Anderson and Putz, 2002; Golar, 2007; Rist et al., 2008; that’s Indigenous people and their knowledge about nature have assumed major importance in modern conservation practice including in relation to protected areas, like Lore Lind National Parks in this research context.
Savitri and Purwandari (2006) argue that the migrant who have used the land in a certain site try to adapt to their new lives and work hard to respond the change from externally, including the land use pattern. This enables them to be more productive and more ”successful” compared with
”the local villagers”. However, this research also provides another different fact. In Simoro Village, the local ethnics who dominantly use land remain relatively the same as their counterparts in Salua Village. The fundamental difference is that the two typologies of the community have in their own orientation of land use.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
1. The typology of agroforestry landscape in the two research sites is concerned with mixed garden pattern and can be differentiated based on the types of mixed garden developed.
2. The use of agroforestry pattern in Salua Village focuses on the orientation of egoistic value, putting the priority of economic aspect of the land. Meanwhile, in Simoro Village, altruististic
value is dominant, where the land use is not only for economic advantages, but it is also for socio- cultural aspects.
REFERENCES
Anderson, P.J., Putz, F.E., 2002. Harvesting and conservation: are both possible for the palm, Iriartea deltoidea? Forest Ecol. Manage. 170, 271–283.
Arifin H.S., Suhardi, Wulandari, C. Sn Pramukanto, Q. 2008. Agroforestry Landscape analysis in
‘Mendalam’ River Basin, the Upper Stream of Kapuas Watershed, West Kalimantan Province, Indonesia. Research Report, SEANAFE-ICRAF. 70pp.
Arifin H.S. 2009. Rural landscape Management for Sustainable and walfere: on The Agroforestry landscape, concept, method, and Agroforestry management: The cases in Indonesia, Filipina, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam (in Indonesian version). Bogor: IPB Press.
Berg, B.L. 2007. Qualitative Research Methods for The Social Sciences. Pearson International Edition.
California State University. Long Beach.
Fisher, R.J., 1989. The Management of Forest in Rural Development: A Case Study of Sindhu Palchowk and Kavre Palanchowk Districts of Nepal. Discussion Paper No. 1. Mountain Populations and Institutions, Kathmandu.
Geist, H.J., Lambin. 2002. Proximate Causes and Underlying Driving Forces of tropical Deforestation.
Bioscience 52.
Golar. 2007. Adaptation Strategy On Maintaining Forest Sustainability: Jurnal Agrisains, Tadulako University, Palu.
2008. Attitude and Social Decision Toward Mangrove Conservation in Banawa Selatan Sub-District of Central Sulawesi Indonesia. Research Report on Collaboration between The Centre of Forest Research Tadulako University dan EEPSEA – Canada
Golar dan Hasriani. 2009. The Analysis of dominant factors that influences the encroachments in Lore Lindu national (In Indonesian version). Jurnal Foresains, XI editions. University of Tadulako, Palu
Golar. 2010. The Study of Implementations of ACM Methods on Identification of Forest
Encroachment at Sintuwu Regency) (In Indonesian Version). The Proceeding of research result on Tadulako University. Central Sulawesi.
2014. The Conflict Resolution and Shifting Community Empowerment at Lore Lindu national Park. (In Indonesian Version). The Proceeding of national seminar of Forest management Community (KOMHINDO) Hasanuddin University, Makassar 4 – 5 September 2014.
Gunatilleke, I.A.U.N., Gunatilleke, C.V.S., Abeygunawardena, P., 1993. Interdisciplinary research towards management of non-timber forest resources in lowland rain forests of Sri Lanka.
Econ. Bot. 47 (3), 282–290.
Hutapea T. 2005. Development of Sustainable Agroforestry in Watershed (case study of DAS Cilliwung Bogor Regency (in Indonesian Version). (disertasition) not publication. Bogor Agriculture University (IPB). Bogor.
Kelso, A, Jacobson, M. 2010. Community Assessment Of Agroforestry Opportunities in GaMothiba, South Africa. Agroforestry System 83: 267–278 DOI 10.1007/s10457-011-9384-5
McGregor D. 2011. Aboriginal/non-Aboriginal relations and sustainable forest management in Canada: The influence of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples Journal of Environmental Management 92 (2011) 300–310 DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.09.038.
Pascal C. Sanginga, Rick N. Kamugisha, Adrienne M. Martin. 2007. Conflicts management, social capital and adoption of agroforestry technologies: empirical findings from the highlands of southwestern Uganda. Agroforest Syst (2007) 69:67–76. Springer Science Business Media B.V.
2006.
Pei, S., Huai, H., 2007. Ethnobotany. Shanghai Science and Technology Press, Shanghai, China.
Rist, L., Shaanker, R.U., Milner-Gulland, E.J., Ghazoul, J., 2008. Managing mistletoes: the value of local practices for a non-timber forest resource. Forest Ecol. Manage. 255, 1684–1691.
Savitri L.A. 2006. Under the control of Source - Agricultural Resources and Conservation Areas : Marriage BETWEEN Structural Interventions And Cultural hearts Canyons case in Jambi Peatland Rehabilitation (in Indonesian Version). Journal of Rural and Agrarian Reform.
Schmitz, Soentoro M.F., Matos DGG., De Aranzal., Ruiz-Labourdette P., Aguilera, P., Pineda, F.D. 2012.
Effects of a protected area on land-use dynamics and socioeconomic development of local populations. Biological Conservation 149: 122–135. http://www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon.
Sitorus S. 2006. Reclaim forest land (in Indonesian version). Journal of Rural and Agrarian Reform . Jogyakarta : LAPERA, Putaka Utama.
Wyatt, S., Fortier, J.-F.,Natcher, D., Smith, P., Hébert, M. 2013. Collaboration between Aboriginal peoples and the Canadian forest sector: A typology of arrangements for establishing control and determining benefits of forestlands. Journal of Environmental Management 115;21-31.
http://www.elsevier.com /locate/jenvman.
2. Bukti registration form dan pembayaran
Bukti Pendukung
Registration Form
3. Bukti Perbaikan Artikel
Bukti Pendukung
Contoh..
THE AGROFORESTRY SYSTEMS IN LOCAL COMMUNITIES NEAR LORE LINDU NATIONAL PARK
Golar
1,
1 Tadulako University, Dept. of Forestry, Indonesia golar_untad@yahoo.co.id
ABSTRACT
This research aims at finding out the typology of Agroforestry of the community near Lore Lindu National Park in Central Sulawesi. The method of analysis used was landscape approach (landscape approach) using SIG analysis, and New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) Analysis, in order to find out the orientation of agroforestry farming land used in each of the community typology. The result shows that are two dominant agroforestry typologies in the research area: home garden and mixed garden. It is found that the mixed garden is dominant. According to the NEP analysis, it is also found that individual attitudes in Salua villagers are more dominant than in Simoro counterparts.
The orientation in Salua is dominated by economic value. In contrast, Simoro has an altruistic value, that is, the Land Use System is not only for the economic orientation, but also for the socio-cultural value.
Keyword: Agroforestry, land use system, NEP, Lore Lindu National Park
I. INTRODUCTION
Agroforestry practices have been long undertaken in villages (local traditional agroforestry). In some villages, agroforestry plays an important role, particularly in the social-cultural aspects within the community. This is due to the fact that traditional agroforestry practices are the product of thought and experience within the community and even are maintained long within the community civilisation in the effort to satify their needs. Furthermore, the product and functions initiated by the structuring component of traditional agroforestry provide advantages for the implementation of social and cultural activities within the community such as the fulfilment of daily need, relegion, and other social-cultural aspects (Pei, S and Huai, H., 2007; Golar 2007). The agroforestri pattern used generally accounts for sustainability.
Those traditional patterns are often considered unproductive and tend to be short-term, as well as do not provide good planning so that they are not able to support the need of the owners for a long time (Pascal et al. 2007; ). In another side, the migrant, who mostly buy the lands of the local villagers for intensive farming, are able to show higher productivities. These opinion and argument are crucial to further investigate, particularly in agroforesty-based landscape scale.
The study within the agroforesty-based landscape scale context as well as farming orientation is rarely found. If any, not the study on the agroforesty-based landscape scale, but plot-based micro scale (Arifin, 2009; Arifin et. al, 2008). To large extent, there is very few comprehensive information which fundamentally explains the characteristics of agroforestry landscape within the two tipologies of local community and migrant . Based on this, the research problem under investigation are (a) what are the characteritics of the agroforestry landscape within the local community and the migrant
; (b) what is their agroferestry farming orientation?
II. METHODOLOGY
The Study Area
This research was conducted in two sites: Salua and Simoro Village (figure 1) where these sites are the representation for the research purpose. This research was undertaken from April to August 2014.
The unit of analysis in this research was the local community and the migrant by using criteria: (a) they use farming land around the Lore Lindu National Park (LLNP); (b) the farming land uses agroforestry pattern. The data collection used was purposive sampling technique employing some criteria: (a) the selected respondents were the community members who used agroforestry pattern; (b) they were local villagers and migrant ; (c) the farming land was in the forest area.
Interview Design and Analysis
This research was conducted open interview, oral interviews based on the observation results and field observations. Interview questions were developed based on the typology of land use systems. On the first section of the guideline was aimed at identifying reasons for doing agroforestry, and considered the interviewees the land use orientations by NEP instruments. The second section referred to related between the NEP orientations and the agroforestry land use systems. Interviews were predominantly conducted face-to-face and FGD (Focus Group Discussion). All interviews were taped and transcribed. To analysis the interview results, we applied a qualitative analysis approach based on Berg, B.L. (2007). This incorporated the technique of structuring interview material with regard to content.
The method of analysis used was landscape approach (landscape approach) using GIS. This method using to identify and compare the system and the agroforestry pattern of the two typologies of the community; and New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) Analysis, in order to find out the
Figure -1 Research Site
orientation of agroforestry farming land used in each of the community typology, including biospheric (environment orientations); egoistic (economy orientations), and altruistic (social orientations) aspects.
Data analysis can be defined as consisting of three concurrent flows of action: data reduction, data display, and conclusions and verifications. Data reduction using for focusing, simplifying, and transforming raw data into a more manageable form. Data display is intended to convey the idea that data are presented as an organized, compressed assembly of information that permits conclusions to be analytical drawn. After the data have been collected, reduced, and displayed, analytic conclusions begin to emerge and define themselves more clearly and definitively. After that, we was verification the data to assure that they are real and valid.
III. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
3.2. Land Cover
Based on the land cover, the two sites were dominantly forest cover, respectively Salua Village has 8,685.95 ha (± 78.21%) and Simoro Village has 641.01 ha (±44.8%). For the area of mixed garden which is mostly agroforestry pattern, respectively Salua Village has 1,361.08 ha (12.26%) and Simoro Village has 536 ha (37.31%). The map of land cover is presented in Figure 2 and 3.
3.2 Agroforestry Landscape
Agroforestry landscape refers to a natural space area or object in which the land is used for agroforestry. In Salua and Simoro Village, mixed garden pattern is dominant. However, there has been some differences of the two, particularly the composition of the plant types in the garden and the point of the agroforestry land.
In Salua Village, the agroforestry land is situated outside the forest area (70%), while in Simoro Village, most land is located in the forest area (75%). With limited land of APL in Simoro Village, the community’s culture tending to cultivate the forest area, this causes most agroforestry land uses in this village is in the National Park.
In these two sites, the agroforestry land use is the combination of forest plant types (palapi and nyatoh) and agricultural plants. In Salua Village, the plant types of non-forest remain dominant, and commercial types such as cacao, coconuts, and fruit plants (duria and advocado). In Simoro, the villagers tend to mix forest plants (palapi and nyatoh) and agricultural plants (cacao) particularly palawija types (corns and peanuts) in their agroforestry land. The comparison of the composition of forest plants, agriculture, and “semusim (short term) plants is presented in Figure 4.
Figure 2. Map of Land Cover and Land Use in Salua Village
Figure 3. Map of Land Cover and Land Use in Simoro Village
kakao tanaman kehutanan semusim
60 27.5
12.5
45 35 20 Salua Simoro
Figure 4 The Comparison of Composition of the Respondent’s Plant Types in Two Research Sites
Figure 4 above indicates that the comparison of the composition of the respondent’s plant types in the research sites remains different, where the composition of short term plants and forest plants in Simoro Village is dominant while more cacao in Salua Village is. The landscape of the two sites can be seen in Figure 5 below.
Figure 5. Landscape of Land Use System in the Two Research Sites
The Orientation of Individual Value
A number of studies focusing on the driving factor for change in the landscape includes Fisher (1989); Geist and Lambin (2002); Hutapea (2005) found that the dominant factor which drives deforestation is connected with the social fundamental process including the dynamics of population or agricultural policy bringing about the causes in the local context. The typology of agroforestry landscape in the two villages is dominated with mixed garden pattern, and this can be differentiated based on the mix garden types developed. The use of agroforestry pattern in Salua Village puts the emphasis on the orientation of Egoistic value, tending to focus on the economic aspect of the land use. In Simoro Village, however, Altruististic value is more concerned, where the land use is not only on the economic aspect, but it is also concerned with socio-cultural aspect. The comparison of the individual orientation value in the two sites can be seen in Figure 6,7, and 8.
Forest Plants Short terms
Cacao plans
LLNP
Mix Gardens
Mix Gardens
River
Villages
Forest Areas
Indikator 1 indikator 2 indikator 3 indikator 4 indikator 5 indikator 6 indikator 7 indikator 8
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Simoro salua
Figure 6. Comparative Diagram of the Respondent’s Egoistic Value in Simoro and Salua Village
Indikator 1 indikator 2 indikator 3 indikator 4 indikator 5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Figure 7. Comparative Diagram of the Respondent’s Altruistic Value in Simoro and Salua Village
Indikator 1 indikator 2 indikator 3 indikator 4 indikator 5 indikator 6
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Simoro salua
Figure 8. Comparative Diagram of the Respondent’s Biosferic Value in Simoro and Salua Village
To Simoro community, the meaning of ownership and land use authority is not limited with the economic asset. It is, however, concerned with the social asset as the representation of their own self both individual and collective(Wyatt et.al. 2013). This could drive them to use land in forest area, opening farming under their power. It is different from their counterpart in Salua Village, the land is dominantly as the economic asset which can be used maximally in order to cater for their family’s needs. Their land is intensively used through mixed garden for the commercial purposes.
Furthermore, these two agroforestry typologies depict adaptation or various responses within the community and they are shown through interaction with natural resources. Golar (2010; 2008;
2007); Golar and Hasriani (2009); Golar (2014) explain the process of interaction between the local community and the natural resources around the National Park of Lore Lindu. It is clear that
institutionally how the local community is able to adapt and use agroforestry-based land use pattern as the actualization of adaptive strategy in order to cater for their daily needs.
In line with this study, Sitorus (2006) describes the fundamental faster change in the village landscape as a consequence of cacao farming development. This indicates that there has been a local social forming of radical change which facilitates the shift in the system of land owner of common resources into individual ownership, where land distribution satisfies the market power (land selling prices).
Interestingly, it is explained that this condition enables the local ethnics to particularly get land resources and sell them to the migrant . Consequently, this causes a fundamental change in the local agricultural structure, where the local villagers have put their position from “having land” into
“having no land” (Schmit et. al. 2012; McGregor 2011; Kelso and Jacobson 2010). Meanwhile, the migrant have got higher position from “having no land” into “having land”. The change in the agricultural structure indicates the decrease in the local villagers’ social economic power. In contrast, there has been an increase for the migrant ’ safety. This condition has driven the local villagers to try to overcome this social economic problem by cultivating land in the forest. According to Gunatilleke et al., 1993; Anderson and Putz, 2002; Golar, 2007; Rist et al., 2008; that’s Indigenous people and their knowledge about nature have assumed major importance in modern conservation practice including in relation to protected areas, like Lore Lind National Parks in this research context.
Savitri and Purwandari (2006) argue that the migrant who have used the land in a certain site try to adapt to their new lives and work hard to respond the change from externally, including the land use pattern. This enables them to be more productive and more ”successful” compared with
”the local villagers”. However, this research also provides another different fact. In Simoro Village, the local ethnics who dominantly use land remain relatively the same as their counterparts in Salua Village. The fundamental difference is that the two typologies of the community have in their own orientation of land use.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
3. The typology of agroforestry landscape in the two research sites is concerned with mixed garden pattern and can be differentiated based on the types of mixed garden developed.
4. The use of agroforestry pattern in Salua Village focuses on the orientation of egoistic value, putting the priority of economic aspect of the land. Meanwhile, in Simoro Village, altruististic value is dominant, where the land use is not only for economic advantages, but it is also for socio- cultural aspects.
REFERENCES
Anderson, P.J., Putz, F.E., 2002. Harvesting and conservation: are both possible for the palm, Iriartea deltoidea? Forest Ecol. Manage. 170, 271–283.
Arifin H.S., Suhardi, Wulandari, C. Sn Pramukanto, Q. 2008. Agroforestry Landscape analysis in
‘Mendalam’ River Basin, the Upper Stream of Kapuas Watershed, West Kalimantan Province, Indonesia. Research Report, SEANAFE-ICRAF. 70pp.
Arifin H.S. 2009. Rural landscape Management for Sustainable and walfere: on The Agroforestry landscape, concept, method, and Agroforestry management: The cases in Indonesia, Filipina, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam (in Indonesian version). Bogor: IPB Press.
Berg, B.L. 2007. Qualitative Research Methods for The Social Sciences. Pearson International Edition.
California State University. Long Beach.
Fisher, R.J., 1989. The Management of Forest in Rural Development: A Case Study of Sindhu Palchowk and Kavre Palanchowk Districts of Nepal. Discussion Paper No. 1. Mountain Populations and Institutions, Kathmandu.
Geist, H.J., Lambin. 2002. Proximate Causes and Underlying Driving Forces of tropical Deforestation.
Bioscience 52.
Golar. 2007. Adaptation Strategy On Maintaining Forest Sustainability: Jurnal Agrisains, Tadulako University, Palu.
2008. Attitude and Social Decision Toward Mangrove Conservation in Banawa Selatan Sub-District of Central Sulawesi Indonesia. Research Report on Collaboration between The Centre of Forest Research Tadulako University dan EEPSEA – Canada
Golar dan Hasriani. 2009. The Analysis of dominant factors that influences the encroachments in Lore Lindu national (In Indonesian version). Jurnal Foresains, XI editions. University of Tadulako, Palu
Golar. 2010. The Study of Implementations of ACM Methods on Identification of Forest
Encroachment at Sintuwu Regency) (In Indonesian Version). The Proceeding of research result on Tadulako University. Central Sulawesi.
2014. The Conflict Resolution and Shifting Community Empowerment at Lore Lindu national Park. (In Indonesian Version). The Proceeding of national seminar of Forest management Community (KOMHINDO) Hasanuddin University, Makassar 4 – 5 September 2014.
Gunatilleke, I.A.U.N., Gunatilleke, C.V.S., Abeygunawardena, P., 1993. Interdisciplinary research towards management of non-timber forest resources in lowland rain forests of Sri Lanka.
Econ. Bot. 47 (3), 282–290.
Hutapea T. 2005. Development of Sustainable Agroforestry in Watershed (case study of DAS Cilliwung Bogor Regency (in Indonesian Version). (disertasition) not publication. Bogor Agriculture University (IPB). Bogor.
Kelso, A, Jacobson, M. 2010. Community Assessment Of Agroforestry Opportunities in GaMothiba, South Africa. Agroforestry System 83: 267–278 DOI 10.1007/s10457-011-9384-5
McGregor D. 2011. Aboriginal/non-Aboriginal relations and sustainable forest management in Canada: The influence of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples Journal of Environmental Management 92 (2011) 300–310 DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.09.038.
Pascal C. Sanginga, Rick N. Kamugisha, Adrienne M. Martin. 2007. Conflicts management, social capital and adoption of agroforestry technologies: empirical findings from the highlands of southwestern Uganda. Agroforest Syst (2007) 69:67–76. Springer Science Business Media B.V.
2006.
Pei, S., Huai, H., 2007. Ethnobotany. Shanghai Science and Technology Press, Shanghai, China.
Rist, L., Shaanker, R.U., Milner-Gulland, E.J., Ghazoul, J., 2008. Managing mistletoes: the value of local practices for a non-timber forest resource. Forest Ecol. Manage. 255, 1684–1691.
Savitri L.A. 2006. Under the control of Source - Agricultural Resources and Conservation Areas : Marriage BETWEEN Structural Interventions And Cultural hearts Canyons case in Jambi Peatland Rehabilitation (in Indonesian Version). Journal of Rural and Agrarian Reform.
Schmitz, Soentoro M.F., Matos DGG., De Aranzal., Ruiz-Labourdette P., Aguilera, P., Pineda, F.D. 2012.
Effects of a protected area on land-use dynamics and socioeconomic development of local populations. Biological Conservation 149: 122–135. http://www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon.
Sitorus S. 2006. Reclaim forest land (in Indonesian version). Journal of Rural and Agrarian Reform . Jogyakarta : LAPERA, Putaka Utama.
Wyatt, S., Fortier, J.-F.,Natcher, D., Smith, P., Hébert, M. 2013. Collaboration between Aboriginal peoples and the Canadian forest sector: A typology of arrangements for establishing control and determining benefits of forestlands. Journal of Environmental Management 115;21-31.
http://www.elsevier.com /locate/jenvman.
