Rights, Authorities and Power:

Gamma Galudra and Ujjwal Pradhan

Forest Tenure Transition in Indonesia in relation to REDD

General Situation of Forest Tenure in Indonesia

2

•Forest land in Indonesia covers more than 120 million hectares. •This is about 70% of Indonesia’s land.

•However, the figure is not representing the actual size of forest cover, but it represents the size of designated forest. •All designated forest are under the state ownership, based on national legislation

General Situation of Forest Tenure in Indonesia

3

•Customary system exist within the forest state ownership. It is very diverse and context specific. •The rights of it are often blending of groups to individual rights.

•This system is contested & eroded by social, economic and cultural change. •Weak/non-existent legal recognition undermines it and exposes local people to dispossession.•In legality, some of the customary systems are sometimes concealed as use rights under various permits scheme such as Village Forest, Community Forestry etc

Brief History of Forest Tenure Transition in Indonesia

4

•During the Dutch Colonial (before independence), except Java, most of the forest area are under the control of customary system.•This continues during the independence period

•During the new order (1967-1997), many of forest area are under state ownership.•The economic development was the main interest.•The state ownership gave the legal basis and pathway for the logging concession to operate in the forest area

Brief History of Forest Tenure Transition in Indonesia

5

•During the decentralization era, despite that forest land is under state ownership, the authority to allocate rights to use forest are on the hand of local government•Deforestation is high during this period

•After 2004, many local government’s authority is taken back to central government•The efforts of recentralize cause conflict of authority

Problem Analysis

6

Indonesia is currently become the target of carbon emission reduction through REDD

This makes possible as the GoIpledges to reduce its carbon emission to 26% or 41% with international supports

It leads to the questions on:1. how REDD will transform tenure

in Indonesia 2. What directions that need to be

address for the success of carbon emission reduction?

Objective of the Presentation

7

The objective of the presentation is:1. to seek the opportunities and challenges of REDD to transform

forest tenure in Indonesia2. to provide directions that need to be addressed for the success

of REDD in Indonesia

The Emerging of ‘New’ Rights

8

• Carbon market have brought issues on ‘ carbon rights’• Carbon rights define as a form of property right that ‘commoditize’

carbon and allow such trading• Key questions are:

(1) who has, or can claim, the right to ‘sell carbon’ or ask for coin vestment in emission reduction efforts (local communities, concessionaires, forest management units, local government, national government); and

(2) who has, or can claim, the right to receive payments for avoided damage.

• These questions demand clarity on resolving land tenure and forest management rights and stakeholder rights/ or a process of negotiation and compromise into shared benefits

Labor and labor opportunity

Access to resources

Negotiation and Social Relation Technology

Capital

Market access

Social Identity

Knowledge

Authority

Costs of claim & enforcement

Expected benefits of resource use

The Challenges (1)

10

• Unsolved problems on forest governance ‘land rights’ impacted on unclear ‘carbon rights’. – Various interpretation among government layers concerning on ‘allocation

rights’ and ‘access’ due to previous decentralization policies, creating overlapping use of land (bundle of rights)

– Local land tenure dynamics, due to shifting regulations, create confusion on rights (co-existing)

– Recentralization becomes a strategic option, but it has created resistance from the local government and local people Case study in Ex-Mega Rice Area, Central Kalimantan.

The Challenges (2)

11

• Many rules and regulations in sub-national level focused only to ‘fairness’ (those who protect/conserve forest), neglecting how REDD funding can be distributed to ‘efficiency’ (those who emit carbon)- Perdasus No 21/ 2008 and RESPEK Program focused only to protect

customary rights. Case study in Papua Province.

The Challenges (3)

12

• Need for greater recognition on customary (adat) land/forest– A practical and just resolution to the relationship between customary

ownership, defined based on PERDASUS No 21/1998 , and statutory law. Case study in Papua Province.

– Collective rights are not being defined by land law, limiting them to be registered as legitimate rights. The village forest scheme is seen as a strategic option to ensure rights, but it has displace customary (adat) rightsCase study in West Sumatra, Jambi and Kalimantan Island

The Challenges (4)

13

• Need for greater recognition not solely to land tenure, but also to tree tenure and water tenure– Land tenure has different scheme and perspective with tree tenure. People

who own land do not automatically own the trees.Case study in Lamandau District, Central Kalimantan Province.

– In the peatland area, water tenure is link to carbon rights. Those who use the rights to drain canal cause carbon emission.Case study in Ex-Mega Rice Area, Central Kalimantan Province

Opportunities to Transform Forest Tenure in Indonesia

14

• Clarifying land rights and tenure, tree rights and tenure, and water rights and tenure– Carbon rights should not link to land, but also to should link to tree and

water rights and tenure. In Australia and New Zealand, carbon rights are linked to land rights and ownership, but in Indonesia, they should link to these three rights and tenure.

• Improved tenure instruments that provide greater security to local communities’ collective rights. – No current legal instrument recognize collective rights. “Sertifikat

Kelompok” (Group Title) implemented by BPN can be an alternative.

Efforts on Carbon Rights

15

• Institutional Setting for distributing REDD funds by balancing ‘fairness’ and ‘efficiency’ issues.– Carbon rights are also link to fairness and efficiency. If the focus is too

much on fairness – with smaller players that clear forests on the agriculturalfrontier or, in particular, indigenous and community groups who often haveunclear legal claim to their land – it makes participation and significantemissions reduction more difficult. If the focus is too much on efficiency –on heavily threatened forest – it could unduly reward wealthy and oftenloggers and agribusiness interests responsible for a large proportion ofdeforestation.

– Fairness and efficiency must be in balance on this occasion.

Opportunities to Transform Forest Tenure in Indonesia

REDD’s Threat to Transform Forest Tenure in Indonesia

16

• Clarifying carbon rights must be followed by local/ customary rights recognition– REDD may promote status quo, ex. promoting village forest scheme that can

displace adat (customary) rights, strengthening state forest gazettement without properly define ‘abandon’ land, etc. Evidence occurs in Jambi and West Sumatra.

– Carbon rights is seen as ‘rights not to use forest’ cause resistance from local government and local people. Evidence occurs in Central Kalimantan.

REDD’s Threat to Transform Forest Tenure in Indonesia

17

• Improved tenure instruments that provide greater security to local communities’ collective rights should be followed by consistent decentralization policies, not recentralization. – The ‘failure’ of decentralization leads the GoI to recentralize some forest and

land authority from local government. The recentralization creates resistance from the local government and local people. Evidence occurs in Central Kalimantan.

Thank You