STAKEHOLDER CONFLICTS AND FOREST DECENTRALIZATION POLICIES IN WEST KALIMANTAN: THEIR DYNAMICS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE FOREST MANAGEMENT

Yurdi Yasmi,Gusti Z Anshari,Heru Komarudin,Syarif Alqadri

doi:10.1080/14728028.2006.9752554

Abstract

ABSTRACT Stakeholder conflicts in relation to forest decentralization policies were studied in West Kalimantan, Indonesia to determine: • how these policies were understood by local stakeholders, • how they were implemented, and • their impacts in terms of forest management and conflicts. A case study using qualitative methodologies i.e. semi-structured interviews, field observations and workshops, was made. The results show that the implementation of decentralization policies gave rise to conflicts between local and central government as well as among local stakeholders. Despite the goal of benefiting local stakeholders by decentralizing forest management, the central government's subsequent withdrawal of much of the local governments' authority to manage forestry raises new questions on whether the central government is indeed willing to share power. We concluded that central and local governments and relevant stakeholders need to develop better communication and negotiation procedures to address current conflicts appropriately.

Highlights

Natural resource management (NRM) is almost always characterized by conflict
The results show that the implementation of decentralization policies gave rise to conflicts between local and central government as well as among local stakeholders
There is a large body of literature that deals with NRM conflicts and covers areas such as forestry (e.g., Matose, 1997, FAO, 2000, Hellstrom, 2001, SchroederWildberg and Carius, 2003, Yasmi, 2003, Wulan et al, 2004), fishery

Summary

Introduction

Natural resource management (NRM) is almost always characterized by conflict. Many authors have argued that conflict is unavoidable because stakeholders have differing and competing interests, perceptions and ideas about how NRM should be carried out (e.g., Buckles 1999, Castro and Nielson 2003). There is a large body of literature that deals with NRM conflicts and covers areas such as forestry (e.g., Matose, 1997, FAO, 2000, Hellstrom, 2001, SchroederWildberg and Carius, 2003, Yasmi, 2003, Wulan et al, 2004), fishery A variety of consequences of NRM conflicts have been noted including distrust among stakeholders, resource degradation, hostility etc. To a limited extent, conflicts have had positive outcomes: for instance, new agreements over resource management, policy changes and co-management agreements among stakeholders (Castro and Nielson, 2001)

Methods

Findings

Discussion

Conclusion