ˏ˻ˏ͹ˏ̶͠ˡ‫ݖܩ‬቉ድǵፀ 2 ‫ش‬ǵ2002 ॷ 11 ೐අਬȆै໤̥͙̹ͣͺΐͺȆͺές΃

Kemiri (Aleurites moluccana) and Forest Resource Management in Eastern
Indonesia: An Eco-historical Perspective1)
TANAKA Koji*

Abstract
Kemiri, Aleurites moluccana, is an important useful plant in the Indonesianarchipelago. It has been grown for both subsistence and commercial purposes,
particularly in regions with a tropical monsoon climate, and has been important insustaining the everyday life of people in Eastern Indonesia. It has been utilized forvarious purposes: the lipid-rich seeds provide material for illumination, cooking andpharmaceuticals, and its trunks provide timber. Most of the production is currently
exported to Surabaya for local consumption, and part of it is exported abroad.
In addition to such economic uses, it is worth paying attention to kemiri’s role in
the rehabilitation of forest areas in Eastern Indonesia. There were two epoch-making
periods in relation to kemiri plantations, one in the colonial and the other in the New
Order period. In South Sulawesi in the 1920s and 1930s, the Dutch forestry agency
recommended kemiri planting to rehabilitate abandoned fields of shifting cultivation.
This was the region's first encounter with government forest policy. Under the New
Order regime, in accordance with policies favoring rapid economic development,“encroachment” on forest areas raised complicated issues. As local people, both natives
and migrants, began to open forest areas for agricultural purposes, the government ofSouth Sulawesi was forced to adjust the disignated boundaries of forest areas and also
to launch a new policy for stabilizing the encroachment. Under Pola Sul-Sel (the South
Sulawesi system), agricultural activities were legally recognized, even in the forest area, if
combined with the plantation of useful trees such as kemiri.
As these cases show, kemiri can be considered to have left an important “footprint”
from which we can learn about the process of political ecology in forest areas adjacent toagricultural lands in Eastern Indonesia.
* ᅒμᓚ‫⏋ص‬Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University
1) This paper is a revision of an oral presentation in Indonesian given at the International Symposium and Workshop,“The Beginning of the 21st Century: Endorsing Regional Autonomy, Understanding Local Cultures, Strengthening
National Integration,” held by the editorial committee of the Journal of Antropologi Indonesia at Hasanuddin University,
South Sulawesi, on 1st to 5th August, 2000, and of an oral presentation in Japanese given at the 88th Meeting of theJapan Tropical Agriculture Society held at the Faculty of Agriculture, Gifu University, in October, 2000. It summarizes
the results of research conducted in Indonesia, Vietnam, China, and Laos as part of the project on “Migration andTransformation of Resource Management under the Confrontation of Different Ecosystems”(Team Leader: Hisao
Furukawa) with financial support by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (A) from MEXT, 1998-2000.

5ˏ˻ˏ͹ˏ̶͠ˡ‫ݖܩ‬቉ድǵፀ 2 ‫ش‬

1. Introduction
Oil (or lipid)-containing plants are one of the most important resource plants in thetropics. Their oils, mainly contained in the seeds and fruits, have been used in a wide
range of applications, including as food, fuel, illumination, pharmaceuticals, and industrial
materials. Oil-containing plant species are quite frequently found among the plant families
Palmae, Sapotaceae, Euphorbiaceae, and Leguminosae, among which about 70 % areestimated to have their origins in the tropics.2) Not surprisingly, people in these regions
have established close relationships with the oil-containing plants, both cultivating themand using wild or semi-cultivated plants to produce oils. Whether for subsistence or for
earning cash, they have harvested these plants as a part of their everyday lives.
As the demand for oils increased with the development of the colonial economy, thecultivation of oil-producing crops or plants expanded at various levels, from that of smallscale subsistence farming to large-scale commercial plantations. This expansion has
continued in the post-colonial age and persists in Southeast Asian countries today as
shown by the rapid expansion of areas cultivated with coconut palm, oil palm, and cacao[Tanaka 1990]. In subsistence farming, diverse oil-producing plant species are cultivatedor harvested on a small scale and used for various purposes by local people, while largescale commercial cultivation in plantations generally concentrates on uniform, extensive
cultivation of a single useful species. In both cases, the cultivation of oil-producing plants
has been accelerated and expanded because of a global increase in demand for oils. This
rapid expansion of cultivation should greatly affect the use of lands and resources and their
management systems and should be particularly observable at the boundaries between
forest areas and farmlands.3) In Indonesia, the expansion of clove, cacao, and oil palm
cultivation has recently highlighted several issues concerning land and resource management [Tanaka 1997; 2000; Ruf 2001].
This paper deals with kemiri (Aleurites moluccana) as a representative example ofsuch oil-producing plant involved in these issues. To meet the increasing demand for2) Personal communication from Dr. M. Hotta, Professor Emeritus of the Faculty of Science, Kagoshima University.
3) The term “forest areas” is here used to describe the areas managed and designated as kawasan hutan (forest areas) by
the Indonesian Department of Forestry. The forestry law classifies the kawasan hutan into several categories, including
protected forests, production forests, and utility-convertible forests. The invasion of farmers is mostly found in forests inthe last two categories.

6

Tanaka: Kemiri (Aleurites moluccana) and Forest Resource Management in Eastern Indonesia

various agricultural products, or simply to make a living, farmers have expanded theirfarmlands into the forest areas to earn cash. Meanwhile, local governments must restrain
such “invasion” of farmland into the forest areas. These conflicts between farmers andgovernment over land resource management are taking place frequently in many tropicalcountries. And kemiri, an oil-producing arborescent plant generally cultivated on slopes
such as piedmonts and hillsides, has been greatly involved in the process. By focusing
on this particular plant’s role in upland agriculture and forest management in Eastern
Indonesia, this paper aims to illustrate land and resource management in mountain regions
from an eco-historical perspective. Furthermore, the paper refers to Aleurites fordii,
another oil-producing member of genus Aleurites, which is cultivated in the mountainregions of continental Southeast Asia and in Yunnan Province in southwestern China, with
the intention of presenting preliminary information useful for the future comparison of theecological history of insular and continental Southeast Asia.
2. Kemiri and Its Uses
2.1 Kemiri Cultivation
Kemiri, 4) also known as the candlenut tree in English, is an evergreen arborescentplant (Photo 1) belonging to genus Aleurites of the Euphorbiaceae family. It has a wide
distribution, ranging from insular Southeast Asia to the Pacific. Its lipid-rich fruit hashistorically been used for various purposes in Indonesia and is still an important seasoningin Indonesian cooking today.
Although kemiri is widely distributed throughout Indonesia, it is extensively cultivatedin areas associated with the tropical monsoon climate which have rather drier conditionsin the dry season. The main kemiri cultivation areas in Indonesia are the provinces of
Daerah Istimewah Aceh, Sumatera Utara (North Sumatra), Sulawesi Selatan (South
Sulawesi), and Nusa Tenggara Timur (East Nusa Tenggara). As shown in Table1, kemiri
is cultivated in approximately 170,000 ha in Indonesia, yielding around 60,000 tons of fruit.
The largest kemiri-growing province is Sulawesi Selatan, which accounts for about 40 % of
both cultivation area and production.
Kemiri plants usually bear their first fruits within three to four years and mostly by the4) Kemiri is a Malayan name for Aleurites moluccana. Many vernacular names are listed in De Nuttige Planten van
Nederlandsch Indië (Useful Plants of the Netherlands East Indies) [Heyne 1927] , but this name is widely and commonly
recognized in Indonesia and Malaysia.

7ˏ˻ˏ͹ˏ̶͠ˡ‫ݖܩ‬቉ድǵፀ 2 ‫ش‬Photo 1 Tree Form and Fruit of Kemiri
Generally, one fruit includes two seeds. Each seed covered with ahard shell contains a fat-abundant endosperm (albumen).

Table 1 Cultivated Area and Production of Kemiri in Indonesia
Year
Indonesia
Daerah Istimewah Aceh
Sumatera Utara
Sulawesi Selatan
Nusa Tenggara Timur

1984
74.7

Cultivated area
1988
1992
70.6
131.7

1996
172.3

1984
29.2

Production
1988
1992
27.7
38.2

1996
61.5

7.6
4.2
44.4
24.6

9.1
6.7
44.0
29.4

̆
̆
̆
̆

̆
̆
̆
̆

19.5
9.6
41.0
17.0

23.8
14.8
42.5
12.0

̆
̆
̆
̆

̆
̆
̆
̆

Unit: Cultivated area and production totals (Indonesia) are 1,000 ha and 1,000 ton, respectively. Values for eachstate are a percentage of the total.
Source: Statistik Indonesia

fifth year after the seedlings are planted. On average, the production of shell-removed
fruit is 10 kg/tree in the first year of fruiting, 25 kg/tree by the sixth year, and 35-50 kg/treein the tenth to twentieth years. After the age of thirty-five to fifty, the trees gradually lose
their fruit-producing ability until they finally become completely fruitless [Paimin 1997].
As can be calculated from Table 1, the average yield in Indonesia is 0.35 ton/ha, which isquite low, but it may reach 2-3 ton/ha under intensive cultivation. In fact, the production
greatly varies among areas, being high in Daerah Istimewah Aceh and Sumatera Utara
with average yields of approximately 1 ton/ha, but low in Sulawesi Selatan and Nusa Tenggara Timur with average yields of approximately 0.3 and 0.15 ton/ha, respectively.
In pre-colonial times, kemiri cultivation was combined with shifting cultivation bysowing kemiri seeds in swiddens, leaving the volunteer seedlings found growing during
8

Tanaka: Kemiri (Aleurites moluccana) and Forest Resource Management in Eastern Indonesia

shifting cultivation, and transplanting natural seedlings grown in other lands to swiddens.
Abandoned swiddens were weeded once a year, the only management practice necessary
in the early stage of kemiri cultivation. Such association of kemiri with shifting cultivationis still found in many places in South Sulawesi and Nusa Tenggara Timur. For example, in
Detu Soko in Kabupaten (District) Ende, Flores Island, people cultivate kemiri when they
develop fields (uma maja) by shifting cultivation. They plant kemiri seedlings as they sow
upland rice and maize in the first year of uma maja; after cultivating maize in the second
year and cassava in the third, they abandon the swidden but leave the kemiri plants. The
field becomes a kemiri garden called uma feo (field of kemiri) which will be managed byweeding every year. In cases where kemiri is sowed in swiddens, first people clear theland and bury the seeds without removing the shells at a depth of about 4 cm. Next theyburn the field and sow upland rice and maize. Kemiri is sowed before the burning to
induce its germination with the heat, a technique also applied to artificial seedling production.
Although people usually lose their usufruct of the swiddens when they abandon themand move to other sites, their ownership of the kemiri trees growing at the abandonedsites is recognized among the villagers, the same as the fruit trees or other useful trees
which are more frequently left in abandoned swiddens. In the past, similar systems ofkemiri cultivation were applied in many areas other than Flores Island, indicating a strong
association existed between kemiri cultivation and shifting cultivation.
Wherever I visited, people told me that kemiri cultivation was very easy. Once theycreated a kemiri garden, all they needed to do was weed it once a year and wait until harvest time. Conventionally, kemiri trees were planted at intervals of 10 × 10 m or wider,as they were basically for private use rather than for developing kemiri forests. The
wide distances were more convenient for inter-planting other species of trees among thekemiri trees or for cultivating various annual crops in the vacant space. Today, technicalinstructions are given for kemiri cultivation, which will be discussed later, encouraging
dense planting with an ideal distance of 6 × 6 m or 8 × 8 m for fruit harvesting or 4 × 4 m
for industrial forestation [BPKU 1994].
2.2 Uses of Kemiri
Since the old days, kemiri has been greatly involved in people’s lives [Heyne 1927;
Burkill 1966]. Its lipid-containing kernel has been used for illumination, pharmaceuticals,
and seasonings, while its seed covered with a hard shell has been used for children’s toys
9ˏ˻ˏ͹ˏ̶͠ˡ‫ݖܩ‬቉ድǵፀ 2 ‫ش‬or ritual offerings. Kemiri wood has been used for fuel or woodworking. Today, the fruit
is widely used in cooking within Indonesia and Malaysia, and some is exported to othercountries where the drying oil has medicinal or industrial use as an alternative to tung oil.
About 95 % of total kemiri production in Indonesia today is domestically consumed, withthe remainder exported, mainly to Singapore and Malaysia [BPKU 1994; Paimin 1997].
Investigations in Sulawesi Selatan and Flores Island and Sumbawa Island in Nusa
Tenggara Timur reveal that kemiri has been used in many aspects of people’s lives.
Besides cooking, kemiri was most commonly used for illumination, leading to its English
name, candlenut tree. The kemiri endosperm has an oil content of about 60 % and burns
easily if simply lit with fire. To make a candle, several kemiri fruits are squashed into apaste which is subsequently mixed with kapok or cotton fibers and pasted on a spit madeof bamboo or a branch. A candle can also be made with the dry corn cob. Rubbing kemiri
fruits against the corn cob makes a candle that lasts for at least one night. Use of thekemiri candles, called sulo kanjoli in Buginese, rrasa kanjoli in Makassarese, and ilo in
Sumbawa, ceased with the spread of kerosene lamps, but in Camba, Kabupaten Maros, afamous kemiri-producing area in Sulawesi Selatan, they are still used on ritual occasions
such as rice harvest festivals.
Kemiri was also used as a medicine, especially for treating injuries, toothaches, fever,swelling, etc. Generally, kemiri was used as an ointment prepared by thoroughly kneading
the smashed fruits which were then broiled over fire and mixed with finely mashed garlicor ginger. The ointment or medicated oil could also be prepared by broiling the kemiri
fruit alone. The oil made through a similar process was also used for washing or dressing
hair.5)In Sulawesi Selatan, kemiri is used as an additive in the production of palm-sugar thatis prepared by boiling down the sap of sugar palm (Arenga pinata). The kemiri is believed
to promote solidification of the palm sugar and to improve its flavor and taste. Moreover,in Flores Island, kemiri oil is used for strengthening cotton thread. According to people
there, thread can be strengthened by soaking it for about two days in the oil obtained by

5) According to people in Detu Soko, Flores Island, there are two ways of extracting oil from kemiri. In the first method,they burn the fruit without removing its shell and allow the heat to crack open the shell. After the shell and theendosperm both turn black, they take out the endosperm and scrub it against the base of a pinang leaf petiole, in thesame manner as a grater, to obtain the oil. In the other method, they take the endosperm out of the shell, grind it, wrap
it in a banana leaf, and burn it, before finally squeezing out the oil.

10

Tanaka: Kemiri (Aleurites moluccana) and Forest Resource Management in Eastern Indonesia

grinding a mixture of kemiri and kenari (Canarium vulgare) fruits, then drying it in thesun.
The shells of kemiri fruits are also utilized. After the harvest, the fruits are first dried
and the shells cracked to remove the kernels. It is extremely laborious to crack the shells
manually one by one. Kemiri producers commonly use a small ladle-like tool made ofrattan or wood for this process. They place the kemiri fruits on the tool and strike themagainst a large stone to crack the shells (Photo 2). After the fruits are extracted, the remaining shells can be used directly as fuel or as material for making charcoals. Moreover,
the ashes can be used as detergent for washing or can be used as fertilizer. Unshelled
fruits are used in games which are popular among children in any kemiri-producing area.
In one such game, kemiri fruits are placed within a circle drawn on the ground and players
compete for the number of fruits they can flick out of the circle by throwing fruits fromoutside. In another game, the fruits are placed in a row and players throw stones againstthem from a certain distance (Photo 3).
Due to their poor quality, kemiri wood is rarely used for construction but is widelyused for fuel. Their bark is known to contain tannins, so it is brewed into folk medicines
effective for diseases such as dysentery.
Although in the past kemiri was commonly used in all the applications outlined above,
today most domestic kemiri is consumed as a seasoning in Indonesian cooking. The
product sold through the market under the name kemiri is the endosperm separated
by drying the fruits and removing the shells. Products from Sulawesi Selatan or Nusa
Tenggara Timur are first gathered in Surabaya before their distribution to different areasof Java Island. But the extinction of many of kemiri’s applications does not mean thatits significance has diminished. Its consumption as a seasoning in Indonesian food isincreasing markedly, which has led to shortages in the Jakarta market [Paimin 1997].

Photo 2 Tools for Cracking Kemiri Seeds
11ˏ˻ˏ͹ˏ̶͠ˡ‫ݖܩ‬቉ድǵፀ 2 ‫ش‬Photo 3 Villagers Demonstrating the Kemiri GameThe villagers kindly demonstrated the game as soon as the use of kemiri in games was mentioned during a break
between interviews. The players are usually children, but here the adults are playing it for demonstration.

This increase in demand has led to a definite expansion of kemiri cultivation, which canbe seen in the doubling of its cultivation area and production over the past decade (Table
1). And as an important cash-earning plant, it still plays a certain social role at the local
community level.
In most cases, kemiri harvesting is managed by individual families. At harvest time,
the owner of the trees or landowner who has planted the kemiri plants uses family labor
and/or employed domestic workers to gather the kemiri fruits which have dropped to theground. Kemiri trees often spread their crowns across the boundaries between adjacentlands owned by different owners; in such cases, the owners can only claim ownership ofthe fruit lying on their property. Kemiri fruits may roll out or be washed away by rain,
and in many regions, fruit that has gone out of private areas can be harvested by anyone.
Moreover, in many communities, all the kemiri gardens are opened to the public as commons after the harvesting season is over, allowing any member of the community to enterand gather the leftovers.6)
Perhaps these customs of kemiri harvesting were originally associated with shifting
cultivation, but even after shifting cultivation was no longer practiced, such customs

6) For example, in Camba, Kabupaten Maros, Sulawesi Selatan, the peak season (kampiri) of the kemiri harvest is from
November to December; after the kampiri comes a season called kallice, in which anyone can harvest kemiri. In Desa
Bontokaraeng, Kabupaten Jeneponto, Sulawesi Selatan, kemiri is harvested by landowners from September to January
or February, but when the jambao season comes in March, the fruits can be gathered by anyone, regardless of theownership of the land.

12

Tanaka: Kemiri (Aleurites moluccana) and Forest Resource Management in Eastern Indonesia

have remained. In kemiri-producing areas today, kemiri plays an important role in uniting
village society. When interviewing people in such areas, I often heard success stories
about large profits, becoming hajji, or providing education to their children. Those people
claim to owe their success to kemiri. Other people, especially elders or village officials,
mentioned the importance of kemiri cultivation as a public property or a safety net for thevillage. They claim that kemiri brings at least some income to the aged and the handicapped through the post-harvest opening of kemiri gardens to the public. In many parts ofEastern Indonesia, there are mountainous areas that were used for shifting cultivation in
the past and that are completely covered with kemiri today. In most of these areas, people
still use kemiri for the various applications mentioned above, which demonstrates thecontinuing significance of kemiri within these communities.
3. The Expansion of Kemiri Cultivation
3.1 Government Promotion of Kemiri Cultivation in the Colonial and New Order Eras
Most people today do not know the exact period in which the number of kemiri plants
began to increase in the kemiri-producing areas. People’s answers are vague, such as “along time ago” or “way back at the time of their ancestors.” Some people can be more
specific, stating that kemiri plants were much fewer in the prewar period but started
to increase around the 1960s. Perhaps all of these answers are correct, but it is rather
doubtful that the kemiri forests observed today have existed for ages. It is more likelythat kemiri plants used to be grown sparsely around the abandoned swiddens and villages
but their numbers rapidly increased after a certain point. In fact, the history of expansionof kemiri cultivation in Eastern Indonesia contains two epocks; one is the promotion of
kemiri cultivation by the Dutch colonial government and the other is its promotion in the
New Order regime, which began in the late 1960s.
In the case of Sulawesi Selatan, the Forestry Department of the colonial government
promoted kemiri cultivation in 1920s and 1930s to restore the forests degraded byshifting cultivation. This was the first experience with a forestation administration forthe people in this area, but no one remembers it today. A study conducted in Kelurahan
Mario Pulana, Camba, Kabupaten Maros, contains an interview mentioning that kemiri had
been grown in the village for a long time, but that its cultivation for cash-earning purposes
probably started around 1900 [Zainal 1996/97]. Therefore, it can be assumed that people
recognized kemiri as a commercial crop no earlier than the beginning of the twentieth13ˏ˻ˏ͹ˏ̶͠ˡ‫ݖܩ‬቉ድǵፀ 2 ‫ش‬

century.
The modern colonial period brought forestry administrations gradually into Sulawesi
Selatan, where forest officers began to emphasize the need to forest the mountains ruinedby shifting cultivation. Table 2 shows a list of travel reports containing references to
Sulawesi Selatan by visiting forest officers. For instance, Plasschaert visited Sulawesi
Selatan in 1923 and stated in his report that “on the lower slopes (up to 500 m altitude) of
the G. Lompobattang there are many kemiri (Aleurites moluccana) plantations which keep
the slopes of the ravines in good hydrological condition. These kemiri plantations, which
cover 1,000 ha, will be extended by planting on former ladang fields [Plasschaert 1923].”
In Mol’s travel report of 1930, he stated that “almost everywhere the forest has been
devastated by wood exploitation and ladang cultivation,” and that “the plantation of kemiri(Aleurites sp.) which frequently is done by the people, may be a solution in reafforestation

Table 2 Reports on Kemiri by Dutch Colonial Government Forest Officers
Year
ReporterContents of reports
Sept.-Oct. 1923 Plasschaert, E. K. Kemiri cultivation by residents

Exploitation of kemiri: utility as
drying oil
Kemiri planting in former swiddensites by Forestry Department

References
Unpublished Report: Trip to
Makassar, Manado, and Muna.
Unpublished Report: Trip to
Polewali, Mamasa, and Majene.
Unpublished Report: Sulawesi Forest
Division. Report on December 1923.
Unpublished Report: Report on
the measures to be taken in thecatchment area of the Palaka andPatiro rivers (South Sulawesi).
Unpublished Report: Travel Reportin the Palanro water catchment area,
Sulawesi.
Unpublished Report: State of themain activities in Sulawesi and
Dependencies.
Unpublished Report: Report by
the senior forester of Sulawesi and
Dependencies, November 1932.
Information and Research from theHandelsmuseum Division in 1936.
Unpublished Report: Travel Report
no.13 to Ujungpandang and Bone.

Kemiri planting in former swiddensites by Forestry Department
Exploitation of kemiri: utility as
matchstick

Unpublished Report: Travel Report
no.18 to Ujungpandang and Bone.
Rapp. B.P.S. 30: 11; Rimba Indonesia
1: 69-85.

Apr.-May 1924 Koppel, C. van de Promotion of kemiri planting informer swidden sites
Dec. 1924
Koppel, C. van de Kemiri cultivation by residents
1928

Rhijn, Van

Kemiri planting in former swiddensites by Forestry Department

Sept. 1930

Mol, C. J.

Kemiri cultivation by residents

1931

Gonggrijp, L.

1932

Gonggrijp, L.

Cultivation technique development:
Trees suitable for mixed planting
with kemiri
Cultivation technique development:
Kemiri germination test

1937

Handelsmuseum

Sept. 1948

Haan, J. H. de

Mar.–Aug. 1949 Haan, J. H. de
1950

Griffioen, K.

Source: Based on CAPD [1982].
14

Tanaka: Kemiri (Aleurites moluccana) and Forest Resource Management in Eastern Indonesia[Mol 1930].”
As it can be seen from these reports, by the 1920s, forest officers of the Dutch colonial
government already recognized the effectiveness of kemiri cultivation in the reforestationof former swidden sites. In fact, old records of actual forestation with kemiri can occasionally be found. For example, in 1928, Rhijn reported that kemiri had been planted in former
swidden sites found within the forest reserve in the Palaka and Patiro river basins in
Sulawesi Selatan. “In 1924 about 620 ha former ladang fields near Ponre were reafforested
with kemiri (Aleurites moluccana) by the population under the supervision of the Forest
Service. However, only 25 % of the reafforestation succeeded, probably because thekemiri seeds were planted too far apart (5 × 5 m) [Rhijn, 1928].” This report indicatesthat the colonial government had worked out a positive policy of kemiri planting for recovering former swidden sites. Later, in 1948, Haan reported that the Forestry Department
decided to plant kemiri to promote reforestation of abandoned swiddens in areas where
shifting cultivation was approved [Haan 1948]. These reports show that kemiri planting
in former swidden sites was actively promoted by the prewar colonial government; such
instruction by forestry offices may have served as a trigger for the expansion of kemiri
cultivation in prewar Eastern Indonesia.
In the postwar period, during “the age of development” under the New Orderregime established in 1966, the government actively promoted the development of forest
resources through the Fundamental Law for Forestry (Undang-undang Pokok Kehutanan).
In other words, forest resources came to be systemically extracted through governmentsupported tree felling. Meanwhile, reforestation was promoted within and outside theformer forest areas using quick-growing tree species. Most of the trees used for such
purposes were leguminous trees such as ipil-ipil (Leucaena leucocephala); other usefultrees, such as kapok, cacao, and kemiri, were also employed. In kemiri-producing areas,
kemiri was recommended as the planting species for such reforestation projects.
According to interviews by the authors in the region of Ende in Flores Island, such
reforestation had been promoted even before the New Order. The former chief of DesaRoa village referred to a reforestation project called “5 K” conducted in this area employing five different useful species including coconut palm (kelapa), cacao (kakao), kemiri,kapok, and coffee (kopi). This suggests that kemiri planting was also active in this period.
Since the mid-1970s, a program under the direct control of the president of the Republicof Indonesia (IMPRES) has promoted reforestation employing useful species with the dual
15ˏ˻ˏ͹ˏ̶͠ˡ‫ݖܩ‬቉ድǵፀ 2 ‫ش‬aims of afforestation and economic production. In cooperation with the Provincial Forestry Department (Dinas Kehutanan) and the Plantation Department (Dinas Perkebunan),
the village received a subsidy for planting coffee, kemiri, and cashew in 100 ha areas in theyears 1972-73, 1975-76, and 1978-79, respectively. The village has organized a farmer association to take over the project, but along with the progress of the projects, even people
outside the association have started to plant these useful trees.
Beyond such reforestation projects, however, local people were locked out of the forest
areas by Undang-undang Pokok Kehutanan. They were obliged to abandon practicing
conventional shifting cultivation and prohibited from expanding their farmlands into theforest areas, and as a consequence, illegal “invasions” of farmland into forest have gradually become common. It was not only local people, but also migrants from distant places,
who could no longer make a living through conventional subsistence agriculture; their
expansion of farmland into forest areas coincided with advances in the economy. Since
the government could no longer ignore such “invasions” of residents into the forests, itworked out a policy for conserving the forest areas as forests of useful trees, to be usedvirtually as farmlands, by planting kemiri and other useful tree species in the illegal fields.
This may have been a desperate measure taken by the Forestry Department, which could
not officially approve of the “invader” farmlands as farmlands, but on the other hand,
it could be evaluated as a positive, extremely down-to-earth policy for coping with theestablished fact of “invasion.” For example, in the latter half of 1980s, the provincial
government of Sulawesi Selatan cooperated with Dinas Kehutanan in the introductionof the “Pola Sul-Sel,” a management system for farmland which had invaded into forest
areas. Under this system, agricultural activities in the forest areas were legally approved
if they planted useful trees such as kemiri. Later, this system was employed by otherprovinces and became a model for social forestry programs for reforestation and plantingof the forest areas and surrounding denuded areas. Kemiri is the most important tree
species in such programs, and the introduction of such policies must have contributed
immensely to the expansion of kemiri cultivation in recent years.
Table 3 shows the area in which reforestation and planting were conducted by Kanwil
Sul-Sel, the Provincial Office of the Central Department of Forestry, based on the Pola
Sul-Sel. Although the total number of hectares is not large, the development is significant
because it has resulted in the formation of groups at the district level and in individual
villages and has stimulated their social participation in the reforestation of forest areas
16

Tanaka: Kemiri (Aleurites moluccana) and Forest Resource Management in Eastern Indonesia

Table 3 Areas (ha) in Which Reforestation and Planting were
Conducted under the Social Forestry Program (Pola Sul-Sel)
District
PolmasBarru
Pangkep
Sidrap
Bone
Maros
Gowa

91/92
518
510
200
630
633
205
1,066

92/93
737
400
400
200
584
400
1,200

93/94
0
450
700
200
250
150
200

94/95
42
111
280
100
65
100
200

95/96
150
70
450
70
100
50
250

96/97
0
170
0
200
160
100
0

Total

4,912

5,694

2,980

1,646

2,150

1,405

Source: Kanwil Kehutanan Sulawesi Selatan.
Note: Not all the districts are listed.
Table 4 Recent Kemiri Production in Kabupaten MarosYear
Cultivated area (ha)Production (ton)

1991
9,066
4,980

1992
9,072
4,734

1994
9,303
5,409

1996
9,637
5,602

Source: Dinas Perkebunan Marosthat have been used as virtual farmlands. Table 4 shows changes in kemiri production in
Kabupaten Maros, Sulawesi Selatan, as an example of kemiri production at the districtlevel. The data show a slow but steady increase in the cultivation area and productionof kemiri. Such evidence shows that government-driven forestation projects have also
stimulated kemiri forestation in areas outside project target areas and that government
initiative has partially contributed to the expansion of kemiri cultivation.
3.2 Increasing Demand for Kemiri and the Expansion of Kemiri Cultivation
The previous section discussed the involvement of government-driven planting policyin the expansion of kemiri cultivation in the prewar and postwar years. However, theexpansion of kemiri cultivation cannot be completely explained as being the result of thegovernment promotion. Without economic incentives, such as rising prices accompanied
by increasing demand, kemiri cultivation would not have expanded on such a large scalefrom the level of subsistence production to commercial production.
Before the war, the forest officers of the Dutch colonial government already paid a great
deal of attention to the economic potential of kemiri. As shown in Table 2, they noticed
the potential of kemiri oil as a drying oil, attempted to develop its industrial application,and proposed the use of kemiri wood for matchsticks. Furthermore, they performed17ˏ˻ˏ͹ˏ̶͠ˡ‫ݖܩ‬቉ድǵፀ 2 ‫ش‬some experiments on seed germination, planting techniques, and intercropping with otherwoody plants to establish an efficient cultivation method for kemiri. They seemed to havepursued the possibility of large-scale cultivation for industrial applications.
However, a plantation-type production system of kemiri for industrial applications
has never been established, while kemiri production on the small-scale farmer levelhas persisted through the pre- and postwar periods. The possible reason for this is thatkemiri was no match for Aleurites cordata or Aleurites fordii in the drying oil market. In
later years, petrochemical products replaced plant-derived oils, eliminating the need forplantation-type production of kemiri. Moreover, small-scale production could sufficiently
meet the increased local demand for kemiri which has continued from the prewar period
until today.
The largest factor contributing to the increase in demand for kemiri was the population
increase on Java Island. The kemiri fruits are essential in Indonesian daily cooking, so
the increase in population led directly to an increase in demand. Other factors are a risein interest in cooking among urban residents, leading to the popularization of Indonesianrecipes, 7) and an increase in the number of restaurants in urban areas. Although thefluctuations of kemiri market prices have not been investigated thoroughly, these developments are assumed to have triggered kemiri planting in Eastern Indonesia.
Meanwhile, some grower-related factors were also responsible for the expansion of
kemiri cultivation. One was the improvement of roads for transporting kemiri from farmto the markets. Flores Island, for example, has a long history of kemiri cultivation in themountain areas, but in the old days, even if residents heard that kemiri could be sold at agood price at the island’s port, it was very hard to delivery the product. According to theformer chief of Desa Roa, in the 1950s villagers heard that kemiri sold well in Maumere,
but road conditions were so poor that no one dare to go there. Only in the 1960s, after
the government-aided planting program started and road conditions had improved, didvillagers start selling their kemiri outside the village.
Furthermore, the nature of kemiri production made it a suitable crop for small-scale
farmers. This was also an important factor in the expansion of its cultivation in response
to increasing external demand. As mentioned above, kemiri cultivation does not require
7) Kemiri appears in many recipes in cookbooks published in the pre- and postwar periods [Cornelia c.1870; Departemen
Pertanian 1967]. Perhaps the recent popularity of these books among the urban middle class has secured kemiri an
essential position among Indonesian food materials.

18

Tanaka: Kemiri (Aleurites moluccana) and Forest Resource Management in Eastern Indonesia

much labor, so it can be well managed with domestic labor alone. Kemiri can also be
cultivated over a long period, so it does not require a large amount of labor at any one
time. Only the shell-removing step is quite laborious, but can be overcome if no effort
is spared. Moreover, once harvested, kemiri fruits can be stored for a long period with
their shells on, enabling the growers to wait for the price to rise instead of worrying about
the current market price. Table 5 shows the amount of kemiri purchased from farmers
by the cooperative (KUD) in Detu Soko, Flores Island. Stocks were higher in March andApril compared to the harvesting months of October to January, probably because farmers
waited for the price to rise. Such characteristics of kemiri seem to have contributed to thecontinuous expansion of cultivation supported by small-scale farmer production based on
domestic labor.
Stimulated by the policy promoting the use of kemiri in reforestation of degraded
forest areas and afforestation of surrounding areas, as well as by the increase in external
demand, kemiri cultivation has developed in many areas in Eastern Indonesia. The kemiri
forests found today are supported by a delicate balance between local people’s ambitions
for economic opportunity and the government’s mission to conserve forest areas.

Table 5 Monthly Amount of Kemiri Purchased by KUD in Detu Soko,
Flores Island
ǵ
ǵ
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Total

1995

1996

kg

%

kg

%

829
583
3,437
1,138
390
733
̆

5.3
3.7
22.0
7.3
2.5
4.7
̆

446
̆

2.9
̆

543
3,329
4,161

3.5
21.4
26.7

2,878
1,755
3,568
3,068
1,084
768
292
90
265
968
1,841
1,667

15.8
9.6
19.6
16.8
5.9
4.2
1.6
0.5
1.5
5.3
10.1
9.1

15,588100

18,243100

Source: KUD Lepembuse, Detu Soko
19ˏ˻ˏ͹ˏ̶͠ˡ‫ݖܩ‬቉ድǵፀ 2 ‫ش‬

4. Reconstructing Local “History” or a “Curriculum Vitae” of the Area Investigatedthrough Kemiri: Possibilities for Future Comparative Studies of Oil Plants
in Southeast Asia
As mentioned above, although kemiri is not as popular as other oil plants such as
coconut palm or oil palm, the plant deserves an important place in the discussion of thetransition of agricultural land use in the tropics and land property issues.
Table 6 shows the change in the cultivated area of cacao over recent years in Sulawesi
Selatan, representing a rapid expansion of cacao cultivation. For comparison, the cultivated area for kemiri is also included. The data indicate that cacao cultivation in Sulawesi
Selatan has expanded since the 1980s; this rapid expansion of the cultivated area, which
may be called the cacao boom [Ruf 2001], was triggered by the rising price of cacao reflecting increased demand outside the country. Perhaps a similar boom existed for kemiri
during the prewar Dutch colonial period and the postwar age of development.
Today, cacao trees are often found on the forest floor of kemiri plantations, but surely
those cacao trees were not there ten or twenty years ago. Perhaps the same applied
to kemiri in the past. There must be many places where kemiri cultivation is popular
today but kemiri forests did not exist, say, in the 1960s, let alone at the beginning of thetwentieth century. Figure 1 shows a “history” of land use in such an area, which may beconsidered a “footprint” [Balée 1994] or a “curriculum vitae” of the area, with the focus
on kemiri and cacao. As depicted in this figure, re-viewing the landscape by stripping off
the currently existing kemiri forests, in the same manner as stripping off the geologicalstrata, may lead to an understanding of the history of the area.
In addition to fieldwork focused on kemiri plants in Eastern Indonesia, I was able toconduct similar research in continental Southeast Asia and southwestern China. On thisoccasion, I was lucky to have a chance to observe the cultivation of the tung-oil tree (Aleurites fordii) in the Nu Jiang River basin in Yunnan Province. I could observe that Aleurites

Table 6 Changes in Cultivated Areas (ha) of Kemiri and Cacao in
Sulawesi SelatanYear
KemiriCacao

1975
27,343111

1980
29,121
850

1985
32,011
13,906

Source: Sulawesi Selatan dalam Angka
20

1990
35,413
79,974

1994
41,022
114,289

Tanaka: Kemiri (Aleurites moluccana) and Forest Resource Management in Eastern Indonesia

Fig. 1 History of Land Use Focusing on Kemiri and Cacao

fordii was widely cultivated along the Nu Jiang River in Fugong Township in Nu Jiang District and confirmed that the district was one of the most famous tung-oil producing areasin Yunnan Province [Nu Jiang District Department of Forestry et al. 1998]. A Lisu farmer
who responded to our interview request told us that they started cultivating this plantin riverside fields about ten years ago. According to the farmer, the initial growers were
stimulated by government promotion, but many people have since begun its cultivation on
a voluntary basis. Perhaps the market price for tung-oil is rising; like Indonesian farmers,
the face of the Lisu farmer was full of expectation for oil-crop cultivation as a promising
cash-earning source. He told us that he actually lives on the mountainside but moves tothe riverside every year with his family to harvest the crop. The farmer told us that hehad been doing this for about ten years already. Unfortunately, there was not enough time
to ask other questions, such as how they acquired the land for planting Aleurites fordii
and when these Aleurites fordii forests started to expand along the river. Nevertheless,it was apparent that a particular oil crop, Aleurites fordii in this case, played an importantrole in the rapid change of the landscape within this area. The interview was extremely
meaningful since it confirmed the involvement of oil crops in building a history of land use
in an area.
Besides kemiri and Aleurites fordii, there are other oil-producing members of the genus
21ˏ˻ˏ͹ˏ̶͠ˡ‫ݖܩ‬቉ድǵፀ 2 ‫ش‬Aleurites, such as A. montana and A. cordata, which are cultivated in areas extending
from China to continental Southeast Asia. They may have little popularity compared toother oil crops such as coconut palm and oil palm, but as in the case of kemiri, such minor
oil plants may provide a useful account of the large innovations involved in local history.
Therefore, studies focusing on oil plants have their own advantages for the understanding
and comparison of regions and areas.
References
Balée, W. 1994. Footprints of the Forest: Ka’apor Ethnobotany̆the Historical Ecology of Plant Utilization by an
Amazonian People. New York: Columbia University Press.
BPKU (Balai Penelitian Kehutanan Ujung Pandang). 1994. Pedoman Teknis Budidaya Kemiri (Informasi Teknis
Nomor 2/1994). Ujung Pandang: Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Kehutanan, Departemen Kehutanan.
Burkill, I. H. 1966. A Dictionary of Economic Products of the Malay Peninsula, Vol. 1. Kuala Lumpur: Ministry ofAgriculture and Co-operatives.
CAPD (Center for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation). 1982. Indonesian Forestry Abstracts: Dutch
Literature until About 1960. Wageningen: Center for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation.
Cornelia. c. 1870. Kokki Bitja atau Kitab Masak-Masakan India, 9 deVeel Vermeerderde Druk. Batavia: Visser &Co.
Departemen Pertanian. 1967. Mustikarasa: Memuat Resep2 Masakan Indonesia dari Saban sampai Merauke.
Djakarta.
Haan, J. H. de. 1948. Reisrapport no. 13 naar Makassar en Bone van 13-20 September 1948 (unpublishedreport). In CAPD, Indonesian Forestry Abstracts: Dutch Literature until About 1960. Wageningen: Center for
Agricultural Publishing and Documentation, p. 430.
Heyne, K. 1927. De Nuttige Planten van Nederlandsch Indië (2e Herziene en Vermeerderde Druk). Batavia:
Department van Landbouw, Nijverheid & Handel in Nederlandsch Indië, p. 932.
Mol, C. J. 1930. Tournee-verslag 10-18 September, 1930 in het Palanrostroomgebied (unpublished report). In
CAPD, Indonesian Forestry Abstracts: Dutch Literature until About 1960. Wageningen: Center for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation, p. 557.
Nu Jiang District Department of Forestry, Department of Agriculture and Scientific Committee. 1998. Major
Economic Fruit Trees and Their Cultivation (in Chinese). Kummin: Yunnan Ethnic Publication Co.⏃ ਭ ຽ िക෌࣌͹ਭຽिᦅ෌࣌͹ਭຽिዀࠇᑂ⏏1998⏏ȏਭຽςឹᐁཕഗೠ‫ؖ‬ൕ‫ݛ‬ȑᮖ‫׫‬຦౏Տႆ኏⏆Paimin, F. R. 1997. Kemiri: Budidaya dan Prospek Bisnis (cetakan II). Jakarta: Penebar Swadaya.
Plasschaert, E. K. 1923. Reis naar Makassar, Manado en Moena van 9 September t/m 24 Octover 1923 (unpublished report). In CAPD, Indonesian Forestry Abstracts: Dutch Literature until About 1960. Wageningen:Center for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation, p. 509.
Rhijn, Van. 1928. Rapport over de maatregelen te nemen in het brongebiet der Palaka en Patirorivier (unpublished report). In CAPD, Indonesian Forestry Abstracts: Dutch Literature until About 1960. Wageningen:Center for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation, p. 553.
Ruf, F. 2001. Tree Crops as Deforestation and Reforestation Agents: The Case of Cocoa in Côte d’Ivoire andSulawesi. In Angelsen, A. and D. Kaimowitz, eds., Agricultural Technologies and Tropical Deforestation. New
22

Tanaka: Kemiri (Aleurites moluccana) and Forest Resource Management in Eastern Indonesia

York: CABI Publishing, pp. 291-315.
Tanaka, K. 1990. Plantation agriculture and peasant agriculture (in Japanese). In Takaya, Y., ed., Tonan Ajiano Shizen (Nature of Southeast Asia), Koza Tonan Ajia Gaku (Southeast Asian Studies Series), Vol. 2, pp.
247-282. Kobundo.
䌟䌟䌟䌟. 1997. Who Owns the Forest?: The Boundary between Forest and Farmland at the Frontier of Land
Reclamation, Southeast Asian Studies 34 (4): 23-32.
䌟䌟䌟䌟. 2000. Village formation in the Outer Islands in Indonesia (in Japanese). Nenpo Sonraku Syakai Kenkyu(Annual Bulletin of Rural Studies) Vol. 36. Nosan Gyoson Bunka Kyokai, pp. 221-249.
Zainal, Sulviah. 1996/97. Sistem Ekonomi Tradisional Petani Kemiri di Kelurahan Mario Pulana Kecamatan
Camba, Kabupaten Maros. Laporan Penelitian Sejarah dan Nilai Tradisional Sulawesi Selatan. Ujung
Pandang: Balai Kajian Sejarah dan Nilai Tradisional, Dirjen Kebudayaan, Departemen Pendidikan dan
Kebudayaan, pp. 77-147.

23