Has Indonesia's decentralisation led to improved forestry governance? : A case study of Bulungan and Kutai Barat districts, East Kalimantan
Creators: name: Resosudarmo, Ida Aju Njoman Pradnja Dharma Nirwani
Publisher: name: The Australian National University
Year: 2007
Subjects: subject: SD657.I5R47 2007
subject: Forest management Indonesia Kalimantan Timur
subject: Forests and forestry Indonesia Kalimantan Timur
subject: Forest policy Indonesia Kalimantan Timur
subject: Kalimantan Timur (Indonesia) Politics and government

description: This study investigates the nature and the outcomes of the devolution of forestry authority to local governments under Indonesia's most recent and far-reaching decentralisation initiatives, put in place in 1999. The research focuses on the dynamics of the relationships between district governments and other actors in that context, based on case studies of the forest-rich Bulungan and Kutai Barat Districts, East Kalimantan. The adverse outcomes for both forests and local communities of the previous centralised forest governance regime under Indonesia's New Order Government, have been profound and well documented. Indonesia's most recent experiment with decentralisation, often referred to as regional autonomy, provided an opportunity for decentralized forestry regimes that many believed and hoped would improve forest management and provide benefits for local communities. Although there are many studies examining the devolution of forestry governance to the community or village levels, few focus on the transfer of forestry powers to the local government level. The research framework developed for this study integrated three approaches in the analysis of decentralisation of natural resources governance. The first of these is that proposed by Agrawal and Ribot (1999), which emphasizes the analytical dimensions of actors, power, and accountability. The second is the institutional analysis suggested by Manor (1999), focusing on aspects of democratic, administrative and fiscal decentralisation. The third is a model for decentralized forest management suggested by Larson (2003b), highlighting the power relations among actors. The research focuses on the initial period of decentralisation, from 1999 to 2004, using a qualitative case study approach. The changes to the political, administrative, and fiscal framework resulting from decentralisation have had a profound effect on the dynamics of forest governance in Indonesia. The most dramatic changes were in control of access to timber resources: this moved from the Centre to the districts, and then largely back again. Districts also enjoyed significantly augmented fiscal powers and increased share of forestry revenue. During the period that substantial powers were formally devolved to the district level, the two case study district governments exploited the space created by their decentralized mandates quite effectively; as a result, local actors were increasingly important in district decisions, and more benefits accrued to the local level. However, many of the accountability outcomes expected to follow decentralisation did not eventuate. Few downward accountability mechanisms, held to be critical for improved natural resource management, were found to be effective in the case study districts. Thus, at least during the first few years of decentralisation, increased control of access to forest resources and greater share of forestry-derived revenue did not improve forest management in the study districts. The study revealed dynamic and fluid forest politics at the district level. District forestry decision-making and operations have reflected the interplay between the legal-regulatory framework, relations between the Centre and district governments, and relations between and among actors at the district level. Organisational and individual actors each have their own interests and objectives shaping forestry decisions and operations at the district level, and these are well-illustrated in the research case studies. The ambiguity and inconsistency of the legal-regulatory framework, and the reluctance of Central actors to forgo powers, have resulted in tensions and a bitter power struggle between the district governments and the Centre. One of the important consequences has been that district actors have perceived their window of opportunity to be insecure, and have thus vigorously pursued short-term benefits from forest exploitation. Despite the Centre's efforts to retain and subsequently regain its powers, the case study district governments were able to develop strategies and tactics, at least for a period, to continue to ensure they and other local-level actors benefited from regional autonomy. Power relations between and among actors have determined the ways in which timber politics have been shaped at the district level. Local actors have increasingly influenced district government decision-making and forestry operations in the districts, and have destabilized the previously firm position of centrally-linked actors operating at the district level. In one district, the influence of extra-legal actors was significant and largely unchecked. However, as decentralisation progressed, the Centre's policies have ultimately determined district decisions, above and beyond local actors' influences. Forest exploitation has thus continued at the district level, at the expense of longer-term sustainability of the forests. Given the absence of strong downward accountability mechanisms, vertical accountability to the judiciary has been the most effective mechanism in keeping districts' forestry powers in check. The research conducted for this thesis suggests that the research framework developed here has shown useful in the analysis of forest governance dynamics at the district level under the decentralisation regime. Both de jure and de facto powers were taken into account in analysing how decentralisation has been played out, and this proved to be important. The institutional analysis that advances the importance of decentralised financial powers, and analysis of the role of various accountability relations beyond conventional downward accountability were relevant and useful. Further research, however, could be useful in determining how downward accountability in these contexts can explain the direct causal-effect linkages between local-level governance and NRM. The outcomes of this study also suggest that it would be desirable to investigate the incentives and motivations likely to lead to improved NRM under local forest governance. This is particularly relevant given the emphasis on avoided deforestation and reforestation in Indonesia. Finally, the rapidly evolving nature of Indonesia's decentralisation, and its progression beyond the early phase investigated by this research, suggest that it will be important to establish whether the outcomes and trends reported here will continue as they have during this initial period, or whether they will change as the decentralisation process and associated institutions mature.