Indonesia's Forest Management Units: Effective intermediaries in REDD+ implementation?

Forest Policy and Economics

Volumn 62, Issue , 2016, Pages 69-77

  Kim, Yeon Su ^a   Bae, Jae Soo ^b   Fisher, Larry A ^c   Latifah, Sitti ^d   Afifi, Mansur ^d   Lee, Soo Min ^b,e   Kim, In Ae ^b  

^a NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Korea Forest Research Institute   (South Korea)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MATARAM   (Indonesia)

^e CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL FORESTRY RESEARCH   (Indonesia)

Author keywords

Forest governance; Forest Management Unit; Forest policies; Indonesia; Intermediaries; KPH; Payment for ecosystem services; REDD+

Indexed keywords

DEFORESTATION; ECOSYSTEMS; LAWS AND LEGISLATION; LOGGING (FORESTRY); PUBLIC POLICY;

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; FOREST GOVERNANCE; FOREST MANAGEMENT UNITS; FOREST POLICY; INDONESIA; INTERMEDIARIES; KPH; REDD;

FORESTRY;

EID: 84947709611     PISSN: 13899341     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2015.09.004     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Agrawal A., Nepstad D., Chhatre A. Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2011, 36:373-396.
2. Agusdin Pembangunan Sosial Ekonomi Melalui Pengembangan Industri Tembakau Virginia Lombok (Tantangan Keberlanjutan Usaha). Unpublished Research Report 2012, University of Mataram, Mataram, Indonesia.
3. Arhin A.A. Safeguards and dangerguards: a framework for unpacking the black box of safeguards for REDD+. Forest Policy. Econ. 2011, 45:24-31.
4. Bae J.S., Kim Y.-S., Fisher L.A., Moeliono M., DeShazo J. Promises and perils of decentralized forest governance, the case of Indonesia's forest management units in REDD+ implementation. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2014, 27:1346-1354.
5. Bae J.S., Kim C., Kim Y.-S., Latifah S., Afifi M., Fisher L.A., Lee S.M., Kim I.-A., Kang J., Kim R., Kim J.S. Opportunities for implementing REDD+ to enhance sustainable forest management and improve livelihoods in Lombok, NTB, Indonesia. Working Paper 151 2014, CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.
6. Blom B., Sunderland T., Murdiyarso D. Getting REDD to work locally, lessons learned from integrated conservation and development projects. Environ. Sci. Pol. 2011, 13:164-172.
7. Bloor M., Frankland J., Thomas M., Robson K. Focus Groups in Social Research 2001, Sage, London, (110 pp.).
8. BPS, 2012. Regional profile, Nusa Tengarra Barat, Available online: (accessed Aug. 10, 2013). http://www.bps.go.id/profile/ntb.shtml.
9. Brockhaus M., Di Gregorio M. National REDD+ policy networks: from cooperation to conflict. Ecol. Soc. 2014, 19:14.
10. Brockhaus M., Obidzinski K., Dermawan A., Laumonier Y., Luttrell C. An overview of forest and land allocation policies in Indonesia: is the current framework sufficient to meet the needs of REDD+?. Forest Policy Econ. 2011, 18:30-37.
11. Brockhaus M., Di Gregorio M., Mardiah S. Governing the design of national REDD+: an analysis of the power of agency. Forest Policy Econ. 2014, 49:23-33.
12. Brown K., Daw T., Rosendo S., Bunce M., Cherrett N. Ecosystem services for poverty alleviation: marine and coastal situational analysis. Synthesis Report 2008, UK Ecosystem Services for Poverty Alleviation (ESPA) Programme (2008).
13. Caplow S., Jagger P., Lawlor K., Sills E. Evaluating land use and livelihood impacts of early forest carbon projects: lessons for learning about REDD+. Environ. Sci. Pol. 2011, 14:152-167.
14. CISRO Project Design 2010-2013, Climate Futures and Rural Livelihood Adaptation Strategies in Nusa Tenggara Barat Province, Indonesia 2011, CISRO, Australia.
15. Corbera E., Kosoy N., Martinez M. Equity implications of marketing ecosystem services in protected areas and rural communities: case studies from Meso-America. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2007, 17:365-380.
16. Corbera E., Gonzalez C., Soberanis G., Brown K. Institutional dimensions of payments for ecosystem services: an analysis of Mexico's Carbon Forestry Programme. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68:743-761.
17. Datnow A., Hubbard L., Mehan A. Extending Educational Reform: From One School to Many 2002, RoutledgeFalmer, New York, USA.
18. Davies R. The Indonesia-Australia forest carbon partnership: a murder mystery. CGD Policy Paper 60 2015, Center for Global Development, Washington, DC, USA.
19. Davis E.J., Gwin L., Moseley C., Gosnell H., Burright H. Beer, beef, and boards: the role of intermediaries in payment for ecosystem services arrangements in northwestern Montana. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2014, 58:1-15.
20. De Koning F., Aguinaga M., Bravo M., Chiu M., Lascano M., Lozada T., Suarez L. Bridging the gap between forest conservation and poverty alleviation: the Ecuadorian socio Bosque program. Environ. Sci. Policy 2011, 14:531-542.
21. Dinas Kehutanan Provinsi NTB Statistik Kehutanan Provinsi NTB Tahun 2011 2012, Dinas Kehutanan Provinsi NTB, Mataram.
22. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), 2010. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010, Main report. FAO Forestry Paper No. 163. Rome, FAO, 340-41.
23. Galudra G., Buana Y., Khususiyah N. Mau melangkah ke mana pengelolaan Hutan Sesaot? (Brief No. 09 Policy Analysis Unit) 2010, World Agroforestory Center ICRAF Southeast Asia Regional Office, Bogor.
24. Grainger A., Boucher D.H., Frumhoff P.C., Laurance W.F., Lovejoy T., McNeely J., Pimm S.L. Biodiversity and REDD at Copenhagen. Curr. Biol. 2009, 19:974-976.
25. Griscom B., Ganz D., Virgilio N., Price F., Hayward J., Cortez R., Dodge G., Hurd J., Lowenstein F.L., Stanley B. The Hidden Frontier of Forest Degradation: A Review of the Science, Policy and Practice of Reducing Degradation Emissions 2009, The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, (76 pp.).
26. Hajek F., Ventresca M.J., Scriven J., Castro A. Regime-building for REDD+: evidence from a cluster of local initiatives in south-eastern Peru. Environ. Sci. Policy 2011, 1:201-215.
27. Hamann E.T., Lane B. The roles of state departments of education as policy intermediaries: two cases. Edu. Policies 2004, 18:426-455.
28. Harvey C.A., Dickson B., Kormos C. Opportunities for achieving biodiversity conservation through REDD. Conserv. Lett. 2010, 3:53-61.
29. Indonesian REDD+ Task Force, 2012. REDD+ National Strategy. Jakarta, Republic of Indonesia, 40pp. Available online: (accessed Aug. 10, 2013). http://www.satgasreddplus.org/.
30. Indrarto G.B., Murharjanti P., Khatarina J., Pulungan I., Ivalerina F., Rahman J., Prana M.N., Resosudarmo I.A.P., Muharrom E. The context of REDD + in Indonesia: drivers, agents and institutions. Working Paper 92 2012, Bogor. Indonesia, CIFOR.
31. Intarini D.Y., Resosudarmo I.A.P., Komalasari M., Ekaputri A.E. Ketapang Community Carbon Pools, Ketapang, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. REDD+ on the Ground: A Case Book of Subnational Initiatives Around the World 2015, CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia. E.O. Sills, S. Atmadja, C. de Sassi, A.E. Duchelle, D. Kweka, I.A.P. Resosudarmo, W.D. Sunderlin (Eds.).
32. Jang S.K., Bae J.S. New forest governance in Indonesia: a forest partnership between forest management units and local communities. Southeast Asian Stud. 2014, 24:95-144.
33. Jaung W., Bae J.S. Evaluating socio-economic equity of DD+ in a rights-based approach: rapid equity appraisal matrix. Environ. Sci. Policy 2012, 22:1-12.
34. Karsenty A., Ongolo S. Can "fragile states" decide to reduce their deforestation? The inappropriate use of the theory of incentives with respect to the REDD mechanism. Forest Policy Econ. 2012, 18:38-45.
35. Kartodihardjo H., Suwarno E. Study on Mainstreaming Forest Management by FMUs into the Forestry Regulations 2013, Deutsche Gesellscaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, Jakarta, Indonesia.
36. Kartodihardjo H., Nugroho B., Putro H.R. Forest Management Unit Development (FMU): Concept, Legislation and Implementation 2011, Ministry of Forestry, FORCLIME Forest and Climate Change Programme, Jakarta, Indonesia.
37. Kaye M. Indonesia's for-profit conservationists. The Jakarta Post, November 2012, 27.
38. KPH RB Socio-Economic and Cultural Inventory in West Rinjani KPH 2011 2012, KPHL West Rinjani, Mataram, Indonesia.
39. Lane B., Hamann E. Constructing policy: a framework for effective policy implementation. Paper Presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting April 21, 2003, Chicago, USA 2003.
40. Larson A.M., Brockhaus M., Sunderlin W.D., Duchelle A., Babon A., Dokken T., Huynh T.B. Land tenure and REDD+, the good, the bad and the ugly. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2013, 23:678-689.
41. Lederer M. From CDM to REDD+-what do we know for setting up effective and legitimate carbon governance?. Ecol. Econ. 2011, 70:1900-1907.
42. Lee S.M., Kim Y.-S., Jaung W., Latifah S., Afifi M., Fisher L.A. Forests, fuelwood and livelihoods-energy transition patterns in eastern Indonesia. Energy Policy 2015, 85:61-70.
43. Leimona B., Finlayson R., Wijaya C., Prawisuda A., Duque Pinon C., Dam V.B., Pasha R. Rewards for, Use of and Shared Investment in 'Pro- poor Environmental Services Schemes (RUPES) Phase Two' 2013, World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) Southeast Asia Regional Program, Bogor, Indonesia.
44. Luttrell C., Resosudarmo I.A.P., Muharrom E., Brockhaus M., Seymour F. The political context of REDD+ in Indonesia: constituencies for change. Environ. Sci. Pol. 2012, 35:67-75.
45. Matland R.E. Synthesizing the implementation literature: the ambiguity-conflict model of policy implementation. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory 1995, 5:145-174.
46. Ministry of Forestry (MoF) Data and Information: KPH 2012 2012, Ministry of Forestry, Jakarta.
47. Ministry of Forestry (MoF) Executive Summary About Forest Management Unit (February 2014) 2014, Ministry of Forestry, Jakarta, Indonesia.
48. Moeliono M., Gallemore C., Santoso L., Brockhaus M., Di Gregorio M. Information networks and power: confronting the "wicked problem" of REDD+ in Indonesia. Ecol. Soc. 2014, 19:2.
49. Moss T. Intermediaries and the governance of sociotechnical networks in transition. Environ. Plan. 2009, 41:1480-1495.
50. Moss T., Medd W., Guy S., Marvin S. Organizing water: the hidden role of intermediary work. Water Alt. 2009, 2:16-33.
51. Muradian R., Corbera E., Pascual U., Kosoy N., May P.H. Reconciling theory and practice: an alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69:1202-1208.
52. Mustalahti I., Bolin A., Boyd E., Paavola J. Can REDD+ reconcile local priorities and needs with global mitigation benefits? Lessons from Angai Forest, Tanzania. Ecol. Soc. 2012, 17:16.
53. Antara News-Mataram, 2012. NTB Libatkan 260 Mandor Tangani "Illegal Logging". Antara News-Mataram 2012.10.20. Available online: (accessed Aug. 10, 2013). http://mataram.antaranews.com/berita/23106/ntb-libatkan-260-mandor-tangani-illegal-logging.
54. Noordwijk M.V., Leimona B. Principles for fairness and efficiency in enhancing environmental services in Asia: payments, compensation, or co-investment?. Ecol. Soc. 2010, 15:17.
55. Peskett L., Schreckenberg K., Brown J. Institutional approaches for carbon financing in the forest sector: learning lessons for REDD+ from forest carbon projects in Uganda. Environ. Sci. Pol. 2011, 4:216-229.
56. Pham T.T., Campbell B.M., Garnett S., Aslin H., Minh Ha H. Importance and impacts of intermediary boundary organizations in facilitating payment for environmental services in Vietnam. Environ. Conserv. 2010, 37:64-72.
57. Pirard R. Payments for Environmental Services (PES) in the public policy landscape, "Mandatory" spices in the Indonesian recipe. Forest Policy Econ. 2012, 18:23-29.
58. Pistorius T. From RED to REDD+: the evolution of a forest-based mitigation approach for developing countries. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2012, 4:638-645.
59. Poffenberger M. Cambodia's forests and climate change: mitigating drivers of deforestation. Nat. Resour. Forum 2009, 33:285-296.
60. Prasetyo F.A., Aritta S., Purwanto, Hakim H. Making policies work for payment for environmental services (PES), evaluation of the experience of formulating conservation policies in districts of Indonesia. J. Sustain. For. 2009, 28:415-433.
61. Republic of Indonesia (ROI), 1960. Government Regulation No. 5/1960 Basic Agrarian Regulation (in Indonesian). Republic of Indonesia, Jakarta. Indonesia.
62. Republic of Indonesia (ROI) Government Regulation No. 6/2007 Forest Arrangement and Establishment of Forest Management Plan as well as Forest Exploitation (in Indonesian) 2007, Republic of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.
63. Republic of Indonesia (ROI) Ministry of Forestry Regulation No. P.6/Menhut-II/2009 Establishment of Forest Management Unit (in Indonesian) 2009, Republic of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.
64. Republic of Indonesia (ROI) Ministry of Forestry Regulation No. P. 39/Menhut-II/2013 Local Community Empowerment Through Forestry Partnership 2013, Republic of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia.
65. Resosudarmo I.A.P. Closer to people and trees: will decentralization work for the people and the forests of Indonesia?. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 2004, 16:110-132.
66. Resosudarmo I.A.P., Atmadja S., Ekaputri A.D., Intarini D.Y., Indriatmoko Y., Astri P. Does tenure security lead to REDD+ project effectiveness? Reflections from five emerging sites in Indonesia. World Dev. 2013, 55:68-83.
67. Russell-Smith J., Djoeroemana S., Maan J., Pandanga P. Rural livelihoods and burning practices in savanna landscapes of Nusa Tenggara Timur, Eastern Indonesia. Hum. Ecol. 2007, 2007(35):345-359.
68. Sahide M.A.K., Giessen L. The fragmented land use administration in Indonesia-analysing bureaucratic responsibilities influencing tropical rainforest transformation systems. Land Use Policy 2015, 43:96-110.
69. Sahide M.A.K., Nurrochmat D.R., Giessen L. The regime complex for tropical rainforest transformation: analysing the relevance of multiple global and regional land use regimes in Indonesia. Land Use Policy 2015, 47:408-425.
70. Skutsch M., Zahabu E., Karky B. Community forest management under REDD: policy conditions for equitable governance. Paper Presented at the World Forest Congress, Buenos Aires, Oct. 18-25 2009.
71. Suara NTB, 2013. Kurangi Deforestasi dan Degradasi Pemerintah Berdayakan Masyarakat Kawasan Hutan dengan Pola HKm. Suara NTB 2012.09.21. Available online: (accessed Aug. 10, 2013). http://www.suarantb.com/2012/09/21/wilayah/Mataram/detil5.html.
72. Sunderlin W.D., Larson A.M., Duchelle A.E., Resosudarmo I.A.P., Huynh T.B., Awono A., Dokken T. How are REDD+ proponents addressing tenure problems? Evidence from Brazil, Cameroon, Tanzania, Indonesia, and Vietnam. World Dev. 2013, 55:37-52.
73. Thomas S., Dargusch P., Harrison S., Herbohn J. Why are there so few afforestation and reforestation clean development mechanism projects?. Land Use Policy 2010, 27:880-887.
74. UNFCCC, 2010. Decision 1/CP.16: The Cancun Agreements, Outcome of the Work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (FCCC/CP/2010/7/Add.1), 2010. Available online, (accessed Aug. 10, 2013). http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2010/cop16/eng/07a01.pdf%23page=2.
75. UN-REDD Programme, 2013. About REDD+. Geneva, UN-REDD Programme. Available online: (accessed Aug. 10, 2013). http://www.un-redd.org/AboutREDD/tabid/582/Default.aspx.
76. World Bank Readiness Preparation Proposal Assessment Note 2011, World Bank.
77. Wunder S. Payments for Environmental Services: Some Nuts and Bolts, CIFOR Occasional Paper, #42, 24 2005, CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.
78. Wunder S. Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services. Ecol. Econ. 2015, (ahead-of-print).
79. Wunder S., Engel S., Pagiola S. Taking stock: a comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 65:834-852.