Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun. 2019, 67(4), 963-972 | DOI: 10.11118/actaun201967040963

Benefit Sharing Schema from the Forest: Identifying Potential Distributions to Customary Communities in Teluk Bintuni District, Indonesia

Jonni Marwa1,2, Mustofa Agung Sardjono2, Afif Ruchaemi2, Simon Devung2, Reinardus Liborius Cabuy1
1 Department of Forestry, Faculty of Forestry, University of Papua, Jl. Gunung Salju Amban, Manokwari, West Papua Province, Indonesia 98314
2 Faculty of Forestry, University of Mulawarman, Jl. Penajam P.O. Box. 1013 Samarinda, East Kalimantan, Indonesia 75116

This study identifies the benefits that traditional communities receive from the tropical rain forest in New Guinea, Indonesia. In this study, various benefit sharing schema developed by forest concession holder are assessed to understand the precise outcome compared to traditional welfare solutions. It further aims to identify benefit sharing schemas applied by concession investors in the forest sector and assesses these schema based on equitable principles. A questionnaire and semi-structured interviews were used to collect data from traditional communities, concession holders, and the government. Interviews and field observations were randomly conducted and then analyzed for both quantitative and qualitative descriptions. The results indicate that there were five benefits sharing schemas i.e., those based on financial schema, based on the market, based on infrastructure, based on social management, and based on the transfer of knowledge and technology. Overall, all the schemas that were developed did not fulfil the same criteria. However, there were only two schemas that were considered to be equal and efficient: the financial based-schema and infrastructure based-schema. This is indicated by the larger number of criteria and requirements that they fulfil. Yet, all the schemas still present various conflicts either between customary communities and the government or between the communities and investors.

Keywords: benefit shearing schema, customary community, equitable principle, forest concession, investors

Received: November 9, 2018; Accepted: June 5, 2019; Published: August 26, 2019  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Marwa, J., Sardjono, M.A., Ruchaemi, A., Devung, S., & Cabuy, R.L. (2019). Benefit Sharing Schema from the Forest: Identifying Potential Distributions to Customary Communities in Teluk Bintuni District, Indonesia. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 67(4), 963-972. doi: 10.11118/actaun201967040963
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. ANTINORI, C. and RAUSSER, G. 2007. Collective choice and community forestry management in Mexico: An empirical analysis. Journal of Development Studies, 43(3): 512-536. DOI: 10.1080/00220380701204471 Go to original source...
    2. CAMPESE, J. 2012. Equitable benefit sharing: Exploring experiences and lessons for REDD+ in Tanzania. Tanzania Natural Resources Forum.
    3. DINAS KEHUTANAN PROVINSI PAPUA BARAT. 2012. Papua Barat province annual statistics report [in Indonesiam: Statistik kehutanan Provinsi Papua Barat]. Dinas kehutanan provinsi Papua Barat.
    4. DEPARTEMEN KEHUTANAN. 2003. The Forestry Ministry Degree No. 177/Kpts-II/2003 regarding criteria and indicators of sustainable forest concession and management in management unit [in Indonesian: Keputusan Menteri Kehutanan Nomor 177/Kpts-II/2003, tentang kriteria dan indikator usaha pengelolaan hutan secara lestari pada unit manajemen]. Departemen Kehutanan.
    5. DONOVAN, J., STOIAN, D., MACQUEEN, D. and GROUWELS, S. 2006. The business side of sustainable forest management: Small and medium forest enterprise development for poverty reduction. Natural Resource Perspectives 104. London: Overseas Development Institute, 111 Westminster Bridge Road.
    6. FALLET, M. G. 2010. The impact of the oil industry on local communities in the South Sudan. Master Thesis. Department of International Environment and Development Studies, Norway University of Life Sciences.
    7. FAO. 2018. Rethinking forest concessions. Improving the allocation of state-owned forests for better economic, social and environmental outcomes. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
    8. GUBERNUR PROVINSI PAPUA BARAT. 2007. Papua Barat Governor Degree No. 144 in 2007 regarding: Compensation standard for customary community towards wood collected from customary right areas in the Papua Barat province [in Indonesian: Surat Keputusan Gubernur Papua Barat Nomor. 144 tahun 2007, tentang: standar pemberian kompensasi bagi masyarakat adat atas kayu yang dipungut pada areal hak ulayat di Provinsi Papua Barat]. Avaialble at: http://dishut.papuabaratprov.go.id/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=43:keputusan-gubernur-provpb-no144-thn-2007&catid=39:keputusan-gubernur-papua-barat&Itemid=57 [Accessed: 2019, June 15].
    9. IEK, M. 2011. Road development and economic growth activity in rural areas in Papua [in Indonesian: Pembangunan jalan dan pertumbuhan usaha ekonomi di pedalaman tanah Papua]. Diploma Thesis. Faculty of Forestry, University of Papua.
    10. KARSENTY A. 2007. Overview of industrial forest concessions and concession-based industry in Central and West Africa and considerations of alternatives. Cirad
    11. KARTODIHARDJO, H. 2006. Economy and forest management institution: Continuous analysis of forest policy activity [in Indonesian: Ekonomi dan institusi pengelolaan hutan: Telaah lanjutan analisis kebijakan usaha kehutanan]. Bogor: IDEALS.
    12. LI, T. M. 2001. Masyarakat adat, deference and the limit of recognition in Indonesian's forest zone. Modern Asian Study, 35(3): 645-676. DOI: 10.1017/S0026749X01003067 Go to original source...
    13. MAIESE, E. M. 2003. Distribution justice. In: burges, G and Burgess, H. (Eds.). Beyond intractability conflict research consortium. Boulder: The university of Colorado. Available at: http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/types-of-justice [Accessed: 2019, June 15].
    14. MARWA, J., PURNOMO, H.and NUROCHMAT, D. R. 2010. Managing the last frontier of Indonesian forest in Papua. Bogor: Faculty of Forestry, Bogor AgriculturalUniversity, and ASEAN - Korea Environmental Cooperation.
    15. MILNE S. and NIESTEN E. 2009. Direct payments for biodiversity conservation in developing countries: practical insights for design and implementation. The International J. of Conservation, 43(4): 1-12. Go to original source...
    16. MORGAN, R. 2004. Advancing indigenous right at the United Nation: strategic framing and its impact on the normative development of international law. Social legal study 2004. Sage Publication. Go to original source...
    17. MOHAMMED, E. Y. 2011. Pro-poor distribution in REDD+: Who gets what and why does it matter. Redd Working Paper. London: IIED.
    18. NHKATA, A. B., BREEN, C. M. and FREIMUD, W. A. 2008. Resilient social relationship and collaboration in the management of social ecological system. Ecology and society, 13(1): 2. Go to original source...
    19. SABOGAL, C. and CEDERGREN, J. 2017. Making forest concessions work to sustain forests, economies and livelihoods in tropical timber producing countries. A FAO-ITTO initiative in collaboration with SFB, CIFOR and CIRAD.
    20. STARKEY, P. and HINE, J. 2014. Poverty and sustainable transport. How transport affects poor with policy implications for poverty reduction. A literature review. UN-Habitat, the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) and SLoCaT. Available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/1767Poverty%20and%20sustainable%20transport.pdf [Accessed: 2019, June 15].
    21. TELUK BINTUNI IN FIGURE. 2014. Badan pusat statistik kabupaten Teluk Bintuni. Available at: https://telukbintunikab.bps.go.id/website/pdf_publikasi/Kabupaten-Teluk-Bintuni-Dalam-Angka-2014.pdf [Accessed: 2019, June 15].
    22. TOBIN, B. 2008. The role of customary law in access and benefit-sharing and traditional knowledge governance: Perspectives from Andean and Pacific Island countries. World Intellectual Properties Organization and the United Nations University.
    23. WAGSTAFF, G. F. 1994. Equality: equity and need. Three principles of justice or one? An analysis of equity as desert. Current psychology, 13(2): 138-152. DOI: 10.1007/BF02686797 Go to original source...
    24. WICOMB, W. and SMITH, H. 2011. Customary commninties as 'people' and their customary tenure as 'culture': What we can do with the Endorois decision. African human Rights Law Journal, 11(2): 422-446.
    25. WYMAN, M., BARBORAK, J. R., INAMDAR, N. and STEIN, T. 2011. Best practices for tourism concessions in protected areas: A review of the field. Forests, 2: 913-928. DOI: 10.3390/f2040913 Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY NC ND 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content