Ecoregional Assessment of Biological Diversity in East Kalimantan

East Kalimantan Ecoregional Assessment: Chapter 1 – Background & Analysis Process
1) Existing spatial plans have been drawn up by consultants who worked outside the
Province.
2) Absence of community involvement in the preparation of these plans as required by
Government.
3) Plans were derived from inaccurate secondary sources, which were not later ground
checked.
4) Plans ignore traditional community rights.
5) Insufficient involvement from civil society, e.g. non-governmental organizations
(NGOs).
6) Information on the planning process and final plans was poorly disseminated outside a
restricted group of insiders.
According to the Ketua BAPPEDA, the following conditions need to be met to achieve a
working spatial plan in East Kalimantan that will have wide community support:
1) Local village leaders have to be consulted.
2) Information on the process has to be shared with the community.
3) Aspirations of the community have to be considered.
4) Spatial plans have to be consulted with, and have value to guide decisions of,
government.
5) Overlapping and competing land-use requirements have to be considered.
6) Plans have to be politically realistic.
Further, the Ketua BAPPEDA stated that the spatial plans that are currently available:
1) Do not work.
2) Are out of date and have no reality on the ground.
3) Have no mechanisms to enforce them.
4) Do not inform communities of decisions related to implementation of the plans.
The seriousness of this situation comes into sharper focus when it is realized that the process
of government decentralization, ratified in January 2001, shifted much of the responsibility
for managing natural and biological resources from Indonesia’s central government on the
island of Java to the provincial governments and district (kabupaten) governments. The
current relationship and responsibility between these latter two governments is a matter of
both conjecture and considerable discussion.
There are 11 kabupatens in East Kalimantan, and all are required to produce spatial plans.
Craven (2000) examined the spatial planning efforts in two of these kabupatens (Kutai and
West Kutai). A number of policy and implementation reviews indicate that, particularly at
the district level, spatial planning is still confused and not very effective (Craven 2000; Jarvie
1999; Fox 1999; Brown and Jarvie 1998). The main reasons for this arise from the following:
• Spatial plans have limited authority when put up against private sector interests.
• Technical specifications of plans are related to scale, and the detail required cannot be
met.
• Terminology of plans is vague, particularly concerning forest status and land
classification.
• Institutional capacity to carry out the planning is limited.
2