Decentralization of Forest Administration in Indonesia, Implications ...

Chapter 6
The Impacts of Decentralization on
Tenure and Livelihoods
Moira Moeliono and Ahmad Dermawan
6.1 Introduction
Land and forest tenure are perhaps the most contentious and sensitive issues with respect
to state-society relations in Indonesia. At the national level, land tenure, especially in areas
that fall within the boundaries of the officially designated Forest Estate, is a particularly
difficult issue. Although Law 22/1999 on Regional Governance devolved a large part of
government authority to the regions, its implementing regulation, Government Regulation
25/2000, still allows the Ministry of Forestry great power and authority to, among other
things, designate the status, boundaries, and function of forests (Thamrin 2002). The
revised decentralization laws of 2004 have not significantly changed this; in fact they
have strengthened the position of the Ministry to control forest land.
It is also important to analyze how decentralization has affected the livelihoods of
rural communities, since that is a central purpose of decentralization reform processes
taking place both within Indonesia and in many other countries around the world. Tenure
and livelihood issues are often closely interlinked, particularly with regard to access to
forest resources and the distribution of associated benefits.
This chapter discusses the implications of decentralization on the dynamics of
land and forest tenure, as well as its impacts on the livelihoods of communities living
in or adjacent to forests. The discussion focuses particularly on areas where CIFOR and
partners have conducted research. Although it is rather difficult to separate the effects of
decentralization on the livelihoods of communities from other processes of social and
economic change, there are some indications of changes that could not have happened
without the influence of decentralization, particularly in the regions.
6.2 De Facto Decentralization
Law 22/1999 on Regional Governance established districts as autonomous regions
with the authority ”to manage national resources in their region …” (Art. 10). District
governments used this as the legal basis to take control over their forests and other
resources, conveniently ignoring the second part of the same article: “… and be responsible
to maintain environmental sustainability in accordance with the law”. The law also stated
that cross (district) boundary matters are to be under the authority of the province (Art.
9). As forests seldom follow administrative boundaries, this became a source of conflict
between the different levels of government, particularly as the law also stated that there
would be no hierarchical relation between districts and provinces.
As described in earlier chapters, Indonesia’s central, provincial, and district
governments have struggled over the division of authority over forests, while the technical