Local policy-making mechanisms - Forest Climate Center

Local Policy-making Mechanismsdistrict governments and between the provincialand district governments.Two years later, however, this agreementhad not yet to come into force (Jambi ProvincialForestry Office personal communication).Some districts have yet to revise their forestryregulations (District Regulations on IPHH andRHH) to comply with the agreement, and haveyet to make their first payment to the provincefrom their forest sector revenues.b. Revenue lossAround 2000–3000 m 3 of illegal timber hasbeen transported out of Tanjabbar. The districtgovernment is estimated to have suffered a lossof Rp. 220 million 55 in revenues as a result ofillegal logging and timber transportation.In practice, the establishment of a TPR inTanjabbar has simply created more opportunitiesfor corruption at the district level. According tothe Deputy District Head of Tanjabbar, somelocal officials have been caught in dealingswith truck drivers transporting timber not farfrom these posts. Officials manning these postsalso falsify records, recording far less timberthan the trucks are actually carrying.Companies require an official Permit toTransport Forest Products (SKSHH). If theytry to pass a TPR without an SKSHH they haveto pay a fine of Rp. 90 000/m 3 56 . However,local people told us that transport trucks passthrough for a fee of Rp. 180 000 per trip, orthey can pay Rp. 90 000/m 3 for an SKSHH.The income from these fines alone issignificant; however, this provision effectivelylegalizes illegal logging 57 . It is very difficultto halt illegal logging activities when nondocumentedtimber can be transported onpayment of a fine. It is also impossible to knowhow many fines are actually paid at these posts,and what the district account should really bereceiving. This practice is regulated under aJoint Decree 58 , issued by the District Heads ofMuaro Jambi and Tanjabbar.c. Forest DegradationThe joint decree of the District Heads of MuaroJambi and Tanjabbar has given logging operatorsa legal mechanism to transport logs takenillegally from inside Bukit Tigapuluh NationalPark; the park is increasingly threatened withdestruction as a result of this policy. The districtgovernment’s failure to draft regulations basedon local people’s interests and needs has alsocontributed to this loss. Local livelihoodsissues and social or ecological interests havebeen sidelined in favour of an exclusive policymakingsystem.Another factor endangering Bukit TigapuluhNational Park is confusion and conflictsover the location of the park boundaries. Thevillagers of Suban claim that they do not knowwhere the boundaries lie. Forest delineation isunder central government authority: it does notinvolve any of the local people living in andaround forest areas. It is therefore not surprisingthat the community is unaware of the boundariesThe national park is adjacent to the villagers’farmland, but as they played no part in settingthe boundaries local communities do not feela strong responsibility for implementing thedistant policies emanating from the central ordistrict governments.One important point that should be madeis that the forest management policies, both inthe centralized and decentralized periods, havetended to classify forests as a resource to beexploited solely for economic purposes. Littleconsideration has been given to preservingand maintaining the non-economic or localsubsistence functions of forests. Likewise,little attention has been paid to the questionof regeneration. These issues have notbeen prioritized during the formulation offorest management policies at any level ofgovernment.5.2 Conflict between theCommunity and HPH/HTI Companies beforeDecentralizationResearch in the Subdistricts of Tungkal Uluand Merlung showed conflicts between localcommunities and logging companies, forexample:30