Background of FOLU Sink
The Forestry and Other Land Uses (FOLU) sector is projected to contribute nearly 60% of Indonesia’s greenhouse gas emission reduction target in the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) document, so even ambitious initiatives are shown through Indonesia’s Forestry and Other Land Uses (FOLU) Operational Plan document. Net Sink 2030 which has been established through the Decree of the Minister of Environment and Forestry (LHK) Number 168 of 2022, to provide an overview and describe implementation strategies in achieving Indonesia’s FOLU Net Sink 2030 target.
FOLU Sink and Future Forestry Activities
Chairman of the Advisory Council for Climate Change Control, Sarwono Kusumaatmadja said that the Ministry of Environment and Forestry recently outlined the roles and expected outputs of each party in the operation of FOLU Net Sink 2030. Sarwono also underlined the collaboration between stakeholders and international support in FOLU operations. NetSink 2030.
KPH-based FOLU Initiatives
Reference
https://www.menlhk.go.id/site/post/109
http://kph.menlhk.go.id/sinpasdok/
http://ditjenppi.menlhk.go.id/reddplus/images/adminppi/dokumen/Indonesia-2nd_BUR_web.pdf
http://kph.menlhk.go.id/sinpasdok/public/RPHJP/1491969095RPHJP_KPHP_KENDILO.pdf
http://kph.menlhk.go.id/sinpasdok/public/RPHJP/1491969095RPHJP_KPHP_KENDILO.pdf
Social forestry Review and NDC Report
The contribution of sustainable forest management includes the implementation of social forestry in this region. The Indonesian government is committed to realizing Social Forestry on an area of 12.7 million hectares as a form of government concern and attention to realizing prosperous community forests.
This socially charged forest management has become a necessary part of the government and it is time for such a large population living around the forestry and agricultural areas to be integrated into sustainable forestry development. It is feasible of social forestry implementation consequently in Indonesia region.
Java Forests Awakening
Discourse of Government’s Regulation of IPHPS – Izin Pengusahaan Hutan Perhutanan Sosial
Since the launch of P39 [Government’s Regulation no 39] that is broadly acknowledged as IPHPS in 2017, it was mentioned and determined in various forums, both at IPB, UGM, including during an audience in front of the Director General of PSKL (mediated by Pak Rinekso Dean of Fahutan IPB) that “P39 is not an ordinary Social Forestry (PS)”, why?
First, P39 deviates from the Agrarian Reform policy in Nawacita, where Social Forestry is included in the “access reform” category, meaning access to reformed forests, not “asset reform”, so in the PS there should be no “shared forest land”. But in fact that appears is a 35-year, individual, inheritable, tax-paying license (indicated by SPPT), this is the same as dividing the land, although LHK and P39 supporters dispute this. In the general public, SPPT has been considered as proof of land or land ownership.
It’s only been 3 or 4 years since IPHPS permit holders have felt free to do whatever they want on their land.
it is proven, for example, that there is a chicken coop/farm on IPHPS land (please ask Mas Dwi
Latin grace, who was just with me for a walk into the forest). Up to this point, it can be said that
P39 will have the potential to reduce the area of forest area, of course, it will also be accompanied by reduced function of the forest.
Second, P39 uses a “single management” pattern or what Prof. Maryudi from UGM refers to as
“greater forest tenure rights”, a pattern which I think is contrary to the basic principles of PS/SF which
I know so far, namely collective, strategic cooperation, collaboration, multi-stakeholder, equality, mutual
share etc. etc. In other words, even though it’s called Social Forestry, it doesn’t use or
even against the basic principles of true PS.
Still, according to Prof. Maryudi who is a Professor of Policy Science, a good policy is a policy that can
accommodate various interests, in other words, a PS policy with “single management” certainly not a policy that good, especially regarding forests as public assets.
Thirdly, even though it contradicts and violates the laws above, P39 is still implemented.
In PP 6 of 2007 concerning Forest Planning in article 48 paragraph (2) it is stated that the licensor /Ministers are prohibited from issuing permits to forest areas that have been granted permits to State-Owned Enterprises, in this case Perhutani forest areas (which have been stipulated by PP 72/2010)
the Minister may no longer give permission
Land use is an urgent thing in the process of a country’s good governance.
The Forestry and Other Land Uses (FOLU) sector is projected to contribute nearly 60% of Indonesia’s greenhouse gas emission reduction target in the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) document, so even ambitious initiatives are shown through Indonesia’s Forestry and Other Land Uses (FOLU) Operational Plan document. Net Sink 2030 which has been established through the Decree of the Minister of Environment and Forestry (LHK) Number 168 of 2022, to provide an overview and describe implementation strategies in achieving Indonesia’s FOLU Net Sink 2030 target.
Chairman of the Advisory Council for Climate Change Control, Sarwono Kusumaatmadja said that the Ministry of Environment and Forestry recently outlined the roles and expected outputs of each party in the operation of FOLU Net Sink 2030. Sarwono also underlined the collaboration between stakeholders and international support in FOLU operations. NetSink 2030.
There are about 127 million hectares of land that have been allocated for forest use for utilization activities. This utilization activity usually refers to the allocation that is already available and consists of production forest, limited production forest, and conservation forest.
Good governance has indications of natural resource management based on the land rights of natural resource practitioners. One indication that needs to be put forward here is that the basis for natural resource development is to respect and implement basic rights in natural resource management. This means that if in an area there are local community groups, of course, their basic rights are fulfilled and the process of utilizing natural resources, both water, air, sea, and land becomes a part that needs to be handled carefully.
The basic of rights regulate the interaction of natural resource practitioners, including the land where they work and live.
Natural resource management with various potentials needs to be handled adequately and the government as a “state regulator” should consider this governance challenge earnestly.
Indonesia itself faces a better land use process and program that requires reconciliation on paper and on the ground. The land use reconciliation process requires accuracy in carrying out
Identification, drafting of use, Mapping involving all respective stakeholders, clarification on paper and field validation, and no less important is the resolution of disputes if there are findings at the field level that need to be managed and resolved together.
In the distribution of land use, it is necessary to look at the social, economic, and environmental conditions in the location of the land use. Indonesia itself is committed to forestry land use of around 127 million hectares which is divided into production forest, limited production forest, and conservation forest.
It is necessary to consider the process of land use planning that involves the interests of many stakeholders.