Analisis Aktor dalam Perumusan Model Kelembagaan Pengembangan Hutan Rakyat di Kabupaten Bogor

Tatan Sukwika

Abstract



Bogor regency has an area of 16,945 hectares’ community-forests or 22% of the forest area in the regency. Institutional problems of community-forest management include weak interaction of actors within the organization. Since the organization is part of the institution, its existence becomes an important technical part in securing the operation of the institution. Objectives of this research on analyzing actors and the institution in the community-forest area are: (1) to determine the dominant key actors in community-forests action arena; and (2) to formulate community-forests development institutional models. Qualitative descriptive analysis of actors and institutions employs content analysis. Key actors analysis utilized ISM (Interpretive Structural Modeling) analysis methods. Results of the analysis identified seven key actors in community forest management, namely UPTD BP3K, landowners who lives outside the village, farmer landowners, land tenants, farm labors, lumbermens, and middlemen. Of the seven key actors, four key actors are the most dominant in the community-forest action arena, which are farmer landowners, farm labors, lumbermens and middlemen. There are three models of community-forest management institutions for capacity development actors, namely the institutional model related to venture capital, handling waste of resources, and coordination. This study recommends the necessity to strengthen dominant actors at site level according to the criteria of efficiency, equity, and sustainability. The policy makers need to optimize the capacity and coordination function of government agencies through the institutional coordination model.


Keywords


actor; community-forest; content analysis; institutional; Interpretive Structural Modeling

Full Text:

PDF

References


Adam, Y. O., Pretzsch, J., & Pettenella, D. (2012). Contribution of Non-Timber Forest Products livelihood strategies to rural development in drylands of Sudan: potentials and failures. Agricultural Systems, 117 (C), 90-97. https://doi.org/10.1016%2fj.agsy.2012.12.008

Ashari. (2006). Potensi Lembaga Keuangan Mikro (LKM) dalam Pembangunan Ekonomi Pedesaan dan Kebijakan Pengembangannya, Analisis Kebijakan Pertanian, 4 (2), 146-164.

Caballero, G. (2014). Community-based forest management institutions in the Galician communal forests: a new institutional approach. Forest Policy and Economics, 50 (C), 347-356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2014.07.013

Canadas, M. J., Novais, A., & Marques, M. (2016). Wildfires, forest management and landowners’ collective action: a comparative approach at the local level. Land Use Policy, 56 (2016), 179–188. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.04.035

Coleman, E. A. (2009). Institutional factors affecting biophysical outcomes in forest management. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 28 (1), 122–146. http://dx.doi.org 10.1002/pam.20405

[Distanhut] Dinas Pertanian dan Kehutanan Kabupaten Bogor. (2014). Laporan Tahunan Pertanian dan Kehutanan. Monografi. Bogor: Distanhut.

Eriyatno. (2003). Ilmu Sistem: Meningkatkan Mutu dan Efektivitas Manajemen (jilid 1). Bogor: IPB Press.

Ethika, D., Purwanto, R. S., Senawi., & Masyhuri. (2014). Peranan petani terhadap strategi pembangunan hutan rakyat di bagian hulu sub das logawa di Kabupaten Banyumas, Jawa Tengah. Jurnal Manusia dan Lingkungan, 21 (3), 377-385.

Hardjanto., Hero, Y., & Trison, S. (2012). Desain kelembagaan usaha hutan rakyat untuk mewujudkan kelestarian hutan dan kelestarian usaha dalam upaya pengentasan kemiskinan masyarakat pedesaan. Jurnal Ilmu Pertanian Indonesia, 17 (2), 103-107.

Hashemnezhad, H. (2015). Qualitative Content Analysis Research: A Review Article. Journal of ELT and Applied Linguistics, 3 (1), 54-62. http://www.jeltal.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/5.7151855.pdf

Hinings, C., Logue, D., & Zietsma, C. (2017). Fields, governance and institutional infrastructure. SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism., 2nd Edition. R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T.B. Lawrence, R. Meyer, Ed. Sage.

Kartodihardjo, H. (2006). Masalah kelembagaan dan arah kebijakan rehabilitasi hutan dan lahan. Jurnal Analisis Kebijakan Kehutanan, 3 (1), 29-41.

Kasper, W., & Streit, M. E. (1998). Institutional Economics: social order and public policy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Kriyantono, R. (2012). Teknik praktis riset komunikasi, Edisi 6. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group

Kyfyak, V. (2012). The institutional mechanism of development of the agricultural sector of Ukraine. Ecoforum, 1 (1), 2012

McGinnis, M. D., & Ostrom, E. (2014). Social-ecological system framework: initial changes and continuing challenges. Ecology and Society, 19 (2), 30. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-06387-190230

Mokhele, M. (2018). The volatility of institutional arrangements that influence development: The case of Bram Fischer International Airport in South Africa. The Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa, 14 (1). https://doi.org/10.4102/td.v14i1.436

North, D. C. (2012). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808678

Okumu, B., & Muchapondwa, E.(2017). Determinants of successful collective management of forest resources: evidence from Kenyan community forest associations. ERSA working paper 698

Osei-Tutu, P., Pregernig,M., & Pokorny, B. (2015). Interactions between formal and informal institutions in community, private and state forest contexts in Ghana. Forest Policy and Economics, 54 (C), 26-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2015.01.006

Ostrom, E. (2007). Developing a Method for Analyzing Institutional Change. Center for the Study of Institutional Diversity. Arizona: Arizona State University

Ostrom, E. (2008). Doing institutional analysis: digging deeper than markets and hierarchies. Handbook of New Institutional Economics. Menard C, Shirley M., Ed.. Berlin: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

Ostrom, E. (2011). Background on the institutional analysis and development framework. Policy Studies Journal, 39 (1), 7-27. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2010.00394.x

Persson, J., &Prowse, M. (2017). Collective action on forest governance: An institutional analysis of the Cambodian community forest system. Forest Policy and Economics, 83 (C), 70-79, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.06.008

Riduwan. (2009). Pengantar Statistika Sosial. Bandung: Alfabeta

Rout, S. (2011). Collective action for sustainable forestry: institutional dynamics in community management of forest in Orissa. Social Change, 40 (4), 479–502. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/004908571004000405

Saxena, J. P., Sushil., & Vrat, P. (1992). Hierarchy and classification of program plan elements using interpretive structural modeling. Systems Practice, 5 (6), 651-670. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01083616

Saxena, J. P., Sushil, & Vrat, P. (2006). Policy and Strategy Formulation: an application of flexible systems methodology. Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, New Delhi: GIFT Publishing

Setiawan. H., Barus, B., & Suwardi. (2014). Analisis potensi pengembangan hutan rakyat di Kabupaten Lombok Tengah. Majalah Ilmiah Globë, 16 (1), 69-76

Sukisman, S. R. H., & Setiawan, B. (2011). Partisipasi masyarakat anggota koperasi hutan jaya lestari dalam pembangunan hutan rakyat di Kabupaten Konawe Selatan. Majalah Geograf Indonesia, 25 (2), 178 – 197

Sukwika, T. (2016). Evaluasi model kebijakan pengelolaan hutan rakyat berkelanjutan di Kabupaten Bogor [Disertasi]. Bogor (ID): Institut Pertanian Bogor

Sukwika, T., Darusman, D., Kusmana, C., & Nurrochmat, D. R. (2016). Evaluating the level of sustainability of privately managed forest in Bogor, Indonesia. Biodiversitas, 17 (1), 241–248. http://dx.doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d170135

Sushil. (2012). Interpreting the Interpretive Structural Model. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 13 (2), 87-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40171-012-0008-3

Susila, I. (2007). Analisis efisiensi lembaga keuangan mikro. Jurnal Ekonomi Pembangunan, 8 (2), 223-242, https://doi.org/10.23917/jep.v8i2.1043

Suyanto B. (2005). Metode Penelitian Sosial berbagai Alternatif Pendekatan. Jakarta: Prenada

Thompson, R. (2011). Stakeholder Analysis. Winning Support for Your Projects. http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newPPM_07.htm

Tiwari, B. K., Tynsong, H., Lynrah, M. M., Lapasam, E., Deb, S., &Sharma, D. (2013). Institutional arrangement and typology of community forests of Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland of North-East India. Journal of Forestry Research, 24 (1), 179–186

Umar, H. (2002). Metode riset komunikasi organisasi. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama

Yamane T. (1967). Statistics: An introductory analysis, 2nd Ed. New York: Harper and Row




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.29244/jp2wd.2018.2.2.133-150

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2018 Journal of Regional and Rural Development Planning

________________________

Journal of Regional and Rural Develeopment Planning (JP2WD)
Center for Regional System Analysis, Planning and Development (Crestpent), LPPM  IPB
Kampus IPB Baranangsiang, Jalan Raya Pajajaran, Bogor 16127, Indonesia
Telp./fax: +62-251-8359072
Email: jp2wd@apps.ipb.ac.id / journal.p2wd@gmail.com 

Creative Commons License

JP2WD is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.