PENDEKATAN PARTISIPATORI UNTUK STRATEGI PENGEMBANGAN DESA PENYANGGA TAMAN HUTAN RAYA RADEN SOERJO
Abstract
Daerah penyangga merupakan daerah yang berada pada batas kawasan hutan lindung dan merupakan kawasan yang berfungsi untuk melindungi hutan dari aktivitas manusia yang dapat mengganggu ekosistem hutan lindung dan taman nasional. Taman Hutan Raya (Tahura) Raden Soerjo merupakan salah satu kawasan lindung yang secara administratif berada pada beberapa Kabupaten di Provinsi Jawa Timur. Beberapa permasalahan yang timbul pada kawasan desa penyangga Tahura Raden Soerjo berkaitan dengan pengelolaan kawasan pertanian dan sumberdaya hutan. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk merancang alternatif strategi dan arahan pengembangan desa penyangga hutan di Tahura Raden Soerjo yang dapat mengurangi permasalahan pengelolaan sumberdaya hutan. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan partisipatif kepada stakeholder dan pakar terkait strategi pengembangan desa penyangga hutan yang berada di Desa Wiyurejo, Kecamatan Pujon, Kabupaten Malang. Penentuan sampel pada penelitian ini dilakukan secara purposive sampling, dan pengambilan data dilakukan sebagai input pada model MULTIPOL untuk merancang berbagai alternatif strategi pengembangan desa Wiyurejo sebagai daerah penyangga Tahura Raden Soerjo. Hasil penelitian ini mengajukan prioritas kebijakan/policy yang berfokus pada pertanian multifungsi dengan prioritas program kerja membangun kawasan agrowisata, perbaikan infrastruktur dan pengembangan sumberdaya manusia melalui pelatihan dan pendidikan terkait pertanian ramah lingkungan dan agrowisata berbasis edukasi pertanian dan lingkungan.
Metrics
Downloads
References
Deaton, B.J., Nelson, G.L. 1992. Conceptual underpinnings of policy analysis for rural development. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics. 24(1): 87-99.
Fauzi, A. 2019. Teknik Analisis Keberlanjutan. Jakarta (ID): PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
Godet, M., Monti, R., Meunier, F., Roubelat, F. 2004. Scenarios and Strategies: A toolbox for Problem Solving. Cahiers du LIPSOR, LISOR Working Papers. Laboratoire d'Investigation en Prospective, Stratιgie et Organisation.
Godet, M. 2001. Creating Futures: Scenario Planning as a strategic management tool. Washington, DC: Economica. Economica Brookings diffusion.
Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan. 2017. Peraturan Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan Republik Indonesia Noor P.43/MENLHK/SETJEN/KUM.1/6/2017 Tentang Pemberdayaan Masyarakat di Sekitar Kawasan Suaka Alam dan Kawasan Pelestarian Alam.
Listyarini, L., Sari, N., Sutikno, F.R. 2011. Optimalisasi Fungsi Daerah Penyangga Kawasan Taman Hutan Raya Raden Soerjo (Studi Kasus: Desa Sumber Brantas Kota Batu). Jurnal Tata Kota dan Daerah. 3(1): 47-53.
Pemerintah Republik Indonesia. 2015. Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Nomor 104 Tahun 2015 Tentang Tata Cara Perubahan Peruntukan Dan Fungsi Kawasan Hutan.
Pribadi, D.O., Pauleit, S. 2015. The dynamics of peri-urban agriculture during rapid urbanization of Jabodetabek Metropolitan Area. Land Use Policy. 48: 13-24.
Soemarwoto, Otto. 1985. Ekologi, Lingkungan Hidup dan Pembangunan. Jakarta: Djambatan.
Stratigea, A. 2013. Participatory policy making in foresight studies at the regional level—A methodological approach. Regional Science Inquiry. 5(1): 145-160.
Zasada, I. 2011. Multifunctional peri-urban agriculture—A review of societal demands and the provision of goods and services by farming. Land Use Policy. 28(4): 639-648.
Copyright (c) 2021 RISALAH KEBIJAKAN PERTANIAN DAN LINGKUNGAN: Rumusan Kajian Strategis Bidang Pertanian dan Lingkungan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
PUBLICATION ETHICS
Jurnal Risalah Kebijakan Pembangunan Pertanian dan Lingkungan (JRKPL) is a peer-reviewed journal publishing original research to develop a coherent and respected network of landscape architecture knowledge. JRKPL committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics that clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in publishing a scientific article in JRKPL.
As publisher of JRKPL, PSP3-LPPM IPB and PERHEPI takes its duties of guardianship all stages of publishing process and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities.
Duties of Authors
An author should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal is unacceptable and constitutes unethical publishing behavior. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the manuscript and should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism are include passing off another paper as the author own paper, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another paper (without attribution) and claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Plagiarism detected works will be banned for further publication procedure.
The authors acknowledge that they have disclosed all and any actual or potential conflicts of interest with their work or partial benefits associated with it. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
Duties of the Editorial Board
Review Process
JRKPL is committed to objective and fair double-blind peer-review to prevent any actual or potential conflict of interests between the editorial and review personnel and the reviewed material. JRKPL chooses reviewers based on their expertise (whose most closely matches the topic of the paper). At least 2 reviewers are invited to evaluate a manuscript. In cases of controversy or disagreement regarding the merits of the work, an additional review will be solicited. The JRKPL editor mediates all interaction between authors and reviewers, and the review results owned by JRKPL.
Publication Decisions
The editor of a peer-reviewed JRKPL is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The final decision on article acceptance based on reviewer's opinions, suggestions, and comments. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Fair Play
JRKPL evaluates manuscripts only based on the intellectual content. No race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophies of the authors are considered in the evaluation process.
Confidentiality
JRKPL assure the confidentially of the manuscripts, actors, and other related information on the publishing process. Only corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher are allows for the information.
Disclosure
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Duties of reviewers
(1) Objectivity: Reviewer should provide written and unbiased feedback to the authors, personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewer comments should be clearly with supporting arguments indicating whether the writing is concise and relevant
(2) Expertise: Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
(3) Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewer suggest relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors to improve the quality of the manuscript,
(4) Confidentiality: Reviewer should maintain the confidentiality of the review process. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
(5) Disclosure and conflict of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer own research without the express written consent of the author. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
