| Summary: | This study has three research questions. First, how government policies related to
the development of community forests in the Watuagung Village, incentives/
disincentives policy runs, and the political economy of community forest policy.
Second, the ecological changes related to community forest development (changes
in planting patterns, and structure of plant of community forests). Third, social
and economic dynamics (structure and typology of community forest are formed,
peasants economic views to the land and its products, and marketing chain
commodities). This study used a qualitative approach by ethnographic methods.
Data was collected through participant observation, in-depth interviews, and
document analysis.
The results of this study are as follows. First, regulations governing community
forests more issued by government institutions at the central level. Local
governments (Banyumas regency) relatively little instituted policies despite the
derivative. Second. There are many obstacles in the development of community
forests, there is lack of capital support, marketing channels, low land ownership,
and lack of assistancy. In another part, small incentives while there are some
policies that it is a disincentive. Third. From the perspective of political economy,
it will be seen that many stakeholder who play the role and have an interest with
community forest in Watuagung Village. They are the peasants/peasant groups,
village government elites, businessmen, assistant agency/NGO, and government
elites at the district level. This study shows that although peasants was the target
of community forest program, but they remain a minor beneficiaries.
Fourth. Viewed from the ecological changes can be concluded that in the
early, the people of Watuagung Village did planting their land by mixed cropping
with simple cultivation. It was about 1976, government introduced clove. Here the
monoculture system was started. These conditions lasted until now the major
commodities such as cloves, ganitri and sengon. Nevertheless, the general trend is
to use mixed cropping. It seems that government policies affect the ecological
conditions that exist despite the diverse community response to that policy.
Fifth. The structure of land tenure in village Watuagung relatively lame.
Reflecting the presence of a handful of landowners who own land above 2 ha, but
more than 50 percent of the others were just having an average land from 0.18 to
0.28 ha. In addition, too many who don�t have land (tunakisma). Sixth. Economic
xii
views of farmers on land and forest product can be said of the people still in the
stage of subsistence. Judging from the level of economic development of society,
the farmers in the Watuagung Village still more oriented to meet their own needs.
Farmers who manage land and sell products for commercial and capital
accumulation has not been established.
Seventh. Commodity chain trading system is divided into three
commodities namely wood, plantations, and fruit. Chain trading system for timber
plants tend to be more diverse and longer, but the price fluctuations is small.
Chain trading system of plantation crops are relatively more homogeneous
although its longer than fruit. Plantation crops, especially ganitri more for export
than for domestic sale. Fruit trading chain relatively simplest and only traded
domestically. Needs to be noted here that the peasants as the first chain's trading
system is always get the small profit but they have big risk. The peasants only
have a role as a pricetaker.
Eighth, in the context of wider political ecology, we will see the link
between the politics of government policy, social and economic dynamics, and
environmental changes that occur. (1) the effects of government policy on the
condition of ecological, economic and social dynamics of the community shows
that government policies (eg, seed aid, technical assistance) resulted in ecological
changes in the form of community forest development in the Watuagung Village.
These policies also have an impact on improving the welfare of society and the
dynamics of the community forest-based economy. However these policies also
decrease on food diversification and increased reliance on market. (2) the socioeconomic
dynamics of the community in responding to the policy shows that
despite community forest policies provide tangible benefits in the form of
increased prosperity, but the public response was so varied (many people running
the direction and many others ignoring that). For example, the spacing, a lot of
people who do not follow that because land owned is so narrow. This problem is
also caused by the rent-seeking behavior of the elite who took over the
government policy. So, the policy is not running optimally. Although there is
more policy evaluation, but the implementation of the policy has not still changed.
|
|---|