Communities in Indonesia’s Tanimbar Archipelago retain strong traditional resource management systems and have a history of resisting exploitation of their fragile islands by outsiders. But Tanimbar is poor and remote, so there is a desire for development. In this presentation, Yves Laumonier describes how a joint project with the International Center for Research in Agricultural Developmnet (CIRAD), CIFOR, and Birdlife Indonesia, successfully combined local concerns and national priorities in land-use planning using an participatory, ecosystem-based approach. The presentation, which has implications for community-based land-use planning in other parts of Indonesia, was given on 6 December 2011 at the 25th international congress of the Society for Conservation Biology. The theme of the congress was ‘Engaging Society in Conservation’ and more than 1,300 scientists, practitioners and students of conservation biology from around the globe attended.

1. Towards participatory ecosystem-based
planning in Indonesia: a case study in the
Moluccas
Yves Laumonier
Robin Bourgeois
Robert Nasi
Aloysius Tao
Bayuni Shantiko
25th International Congress for Conservation Biology (ICCB),
Auckland, New Zealand, Dec 4 – 9 2011

2. Tanimbar Archipelago, southeastern
Indonesia
MOLUCCAS
5.900 km2, 9 Districts, 71 villages
Biologically very rich seas
Last significant Monsoon Forest
Jav Poorest population of Indonesia
a
Lesser Sunda
Islands

3.  Communities retain strong traditional
resource management systems
 History of local action against
outsiders (riots against logging
companies in 1992 and 1995)
Aspiration for development,
decentralization in 1999
Fragile environment
• Limestone and raised coral geology
• Thin soil easily eroded once forest
cover removed
• Water shortage, seasonal climate
• Confined to coast, population depends
on forested water catchments inland

4. Promote a participatory ecosystem-based approach
in land-use planning (LUP), facilitating the
integration of local concerns and national priorities
Objectives
Co-develop land zoning and land use plan
Co-prepare community-based development
project proposals

5. By working on four main components
1. Identifying stakeholders and collaboratively
designing programme framework
2. Facilitating common vision, goals and objectives
3. Collecting and synthesizing social-ecological data
on issues linked to ecosystem-based planning and
community-based development projects
4. Developing a process of advocacy, consultation
and agreement about ecosystem-based land
allocation and Land Use Plan, including legal
aspects

6. Methods
1. Identify stakeholders and
program framework
Preliminary assessment of issues:
 Focus groups, key informant
interviews, public meetings
 Socialization of concepts (LUP,
ecosystem, participatory)
 Identify program scale and boundaries
• Identify and agree about the needs of a
revision of the land allocation and LUP

7. Socialization of concepts and community
development in ecosystem-based approach to
Land Use Planning
Review
Dusun /
Soa level
Socialization Constitution Review Dusun/ Workshop
of concept, Workshop Regency
of facilitation Kampung/Soa
process and village
team
methodology level
Training Review
methodology Dusun/
Kampung/Soa
Meeting
betwee
n
villages
Result of review on:
Ecological,
biophysical and social Village agreement Imple
data: collective on Land Use Plan mentat
(desa, Kecamatan, ion
recommendations
Yamdena,
kabupaten)
Monitoring/
Evaluation
Participation

8. Methods
2. Common vision and goals
• Forum and workshops, focus group
techniques to build collaboration
• Participatory Prospective Analysis to build
vision and scenario

9. The main steps of Participatory Prospective Analysis
1. Define the limits of the system S0 – Definition of the
system
2. Identify the variables
3. Define the variables
S1 – Identification of
4. Analyse their mutual influences / dependence the key factors that
5. Identify and select the key variables will shape the future
6. Define the states of the key variables S2 – Identification
(what will happen in the future) and description of
the possible futures
6. Build up scenarios (a combination of hypotheses
about what will happen to the key variables)
S3 – Definition of a
strategy

10. Methods
3: Social-ecological data collection
for ecosystem-based planning
 Community-based survey, participatory
mapping
 Socioeconomics, biophysical, ecological,
ethno-biological surveys
 Analysis of data to identify critical patterns,
processes and linkage

11. Main Results

12. 1. Agreement on the weakness of existing land zoning
•Spatial data used insufficiently
detailed (1:250,000) for practical
HP
LUP, ‘blown up’ at larger scale
HPT •Very poor agreement between
zoning and topography or
vegetation, serious spatial
HSAW
inaccuracies
HPT •Unclear zoning criteria and legal
HPK status
APL •Use of ‘Forest Score’ to define
HP Forest Land Status not adapted to
island like Yamdena (seasonal
climate, fragile soil type)

13. 2. Traditional spatial allocation of land use rights
Forbidden
Shared forest use
use,
permitted, timber
Mangrove, protected
and non-timber
regulated use forest
forest products
Coastal area,
regulated use
Restricted
use
River
riverine
Regulated
forest
use
Agriculture and
plantations

14. 3. Bunch of ecological data for the main ecosystems: trees,
small mammals, birds, soil; ecological mapping
Dry Deciduous
Mixed Deciduous
Evergreen Rain Forest

15. 4. Decision rules for government using ecosystem and
watershed based planning
Forest cover used as first re-adjustment of ‘Forest Land’
• All sub-watersheds where more
than 70% of the land cover is food
crop, shrub, grass, mixed garden
should be classified as non Forest
Estate.
• The forest that remains within
these watersheds is assigned as
community forest (Hutan
Masyarakat).
• Negotiations with Ministry of
Forestry by local government.

16. Delineation of Protection and Conservation Forest
area (unit watershed and ecosystem)
• Under current MoF regulations, all
areas under Mangrove
• Under current MoF regulations, all
areas within 100 m of main rivers
• Soil type very prone to erosion
with slope 15% (Decree 44,
2004)
• The forest cover is more than 30%
Dry Deciduous Forest (new
specific decision rules for
Monsoon forest)

17. Delineation of Production Forest
• Soil survey data showing very
high rates for potential soil
erosion.
• Economic studies showing at the
same time that logging operation
in Yamdena is not economically
viable
Normal logging intensities under
Production Forest are not
permissible in Yamdena.
Commercial forest activity, if any,
should be managed as Limited
Production Forest.

18. HP
HPT HL
HSAW CA
HPT
HM
HPT
HPK HL
HPT
APL
HP
Before After

19. Advocacy and agreements,
civil society and
government
Final agreement between
People representatives
(customary and village
leaders, religion leaders,
youth and women groups)
from the 40 villages of
Yamdena Island, local
technical agencies and
local government
Official request for
endorsement to central
government

20. Legally supported

21. Satisfactory achievements
• Consensus on new Land Allocation/zoning and Land Use
Planning
• Collectively designed project proposals between communities
and local government on future actions in agriculture, forestry
and fisheries sectors (community-based micro-projects)
• Better mutual understanding on social-ecological systems in a
Monsoon Forest environment
• Better mutual understanding that the customary lawshould be
integrated into the national law as a better conflict resolution
solution
… but
Although results endorsed at district and provincial level,
no follow up nor official agreement at national level

22. Conclusions
• Ecosystem-based approach is
appropriate as an expanded land-use
planning process.
• In the present study it facilitated the
integration of broad scale natural and
social system in community development
and collaborative LUP.
• Similar approach should be promoted
for other areas in the Moluccas and in the
rest of Indonesia, considering carefully
governance links between regional and
national decision levels.

23. Kalwedo
Thank you !
Kidabela!