IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Indonesia's Forest Management Units: Effective intermediaries in REDD+ implementation?


  • Kim, Yeon-Su
  • Bae, Jae Soo
  • Fisher, Larry A.
  • Latifah, Sitti
  • Afifi, Mansur
  • Lee, Soo Min
  • Kim, In-Ae


Previous literature encouraged a hybrid institutional approach for REDD+ implementation, where clear government policies help reconcile the rules, regulations and interests of external institutions with those of the communities involved. However, it is unclear how such an approach can be designed in the scale necessary to match local, national and international interests in protecting forests. For this reason, the functions of intermediaries deserve explicit recognition by key actors in shaping REDD+ policy nationally and internationally. Indonesia is promoting the more localized Forest Management Unit (Kesatuan Pengelolaan Hutan or KPH) as a key element of forest governance reform for embracing REDD+ and related initiatives. Using a case study from eastern Indonesia, we analyzed local factors driving deforestation and forest degradation. We then reviewed the work of the local KPH to examine the necessary roles of a potential REDD+ intermediary. We argue that progress made by the local KPH in improving forest governance, including partnerships with local communities, is made possible by the KPH fulfilling the role of policy intermediary while taking on transformative roles reshaping internal and external relations. However, for the KPHs to fulfill their mandate as effective REDD+ intermediaries, more concerted efforts from the central and provincial governments, as well as from international donors, are still needed. These include greater consistency in government policies and regulations, improved policy communications, and the commitment to strengthening the capacity of individual KPHs.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim, Yeon-Su & Bae, Jae Soo & Fisher, Larry A. & Latifah, Sitti & Afifi, Mansur & Lee, Soo Min & Kim, In-Ae, 2016. "Indonesia's Forest Management Units: Effective intermediaries in REDD+ implementation?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 69-77.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:62:y:2016:i:c:p:69-77
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2015.09.004

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL:
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Wunder, Sven, 2015. "Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 234-243.
    2. Muradian, Roldan & Corbera, Esteve & Pascual, Unai & Kosoy, Nicolás & May, Peter H., 2010. "Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1202-1208, April.
    3. Karsenty, Alain & Ongolo, Symphorien, 2012. "Can “fragile states” decide to reduce their deforestation? The inappropriate use of the theory of incentives with respect to the REDD mechanism," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 38-45.
    4. Brockhaus, Maria & Di Gregorio, Monica & Mardiah, Sofi, 2014. "Governing the design of national REDD+: An analysis of the power of agency," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 23-33.
    5. Timothy Moss, 2009. "Intermediaries and the Governance of Sociotechnical Networks in Transition," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 41(6), pages 1480-1495, June.
    6. Pirard, Romain, 2012. "Payments for Environmental Services (PES) in the public policy landscape: “Mandatory” spices in the Indonesian recipe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 23-29.
    7. Lee, Soo Min & Kim, Yeon-Su & Jaung, Wanggi & Latifah, Sitti & Afifi, Mansur & Fisher, Larry A., 2015. "Forests, fuelwood and livelihoods—energy transition patterns in eastern Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 61-70.
    8. Corbera, Esteve & Soberanis, Carmen González & Brown, Katrina, 2009. "Institutional dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services: An analysis of Mexico's carbon forestry programme," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 743-761, January.
    9. Lederer, Markus, 2011. "From CDM to REDD+ -- What do we know for setting up effective and legitimate carbon governance?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1900-1907, September.
    10. Wunder, Sven & Engel, Stefanie & Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 834-852, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Irawan, Silvia & Widiastomo, Triyoga & Tacconi, Luca & Watts, John D. & Steni, Bernadinus, 2019. "Exploring the design of jurisdictional REDD+: The case of Central Kalimantan, Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 1-1.
    2. Lukas Giessen & Pradip Kumar Sarker & Md Saifur Rahman, 2016. "International and Domestic Sustainable Forest Management Policies: Distributive Effects on Power among State Agencies in Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-28, April.
    3. Sayer, Jeffrey & Boedhihartono, Agni Klintuni & Langston, James Douglas & Margules, Chris & Riggs, Rebecca Anne & Sari, Dwi Amalia, 2021. "Governance challenges to landscape restoration in Indonesia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    4. Januar, Rizky & Sari, Eli Nur Nirmala & Putra, Surahman, 2021. "Dynamics of local governance: The case of peatland restoration in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    5. repec:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:4:p:335:d:67745 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Sheng, Jichuan & Tang, Weizong & Zhu, Bangzhu, 2019. "Incentivizing REDD+: The role of cost-sharing mechanisms in encouraging stakeholders to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    7. Meehan, Fiona & Tacconi, Luca & Budiningsih, Kushartati, 2019. "Are national commitments to reducing emissions from forests effective? Lessons from Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Dragoi, Marian, 2018. "Joining or not joining non-industrial private forests into a single management unit: A case-study shaped as an Analytic Network Process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 63-70.
    9. Rakatama, Ari & Pandit, Ram & Iftekhar, Sayed & Ma, Chunbo, 2018. "Heterogeneous public preference for REDD+ projects under different forest management regimes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 266-277.
    10. Kim, Yeon-Su & Latifah, Sitti & Afifi, Mansur & Mulligan, Mark & Burke, Sophia & Fisher, Larry & Siwicka, Ewa & Remoundou, Kyriaki & Christie, Michael & Masek Lopez, Sharon & Jenness, Jeff, 2018. "Managing forests for global and local ecosystem services: A case study of carbon, water and livelihoods from eastern Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 153-168.
    11. Singer, Benjamin & Giessen, Lukas, 2017. "Towards a donut regime? Domestic actors, climatization, and the hollowing-out of the international forests regime in the Anthropocene," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 69-79.
    12. Peltomaa, Juha & Hildén, Mikael & Huttunen, Suvi, 2016. "Translating institutional change - forest journals as diverse policy actors," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 172-180.
    13. Sahide, Muhammad Alif K. & Maryudi, Ahmad & Supratman, Supratman & Giessen, Lukas, 2016. "Is Indonesia utilising its international partners? The driving forces behind Forest Management Units," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 11-20.
    14. Putraditama, Andika & Kim, Yeon-Su & Sánchez Meador, Andrew Joel, 2019. "Community forest management and forest cover change in Lampung, Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jaung, Wanggi & Putzel, Louis & Bull, Gary Q. & Kozak, Robert & Markum,, 2016. "Certification of forest watershed services: A Q methodology analysis of opportunities and challenges in Lombok, Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 51-59.
    2. Bottazzi, Patrick & Wiik, Emma & Crespo, David & Jones, Julia P.G., 2018. "Payment for Environmental “Self-Service”: Exploring the Links Between Farmers' Motivation and Additionality in a Conservation Incentive Programme in the Bolivian Andes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 11-23.
    3. Duong, Ngoc T.B. & de Groot, Wouter T., 2018. "Distributional risk in PES: Exploring the concept in the Payment for Environmental Forest Services program, Vietnam," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 22-32.
    4. Jespersen, Kristjan & Gallemore, Caleb, 2018. "The Institutional Work of Payments for Ecosystem Services: Why the Mundane Should Matter," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 507-519.
    5. Raes, Leander & Loft, Lasse & Le Coq, Jean François & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido & Van Damme, Patrick, 2016. "Towards market- or command-based governance? The evolution of payments for environmental service schemes in Andean and Mesoamerican countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 20-32.
    6. Meyer, Claas & Chen, Cheng & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2018. "Qualitative comparative institutional analysis of environmental governance: Implications from research on payments for ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 169-180.
    7. Vaissière, Anne-Charlotte & Quétier, Fabien & Calvet, Coralie & Levrel, Harold & Wunder, Sven, 2020. "Biodiversity offsets and payments for environmental services: Clarifying the family ties," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    8. Pierre Mokondoko & Robert H Manson & Taylor H Ricketts & Daniel Geissert, 2018. "Spatial analysis of ecosystem service relationships to improve targeting of payments for hydrological services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, February.
    9. Arriagada, Rodrigo & Villaseñor, Adrián & Rubiano, Eliana & Cotacachi, David & Morrison, Judith, 2018. "Analysing the impacts of PES programmes beyond economic rationale: Perceptions of ecosystem services provision associated to the Mexican case," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 116-127.
    10. Pham, Thu Thuy & Loft, Lasse & Bennett, Karen & Phuong, Vu Tan & Dung, Le Ngoc & Brunner, Jake, 2015. "Monitoring and evaluation of Payment for Forest Environmental Services in Vietnam: From myth to reality," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 220-229.
    11. Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Sven Wunder & Manuel Ruiz-Pérez & Rocio del Pilar Moreno-Sanchez, 2016. "Global Patterns in the Implementation of Payments for Environmental Services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.
    12. Yin, Runsheng & Zhao, Minjuan, 2012. "Ecological restoration programs and payments for ecosystem services as integrated biophysical and socioeconomic processes—China's experience as an example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 56-65.
    13. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    14. Lin, Yongsheng & Dong, Zhanfeng & Zhang, Wei & Zhang, Hongyu, 2020. "Estimating inter-regional payments for ecosystem services: Taking China’s Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region as an example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    15. Brathwaite, Angelique & Pascal, Nicolas & Clua, Eric, 2021. "When are payment for ecosystems services suitable for coral reef derived coastal protection?: A review of scientific requirements," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    16. Blundo-Canto, Genowefa & Bax, Vincent & Quintero, Marcela & Cruz-Garcia, Gisella S. & Groeneveld, Rolf A. & Perez-Marulanda, Lisset, 2018. "The Different Dimensions of Livelihood Impacts of Payments for Environmental Services (PES) Schemes: A Systematic Review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 160-183.
    17. Rodríguez-Robayo, Karla Juliana & à vila-Foucat, V. Sophie & Maldonado, Jorge H., 2016. "Indigenous communities’ perception regarding payments for environmental services programme in Oaxaca Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 163-171.
    18. Authelet, Manon & Subervie, Julie & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Asquith, Nigel & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss, 2021. "Economic, pro-social and pro-environmental factors influencing participation in an incentive-based conservation program in Bolivia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    19. Muñoz Escobar, Marcela & Hollaender, Robert & Pineda Weffer, Camilo, 2013. "Institutional durability of payments for watershed ecosystem services: Lessons from two case studies from Colombia and Germany," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 46-53.
    20. Van Hecken, Gert & Bastiaensen, Johan & Vásquez, William F., 2012. "The viability of local payments for watershed services: Empirical evidence from Matiguás, Nicaragua," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 169-176.


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:62:y:2016:i:c:p:69-77. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.