IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i21p13924-d954026.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reconciling Conflict of Interest in the Management of Forest Restoration Ecosystem: A Strategy to Incorporate Different Interests of Stakeholders in the Utilization of the Harapan Rainforest, Jambi, Indonesia

Author

Listed:
  • Tabah Arif Rahmani

    (Forest Management Science Program of the Graduate School, IPB University, Bogor 16680, Indonesia)

  • Dodik Ridho Nurrochmat

    (Department of Forest Management, Faculty of Forestry and Environment, IPB University, Bogor 16680, Indonesia)

  • Mi Sun Park

    (Graduate School of International Agricultural Technology, Seoul National University, 1447 Pyeongchangdaero, Daehwa, Pyeongchang 25354, Gangwon, Korea)

  • Rizaldi Boer

    (Centre for Climate Risk and Opportunity Management in Southeast Asia Pacific (CCROM-SEAP), Kampus IPB Baranangsiang, IPB University, Bogor 16153, Indonesia)

  • Meti Ekayani

    (Department of Resource and Environmental Economics, Faculty of Economics and Management, IPB University, Bogor 16680, Indonesia)

  • Arif Satria

    (Department of Communication and Community Development, Faculty of Human Ecology, IPB University, Bogor 16680, Indonesia)

Abstract

The Harapan Rainforest is the only remaining lowland rainforest in Sumatera Island, Indonesia, that the Ministry of Forestry has designated for restoring lowland rainforest ecosystems. In the Harapan Rainforest, several stakeholders are interested in using the forest for several things. For example, the local community uses the forestland for their oil palm plantation, while PT Restorasi Ekosistem Indonesia (PT REKI) as forest manager, uses the forest for ecosystem restoration goals, causing a conflict of interest. This study aims to identify the stakeholders involved and provide a policy recommendation for the contestation in the Harapan Rainforest. We conducted key-person interviews to identify the stakeholders involved and analyze the interest and influence of all important stakeholders related to the utilization of the the Harapan Rainforest. The stakeholder analysis method analyzes and categorizes stakeholders’ interests and influences in the Harapan Rainforest utilization. According to the study, three of the eight stakeholders have a direct role in the Harapan Rainforest’s utilization. The last section of this paper ends by giving an alternative strategy for considering policy options and a win-win solution that prioritizes all stakeholders’ interests. This study concludes that the utilization of the Harapan Rainforest should be conducted with multiple-use forest management for production and rehabilitation.

Suggested Citation

  • Tabah Arif Rahmani & Dodik Ridho Nurrochmat & Mi Sun Park & Rizaldi Boer & Meti Ekayani & Arif Satria, 2022. "Reconciling Conflict of Interest in the Management of Forest Restoration Ecosystem: A Strategy to Incorporate Different Interests of Stakeholders in the Utilization of the Harapan Rainforest, Jambi, I," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-16, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:13924-:d:954026
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/13924/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/13924/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Susanti, Ari & Maryudi, Ahmad, 2016. "Development narratives, notions of forest crisis, and boom of oil palm plantations in Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 130-139.
    2. Phimmavong, Somvang & Maraseni, Tek Narayan & Keenan, Rodney J. & Cockfield, Geoff, 2019. "Financial returns from collaborative investment models of Eucalyptus agroforestry plantations in Lao PDR," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    3. Hubo, Christiane & Krott, Max, 2013. "Conflict camouflaging in public administration — A case study in nature conservation policy in Lower Saxony," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 63-70.
    4. Nurrochmat, Dodik Ridho & Nugroho, Ignatius Adi & Hardjanto, & Purwadianto, Agus & Maryudi, Ahmad & Erbaugh, James Thomas, 2017. "Shifting contestation into cooperation: Strategy to incorporate different interest of actors in medicinal plants in Meru Betiri National Park, Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 162-168.
    5. John M Bryson, 2004. "What to do when Stakeholders matter," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 21-53, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Nurrochmat, Dodik Ridho & Nugroho, Ignatius Adi & Hardjanto, & Purwadianto, Agus & Maryudi, Ahmad & Erbaugh, James Thomas, 2017. "Shifting contestation into cooperation: Strategy to incorporate different interest of actors in medicinal plants in Meru Betiri National Park, Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 162-168.
    2. Harbi, Jun & Erbaugh, James Thomas & Sidiq, Mohammad & Haasler, Berthold & Nurrochmat, Dodik Ridho, 2018. "Making a bridge between livelihoods and forest conservation: Lessons from non timber forest products' utilization in South Sumatera, Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1-10.
    3. Sari, Dwi Amalia & Sayer, Jeffrey & Margules, Chris & Boedhihartono, Agni Klintuni, 2019. "Determining the effectiveness of forest landscape governance: A case study from the Sendang landscape, South Sumatra," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 17-28.
    4. Sahide, Muhammad Alif K. & Fisher, Micah R. & Maryudi, Ahmad & Dhiaulhaq, Ahmad & Wulandari, Christine & Kim, Yeon-Su & Giessen, Lukas, 2018. "Deadlock opportunism in contesting conservation areas in Indonesia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 412-424.
    5. Handavu, Ferdinand & Chirwa, Paxie W.C. & Syampungani, Stephen, 2019. "Socio-economic factors influencing land-use and land-cover changes in the miombo woodlands of the Copperbelt province in Zambia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 75-94.
    6. Fatem, Sepus M. & Awang, San A. & Pudyatmoko, Satyawan & Sahide, Muhammad A.K. & Pratama, Andita A. & Maryudi, Ahmad, 2018. "Camouflaging economic development agendas with forest conservation narratives: A strategy of lower governments for gaining authority in the re-centralising Indonesia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 699-710.
    7. Bert George, 2017. "Does strategic planning ‘work’ in public organizations? Insights from Flemish municipalities," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(7), pages 527-530, November.
    8. Bou Dib, Jonida & Alamsyah, Zulkifli & Qaim, Matin, 2018. "Land-use change and income inequality in rural Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 55-66.
    9. da Costa Lima Pires, Pâmela & da Silva César, Aldara & Cardoso, Alexandre Nunes & Favaro, Simone Palma & Conejero, Marco Antonio, 2023. "Strategies to improve the competitiveness of an agroindustrial system for a macauba based oil production in Minas Gerais State, Brazil," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    10. Martin Luštický & Martin Musil, 2016. "Stakeholder-Based Evaluation of Tourism Policy Priorities: The Case of the South Bohemian Region," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2016(3), pages 3-23.
    11. Jolanta MAJ, 2015. "Diversity Management’S Stakeholders And Stakeholders Management," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 9(1), pages 780-793, November.
    12. Franco-Trigo, L. & Fernandez-Llimos, F. & Martínez-Martínez, F. & Benrimoj, S.I. & Sabater-Hernández, D., 2020. "Stakeholder analysis in health innovation planning processes: A systematic scoping review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(10), pages 1083-1099.
    13. Kik, M.C. & Claassen, G.D.H. & Meuwissen, M.P.M. & Smit, A.B. & Saatkamp, H.W., 2021. "Actor analysis for sustainable soil management – A case study from the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    14. Mark K. McBeth & Donna L. Lybecker & James W. Stoutenborough, 2016. "Do stakeholders analyze their audience? The communication switch and stakeholder personal versus public communication choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 421-444, December.
    15. Christophe Favoreu & David Carassus & Christophe Maurel, 2015. "Strategic management in the public sector: a rational, political or collaborative approach? [Le management stratégique en milieu public : approche rationnelle, politique ou collaborative ?]," Post-Print hal-02152509, HAL.
    16. Sandra Ricart & Antonio M. Rico-Amorós, 2022. "Can agriculture and conservation be compatible in a coastal wetland? Balancing stakeholders’ narratives and interactions in the management of El Hondo Natural Park, Spain," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 589-604, June.
    17. Mijailoff, Julián Daniel & Giessen, Lukas & Burns, Sarah Lilian, 2023. "Local to global escalation of land use conflicts: Long-term dynamics on social movements protests against pulp mills and plantation forests in Argentina and Uruguay," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    18. Ashton W. Merck & Khara D. Grieger & Alison Deviney & Anna-Maria Marshall, 2023. "Using a Phosphorus Flow Diagram as a Boundary Object to Inform Stakeholder Engagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-10, July.
    19. Ogunlowo, Olufemi O. & Bristow, Abigail L. & Sohail, M., 2017. "A stakeholder analysis of the automotive industry's use of compressed natural gas in Nigeria," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 58-69.
    20. Austen Agata, 2012. "Stakeholders management in public hospitals in the context of resources," Management, Sciendo, vol. 16(2), pages 217-230, December.

    Corrections

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:21:p:13924-:d:954026. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.