IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/jsd123/v8y2015i3p10.html

Actor Positions on Primary and Secondary International Forest-related Issues Relevant in Indonesia

Author

Listed:
  • Agung Wibowo
  • Lukas Giessen

Abstract

Over the last 20 years a considerable number of international forest-related policies has evolved, collectively referred to as the international forest regime complex. The objectives of this study are to identify the most relevant international forest-related issues discussed in Indonesia as well as the most active actors and their positions on these issues. The empirical methods used include content analysis of Indonesian newspapers, national expert journals, expert mailing lists, and international organizations’ position papers. In addition, experts were interviewed to verify and complement the data. As a result, three primary forest-related international issues in Indonesia are identified, namely- timber legality; climate change including REDD initiative; and oil palm plantation and its environmental aspects; and the other four considered as secondary issues, namely- harmonization of wood and forest certification schemes; land use change; forest and species conservation; and deforestation and decentralized forest governance. Public and expert deliberations are found to differ regarding the depth of information as well as their immediate importance for the people and their long-term objectives. The Ministry of Forestry and, surprisingly, the Ministry of Trade are the most active actors in these issues. The main lines of conflict lie between forest utilization interests which are supported by the Ministry of Forestry, Ministry of Trade, oil palm and wood industry associations face-to-face with forest conservation interests powered by WWF and Greenpeace.

Suggested Citation

  • Agung Wibowo & Lukas Giessen, 2015. "Actor Positions on Primary and Secondary International Forest-related Issues Relevant in Indonesia," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(3), pages 1-10, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:jsd123:v:8:y:2015:i:3:p:10
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/download/45911/25613
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jsd/article/view/45911
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sadath, Md. Nazmus & Krott, Max, 2012. "Identifying policy change — Analytical program analysis: An example of two decades of forest policy in Bangladesh," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 93-99.
    2. Krasner, Stephen D., 1982. "Structural causes and regime consequences: regimes as intervening variables," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(2), pages 185-205, April.
    3. Krott, Max & Hasanagas, Nicolas D., 2006. "Measuring bridges between sectors: Causative evaluation of cross-sectorality," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(5), pages 555-563, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Louise Marie Busck-Lumholt & Esteve Corbera & Ole Mertz, 2025. "Why Target Communities Remain Subjects Rather than Partners of Development Agencies in Integrated Conservation and Development Projects in Latin America," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 37(1), pages 100-123, February.

    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. 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.
    2. Rahman, Md Saifur & Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Sadath, Md. Nazmus & Giessen, Lukas, 2018. "Policy changes resulting in power changes? Quantitative evidence from 25 years of forest policy development in Bangladesh," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 419-431.
    3. Jaroslava Jebavá, 2017. "Factors Explaining Engagement Of Non-Governmental Organisations In The Un," Medzinarodne vztahy (Journal of International Relations), Ekonomická univerzita, Fakulta medzinárodných vzťahov, vol. 15(2), pages 121-153.
    4. David Ciplet, 2014. "Contesting Climate Injustice: Transnational Advocacy Network Struggles for Rights in UN Climate Politics," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 14(4), pages 75-96, November.
    5. Bastos Lima, Mairon G. & Visseren-Hamakers, Ingrid J. & Braña-Varela, Josefina & Gupta, Aarti, 2017. "A reality check on the landscape approach to REDD+: Lessons from Latin America," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 10-20.
    6. Giessen, Lukas & Krott, Max & Möllmann, Torsten, 2014. "Increasing representation of states by utilitarian as compared to environmental bureaucracies in international forest and forest–environmental policy negotiations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 97-104.
    7. Taiwo Adeagbo, 2024. "Taking Populism Seriously: A Focus on Global Economy and the International Organizations," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 8(3), pages 49-67, March.
    8. Park, Mi Sun & Lee, Hyowon, 2019. "Accountability and reciprocal interests of bilateral forest cooperation under the global forest regime," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 32-44.
    9. Nathan Jensen, 2007. "International institutions and market expectations: Stock price responses to the WTO ruling on the 2002 U.S. steel tariffs," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 261-280, September.
    10. Hamanaka, Shintaro, 2017. "Legalization of international economic relations: is Asia unique?," IDE Discussion Papers 681, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    11. Carmen Rodríguez Fernández-Blanco & Sarah L. Burns & Lukas Giessen, 2019. "Mapping the fragmentation of the international forest regime complex: institutional elements, conflicts and synergies," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 187-205, April.
    12. Loik Ramon, 2016. "Integration Trends of EU Internal Security and Law Enforcement: How Legal, Technological and Operational Advancements Matter," TalTech Journal of European Studies, Sciendo, vol. 6(2), pages 3-27, October.
    13. Stephen R. Buzdugan, . "The global governance of FDI and the non-market strategies of TNCs: explaining the “backlash” against bilateral investment treaties," UNCTAD Transnational Corporations Journal, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
    14. Ba, Feng & Li, Xiaoyun & Zhang, Yao & Shi, Weiping & Zhang, Pei, 2023. "How human-elephant relations are shaped: A case study of integrative governance process in Xishuangbanna, China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    15. van de Kaa, Geerten & Greeven, Mark, 2017. "LED standardization in China and South East Asia: Stakeholders, infrastructure and institutional regimes," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 863-870.
    16. Diana Tuomasjukka & Staffan Berg & Marcus Lindner, 2013. "Managing Sustainability of Fennoscandian Forests and Their Use by Law and/or Agreement: For Whom and Which Purpose?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-32, December.
    17. Helmut Breitmeier & Sandra Schwindenhammer & Andrés Checa & Jacob Manderbach & Magdalena Tanzer, 2021. "Aligned Sustainability Understandings? Global Inter-Institutional Arrangements and the Implementation of SDG 2," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 141-151.
    18. Alasdair R. Young, 2001. "Trading Up or Trading Blows? US Politics and Transatlantic Trade in Genetically Modified Food," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 30, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    19. Ronald Mitchell, 2013. "Oran Young and international institutions," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, March.
    20. Stanislav Mráz, 2017. "State Sovereignty And Humanitarian Intervention," Medzinarodne vztahy (Journal of International Relations), Ekonomická univerzita, Fakulta medzinárodných vzťahov, vol. 15(2), pages 154-162.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ibn:jsd123:v:8:y:2015:i:3:p:10. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.