Collaborative forest management of teak forest in Central Java

METHODS

In Java, various activities were carried out and a number of methods were used.

In Year 1, the baseline study about PHBM implementation in KPH Pemalang and KPH Randublatung used more than one method. This was due to the wide variety of information that needed to be collected. The research methods and tools that were used are described below.

Survey

This method was used to collect information on livelihood, resource, and resource use. For this purpose, 40 respondents were selected as follows: 30 respondents were farmers who worked on forest lot (forest farmer), and 10 respondents were board members of LMDH (Lembaga Masyarakat Desa Hutan) or community organisation for partnership with Perhutani on PHBM program.

The survey collected information related to individual livelihood, which was represented by the household. The data also shows the prosperity level of each actor who worked on forest land and the background, so that the typology of the forest farmer could be described.

Key Informant Interview (KI)

Key informant Interview was used to obtain the information related to:

1. Resources and resource use

2. Institutions

3. PHBM agreements

Focus Group Discussion (FGD)

Focus group discussion was conducted to collect relevant information on:

1. Resources and resource use

2. Institutions

3. PHBM agreements

Role Playing

Role playing was used to support FGD for resources and resource use.

Venn Diagram

This is a participatory method to discover participants’ perspectives with regards to relations among the institutions that exist in the village. By drawing the relationship among institutions, participants could express their perceptions easily.

Metaplan

This method was used to enable more opportunities for each participant to freely express their ideas and thoughts.

Ice Breaker

Ice breakers, such as games, were used to reinvigorate the discussion environment so that the participant could relax during the discussion. It also helped reduce the dominant role of the facilitator. Ice-breakers were facilitated by the participants, and sometimes by the facilitators. Ice-breakers were also used to gauge the moods of the participants (how they felt during certain stages of the discussion) and whether the participants felt the discussion met their objectives, etc.