Public Participation in Local Forestry Policy-making after Decentralization : Uncertainties , challenges and expectations in Tanjung Jabung Barat District , Jambi Province

Increased local responsibility is evident in the many district regulations developed since 1999, including the forestry sector. Whilst decentralization certainly brought decision-making closer to local people the public still does not have enough influence over policy making; and local and national interests often still contradict each other. This causes problems implementing policies on the ground.

The Tanjabbar government also drafted two other Perdas 1 , regulating tax collection and setting fees.Although a Perda is the highest district regulation, none of these Perda could be implemented without the District Head (Bupati), authorizing their implementation with a special decree 2 .The Bupati has individual authority to pass this lower regulation without public consultation.
Seventy per cent of Indonesia's landmass is classified as Kawasan Hutan, or state-owned forest land.In Jambi province, the state-owned forests were already heavily logged before decentralisation.In Tanjabbar, the total forest cover has declined by almost 40% in the last 20 years.First, significant areas were excised and allocated for transmigration and oil palm plantations.Further areas were then rezoned for agricultural use. 3 The remaining forest area mainly comprises loggedover forests, secondary forests and tree plantations, with a small, protected area in the hills.Yet, despite the deforestation and the degraded nature of many logged-over areas, more than half the Tanjabbar district is still officially classified as state-owned forest, with 87% of that classified as timber "production forest" in 2002.This is actually an increase from the total production area recorded in the 1999 provincial spatial plan.
However, the national policy on small-scale logging concessions only allowed permits inside state-owned "conversion forest" areas, not "production forests". 4one of Tanjabbar's Kawasan Hutan is currently classified as "conversion forest".Under the smallscale concession IPHH policy, only two types of permit were issued in Tanjabbar.These only applied to forested areas outside the Kawasan Hutan: on village lands, areas subject to adat claims, and land owned by individuals, commercial firms or under partnership agreements between large corporations and local communities.
The other two permit types were only to be used inside the state-owned forests, including on production areas.This regulation contradicted national policy, 5 but the district never issued any of these permits.As a result, when the central government revoked the rights of district heads to issue small-scale logging permits 6 , this did not change Tanjabbar's policy or its implementation.The head of Tanjabbar continued to issue permits outside the Kawasan Hutan, as this land had always been outside the Ministry of Forestry's jurisdiction.The district's forestry Perda all refer to mechanisms for collecting revenue and allocating land.They also simplify the process for obtaining permits to manage and use forest resources.However, they do not regulate forest management, nor environmental and socio-economic impacts.
Limited provisions for these impacts are instead included in a Bupati's Decree setting out the rules and processes for handling IPHH permit applications and providing "logging schedules".Perda 13 also briefly mentions processes for managing logging activities and their impacts, and the permit-holder's obligation to rehabilitate logged over areas.However, the regulation says nothing about how or when these activities should be carried out, or how they will be monitored.The implementing decrees also neglect these issues.Permits are issued for 6 months.Permit holders can request an extension only "if timber production is still possible" 7 .This implies that extensions cannot be given if there are no more trees to be logged -effectively ruling out extensions for rehabilitation.
This small scale concession policy has facilitated the exploitation of the remaining stands of natural forest areas outside the Kawasan Hutan in Tanjabbar.
At the same time, the Ministry of Forestry has implemented a policy with momentous implications for Tanjabbar's forests inside the Kawasan Hutan.
In 1996 the Ministry of Forestry began issuing timber plantation (HTI) permits to PT Wira Karya Sakti (WKS), a daughter company of the conglomerate, Sinar Mas Group (SMG).The first permits allocated in Jambi included permits over the former PT Betara Agung Timber, and PT Lontar concession areas in the Tanjabbar district.After decentralization the central government continued to issue new plantation permits in Tanjabbar, including over the former concession areas of PT Sadarnila, PT Loka Rahayu, and PT IFA.The company PT WKS now controls well over 200,000 ha, including most of Tanjabbar's Kawasan Hutan. 8These areas have been or are presently being clear felled and replanted with acacia.Consequently, this central policy could spell the end for all natural forests in Tanjabbar's Kawasan Hutan.This means that there will soon be no significant natural forest areas remaining in Tanjabbar beyond the little remaining in the Bukit Tiga Puluh national park (9,105 ha) and the adjoining former PT Hatma Shanti area. 9

Recommendations for Reforming Tanjabbar's Forestry Regulations
Based on a review of Tanjabbar's forestry regulations, policy reforms could address at least four fundamental issues: 1. Legal Drafting: The district regulations refer to defunct central laws superseded by decentralisation and revised national forestry laws introduced in 1999 10 .This means district policies contain outdated definitions, terms and formats, and some articles contradict higher regulations.The introduction of the district authority to levy taxes has enabled illegal timber to be taxed.On the one hand, this timber would otherwise have left the district without contributing to government revenue.
On the other, this effectively "legalizes" illegally harvested timber.

Local Policy-making Processes
There are two methods of local policy-making processes in Jambi province.These are still based on decrees issued by local government heads between 1992 and1993 11 .With the first method, members of parliament can propose a draft regulation, which is then debated in parliament (Figure 1).This method is only possible if members of Parliament have the expertise and experience required to initiate a draft regulation.
In the second method, local executive bodies initiate the process, which is then submitted to the District House of Representatives (DPRD) with an introductory note written by the Bupati (Figure 2).All policymaking in Tanjabbar follows this second method.
Reasons for executive initiation include better executive knowledge about sectoral issues, responsibility for implementing regulations, and poorly qualified parliamentary members.
The process followed for the second method has four phases: 1. Policy Drafting: government offices initiate the first draft.For example, the district forestry office (dinas Kehutanan) would draft a local regulation covering logging.2. Policy Synchronization: the initiating office then discusses the draft with the secretary of the district's legal bureau (Biro Hukum), including writing, wording and legal norms.Finally, the Bupati addresses the session.
Both methods leave little or no room for public participation.Another weakness of the process followed in Tanjabbar lies is that the initiator's interests heavily influence the final regulation.Little attention is paid to the substance, or to whether the regulation is consistent with regulations for other sectors.
In general, no districts in Jambi, including Tanjabbar, have adopted a participatory policy-making mechanism in line with the objectives and spirit of decentralization as laid out in Law No. 22.The major local government decrees (Bupati/Mayor/Governor) issued in 1992 and 1993, refer to the old pattern of policy-making (Act No.5/1974 and its operational regulations).Therefore, new regulations on public participation are needed, allowing active public involvement at all stages, from policy initiation to implementation.
Ideally, a more comprehensive process might allow the public to consider issues such as how deforestation contributes to chronic flooding problems, a shortage of village firewood and future building materials, and less land for smallholder agriculture as forest areas are converted to other uses.

Legal Principles
An understanding of legal principles will determine the quality of legal drafting in the final policy.Our review of Tanjabbar's forestry policies 12 highlighted the following basic principles: 1. District regulations should not contradict higher regulations.A local policy is contradictory if it regulates something that is not under district authority; if its technical or procedural aspects and contents are not consistent with higher regulations; or if it refers to now defunct higher regulations.2. National regulations need to be reviewed and reformed to allow districts to issue policies based on legitimate local needs and aspirations, provided they do not contradict widely accepted national principles.Often districts implement divergent policies because higher regulations do not reflect district realities, or because districts see them as serving powerful interests in Jakarta.
A process of legal drafting in Jakarta involving the affected districts would ensure that higher regulations were applicable, equitable and relevant to local stakeholders' needs.This would help ensure district compliance.In Jambi Province, public participation has been encouraged, for example in the Regional Development Program (Propeda). 14This is an encouraging step, opening the way for further participatory policymaking mechanisms to be developed.

Conclusions and Recommendations
Having reviewed Tanjabbar's local forestry policymaking processes, we conclude:

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Permits Regulated under Tanjabbar's Small-Scale 100 ha Concession Policy 3. Pre-hearing: a local parliamentary committee (Panmus) decides on a discussion schedule.4. The hearing: this takes place in the local parliament.The hearing has four plenary sessions: • The first session is based on the Bupati's introductory note to the draft.• In the second session, parliamentary members share their general perspectives.• In the third session, commonly called Rapat Pansus, the special committee discusses all drafts with each relevant technical agency (the initiators) • The Pansus report is read before the fourth plenary session.Prior to closing, all factions sum up their Stemotivering (final perspectives).
The above legal principles are highly recommended to avoid formulating and implementing defective policies and laws.A defective law, however, can be revoked by an authorized institution (under the process set out in the national legal framework for decentralization) or through the Supreme Court via the material test mechanism.
Photo by Chandra Budi mewujudkan hukum yang aspiratif dan berwibawa(2000); 'Increasing public participation in local policymaking(2000)and other relevant papers presented to seminars and workshops in Jambi province.12That is IPHHI, IPHH and RHH.See also Kumpulan Modul PSHP UNJA (2000).13Forestry Law No. 41 issued in 1999 Article 68 entitled "Public Participation" explicitly states that the public has the right to receive good quality environmental services from forests.The public also has the right to information concerning forest land use, utilization of forest products, etc., with emphasis on the participatory mechanism in the local policymaking process.Another regulation stipulating these issues is Act No. 34/2000 issued in 2000, Article 4 (5) regarding Local Taxes and Retribution, which states that the public must be informed of pending new or altered local regulations concerning revenue from permits.
1. Policy-making mechanisms need to be reformed, due to: a. Basic procedural weaknesses.Public Participation in Local Forestry Policy-making after Decentralization D e c e n t r a l i s a t i o n B r i e f