The document discusses forest governance in Indonesia and REDD+. Key points include: 1. Forest governance issues in Indonesia include deforestation from palm oil and mining, development targets conflicting with emission reduction commitments, tenure conflicts, and lack of forest planning. 2. REDD+ aims to reduce deforestation and forest degradation, and Indonesia has taken steps like establishing a REDD+ task force and developing REDD+ strategies. 3. Improving forest governance is seen as an enabling condition for effective REDD+ implementation in Indonesia. Tools like the Governance Forest Initiative could help create data on governance, provide recommendations, and bridge interests of national and local governments.

2.  Governance basically is about Transparency, Inclusivity, and
Accountability.
 The forestry act (No.41/1999) actually had an openness, social
justice and inclusive spirit
 In 2008, government enacted the Freedom of Information Act
(No.14/2008). This act mandated that every public body (including
NGO) should have an information system
 In 2011, the ministry of forestry issue ministerial decree (No.
7/2011) regarding the information system in the ministry of
forestry.
 Prior to that the Government of Indonesia (GoI) becoming the first
developing country that commit to reduce emission for 41%, and
the emission reduction will come from LULUCF.

3.  After that commitment, many developed country
start to giving several aid to Indonesia, for
preparing the REDD+ in Indonesia. (eg: Australia,
Japan, UNDP, Europe, UK, etc)
 The most phenomenal aid is between Indonesia
and Norway (The Letter of Intent-LoI), Why?
 The Indonesian government commit for two year
suspension on all new concessions for conversion
of peat and natural forest.
 Creating a new institution for REDD+ (REDD+
agencies)
 Improving forest governance and law
enforcement
Forest Governance in Indonesia &
REDD+

4.  For some of the government, the hot issue is REDD+, but for many
of other Indonesian the Issue is “restructuring forestry sector”
 With the commitment to cut emission that Indonesia gave to the
international societies, emission reduction from forest sector is
becoming the most hot issue in Indonesia.
 But within the spirit to cut the emission from forest sector lies
several hurdle that need to be tackle, especially in the context of
forest governance.
 Deforestation is still “under siege” by expansive palm oil plantation
and mining
 National Development Growth Targets vs Emission Reduction
Commitment
 Tenure conflict in many forest area in Indonesia
 Unfinished planning that lead to deforestation by the unplanned
utilization of forest.

5.  Those issue is the primary requirement for realization of emission
cut, and also to implement REDD+. Without improving the
governance, REDD+ is impossible
REDD+ should be Reducing Deforestation/Degradation to Reduce
Emission, so it couldn’t be just bussines as usual.
 The steps that had been taken by the government are:
 Establishing the REDD+ Task Force
 Developing the National Strategy on REDD+ (Draft)
 Developing a multi stakeholders technical team that will be helping
the task force to perform their job.
 And….
Issuing the Presidential Decree on License Suspension
on Natural Primary Forest & Peatland for 2 Years (No.10/2011).

6.  Politic is always a “headline”, absorbing too much energy of
civil society movements without any significant results. Policy
change in the forestry context change fast without any
predictions.
 Big gap capacities between central and local for both
government and civil societies regarding the forest
governance.
 The spirit of openness is already understood by many
government official, but not lies within the system.
 Same understanding for underlying forest problem, but using
a different perspective/approach to answering the problem.

7.  Commitments to “fix” the problew both within the
NGO and the governement
 Many effort to enforce the law
 New law that promote good governance (FoIA & Env
Management Act)
 International support for Indonesia to have a clear
strategies in demonstrating a way of good governance
 REDD+ as an opportunities to promoting the needs of
good forest governance

8.  With those obstacles and opportunities that
Indonesia faced, we believe GFI could become a
powerful tools to create valid and recent data on
forest governance and also providing a
constructive recommendation for future
development of governance.
 Governance Forest Initiatives is also an action as
part of effort to help Indonesian Government
achieve their emissions reduction through
LULUCF
 Using GFI we could “leveling the playing field”
between all the stakeholder on forest issues.

9.  Strong engagement between partners with
commitments and clear objective is strongly needed to
demonstrate prepareness for REDD program
 REDD should deliver a benefit for local communities
and indigenous people in preserving forest resources
 Through REDD+ Indonesia should guarentee the
balancing between mitigation and adaption strategies
 Good forest governance becoming the main enabling
condition for REDD+ Implementation

10.  A tools to work “hand in hand”, could be
practical to the local communities
 A tools to picture and get fact findings in
forest governance for both national and local
level
 A tools to have a strong avocacy strategies to
improve forest governance
 A tools in bridging the interest of national and
local government in term of decentralization

11. Phase I
Testing the global Indicator that already been made.
Developing the lesson learned in the report and
creating a future strategy.
Phase II
Contextualizing the global Indicator with the national
context based on the lesson learned from the phase
I.
Phase II
Enggaging with the governement, widening the
public communication through website, Finalizing
the strategy for using the new “contextualized”
indicator on the next phase.

12. GFI Assesment should go beyond just an assessment. It should
gave a clear a comprehensive solution for the governance
improvement in Indonesia
 Several “important notes” that we have from the
1st assessment regarding the methodology,
context of the indicators, assessor,
terms/definition that being uses, and not at the
perfect timing to engage optimally with the
government.
 We could not continue without having any
modification for the indicators and considering all
the notes that we have

13. Brazilian Indonesian
context Global indicators context
consist of
fundamental
values that
needed to create
a good forest
governance
Other
Cameroon country
context partners
context??
Terms, Language, definitions, specific characteristic, case specification, etc. need
to be contextualized

14. Indicators 1.0 (Tenure)

15. The Result:
• Many of the
indicators are
repeating other
Trial using indicators
the Global • Indicators are not
Indicator quite amplified
separately
Normative • The indicators
are still not fully
consistent
At the National Level Using Interview /
and Sub-national “Triangulation” Perspectiv
• Country level
Level (west Methodology e context are still
Kalimantan) not
comprehensively
Observation captured
• The analysis
could not
conducted
objectively

16. Indikator Global versi 1.0 (Tenure)
There are no indicator assessing
the quality of the law regarding
the conflict resolution

17. The Result:
• Many of the
indicators are
repeating other
Trial using indicators
the Global • Indicators are not
Indicator quite amplified
separately
Normative • The indicators
are still not fully
consistent
At the National Level Using Interview /
and Sub-national “Triangulation” Perspectiv
• Country level
Level (west Methodology e context are still
Kalimantan) not
comprehensively
Observation captured
• The analysis
could not
conducted
Asking input from various expert to developed a more objectively
comprehensive and contextual indicators that could
lead to a constructive solutions

18.  The objective is to enrich the global
indicator, giving the national context, and to
get as many input as possible from several
expert and government authorities.
 After quite long process with all of the team
and reviewer, we could finalized the
indicator for Indonesia context, we call it
“Indicator V.1.5 or 2.0”
 First we determine the logical framework to
understood the indicator easily.

19. General Law:
#1 Legal acknowledgments that mandated government to conduct reform in forest utilization, cultivation, control, and ownership by the local communities
#2 legal acknowledgements for in forest utilization, cultivation, control, and ownership by the local communities
Rules Actor Practice
#5 Law regarding management and #15 Companies in the forestry industry #25 effective, transparent, and accessible
conversion of forest require policy makers considering local communities rights on forest administration process regarding forest
to consider local communities rights on utilization, cultivation, control, ownership utilization, cultivation, control, ownership
Transparency forest utilization, cultivation, control, when proposing for a conversion
ownership -CORE-
-CORE-
#9 Law guarantee public involvement in #17 Forestry authority (national and sub- #28 Communities involvement on
the process of developing, national) had the capacity for inclusively monitoring and evaluation of forest
implementation, evaluation and conflict managing the aspect of forest utilization, utilization, cultivation, control, ownership
Participation resolution in the context of forest cultivation, control, ownership
utilization, cultivation, control, ownership
-CORE- -CORE-
#10 Law guarantee the existence of #21 Alternative dispute resolution that based #30 Resolution conflict mechanism
alternative dispute resolution that based on customary law that could be used by local regarding forest utilization, cultivation,
on formal law and customary law in the communities control, ownership working effectively,
Accountability context of resolving the conflict in the cheap, and accessible.
context of forest utilization, cultivation,
control, ownership
-CORE-
#12 Legal guarantee of integration #24 Coordination effort regarding forest #33 Effective Implementation of policy
between forest management policy and utilization, cultivation, control, ownership, regarding the forest utilization,
forest utilization, cultivation, control, conducted systematically and by planning.
Coordination ownership policy
cultivation, control, ownership by the
local communities.
-CORE-

20. After that we using the
“Principle, Criteria, Indicators
and Element of Quality” to make
all the indicators workable

21. Rules
Principle Criteria Indicators Element of quality
#5 Law regarding
Openness in the
administering the
Transparancy in the
utilisation and management and
What is “principle”:
To what extent the regulation regulate clear and explicitly regarding the
forest resources utilization will be used for the public needs? (not only
rights of local conversion of the conversion of forest A fundamental value that
private needs)
require policy makers to
communities in the forest
consider local
becoming the law clearly defines what could or couldn’t do to the state
To what extent reference to asses
context of forest communities rights on theforest?
conditions of forest “Good”
utilization, forest utilization, To what extent law regulate that the process for forest conversion
cultivation, control, cultivation, control,
governance. The principle is the should be transparent?
including policy making in the forestry sector
ownership by the ownership “minimum” requirement that process regarding the allocation
To what extent law regulate a transparent
local communities. -CORE- couldforest resources (for private, a
for be acknowledge as communities, state company), including in
the process of developing an adequate check and balance system?
conditions for good forest
To what extent law regulate a requirement for the policy makers to
governance.information to the public regarding conversion and forest
disseminate
usage ?
To what extent law regulate that every issuance of a forest license should
comply to a safeguard mechanism, and the participation process for
license issuance are based on a valid information?

22. Rules
Principle Criteria Indicators Element of quality
#5 Law regarding
Openness in the
administering the
Transparancy in the
utilisation and management and
What is “criteria”:
To what extent the regulation regulate clear and explicitly regarding the
forest resources utilization will be used for the public needs? (not only
rights of local conversion of the conversion of forest private needs) Further explanation (pointers)
require policy makers to
communities in the forest To what extentto the principle, looking moredo to the state
law clearly defines what could or couldn’t
consider local
context of forest communities rights on forest? detail on “things” that need to
utilization, forest utilization, To what extent law regulate that the process for forest conversion
cultivation, control, cultivation, control,
be achieve for reaching the
including policy making in the forestry sector should be transparent?
ownership by the ownership To what extentprinciple a transparent process regarding the allocation
law regulate
local communities. -CORE- for forest resources (for private, communities, state company), including in
the process of developing an adequate check and balance system?
To what extent law regulate a requirement for the policy makers to
disseminate information to the public regarding conversion and forest
usage ?
To what extent law regulate that every issuance of a forest license should
comply to a safeguard mechanism, and the participation process for
license issuance are based on a valid information?

23. Rules
Principle Criteria Indicators Element of quality
#5 Law regarding
Openness in the
administering the
Transparancy in the
utilisation and management and
What is “indicators”:
To what extent the regulation regulate clear and explicitly regarding the
forest resources utilization will be used for the public needs? (not only
rights of local conversion of the conversion of forest private needs) A conditions that can “examine”
require policy makers to
communities in the forest To what extenttheclearly defines what could or couldn’t do to the state
law factors in the forestry
consider local
context of forest communities rights on forest? sector and had their own
utilization, forest utilization, To what extent law regulate that the process for forest conversion
cultivation, control, cultivation, control,
“value”. When the value is being
including policy making in the forestry sector should be transparent?
ownership by the ownership To what extentfullfiled, the condition could be the allocation
law regulate a transparent process regarding
local communities. -CORE- classified that they already done
for forest resources (for private, communities, state company), including in
the process of developing an adequate check and balance system?
a “minimum good governance”
To what extent law regulate a requirement for the policy makers to
disseminate information to the public regarding conversion and forest
usage ?
To what extent law regulate that every issuance of a forest license should
comply to a safeguard mechanism, and the participation process for
license issuance are based on a valid information?

24. Rules
Principle Criteria Indicators Element of quality
Openness in the Transparancy in the #5 Law regarding To what extent the regulation regulate clear and explicitly regarding the
administering the utilisation and management and forest resources utilization will be used for the public needs? (not only
rights of local conversion of the conversion of forest private needs)
require policy makers to
communities in the forest To what extent law clearly defines what could or couldn’t do to the state
consider local
context of forest communities rights on forest?
utilization, forest utilization, To what extent law regulate that the process for forest conversion
cultivation, control, cultivation, control, including policy making in the forestry sector should be transparent?
ownership by the ownership To what extent law regulate a transparent process regarding the allocation
local communities. -CORE- for forest resources (for private, communities, state company), including in
What is “Element of the process of developing an adequate check and balance system?
Quality”: To what extent law regulate a requirement for the policy makers to
disseminate information to the public regarding conversion and forest
A sets of benchmarks to measures
usage ?
the indicators that will asses the To what extent law regulate that every issuance of a forest license should
quality of the indicators, so the comply to a safeguard mechanism, and the participation process for
quality of an indicator could be license issuance are based on a valid information?
clearly, detailed and objectively
identified

25. Good and Healthy food
Principle Criteria Indicators Element of quality
Having The food #1 The amount of To what extent the food ingredient are
good and should have organic (non GMO) taken from a certified organic farming?
healthy an organic material that the To what extent that the monitoring of the
food contain
food. ingredient, food processing is being made?
low fat -CORE- To what extent the food is being tested in
/cholesterol an adequate laboratories for food testing?
, and taste
good

26. Indonesian Indicators Global indicators
 The approach is The approach is
triangulation triangulation
 Using the element of Using the element of
quality as a scoring quality as a scoring tools
tools
 Aiming for a detail Aiming for a detail
picture picture

27. Indonesian Indicators Global indicators
 Using principle ,criteria,  Using the approach of
indicators and element of indicators, component,
Indonesian Indicators
quality Global indicators
diagnostic question and
element of quality
 Consist of 4 thematic (Tenure,  Consist of 4 thematic but
Land use, Management, slightly different approach
Revenue) (Tenure, land use
“coordination”, Forest
institution , forest
management enforcement)
 Separating between “rules,  Combining “rules, actors and
actors and practice” practice”

28.  Many effort and initiative regarding the
forest governance already being conducted
(world bank, CIFOR, Transparency
International, UN-REDD, FAO, etc). The word
“Forest Governance” quite so familiar, but
only few know how to make it happen.
 With that reason we want to amplified the
concrete action regarding the forest
governance with the framework of GFI.
 We develop a website for GFI (for Indonesia
region, could be expanding to become
global), and creating media awareness about
the importance of what GFI networks are

30. We already develop a more stronger
indicators, but we need to strategize it well:
1. Training several assessor (2 person for
each region in Indonesia) using the new
developed indicator.
2. Conducting assessment in 5 region in
Indonesia
3. Making a report on the assessment
4. Together with the Forestry Council,
launch the Indonesian GFI
5. Interactive communication through
website maintenance, and update any
information related to forest governance

31.  Indicators are a living document, need always
to be check and recheck to make sure the
recent context of forest conditions are fit with
the indicators. Need to be improved
periodically
 Scoring mechanism need to be agreed within
the researcher
 Researcher need to think not only
“methodologically” but also “philosophically”
to get the basic value of forest governance.