Managing forests for community, conservation, and social equity: a case study of social forestry in Indonesia

Forest conservation is increasingly acknowledged as both an ecological and a social challenge, requiring concurrent consideration for human needs and well-being, conflict reduction, and the health of habitat, species, and natural resources. However, social (including property rights, institutions, and values) and ecological (natural environment) systems are complex and inherently linked - social processes shape and are shaped by management practices and consequently ecosystem dynamics. The explicit inclusion of social equity objectives in international environmental policy processes, and a trend toward participatory approaches to conservation - which place natural resources management authority into the hands of local people - reflect a growing recognition of this complexity.nReal world applications of participatory natural resources management are challenged by incomplete assumptions and incongruous objectives, thus leading to trade-offs between practical and moral motivations. Inclusion of local people in conservation interventions can be viewed from a utilitarian perspective - improving the chance of successfully meeting conservation objectives and increasing the likelihood of long-term sustainability. Other arguments suggest that it is a moral or ethical issue to ensure that conservation is carried out in a just or equitable fashion. This thesis addresses a growing imperative to incorporate social equity considerations into conservation and natural resources management research and practice. In particular, it applies a multidimensional equity framework to an empirical case study of community-based forest management in Indonesia, examining the implications for different aspects of social equity and developing an understanding of the interactions between them.nTo establish a baseline understanding of what constitutes socially equitable conservation, Chapter 2 of this thesis systematically reviews how research has assessed social equity in conservation interventions. The theoretical scholarship on social equity identifies multiple dimensions that would capture a holistic notion of what is just. These elements include the distribution of costs and benefits, the procedure by which decisions are made and who is engaged, and recognition of different identities, cultures, values, and knowledge systems. This chapter reveals that, for most conservation research, social equity has been conceptualised in a narrow manner, primarily concerned with the distribution of costs and benefits arising from interventions. Other dimensions of equity, as well as non-monetary and ecological metrics, are still underrepresented within the conservation literature.nChapters 3-5 of this thesis develop a case study addressing some of the empirical research gaps identified in chapter 2, within the context of community forest policy in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. As part of a shift toward decentralised governance, the Indonesian government planned widespread allocation of forested land to communities, broadly aimed to achieve a suite of social equity, human well-being, and environmental objectives. Understanding how well these expectations and reality align, and the reasons why such participatory natural resources management policies might succeed or fall short of meeting their goals, is critical to long-term sustainability in social-ecological systems.nDifferent distributional norms - such as supporting the neediest, rewarding merit, or equality - inform what are considered equitable benefits from conservation interventions. Chapter 3 further develops our understanding of the implications of adhering to different ethical norms for distributional equity outcomes, using a case of communities in West Kalimantan. In expanding the benefits to include non-monetary well-being indicators, this chapter shows defining a fair and just distribution can influence whether equity objectives are achieved in a community forest programme. It also highlights how communities may differ in their perceptions and opinions on well-being and equity.nLocal participation in the decision-making and management of forested lands is one core principle of community-based forest management. But do community forests actually improve procedural equity, and does this result in increased support for conservation? Chapter 4 draws on household questionnaire data from West Kalimantan to investigate associations between village-level procedural equity and community forests. The results suggest that the particular design of this community forest programme may yield neither representative participation in decision-making nor universal satisfaction with the process. However, it highlights the positive relationships between village leadership, greater well-being, and support for forest conservation.nRecognising the needs and aspirations of communities is a final key component of social equity. Chapter 5 takes a step back to understand how the larger pool of stakeholders are engaged in operationalising community forest management, and how they contribute to empowering communities to achieve their objectives. In situations where there are often power disparities, due to social capital or resource access, are the capacities of communities being supported and their needs recognised? Using interviews and social network analysis, this chapter constructs the network of stakeholders external to communities at different stages in the establishment of a community forest. The network shows an emphasis on early permitting processes and promotion of conservation objectives, without necessarily recognising the needs for social support and capacity building to ensure longevity and efficacy of management efforts.Overall, this thesis examines an empirical case study of community-based forest management through different equity lenses, questioning some of the established and theoretical claims about participatory conservation interventions, and whether and when certain institutional arrangements are fit for purpose. The findings help to identify barriers and opportunities for sustainable and equitable management of social-ecological systems, which can inform similar programmes being implemented in many Southeast Asian countries. Finally, this thesis demonstrates the challenge of defining and assessing social equity in a holistic and context-sensitive way. It is clear that understanding the social and ecological implications of community-based forest management is far more complex than single metrics can convey. It requires interdisciplinary and mixed-methods approaches, and a critical eye on researchers’ assumptions and biases.n