A4 Indonesia Inception Report

GREEN LIVELIHOODS ALLIANCE: INDONESIA COUNTRY PROGRAMME
SEPTEMBER 2016
INCEPTION REPORT 4
GREEN
LIVELIHOODS
ALLIANCE –
INDONESIA COUNTRY
PROGRAMME
PREPARED BY: GLA INDONESIA PARTNER TEAM
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 5
2. PROBLEM AND CONTEXT ANALYSIS 8

2.1 Sketch of the landscapes 9
2.2 Actor analysis 10
2.3 policy analysis 13
2.4 Status of the international public goods 16
3. THEORY OF CHANGE 17
3.1 Desired change and change pathways 18
3.2 Relation between national and landscape ToCs 21
3.3 Linkage with the GLA ToC 22
3.4 Synergies with other strategic partnerships 26
3.5 Assumptions 28
3.6 L&A strategies of participating CSOs 28
3.7 Capacity development priorities 31
4. MONITORING AND LEARNING 34

4.1 Capacity development baseline 35
4.2 Lobby and advocacy baseline 36
4.3 Learning 36
4.4 PMEL protocol 37
5. REFERENCES 39
ANNEXES (All annexes are available upon request)

Annex 1: Mudiak Baduo
Annex 2: Gunung Tarak Landscape
Annex 3: Lariang Watershed
Annex 4: Report of the national workshop, including national policy analysis
and national actor analysis
Annex 5: Baseline for lobbying and advocacy outcomes
Annex 6: Baseline for capacity development
3
ABBREVIATION AND TERMS

APL : State forest areas which are allocated for non-forestry land uses
DG-SFEP : Directorate General of Social Forestry and Environmental Partnership
BRG : Badan Restorasi Gambut, Peatland Restoration Agency.
EIA : Environmental Impacts Assessment
FBSL : Forest based sustainable livelihoods
FoE : Friends of the Earth
GPNP : Gunung Palung National Park
GTPF : Gunung Tarak Forest Protection
GAPKI : Association of Indonesian Palm Oil Growers
HCV : High Conservation Values
HCVNI : HCV Network Indonesia
HCVRN : HCV Resource Network
HPK : Convertible Production forest
HKm : Community Forest
HTR : Community Plantation Forest
IPOP : Indonesian Palm Oil Pledge
ISPO : Indonesian Sustainable Palm Oil Initiative
ISLA : Initiative for Sustainable Landscapes
L&A : Lobby and advocacy
LLNP : Lore Lindu National Park
MoEF : Ministry of Environment and Forestry
MA : Ministry of Agriculture
NTFPs : Non timber forest products
NTFP-EP : Non Timber Forest Products Exchange Program
NP : National Park
MFSF : Multi-stakeholder Forum on Social Forestry
PAK : The stipulation of community forestry working areas
P&C : Principles and Criteria
Perda : District Regulation
PS : Private Sector
RSPO : Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil
RTRW : Regional Spatial Planning
SF : Social Forestry
SFMR : Social Forestry Management Right
SPFB : Sungai Putri Forest Block
SPPF : Sungai Putri Production Forest
VF : Village Forest
VFMG : Village Forest Management Group
4
1.
INTRODUCTION
5
The Green Livelihoods Alliance (GLA) is a five-year (2016-2020) collaborative programme

be-tween Milieudefensie, IUCN Netherlands Committee and Tropenbos International, funded
by and in strategic partnership with the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It aims to
contribute to inclusive, equitable and sustainable governance of forest landscapes in nine
countries around the globe, including Indonesia.
The Alliance aims to strengthen the role of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) in inclusive and
sustainable governance of forested landscapes. The intervention is particularly applicable and
relevant for Indonesia, given its acclaimed democracy and freedom of speech which paves the
way for CSOs to hold state and non-state actors accountable with regards to their commitments
and obligations to environmental sustainability.
GLA works with partner CSOs and strengthens CSOs’ capacities to put the right local, national and
international public and private sector policies in place so that conditions are met in which com-
munities can engage with stakeholder from the public and private sector to jointly decide on land
use. The GLA seeks to strengthen the lobbying and advocacy (L&A) capacities of selected local
CSOs and CSOs coalition with the ultimate goal of influencing international, national, local and
corporate forest policies and practices. It is expected that better governance of forest landscapes
will benefit local community, local and national economies and contribute to reduced deforesta-
tion and a better global environment.
During GLA Inception Workshop held in Amsterdam end of February 2016, a Indonesian Working
Group was constituted consisting of Rudi Syaf (WARSI), Jusupta Tarigan (NTFP-EP), Albert Nego
Tarigan (WALHI) and Edi Purwanto (Tropenbos International Indonesia). They decided: (a) WARSI
will select landscape in West Sumatra, TBI Indonesia in West Kalimantan and NTFP-EP Indone-
sia and WALHI in Central Sulawesi; (b) Criteria for landscapes selections are: (i) consisting of a
mosaic of land use types which are representative for larger problems, (ii) Potential for social
forestry development, (iii) potential for added value by GLA, (iv) Collaboration and confrontation
strategies are possible and link to strategies at the national and international level. As a fol-
low-up, in March 2016, WARSI selected Mudiak Baduo Landscape in West Sumatra Province, while
TBI-Indonesia selected Gunung Tarak Landscape in West Kalimantan Province, and NTFP-EP Indo-
nesia the Lariang Watershed in Centre Sulawesi Province. Apart from working at landscape level,
we also agreed to work on lobbying and advocacy (L&A) at the national level. This will be largely
related to issues that affect the three landscapes and beyond.
During May and June 2016, the key participating CSOs developed a Context Analysis, based on
review of secondary data and available reports, analysis of landscape based on satellite imagery
and field data collection, key informant interviews and visits to the selected landscapes to assess
the situation of the landscapes and the CSOs in the landscapes.
The country ToC was developed on the basis of three landscape ToCs which were developed du-
ring landscape workshops which held in Ketapang, West Kalimantan Province on 30 May and
1 June (organized by TBI Indonesia), then Padang, West Sumatra Province on 16 and 17 June
(organized by WARSI) and Palu, Central Sulawesi Province on 22 and 23 June (organized by NTEP-
EP Indonesia). Based on the Context Analyses and resulting ToCs at the landscape level, WALHI
organized a National Workshop to develop a country-level ToC in Jakarta on 3 and 4 August 2016
(Annex 4). The participants of the National Workshop were representatives (8-10 persons) of
participants of the each landscape workshop. An Inception Committee (IC) meeting facilitated by
GLA Contact Person (Mr. Roderick Zagt) was organized on 5 August 2016 in Jakarta to discuss the
preparation of Inception Report.
The goal of GLA program in Indonesia is ‘Inclusive and sustainable governance of forested
landscapes in Indonesia’. The achievement of the goal is conditional on two intended impacts,
i.e. ‘inclusive and sustainable governance of land-based investments’ (a private sector orien-
ted impact) and ‘improved community land tenure and sustainable livelihoods in forested
landscapes’ (a community oriented impact).
The sustainable governance of land based investments is not limited to oil palm plantations
which are taken as the main example in the ToC, but also includes industrial forest plantations,
6
natural forest exploitation, mining and rapid development of cash crops (cacao and coffee) at the
expense of forest conservation and protection forest degradation in the focus landscapes and in
Indonesia at large. Those impacts are addressed through the establishment of CSOs coalitions
at regional level (landscape level and surroundings) and national level, and by capacitating and
facilitating them to conduct L&A.
To reach the defined goals and impacts, the country ToC intends to achieve five outcomes, i.e.
(a) Government adopts and implements equitable, sustainable and well-coordinated spatial
planning policies; (b) Private sector and government use the High Conservation Values (HCV)
approach as the key tool for sustainable production investment and regional development; (c)
Oil palm growers sustainably manage their concessions, while traders and buyers conduct sustai-
nable trade; (d) Village government and community groups participate and are equally involved
in sustainable agro-industry; (e) Local communities have a greater involvement in sustainable
forest management.
This inception report presents an overview of the context in Indonesia, within which the GLA inter-
vention shall operate, the changes that GLA Indonesia programme desires to make in the selected
landscapes and nationally, the intended change pathways, and the capacity situation of the core
participating CSOs for the implementation of the intervention.
7
3. ASSUMPTIONS
2.
PROBLEM
AND CONTEXT
ANALYSIS
8
2.1
SKETCH OF THE LANDSCAPES
Indonesia accounts for the third largest forest area in the world, with designated forest lands
covering 60% of its landmass - equivalent to 113.2 million hectares (ha), yet it also has one of
the highest rates of deforestation globally. To date economic growth has been sustained through
a strategy which builds on the use of Indonesia’s abundant natural resources. Commodities com-
prise more than half of exports, and agriculture (15%) and mining (12%) are key contributors to
the national Gross Domestic Product. Agriculture is still vital for livelihoods, employing more than
a third of the working population. The GLA partners in Indonesia have selected three landscapes
which represent the general problems and livelihoods strategy in the country very well.
The first selected landscape is called ‘Mudiak Baduo’ (720,436 Ha), located in the upper
watershed (‘Mudiak’) of Batanghari River, and is dominated by Batanghari two (‘duo’) or
‘Batanghari duo/Baduo’ protection forest (211,820 Ha). The boundary of the landscape follows
the inter-districts roads from the capital of Dharmasraya District to Solok then from Solok District
to Solok Selatan/South Solok (Annex 1). The landscape is located in 4 Districts, i.e. Solok, Solok
Selatan, Sijunjung and Dharmasraya, West Sumatra Province.
The large part of the landscape is located on the highland of West Sumatra Province; it is the
centre of the Minangkabau culture . About one million people reside in Mudiak Baduo landscape.
1
The village as the smallest adminsitrative unit is called Nagari in which in terms of the area
2
extent (which follows customary boundaries) is larger than the usual village in West Kalimantan
and Central Sulawesi Provinces.
The landscape is highly dissected and is characterized by high biodiversity and important eco-
system services which is threatened by unstoppable land-based concessions, i.e. oil palm plan-
tations, mining, industrial forest plantations, logging, unsustainable development of temperate
climate cash crops and illegal logging. The landscape has an excellent success story on social
forestry (SF) development in Indonesia: there are 12 Social Forestry Management Rights (SFMR)
in the form of Village Forest/VF and Community Forestry (HKm), while 16 other proposed permits
are still in the pipe line.
The second landscape is called ‘Gunung Tarak’ (500,000 Ha) - a name borrowed from the name
of the protection forest (‘Gunung Tarak’) in the centre of the area. The landscape is located in
two districts, Ketapang and Kayong Utara Districts, West Kalimantan Province. It is composed
of contiguous state-managed forest areas, i.e. Gunung Palung National Park/GPNP, Gunung
Tarak Protection Forest and Sungai Putri (peat swamp) Forest Block/SPFB. These forest areas are
increasingly isolated by unstoppable Oil Palm expansion, totalling 166,000 Ha (mostly owned by
RSPO members, not necessarily RSPO certified concessions), which has seriously degraded the
landscape, including the ecological corridor for the Bornean Orangutan (Annex 2). Other threats
include timber plantations, smallholder agriculture (swidden agriculture and rubber plantations),
small-scale illegal logging and mining. There are two SFMR, one is Pematang Gadung peat swamp
forest (15,000 ha, the largest VF permit in Indonesia) and Laman Satong VF (l,070 Ha). Two
other proposed permits (Padu Banjar and Pajajalan Villages) are still in the pipe line. The landscape
is inhabited by more than 200,000 people which is dominated by Malay and Dayak Groups.
The third landscape (900,000 Ha) is called ‘Lariang’; the landscape boundary follows the water
divide of Lariang watershed where major areas of the selected landscape is situated (Annex 3). The
landscape is located in two districts, Sigi and Poso Districts, Central Sulawesi Province. The lands-
1
The center of the Minangkabau culture is the highland of cape which is dominated by hilly terrain is still dominated by forested areas under conservation
West Sumatra. This highland is ‘traditionally’ divided into
three regions: Limapuluh Koto, Tanah Datar and Agam.
and protection status, of which the central part is the Lore Lindu NP. The landscape has been thre-
(Kato, 1982, p.36). All the areas outside (even the coastal atened by palm-oil plantation expansion, illegal logging followed by encroachment for smallholder
areas of West Sumatra) are called rantau. cash-crop (cacao and cacao) development, mining and small-scale illegal hunting/poaching.
2
In the year 1999 the central government promoted an
autonomous regional government. This policy intend to
support the numerous cultures and societies of the country. About 1 million people live in the landscape which is dominated by Lore People, other ethnics
Many local governments in West Sumatra promoted the
unique Minangkabau way of life. The term desa was found to spread over the landscape are Bugis (from South Sulawesi), Mandar (from West
replaced by the term nagari in the year 2001. Sulawesi), Javanese and Balinese.
9
TABLE 1: FOREST PLANNING IN THE THREE SELECTED LANDSCAPES IN INDONESIA
LANDSCAPE LOCATION OFFICIAL STATUS OF FOREST AREAS

Mudiak Baduo West Sumatra Province 1. Conservation Forest (33,860 Ha)
(720,436 Ha) 2. Protection Forest (211,820 Ha)
3. Production Forest (51,472 Ha)
4. Limited Production Forest (98,479 Ha)
5. Convertible Production Forest (39,627 Ha)
Gunung Tarak West Kalimantan Province 1. Conservation Forest (95,000 Ha)
4. Convertible Production Forest (8,458 Ha)
Lariang Central Sulawesi Province 1. Conservation Forest (223,767 Ha)

4. Limited Production Forest (223,767 Ha)
The shared issues among the three landscapes are:
a. Rapid expansion of agro-commodity oil palm and other land-based investments at the expen-
se of forests, leading to a degradation of natural and social infrastructure (including land tenure
conflicts).
b. The long procedure on arranging SF permits has frustrated local communities and SF propo-
nents, while the next big question arises, i.e., what will community do with their SF permits? How
they will use forest environmental services to create better lives?
c. Lack of forest-based sustainable livelihood surrounding conservation areas (national park,

wildlife reserves) and (watershed) protection forests (Hutan Lindung) has led to rampant illegal
logging and encroachment. Unfortunately the problem is often only recognized after the situati-
ons have become severe and difficult to control.
2.2
ACTOR ANALYSIS
2.2.1.
IDENTIFICATION OF KEY ACTORS
The main criteria for identifying key stakeholders (actors) in the selected landscapes were: (a)
dependence to forested areas; (b) legal rights; (c) traditional rights and (d) relevance for GLA
approach and outcomes. Based on the criteria, at least 30 key actors are identified which can
be classified into seven groups, i.e. (a) Forest and land use public entities; (b) Private sector; (c)
Community; (d) Mass Organization; (e) Law enforcement institutions; (f) CSOs/CBOs; (g) Mul-
ti-stakeholder Platform; (h) Mass media.
10
TABLE 2: LIST OF ACTORS AND REASON FOR SELECTION
NO SECTOR ACTORS REASON FOR SELECTION

1. a. Forest and land use Ministry of Environment Hold policy and authority for state forest area
public entities and Forestry planning, licensing, relinquishment for palm-oil,
borrow-and use (pinjam-pakai) for mining.
2. Ministry of Agriculture Hold policy for palm oil expansion, hold rule and
regulation on Palm-oil environmental and social
management
3 Ministry of Agrarian and Hold policy on agrarian and national
Spatial Planning spatial planning
4 Ministry of Village, Deve- Hold policy for strengthening village governance
lopment of Disadvantaged
Regions, and Transmigration
5 The Office of the Coordinate efforts to speed up agrarian reform
Presidential Staff
6 Peatland Restoration Coordinator on peatland rehabilitation
Agency (BRG) and restoration
7 National Park and Conser- The extended hand of MoEF to manage and protect
vation Forest Agency the Park and conservation areas
8 Province Forestry office The extended hand of MoEF at regional level,
policy coordinator of forest management at
province level, hold policy on forest production
and protection forest
9 Province Plantation office The extended hand of MoA at regional level, policy
coordinator of agro-commodity investment manage-
ment at province level
10 District Plantation Office Hold authority as the first gate for issuing plantation
business permit
11 District Forestry offices Hold authority over identification and registration of
customary land
12 b. Private sector Palm oil companies Aggressive invasion and poor environmental
management which posed severe threats and
pressures to natural and social infrastructure
13 Mining companies Its actual and potential impacts on long term
environmental degradation
14 Forest industrial Its impacts for forested landscape degradation
plantation companies and wild fires.
16 c. Community Village Forest Its roles to utilize forest environmental services
Management Group as a source of community based sustainable
livelihoods and best solution for community
land tenure problem
17 Smallholder rubber/oil Its roles as community based economic development
palm plantations at regional level
18 Smallholder tree crop Its roles to develop tree based sustainable
plantations livelihoods at regional level
19 NTFPs collectors and Its roles to develop forest based sustainable
processors livelihoods at regional level
20 Customary Figures Its roles to revive local wisdom on sustainable
forest resources management
Village Government Its roles to include sustainable utilization of forest
resources in the village planning and budgeting.
11
NO SECTOR ACTORS REASON FOR SELECTION

21 d. Mass organizations From village to national Its roles as agent of changes at grass root level and
level political power at regional and national level
22 e. Law enforcement National Police Maintain security and public order, responsible for
institutions enforcing the forest crime law.
23 Public Prosecutor carrying out prosecutions against violators, (b)

executing judges’ rulings and court decisions,
24 Judiciary Hold jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases.
25 e. Law enforcement RSPO* Its role to enforce sustainable palm-oil plantation

institutions management to its members.
26 HCVNI* Its role to guide HCV assessment and management
and reconcile conflicts on HCV diverse perceptions
27 Multi-stakeholder Social Its role to resolve land conflicts resolutions of areas

Forestry Forum stipulated as SF working areas at the grass root level
28 Watershed Management Its role to synergize sustainable land use planning
Forum and management at large watershed areas
29 National Parks Manage- Its role to synergize conservation actions by invol-

ment Forum ving the roles of district government, private sectors
and private sector surrounding NPs.
30 g. CSOs/CBOs GLA collaborating partners Partners for Lobby and Advocacy
and beyond
31 NGOs focused on gender Gender-sensitive and responsive attention to the
situation of women and accommodate the interests
of women
32 h. Mass Media Television, newspapers Promotion of good and bad practices/ social
and social control and pressure groups
* Example
2.2.2
POWER ANALYSIS
Control over land use planning and implementation in forested landscape is at the hand of cen-
tral (1, 2), province (8, 9) and district governments (10, 11) which are highly influenced by giant
land-based investors (12-14), they mostly have limited leadership (read: insufficient engagement
3
on sustainable forested landscape). On the other hand, government institutions which have high
leadership (4, 5, 6, 7), due to bad political and economic system, receive poor public supports and
thereby limited power. Given the low power and interest of legal (law enforcement) institutions
(22, 23, 24), the ultimate victims are local and indigenous community which have high interest
but limited power (15-20).
Given the above condition, GLA should enable to: (a) enhance leadership of government institu-
tions which hold power but limited leadership, and strengthen power (through influencing policy
and capacitate public support) to those which have limited; (b) support local community (15-20)
to have equal opportunity and equitable right to utilize forested landscape in sustainable manner;
(c) work together with legal institutions (22, 23, 24) to enforce law and regulations; (d) collabora-
te with the existing multistakeholder platforms (26-29) and mass organization (21) to synergize
efforts and impose political pressure; (e) work together with mass media (30) to promote good
and bad practices of natural resource utilization.
2.2.3
GENDER ASSESSMENT
Women and men in the three landscapes have similar gender divisions of labor. Men use natural
resources in agriculture, logging, and fishing for commercial purposes more than women. In crop
production, men tend to focus on market-oriented or cash crop production, whereas women work
with subsistence crops, minor crops, and vegetable gardens. In many cases men and women per-
form complementary roles, for example, men clear land, women plant and tend crops, and men
harvest and market crops.
3
Leadership is defined as willingness to initiate, convoke or
lead an action (Brinkerhoff and Crosby 2002)
12
Apart from Mudiak Baduo Landscape having Minangkabau matrilineal system, women in the two
other landscapes have fewer legal ownership rights than men. The Minagkabau or Minang people
are well-known for their distinctive customary traditions. Customary laws protect and respect
the rights of women, and these are still relevant in the present time. In Minangkabau, women
control the land, the property and the workers. ‘High property’ or Pusako Tinggi is passed down
from mother to daughter, including the land and the big family house (rumah gadang). Minang
women are customarily led by Bundo Kanduang (‘my own mother’), while men are led by Niniek
4
mamak; women are the owners of the land resources and family treasures, while men play roles
to manage them.
Despite the government’s commitments, policies and efforts to promote gender equality, gen-
der gaps persist. In practice, direct women engagement in decision-making processes is still low
within the existing forestry-related activities. Women are often excluded from decision making
because of social barriers; logistical barriers; the rules governing community forestry and male
bias. In fact, the situation is not different for the Minangkabau matrilineal system:, which gives
women more customary property rights but no decision making rights. Rural women in many
parts of Indonesia are responsible for providing food for their families; they rarely have access
to and control over the natural resources and/or forest products required for their families’ liveli-
hoods and for income generation.
2.3
POLICY ANALYSIS
The international, national and regional policies which are of relevance to the ToC at the lands-
capes and national level are summarized below:
2.3.1
INTERNATIONAL POLICIES
a. Indonesia-EU Voluntary Partnership Agreement: Legally-binding trade agreement between
Indonesia and the EU which restricts Indonesia-EU timber trade to only timber and timber
products from legal sources. It has strong potential influence on timber exploitation in the
landscapes and forest governance but it is yet to be visible on the ground.
b. Global climate policy (UNFCCC): The ultimate objective is to stabilize greenhouse gas con
centrations in the atmosphere at a level that prevents dangerous human interference with
the climate system. It has strong potential influence on resource use practice but yet to be
visible on the ground.
2.3.2
NATIONAL POLICIES
a. Law No. 23/2014 on Local Government that replaced Law No. 32/2004 . The revisions
5
brought changes in the distribution of governmental functions among the central and the
provincial or district/municipal governments in the areas of forestry planning and manage-
ment, the granting of (location) permits, business permits, the resolution of tenurial con-
flicts, the rights of indigenous people and local communities. MoEF retains the authority
over state forest areas, including the planning and licensing process, the implementation of
forest management and monitoring of forest resources, including gazettement of state forest
areas. The implementation will be the task and responsibility of the provincial government,
including the settlement of third party rights claims and monitoring the use of forest areas.
The new laws give provincial governors a bigger portion of authority for coordination in the
4
They organize the traditional rites of the society,
forestry sector, at the expense of district governments. This, in turn, influences authority
as well as mediate the social relationships
between and within the villages, giving them both over many other functions, such as licensing, management of forest areas, and spatial plan-
representative and diplomatic roles within the society. ning. District Government has no authority over the management or utilization of production
5
Since the fall of Soeharto, the Local Government Law has
changed three times. The first Law was enacted in 1999 and forest and protection forests (with the, exception of Grand Forest Parks);, those authorities
was effective in 2001. It underwent the next revision three are held by provincial government. District government neither has authority in proposing
years later, in 2004. Ten years later, in 2014, it was revised
again through the enactment of Law No. 23/2014 on Local a change in the status and function of forests to non-forest areas and the use and exchange
Government. of forest areas.
13
b The Law No. 6/2014 on villages has provided a new perspective on village natural resource
management. The law provides a wider scope and stronger positions for village govern-
ments in managing their natural resources. The dream behind the legislation is to establish
villages that are strong, developed, independent and democratic — the keys to enabling
the welfare of a community. Villages are not the sub-system of district/town governments
but the unitary state of Indonesia. Village government is self-governing communities, like a
“small state”, which has clear boundaries of jurisdiction, authority, community and natural
resources.
c. The MoEF has set a target of redistributing 12.7 million hectares of social forests (2015-
2019). The President Joko Widodo administration has put great emphasis on overcoming
long and unequal control over state forest areas for the better management of space for
local communities; however, evil is always in its implementation. This is mainly because of
indeterminate entitlements to land, the lack of a comprehensive land registry and related
geospatial information, a lack of formal methods to protect and recognize customary rights
to land, unclear state forest boundaries and a lack of government facilitators dealing with
dispute resolution at the field level. The implementation of social forestry has been very
slow. Only 646,000 Ha out of 2.5 million Ha were achieved by the previous government. The
challenges lay on the lack of support from district administrations and long procedures at
the forestry ministry.
d. As part of a larger goal of reducing deforestation and carbon emissions, President Joko Wi-
dodo extended, in May 2015, a moratorium on the clearing of primary forests and peatlands.
It was the second time the ban on issuing concessions to plantation companies was renewed
since a presidential decree was issued in 2011.
e. Indonesia’s Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC), submitted during UNFCCC

COP 21, identifies climate mitigation and adaptation as critical strategies in building resi-
lience for natural resources and thus water, energy and food security. They also recognize
that addressing the drivers of deforestation outside the forest sector is critical to achieving
emissions reductions targets. In managing this potential trade-off, the INDC identifies a num-
ber of strategies to reduce pressure on forests, including increasing productivity, no burning,
utilizing degraded land, and promoting value added industries.
f. President Joko Widodo established a new Peatland Restoration Agency (BRG) to restore 2
million hectares of peatland by 2020 and impose a moratorium on new clearing, drainage
and conversion of unopened peatland.
g. MoEF still holds power to hand over huge swaths of land to palm oil producers: Despite the
moratorium, at least 10 million ha of forest is still classified by MoEF as ‘convertible produc-
tion forest’ (HPK) or ‘other land uses’ (APL) as suitable for conversion to plantations – mostly
in Kalimantan and Papua.
h. Law No. 39/2014 on Plantation requires palm oil concession holders to clear and develop
all plantable land within their concession within six years. If this is not done, companies
face sanctions, including fines and the revocation of their business licenses, with the land
being taken back into state control and potentially awarded to another developer. The Act
also appears to be part of a coordinated assault mounted by various government ministers
against the private sector’s attempts to raise the environmental and social standards of
palm oil production.
i. In 2014, major palm oil companies Wilmar International, Cargil Inc., Golden Agri Resources,
Asian Agri and Musim Mas signed the Indonesian Palm Oil Pledge (IPOP), “No deforestation,
no peat, no exploitation policy” (NDPE), which is a commitment to transparency, accounta-
bility and to ensuring compliance of all third-party suppliers. However, IPOP was recently
disbanded by the Government.
j. The MoA refuses to release to the public shapefile maps of plantation concessions, despite
a stated commitment to open government and promises to move forward with the One Map
14
initiative. In November 2013, the RSPO adopted a new resolution requiring all members to
provide it with concession maps. Two years later, few have complied, and the RSPO has
stopped publishing such maps in the public domain. This secrecy was encouraged by a
letter sent by the MoA members of RSPO, purporting to forbid companies from making such
disclosures.
k. Minister of Forestry (currently the Ministry of Environment and Forestry/MoEF) Regulation

65/2011 on Guidelines for Gender Responsive Planning and Budgeting in the Forestry Sector
is a significant step forward for gender mainstreaming in the forestry sector. It requests
ministries and agencies to include gender budget statements in their annual work plan that
outline their programs and activities that will address gender gaps.
2.3.3
REGIONAL POLICY
a. In 2012, West Sumatra Governor set target to allocate 500,000 Ha of state forest areas for
social forestty, the target was raised to 750,000 Ha in 2016.
b. In 2014, Parliament of Ketapang District issued regulation to protect HCV (Perda 2/2014 on
District Conservation). This will become an umbrella for the issuance of a Regent regulation
to protect HCV.
An analysis of the policy framework shows significant progress in addressing aspects of gover-
nance, spatial planning, land tenure and forest management (including law enforcement) in Indo-
nesia, but also reveals important gaps and constraints. Key issues that need addressing and that
underlie CSO strategies include:
a. Transparency: openness has tremendously increased in the era of reform, but in spite of a
legal guarantee regarding public access to information, information related to, e.g., licensing
and the licensing process is excluded from openness. This concerns among others the
allocation of permits and plantation licenses.
b. Participation: formal participation of citizens is legally guaranteed through the represen-

tative parliamentary system but politics stands in the way of effective public participation.
In practice, public participation in decision making must be secured in different ways.
c. Accountability: existing and legally guaranteed mechanisms to ensure accountability to the

public of government decisions are impeded in practice due to numerous procedural
obstacles to, e.g., filing lawsuits etc.
d. Coordination between sectoral government agencies is hardly guaranteed by the law and
therefore not happening in practice. This leads to contradicting policies, overlapping
planning and permits.
e. Implementation: a lack of funding, human resources, institutional capacities; and a legal

culture that does not favour regulation impede the translation of policies in effective action
on the ground and enforcement of laws.
15
2.4
STATUS OF THE INTERNATIONAL
PUBLIC GOODS
2.4.1
MUDIAK BADUO
The forest watershed function of the hilly terrain of the landscape provides an unaccountable
source of water for irrigated rice field and hydro-power in West Sumatra and Riau Provinces. The
forested landscape has strategic function for ecological corridor for endemic Sumatran species
(such as Sumatran tiger and orangutan) between Kerinci Seblat NP with Bukit Dua Belas NP in
Riau Province, while also still contain ample carbon storage.
2.4.2
GUNUNG TARAK
Gunung Palung National Park (GPNP) provides a source of irrigation water to 45,000 ha of irri-
gated rice field in Kayong Utara District. It is also source of clean drinking water for one million
people in Ketapang and Kayong Utara Districts. GPNP and GunungTarak Protection Forest are the
only remaining intact habitats for orangutan (2,500 individuals) in the landscape of Ketapang
and Kayong Utara region. The Sungai Putri forest is one of the coastal peat forests among 17,500
km2 other peatlands in West Kalimantan Province (Anshari et al. 2010). Sungai Putri peat swamp
forest, which consists of several peat domes, are significant areas for carbon storage, biodiversity,
and freshwater supplies. It is a very important role for carbon sequestration and potential site for
a REDD project.
2.4.3
LARIANG WATERSHED
Lore Lindu National Park (LLNP) which is the core zone of the Biosphere Reserve Lore Lindu, which
was declared by UNESCO in 1977. The park is the source for 3 important rivers in Central Sulawesi,
the Lariang, Gumbasa and Palu Rivers. The Park is one of the largest remaining mountainous rain
forests in Sulawesi and being source of water resources, biodiversity and carbon storage and
sequestration in the region.
16
3. ASSUMPTIONS GREEN LIVELIHOODS ALLIANCE: INDONESIA COUNTRY PROGRAMME
3.
THEORY
OF
CHANGE
17
3.1
DESIRED CHANGE AND
CHANGE PATHWAYS
This section explains the desired changes, outcomes and the intended pathways expected to lead
to the changes illustrated in the visualization of the ToC (Figure 6). Numbers between brackets
refer to the numbers in the boxes of this ToC visual
The ‘National’ Theory of change is based on ToCs developed for each of the three landscapes. It pro-
vides a cross-section of the key issues encountered in each of the landscapes, and those requiring
L&A outcomes to be realized at a national (or even international) level. Each landscape ToC provides
additional detail that may be locally specific. This is outlined in section 3.2.
Outcome 1: Spatial planning to become more equitable and sustainable
Spatial planning in Indonesia has been progressively decentralized and theoretically opens to
civil society participation. Various laws issued with recent democratization guarantee civil soci-
ety participation to spatial planning decision-making processes. Following the democratization
and decentralization process, spatial planning became stratified in national (RTRW-N), provincial
(RTRW-P) and regency (RTRW-K) plans. The regency spatial planning (RTRW-K) become the most
detailed land-use planning process. Several CSOs (mainly NGOs) have been active on these is-
sues. They are local, regional, national and international CSOs. Some of them prefer to conduct
lobbying while others are confrontation. They usually collaborate through networking and project
complementary or through coordinated and organized advocacy coalitions.
GLA’s CSO participating partner at national level will work with the existing CSOs network to con-
duct soft approaches and negotiations by presenting well-frame evidences to central government
to review national spatial planning, while other, if necessary, engages power struggles and direct
confrontation. At the regional level, the CSO coalition will participate in spatial planning formula-
tion processes at provincial and district level and oversight its implementation.
As part of a larger goal of reducing deforestation and carbon emissions, President Joko Widodo
extended, in May 2015, a moratorium on the clearing of primary forests and peatlands. It was
the second time the ban on issuing concessions to plantation companies was renewed since a
presidential decree was issued in 2011. In May 2016 the President has planned to issue a decree
on the suspension of new oil palm plantation development. This implied to the suspension of the
MoEF to release convertible state production forests (outside the existing moratorium map) for
palm oil plantations. The problem is how to transfer high policy intentions into practices given the
complex bureaucracy and political setting between central, province and district government. As
such, our L&A on spatial planning issue will ensure that President policy is well reflected to legal
spatial planning documents and monitor that the document will be implemented consistently
(2.1, 2.10, 3.7)
Law No. 32 of 2009 on the Protection and Management of the Environment obliges the central
government and local governments to formulate Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEA) to
ensure that the principles of sustainable development are incorporated and integrated in deve-
lopment. SEA forms a basis for policies, plans, and/or development programs within a region. The
current status of SEA as a ministerial regulation (Ministry of Environment No. 9/2011) is consi-
dered too weak to enforce SEA at national level. It should be raised to the level of Government
Regulation as an umbrella which is then translated into SEA technical implementation guidance
at the ministerial level. Efforts will be made to upgrade the law status of SEA into government
regulation (3.1).
Outcome 2: Private sector and government use HCV as the key tool for sustainable production
investment and regional development
In Indonesia, there are at least 800 management units — covering natural forest production, pulp
plantation and oil palm plantation areas — that have defined their HCV areas. In total, more than
18
1,500,000 ha production area have been identified and designated as HCV areas. HCV is also a
powerful tool for land-use planning on forested areas.
The problems of HCV implementations and management are: (a) National perceptions on HCV
assessments and management still vary among actors (NGOs, assessors, growers, and scientists);
(b) private sector attitudes to HCV initiatives – they are frequently seen as cost center rather than
as a productive investment toward long-term sustainable yield, this leads to violations of national
regulation and voluntary standard; (c) The weakness of voluntary certification initiatives such as
the RSPO to assess and oversee HCV protection; (d) the HCV areas are mostly discrete, like small
islands in the sea of intensive production areas. This leads to failure of HCV as the last resort of
landscape conservation initiatives; (e) Most of designated HCV are not optimally maintained,
enhanced or protected; Those efforts (if any) have not involved local communities; (f) HCV is not
legally secured, its designation and protection within leaseholds (HGU) is considered by govern-
ment as abandoned land.
This outcome intends to address problems (a) and (d). The first is addressed by strengthening
HCV-Network Indonesia (HCVNI) to finalize HCV assessment and management guidance in parti- 6
cipatory manner by involving relevant HCV stakeholders and mainstream it to wider audience in
such a way that the new guidance are respected and adopted by private sector and government
(1.1). For the second problem, GLA will capacitate and facilitate CSOs to establish Landscape Con-
servation Planning (LCP) as a basis for advocacy and technical assistance to the private sector
and government (1.2, 2.3, 2.4, 3.2, 4.2). The remaining HCV problems are addressed by Outcome 3.
Outcome 3: Oil palm grower sustainably manage their concession, while traders/buyers con-
duct sustainable trade
Driven by increased global demand and higher yields, oil palm cultivation has been expanded
significantly by conglomerates and smallholder farmers since early 2000 to date. Indonesia
has become the largest producer and exporter of palm oil worldwide. The total area of oil palm
plantations is currently more than 11 million ha and this will be expanded to 14 million ha by
2020. The key issues are unstoppable expansion at the expense of the remaining forests and
production areas of other agricultural products, severe land conflicts and insufficient corporate
commitments on sustainable production. It has been widely reported that: (a) Palm oil growers
are frequently clear their HCV areas (FoE Europe, 2013 etc.), they improperly develop community
projects leading to conflicts with out-growers and smallholder farmers (Milieudefensie, 2009);
(b) Palm oil growers have made all kind of pledges but the bottleneck is often in the field; planta-
tion management experiences big problems to fulfil the production targets and at the same time
implement social and environmental criteria (Sawit Watch, Evelien van den Broek, 2016 pers.
comm); (c) RSPO has poor capacity to oversee its members’ compliance on its P&C (Greenpeace,
2013); (d) MoEF will still potentially allocate millions of Convertible Production Forest for the Oil
Palm land bank.
To address the above, GLA partners will establish and capacitate a CSO coalition at regional
level to collect field based evidences as a basis for investigation, advocacy, law enforcement,
L&A to palm oil growers which violate national regulations and RSPO P&C, deliver facilitation
and technical assistances to committed palm-oil growers, out-growers and smallholders, deliver
facilitation and L&A to district and province governments to translate RSPO’s P&C into local
regulations, review spatial planning and concession permits, recognize, customary forest and
HCV as ‘eco-cultural zones concept’ defined by indigenous and local community etc. The regional
coalition will work together with existing coalition (e.g., IDH-ISLA etc.) and multi-stakeholder Fo-
rum (Watershed Forum, Sagupa Forum, Lore Lindu NP Forum etc.) to synergize efforts and share
learnings on L&A at regional level (1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5).
At national level, GLA partners will work the issue with other CSOs and alliances to synergize
efforts for policy influencing and delivering technical assistances to central government (i.e. MoA
and MoEF), turning grass-roots evidences into well-framed Policy Briefs, grievances and mate-
rials for L&A with national (ISPO, GAPKI etc.) and international actors (RSPO, Northern CSOs,
agro-commodity financiers, research agencies, EU Commission etc.). Similar efforts may also be
6
The new guidance developed based on HCVRN Common
Guidance 2013 and as revised version of HCV National
developed for other specific issues at landscape level, such as mining, industrial forest plantation,
guidance 2008 natural forest exploitation etc (1.8, 1.9, 1.10, 1.11, 2.9, 3.6).
19
Outcome 4: Village government and community groups participate and are equally involved
in sustainable agro-industry
The village Law No. 6/2014 manifests in two (out of 14) village governance principles, i.e. recog-
nition and subsidiarity. The recognition principle involves the central government acknowledging
village-specific governance, which is rooted in a community’s origin, history and indigenous tra-
ditions. This contradicts past practices, by which the government nationalized diverse indigenous
village governance systems. The subsidiarity principle involves villages holding full authority to
define their own development direction, including human capital to execute this development.
Development activities that can be handled by villages should not be taken on by the central
government. Support from the government and outsiders actors, if any, should be in line with
the village development plan. Villages must make their own decisions about development, rather
than being recipients of central government projects.
The new village law provides a good entry point for better sustainable natural resource manage-
ment at the landscape level, since Village Governments (VG) hold full authority to define their
natural resource management within its jurisdiction boundary. Unfortunately, most VGs have
poor capacity, so they are easy to be cheated by sly opportunists. The situation calls for CSOs
roles to strengthen VG capacity as the last fortress of sustainable natural resource management.
VG’s natural resource governance capacity needs to be strengthened to protect and restore their
remaining forested landscape, intensify forest management through social forestry scheme and
stave off village engagement against bad land-based investment. VG should be actively involved
as co-management of HCV protection and management.
To contribute this, GLA partners will capacitate local CSOs to facilitate village government to de-
velop Green village planning and inter-villages regulations to protect forested landscape, facili-
tate VG for accountable administration and wise allocation of village fund for natural resource
management (1.12, 2.11, 3.8). GLA partners will facilitate the establishment of collaborative
management between VG and private sector to manage HCV. GLA partners will also investigate
the potential carbon credit revenue under REDD+ framework (1.14, 2.13, 3.10).
Outcome 5: Local communities have a greater involvement in sustainable

forest management
During reformation era, heated debates about the best model of forest management arose which
strongly criticized state domination in forest management for, among others, its contribution to
exploitation of forests, its inability to enhance the livelihood of forest communities and respect
their social traditions, and its failure to cope with conflicts and violence in forest areas. To
response the debates, the forester President Joko Widodo has set a target of 12.7 million ha of
social forestry. However during the last two years, the achievement of SF program has remained
low, since the program is still ‘isolated’ within MoEF, in which the only key driver is the Directorate
General of Social Forestry and Environmental Partnership (DG-SFEA). The DG is facing big
obstacles to mainstream SF both internally (within MoEF) and externally (inter-ministerial level).
So far, the idea and ways of expanding access of land to local and indigenous people have not
yet been solid at the central and regional level, as the interest of government is still in arranging
permits for large-scale business rather than managing land tenure for communities.
Until today, ongoing efforts to reform policy are conducted through revisions of the Ministerial
Decree on HKm, HD and HTR, which are intended to short-cut the existing long permit procedures,
while it also opens opportunities for proactive (‘unilateral’) determination by Central Government
(if Province government is considered too slow to respond to community’s permit proposals).
This implicates a revision of Government Regulation No. 6/2007 on Forestry Planning as the
regulation umbrella of the on-going revised Ministerial Regulations. Unfortunately, so far the
aforementioned Government Regulation and Ministerial decrees have not yet been completed.
Considering the beneficiary target of SF program is powerless community, mainstreaming SF

needs strong changes in bureaucratic working culture, from massive and instructive to proactive
and facilitating, from regulating to empowering approaches. As such, the program need wider
and stronger legal and political support as enabling power to consolidate views and commit-
20
ments to convene resource at regional and central level. As such, ideally the implementation of
the program should be enforced by Presidential Decree.
To address the above, GLA will establish and capacitate CSO coalition at national level which will
work with the existing national CSO network to provide key enabling conditions to accelerate SF
program by providing intensive facilitation and technical assistances to DG-SFEA and Presidential
staff on Agrarian Reform. The (GLA) national CSO coalition will also conduct L&A with inter-mi-
nisterial agencies to solve the bottlenecks at the high level (1.15,2.14, 2.15, 3.11, 3.12). While the
(GLA) CSO coalition at regional level will also play role to capacitate Multi-stakeholder Forum
on Social Forestry (MFSF ) at province level to settle land tenure conflicts on areas stipulated
7
by MoEF as SF working areas, they also facilitate Village Forest Management Groups (VFMG) to
apply SF permits (1.17, 1.18, 2.17, 3.13).
The best sustainable livelihoods options community in the forested landscape is those which are
dependent on forest environmental services provided by the existing natural forest ecosystem,
so communities are motivated to protect their forest. Those are the cases for honey bee culture,
development of NTFPs, micro-hydro power, wildlife breeding and forest based ecotourism. The
second best option is environmentally friendly agro-commodity based livelihoods having ecolo-
gical functions a like with natural forest ecosystem, such as agar wood, rubber and pepper based
agroforestry. Agro-commodity development which transfers landscape into monoculture planting
such as palm oil and pulp plantations should be avoided.
GLA will also capacitate CSO coalition to facilitate local community to identify potential forest en-
vironmental services in the SF areas and beyond and facilitate to develop sustainable livelihoods
models from production to marketing (1.20, 1.21, 1.22, 2.18, 2.19, 3.14, 3.15). A ‘Parara’ festival,
a national event to promote local and indigenous community’s products initiated by the previous
alliance, is deserved to be further developed by the program (2.22, 3.16).
3.2
RELATION BETWEEN NATIONAL AND
LANDSCAPE TOCS
3.2.1
MUDIAK BADUO
The desired impact identified in the ToC of the Mudiak Baduo landscape is Collaborative natural
resource management, which helps improve the quality of ecosystem and ensure the community’s
welfare in an inclusive and sustainable way. Four key outcomes are sought: (a) Clear community
tenure rights; (b) Improved community economy and livelihood; (c) multifunctional spatial and
development plans and (d) a private sector that implements sustainable forest management. The
main pathways towards these outcomes consist of strengthened collaboration between local and
national CSOs in the landscape; information exchanges about landscape management with pri-
vate sector and government, and the establishment of a collaborative multi-stakeholder platform
for the management of the landscape. The Mudiak Baduo ToC relates in particular to outcomes
4.1, 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5. See Figure 1.
3.2.2
GUNUNG TARAK
The ToC for the Gunung Tarak landscape seeks to achieve (a) Private sector and government use
HCV as key tool for sustainable production/investment and regional development in the lands-
cape level; (b) Oil palm growers sustainably manage their concession, traders/buyers conduct
sustainable trade; (c) Village Government and community groups equally involved on sustainable
agro-industry; (d) Local communities have a greater involvement in sustainable forest area ma-
nagement. At the landscape level, a key strategy is to strengthen multi-stakeholder governance
and village and small holder forest management of a zone that connects three remaining blocks
7
Multi-stakeholders Working Group for SF Acceleration and
of natural forests. The Gunung Tarak ToC relates in particular to outcomes 4.2, 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5.
Conflict Resolution See Figure 2.
21
3.2.3
LARIANG WATERSHED
The ToC for DAS Lariang also seeks to achieve (a) community access to manage forest resources;
(b) integrated and participatory spatial planning at a landscape level; (c) the adoption of sustai-
nable practices by local business entities. The relation with the overall ToC is mainly in outcomes
4.1, 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5. See Figure 3-5.
3.3
LINKAGE WITH THE GLA TOC
Within the Sphere of Interest, the Indonesia ToC addresses all four components of the generic GLA
ToC. The intended outcomes related to plantation expansion and management (4.1 and 4.2) emp-
hasise ‘Compliance with legislation…standards’ such as existing and yet to be developed national
laws and regulations, and the “integration of ecological and social standards…policies” such as
those of RSPO, the HCV network. The outcomes sought in the involvement of communities in the
agroindustry (4.3) and sustainable forest management (4.4) are based on “viable and innovative
alternatives…”. All outcomes address the “adoption of sustainable practices” by local actors
(both community level and private sector).
The composition of the GLA partner coalition enables a coordinated approach towards policy
influencing, whereby collaborative and dissenting strategies complement each other. Several
outcomes that are related show on the one hand an emphasis on rights (e.g., 2.4-2.6) and on the
other hand a collaborative approach between partners, government and oil palm growers (e.g.,
2.8).
The outcomes envisaged by GLA in Indonesia contribute to the three overall conditions for sus-
tainable and inclusive governance of forested landscapes as described in the international ToC
for the GLA:
a. security of land tenure/access to land and resources use for local communities is addressed
through interventions related to Village Forestry (e.g., 3.12) and community participation in
the management of plantations (e.g., 2.13, 3.10)
b. communities and CSOs included in decision making on land use is throughout, through
collaboration or through access to justice,
c. implementation of nature based approaches to the management of forested landscapes is in
the implementation of sustainable management of village forests, in the implementation of
the HCV approach and many other examples.
22
FIGURE 1: ToC VISUALIZATION OF MUDIAK BADUO LANDSCAPE
SPHERE OF INTEREST
Outcome : Collaborative natural resource management will be able to

improve the quality of ecosystem and ensure the community’s welfare
inclusively and sustainably.
Development
Clear community
Ensuring the planning Sustainable forest
tenure right
improvement of accommodates management is
through
Community the interest of adopted and
development of
economy and multi parties implemented by
Social forestry
livelihood which is stated private sector.
scheme
on spatial plans.
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
Encourage the establishment

Establish relation and of Multistakeholder forum in
Strengthening collaboration intensive communication the management of Mudia
inter local CSO and national in about the management of Baduo and have collaboration
the landscape. Mudiak Baduo landscape with with CSO, local community,
government and corporation. government, corporation,
media and universities.
SPHERE OF CONTROL
• Community management area

Increasing the sustainable is included into
forest r esource management provincial/regional spatial Corporation and private
which support community’s plan. sector obey to implement
• Participatory m apping
• Recognition over community self-‐reliance. • Developing the law sustainable forest
management right enforcement mechanism management.
• Forest boundaries, zonation
which transparent and
village forest and concession area reliable.
permits. • strengthening government
• Improving community capacity • Developing community economic services to community in
building about natural resource and livelihood. natural r esources. • Encourage the corporation to
management. • Developing energy resources for • encourage the regular understand about sustainable
• Institutional strengthening about local community. communication among forest management.
natural resource management. • Improving the quantity on locality, government, in • Encourage government to
community’s production and designing development control corporation and to
benefit sharing. planning. design the mechanism of
• Developing m arket access and sustainable forest
networking. management which r espect
Regional planning the right of local community.
Conflict r esolution about
forest management. accommodates sustainable • Collaboration community and
forest management corporation is mutually
conducted by community. benefitted..
23
FIGURE 2: ToC VISUALIZATION OF GUNUNG TARAK LANDSCAPE
Figure XX. ToC of Gunung Tarak Landscape

SPHERE OF CONTROL SPHERE OF INFLUENCE SPHERE OF INTEREST
SHORT-‐TERM OUTCOME MID-‐TERM OUTCOME LONG-‐TERM OUTCOME GLA IMPACT
1.1 GLA in collaboration with HCVRN provides

technical assistances and facilitation to HCVNI to 2.1. Private sector and government respect new
finalize national HCV assessment and national HCV guidance
management guidance.

3.1. Private sector and government use HCV

2.2. CSO use LCP Maps as advocation material 4.1. Private sector and government use HCV
guidance and LCP to define conservation in
to private sectors (to improve and review HCV as key tool for sustainable
production areas, land-use planning, issuing
areas) and government to review concession production/investment and regional
land-based concession permits, and ecological
permits. development in the landscape level
corridors
1.2. GLA supports CSOs to develop Landscape

2.3. CSO provide technical assistances to
Conservation Planning (LCP) as guidance for
private sectors to develop strategy to improve
HCV assessment at Management Unit (MU) and
HCV connectivity and management
landscape level.
2.4. Performance of growers, buyers/traders

and its suppliers on SFM researched by CSOs 3.2. Palm oil growers protect and manage HCV
coalition and Northern CSOs and promote it to areas while buyers/traders purify their supply
relevant actors (financiers in EU and US, changes against unsustainable products
buyers, EU Commission etc.).
2.5. Government, ISPO, RSPO and Northern

1.3. CSO coalition trained on geospatial data CSOs receive and respond to grievance cases
collection to monitor the compliances of Palm-oil submitted by CSOs coalition 3.3. RSPO have stronger capacity to enforce 5.1. Inclusive and sustainable
growers to national legislation and voluntary their rules and standards governance of land-based investments
standard.
1.4. CSOs coalition facilitated to monitor the

4.2. Growers sustainably manage their
quality of RSPO auditors, RSPO responses to
concession, traders/buyers coduct
violations, NPP implementation, HCV
sustainable trade
compensation and remediation.
2.6. Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) drafts law
& regulation on HCV protection and reviews 3.4. MoA supports HCV allocation, management
palm-oil development policy for stronger and protection and improved palm oil
contribution to economic development and development policy
control environment degradation
1.5. GLA national CSOs coalition influence 5.2. Inclusive and sustainable
government policy for sustainable Palm Oil governance of forested landscapes in
plantation management Indonesia
1.6.In collaboration with Northern CSOs, national

2.7. MoEF reviews state forest land use to 3.5. MoEF issues regulation to suspend the
CSOs coalition research the impacts of Palm oil
protect primary forest, peatlands and retain release of primary forest, peatlands and HPK to
development to national revenue distribution and
HPK land-based investment
its impacts to natural resource degradation
1.7. National CSOs coalition conducts intensive

monitoring and research on protection status of 2.8. Village Government includes sustainable 3.6. Village government manages remaining
primary forest and peatland and convertible utilization of forest resources in the village forest ('eco-cultural zones') within and
production forest (HPK) relinquishment to Palm planning and budgeting. surrounding their villages
Oil company.
4.3. Village Government and community 5.3 Improved community land tenure
groups equally involved on sustainable agro- and sustainable livelihoods in forested
industy landscape
2.9. Village government collaborates with

1.8 Local CSOs are trained on village natural 3.7.Palm oil company provides fair
private sector on HCV management and
resource governance facilitations compensation to village government
protection
2.10. Directorate Generals within MoEF and

beyond have solid views on SF
1.9. (GLA) National CSO coalition collaborate 4.4 Local communities have a greater
3.8. MoEF supported by other ministers has
with existing CSOs network to stregthen MoEF on involvemnet in sustainable forest area
stronger resource and capacity to execute SF
L & A to speed up SF target management
2.11. President issues Presidential Decree or

other national legislation to convene national
support to SF
24
FIGURE 3. TOC VISUALIZATION FOR COMMUNITY ACCESS TO MANAGE FOREST RESOURCES IN LARIANG LANDSCAPE
FIGURE 4. TOC VISUALIZATION ON THE ADOPTION OF SUSTAINABLE PRACTICES BY LOCAL BUSINESS ENTITIES
IN LARIANG LANDSCAPE
FIGURE 5. ToC VISUALIZATION OR INTEGRATED AND PARTICIPATORY SPATIAL PLANNING IN LARIANG LANDSCAPE
25
3.4
SYNERGIES WITH OTHER STRATEGIC
PARTNERSHIPS
The GLA is one of 19 Strategic Partnership Programmes that is operational in Indonesia. Several
address related issues in natural resources management and the role of CSOs in lobbying and
advocacy. The Shared Resources, Joint Solutions programme (IUCN-NL and WWF Netherlands)
shares some CSO partners and also addresses the role of plantation agriculture; it will lobby for
Strengthening the Moratorium of Palm Oil Expansion (outcome 1.2) and upgrading the status of
Strategic Environmental Assessment (outcome 3.1). Synergies between the two programs will be
maximised by involving the various partners in planning and learning activities (see section 4.4),
both in Indonesia and in the Netherlands. A similar approach will be followed for other Strategic
Partnerships operating in Indonesia.
26
SPHERE OF CONTROL SPHERE OF INFLUENCE SPHERE OF INTEREST
SHORT-TERM OUTCOME MID-TERM OUTCOME LONG-TERM OUTCOME GLA IMPACT

FIGURE 6: 3.1. Government upgrades the law status of
2.1. Government extends and strengthens 4.1. Government adopts and implements
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)
VISUALIZATION OF moratorium on oil palm expansion (incl.
coal)
from ministerial regulation to Government
equitable, sustainable and well-
coordinated spatial planning policies
Regulation
THE INDONESIA
COUNTRY TOC 1.1 GLA in collaboration with HCVRN
provides technical assistances and facilitation 2.2. Private sector and government respect
to HCVNI to finalize national HCV new national HCV guidance
assessment and management guidance.
3.2. Private sector and government use HCV

2.3. CSO use LCP Maps as advocation 4.2. Private sector and government use
guidance and LCP to define conservation in
material to private sectors (to improve and HCV as the key tool for sustainable
production areas, land-use planning,
review HCV areas) and government to production/investment and regional
issuing land-based concession permits, and
review concession permits. development in the landscape level
ecological corridors
1.2. GLA supports CSOs to develop 2.4. CSO provide technical assistances to
Landscape Conservation Planning (LCP) as private sectors to develop strategy to
guidance for HCV assessment at Management improve HCV connectivity and
Unit (MU) and landscape level. management
1.3. CSO coalition trained on geospatial data 3.3. Palm oil growers protect and manage
collection to monitor the compliances of Palm- HCV areas while buyers/traders purify their
oil growers to national legislation and supply changes against unsustainable
voluntary standard. products
1.4. CSO coalition trained on collection of 2.5. Performance of growers, buyers/traders

legal evidences, making legal brief and due and its suppliers on SFM researched by
process of laws for companies which violate CSOs coalition and Northern CSOs and
national regulations related to environmental promote it to relevant actors (financiers in
and social safeguards. EU and US, buyers, EU Commission etc.).
1.5. CSOs coalition investigate growers

0. CSOs lobby, advocate and mobilise public 2.6. Perpetrators brought to the court and 5.1. Inclusive and sustainable
commitments to community projects (out- 3.4. Growers properly develop out-growers
support for responsible palmoil sector imposed with criminal and administrative governance of land-based
grower) including fair treatment to and fair-treatment to smallholders
(production and supply chain) (compensation) penalties. investments
smallholder plantations
2.7. Government, ISPO, RSPO and

Northern CSOs receive and respond to
grievance cases submitted by CSOs
coalition
1.6. CSOs coalition facilitated to investigate

the quality of RSPO auditors, RSPO responses 3.5. RSPO have stronger capacity to enforce
to violations, NPP implementation, HCV their rules and standards
compensation and remediation.
2.8. Government adopt RSPO's Principle

1.7. CSO coalition trained on legal drafting and Criteria (P&C) into provincial and
district regulations
1.8. GLA national CSOs coalition influence 4.3. Oil palm growers sustainably
government policy for sustainable Palm Oil manage their concession, while
plantation management traders/buyers coduct sustainable trade
2.9. Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) drafts

law & regulation on HCV protection and
3.6. MoA supports HCV allocation,
reviews palm-oil development policy for
management and protection and improved
stronger contribution to economic
palm oil development policy
development and control environment
degradation
1.9. In collaboration with Northern CSOs,

national CSOs coalition research the impacts
of Palm oil development to national revenue
distribution and its impacts to natural resource
degradation
1.10. CSOs conduct public campaigns to

mobilise support for forest protection and
social justice
1.11. National CSOs coalition conducts

3.7. MoEF issues regulation to halt palmoil
intensive monitoring and research on 2.10. MoEF reviews state forest land use to
expansion with a suspension to the release of
protection status of primary forest and protect primary forest, peatlands and retain
primary forest, peatlands and HPK to land-
peatland and convertible production forest HPK
based investment
(HPK) relinquishment to Palm Oil company.
2.11. Village Government includes 3.8. Village government manages remaining

1.12. Local CSOs are trained on village
sustainable utilization of forest resources in forest ('eco-cultural zones') within and
natural resource governance facilitations
the village planning and budgeting. surrounding their villages
1.13. Local CSOs trained to capacitate local 2.12. Community groups (out-growers, 3.9. Community groups received fair,
community groups to defence their rights small-holders plantations, labour coalition) equitable rights from government and
against private companies enable to voice their rights. private sectors
4.4. Village Government and community

groups participate and are equally
involved in sustainable agro-industy
1.14. Local CSOs trained on Village 2.13. Village government collaborates with
3.10. Palm oil company provides fair
government collaborative management to private sector on HCV management and
compensation to village government
manage and protect HCV areas. protection
5.2. Inclusive and sustainable

2.14. Directorate Generals within MoEF
governance of forested landscapes
and beyond have solid views on SF
in Indonesia
1.15. (GLA) National CSO coalition
collaborate with existing CSOs network to 3.11. MoEF supported by other ministers has
stregthen MoEF on L & A to speed up SF stronger resource and capacity to execute SF
target
2.15. President issues Presidential Decree
or other national legislation to convene
national support to SF
1.16. CSO coalition at national level facilitate

2.16. MoEF and Province Forestry office
MoEF and Povince Forestry to short-cut the 3.12. MoEF significantly enhance the SF
significantly reduce the long bureaucracy of
stipulation of SF working areas and issuance areas achievement
SF application
of SF lisence holder
1.17. CSOs coalition at regional level is

trained on L & A for land conflict resolutions
2.17. CSO coalition facilitates Multi-

3.13. MFSF optimally functions to resolve
stakeholder Forum on Social Forestry
land conflicts resolutions
(MSFS) tasks and responsibility
4.5. Local communities have a greater 5.3. Improved community land

1.18. CSO coalition at regional level delivers
involvement in sustainable forest areas tenure and sustainable livelihoods
serial trainings to MSSF members.
management in the forested landscapes
1.19. CSOs coalition trained to facilitate

2.18. VFMGs has strong capacity to follow 3.14. VFMGs receives SF permits within 1
Village Forest Management Groups to gain SF
SF application procedure year
permits.
1.20. CSO coalition trained to identify forest 3.15. VFMGs developes forest
2.19. VFMGs identifies forest
environmental services in the SF areas and environmental services into sustainable
environmental services in their SF areas
develop into sustainable livelihoods livelihoods
1.21. CSOs coalition trained to identify and

2.20. Government improves marketing
develop forest based sustainable livelihoods
policy of NTFPs
(FBSL)
2.21. Government and private sector support 3.16. FBSL models linked to regional and
FBSL development and marketing (inter) national market
1.22. CSOs coalition trained to improve 2.22. Annual festival ('Parara') promotes 27
strategy of FBSL development FBSL products at (inter) national level
3.5
ASSUMPTIONS
a. The goal and impacts of the program will be achieved if the implementation of the program
can ignite and maintain integrated actions towards inclusive and sustainable governance of
forested landscape among government, private sector and local community (4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4).
b. CSOs capacity building and facilitation to gather and present reliable evidence for L&A is an
effective approach to become a credible partner for government and private sector (4.3).
c. Government, private sector and local communities will change their policies and practices
when they receive the right information in the right time; they receive intensive facilitation
and technical assistances from CSO coalition (4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4).
d. Improvement of government capacity lead to better policy development and wise resource
allocation (4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4).
e. Utilization of forest environmental services as source of sustainable livelihoods for local and
indigenous community is a good incentive to save their natural forest (4.5).
f. Improvement of village government capacity leads to better village natural resource

governance (4.4).
g. CSO coalition and networks are more effective in L&A as they can complement each other
and better regional and (inter) national recognition and legitimacy (4.1, 4.2, 4.3).
h. National and international incentives/pressures on agro-commodity businesses is

an effective means to reduce the impacts of palm oil production and trade (4.3).
i. Increased public pressure from communities and citizens in Indonesia leads to changes
in private sector attitudes (4.3).
j. Both voluntary (IPOP, Certification schemes (FSC, IFCC and RSPO) and compulsory
mechanisms are effective tools towards sustainable production of agro-commodities (4.3)
k. HCV approaches are effective in conserving ecosystems and supporting livelihoods within
agro-commodity landscapes when they are applied at a landscape level rather than a
management unit level (4.4).
l. Providing communities with co-management rights in partnership with private sector leads
to sustainably improved livelihood opportunities in agro-commodity landscapes (4.4).
m. Local communities involved in social forestry schemes are more effective stewards of forests
than the state, leading to lower levels of deforestation (4.4. and 4.5).
3.6
L&A STRATEGIES OF PARTICIPATING CSOS
The Indonesia ToC reflects the combined strengths of the four CSO partners in Indonesia and
their specific approaches to advocacy and influencing policies and practices. WARSI has intensive
working relationships with Village Forestry Committees and a proven track record in working with
the MoEF at the central and provincial levels to facilitate social forestry. TBI Indonesia has a long
standing relation with MoEF-FORDA, technical expertise in the field of HCV, forest restoration and
GIS, and plays the role as intermediary and knowledge broker. NTFP-EP has long experience in
promoting NTFPs-based sustainable livelihoods for food and health security of community living
28
surrounding forested areas. WALHI has strong grassroots representation across Indonesia and is
able to effectively represent people’s rights to a healthy environment and sustainable sources of
livelihood.
Each CSO partner is committed to conduct activities contributing to each of the three landscape
ToCs (as well as the integrated national ToC), even though the relative contribution of each will
be largest in one landscape, as follows: Mudiak Baduo – WARSI; Gunung Tarak – TBI Indonesia;
Lariang Watershed – NTFP-EP, while WALHI will work throughout and all will work nationally.
3.6.1
WARSI
WARSI’s strategy can be divided into two main approaches: (a) building the capacity of ‘forest
management groups’ (which can be considered intermediary organizations); (b) facilitating lob-
by and advocacy initiatives to support communities in their efforts to secure forest management
rights. KKI-WARSI’s role is to guarantee that the government does not issue conversion licenses
to private initiatives, and to obtain recognition of the Hutan Desa to secure sustainable and local
forest management.
3.6.2
TBI INDONESIA
Tropenbos Indonesia aims to apply the approach TBI takes to addressing ‘wicked’ problems as
represented by complex multi-actor, multi-sector landscape. The absence of ‘simple’ technical
solutions requires collaboration between stakeholders who jointly discuss, negotiate and agree
on acceptable ways forward. In such contexts, it is important to bring independent, validated
knowledge into the dialogue. TBI takes the position of ‘knowledge broker’ within the GLA part-
nership, which means that we work on making knowledge available for practice and policy. As
knowledge broker we work on bringing stakeholders together for informed dialogue, while at the
same time we promote the use of validated knowledge in this dialogue. TBI seeks to apply an
integrated approach by combining (action) research and capacity building towards effective and
informed dialogue.
TBI perceives itself not only as a knowledge broker, but also as “honest” broker, which means that
we do not take position, but help actors develop and evaluate alternative development scenarios
to inspire decision making. The underlying assumption is that “better knowledge leads to better
decisions”. TBI expects this to be a good complement to the approach that develops and advo-
cates best practical solutions that some of the other partners bring into the partnership.
TBI aims to facilitate and inform multi-stakeholder dialogues, without taking part as a stakehol-
der itself. As part of its strategy to ToC, TBI aims to engage CSOs and research organizations in
the partnership, who share an interest in the TBI approach and complement it in terms of specific
capacities in the areas of research, capacity building and stakeholder engagement.
Within the ToC (particularly the landscape ToCs), it will actively seek engagement with existing
platforms – such as, Watershed Management Forum in West Kalimantan and Centre Sulawesi,
Conservation Forum (Gunung Palung NP and Lore Lindu NP), Social Forestry Forum in West Su-
matra, the ISLA-IDH in West Kalimantan etc. that already unite multiple stakeholders around key
natural resources management dilemmas and emphasize the Civil Society perspective and know-
ledge dialogue aspects of these platforms. It will also provide knowledge and expertise related to
the effective application of HCV approaches in the management of agro-commodity landscapes
(outcomes 4.2 and 4.3).
3.6.3
NTFP-EP INDONESIA
Lobby and advocacy in NTFP-EP Indonesia work is integrated with thematic programmes (sustai-
nable livelihoods, community based conservation, indigenous food and health, land tenure and
governance). Our lobby and advocacy will contribute to strengthen the capacity of forest-based
communities and their support organizations. Employing a participatory strategy, we will em-
power our partners through serving as a platform for information and knowledge exchange of
appropriate resource management techniques and experiences, technical support and training,
inputs in strategy discussions, documentation of best practices and success stories, mobilization
29
of resources and contacts, advocacy support for local initiatives, and lobby for enabling policies.
NTFP-EP Indonesia strategies on L&A are the following:
a. Develop good relations among stakeholders (national, subnational, districts, and village
level), build constructive communication, conduct participatory research with relevant
stakeholders.
b. Publish policy briefs on specific issues to expand the successful stories community practice,
policy implementation, etc.
c. Conduct Media briefs (TV, journalist visits, Talk Show, Press Conference, etc) to disseminate
GLA work at local, district, sub national and national level.
d. Organise the PARARA festival as a vehicle to promote green and sustainable economic at
landscape level
e. The other strategy is to initiate regular meetings with businesses sector at landscape level to
share knowledge and experience in especially related to community economic development.
As part of these strategies, NTFP-EP Indonesia will carry out the below activities:
a. Established working group of Spatial Planning at Lariang Landscape (Poso and Sigi
districts) in order to enhance stakeholders participation on spatial planning (landscape ToC).
b. Reviewing Policy on NTFPs in especially on Ministry of Trade Decree number 35/2011 on
rattan banned as well as rattan tariff (outcome 3.16)
c. Strengthening of Social forestry enterprises at national level and the three landscapes (out
come 4.4).
d. Support government policy through MoEF on the allocation of social forestry area of 12.7
million hectares and land redistribution policies to the people of an area of 9 million
hectares which is the policy of the Ministry of Agrarian and Spatial Planning (outcome 4.5)
e. Campaign of sustainable non timber forest products and sustainable landscape through
PARARA festival (outcome 2.22).
f. Strengthening the protection of environmental activists (Environmental Human Rights
Defender - EHRD)
3.6.4
WALHI
The policies to be influenced are:
a. Spatial Planning Policy (RTRW) to become more equitable and sustainable. (Outcome 4.1)
b. Promote the law status of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) from ministerial
regulation to become Government Regulation (Outcome 3.1)
c. Strengthening the Moratorium of Palm Oil Expansion (In all landscapes) and Coal (West
Sumatra). (Outcome 2.1, 3.7)
d. Expanding government support at national, provincial, (sub) district and village for social
forestry program and agrarian reform. (Outcomes 4.4 and 4.5)
e. Policy on sustainable forest governance. (Outcome 4.5)
f. Strengthening the protection of environmental activists (Environmental Human Rights
Defender - EHRD)
Strategy for L&A include:

a. Build constructive communication through dialogue spaces created to facilitate a variety of
natural resource management and environment issues especially the community-based
forest at the ministerial level, provinces and or districts including local authority.
b. Encourage law enforcement through various lawsuits, including judicial reviews and strict
law enforcement against corporate crime.
c. Conduct policy studies, academic papers, legal drafting and campaign material.
d. Public campaign to encourage policy changes through petitions, mass actions, open letters,
mass media.
30
3.7
CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT PRIORITIES
Each of the four CSO partners has analysed its lobby and advocacy capacities using the GLA
Capacity Analysis Tool. The analysis assessed the relevance and capacity level of 18 indicators
grouped under 5 capacities related to lobby and advocacy. On the basis of relevance and capa-
city level each partner has identified three to five capacity development priorities. The rationale
and capacity development options for these capacity development priorities will be given in the
section below, a summary of the capacity development analysis will be given in section 4.1, the
baseline is provided in Annex 6.
3.7.1
WARSI
WARSI, established in January 1993 by an alliance of 20 Sumatra-based organisations, currently
forms a network organisation of twelve regional NGOs based in four provinces: South Sumatra,
West Sumatra, Bengkulu and Jambi. WARSI was formed with the vision of supporting sustainable
development, defined as development that fulfils the needs and guarantees the welfare of people
in the present, without endangering the continued survival of future generations. Since 2002,
WARSI’s efforts have focused on biodiversity/natural conservation and community development.
The mission of WARSI is to uphold conservation principles of indigenous communities and encou-
rage the development of a model for conservation area management in Sumatra. As such, WARSI
has developed a concept termed ‘conservation with community’.WARSI’s motto, “conservation
for community prosperity” does not discard community prosperity for the sake of conservation.
WARSI’s goals are two-fold: preserving the forest and defending the rights of forest communities
to fulfil their needs without endangering the survival of future generations.
Priorities for capacity improvement:

KKI-WARSI has selected five capacity development priorities:
a. Business development both for KKI WARSI as an institution and for the communities it supports:
this is related to indicators 5.6 and 4.2 of the capacity analysis tool. Indicator 5.6 refers to the
increasing the institutional capacity to generate good proposals (i.e., business plans in this par-
ticular case) and attract more funding. Indicator 4.2 refers to KKI WARSI’s ability to advocate for
business development as a way to prevent that people who have obtained legal ownership of land
sell it to private interests with money.
b. KKI WARSI would like to improve their campaign and knowledge management, related to in-
dicator 3.1, to expand the lobbying and advocacy activities from the local level (where WARSI is
strong) to national and international levels (where improvement is needed).
c. KKI WARSI would like to improve their leadership and their communication to better realise
their vision and mission. This is related to indicators 5.8 related to leadership of the organisation.
d. They would like to improve their capacity to build national and international networks, related
to indicators 2.1 and 3.2. They have a lot of experience in building networks and coalitions at the
local level but they would like to expand this nationally and internationally, and improve their
communications targeting the (inter)national community
e. Lastly, KKI WARSI would like to improve facilitation skills of its staff, because this is very impor-
tant in community capacity building and also to other parties.
3.7.2
TBI INDONESIA
Tropenbos International Indonesia (TBI Indonesia) is a research based organization. It has been
operating in Indonesia since 1986, and focuses on the sustainable forestland management for
people and conservation. The focus of the work is on Kalimantan (mainly East Kalimantan and
more recently West Kalimantan). It works as knowledge broker, generating knowledge/infor-
mation and brings different actors into multi-stakeholder dialogues for better natural resource
governance. TBI Indonesia works in partnership with many local and international organizati-
ons conducting research provide capacity building and dialogue in the field of productive forest
landscapes. TBI Indonesia is part of Tropenbos International. From 2017, TBI will convert into
a network organisation of which TBI Indonesia will be an autonomous member. TBI Indonesia
employs 4 staff.
31
Priorities for capacity improvement:

TBI Indonesia has five capacity development priorities:
a. Capability to convince business sector to adopt sustainable production: this is related to indi-
cator 2.3 of the capacity analysis tool. TBI Indonesia wants to be strengthened in this capacity
because the ToC requires them to work intensely with plantation companies. They would like to
be coached on how to communicate with PS effectively, to understand the way how businesses
operate, and to develop the arguments that convince the business sector actors.
b. Strategy to mainstream gender equality and diversity in all interventions; this is related to
indicator 5.4. They want their staff to be trained in gender because they consider the role and
contributions of women significant in many social and economic activities in the landscape.
c. Strategy and PMEL system for effective L&A (indicators 3.1 and 1.2): TBI Indonesia has a lot of
experiences with providing relevant information for policies, but less with a consistent long term
strategy for L&A; for that explicit monitoring is needed. They would like to be coached on L&A
strategies and share experiences with other CSOs in L&A strategies.
c. Strategy to maintain CSO coalition and multi-stakeholders platform (indicator 2.1): more solid
coalitions are needed specially with institutions with different, complementary strengths. They
think they can strengthen this capability by conducting coordination meetings on a more regular
basis.
e. Creative communications to mobilise public support: this is related to indicator (indicator 3.2):
compared to the present ones more sophisticated means of communications are needed to be
more effective in delivering messages and reaching wider audiences.They want to learn more
about the power of social media.
3.7.3
NTFP-EP INDONESIA
NTFP EP Indonesia is the Indonesian leg of a cooperation network between civil society organi-
zations and local community organizations and indigenous-based non-timber forest products in
South and Southeast Asia. Together with local and indigenous communities NTFP-EP works to
strengthen the capacity of communities, especially the non-timber forest products for sustainable
natural resource management. It was established in Indonesia in 2007.
Top priorities for capacity improvement:

NTFP-EP selected three capacity development priorities:
a. Effective L&A targeted on policy makers, related to indicator 3.1; Currently NTFP-EP Indonesia
doesn’t have a medium-long term strategy for lobby and advocacy. They didn’t have the oppor-
tunity yet to be trained on lobby and advocacy targeted to government/policy makers. If possible
this could be combined with training on lobby and advocacy targeting the private sector. A good
L&A strategy is a basis for operational planning in the GLA.
b. Multiple stakeholders facilitation skills: although NTFP-EP considers their ability to convene
various stakeholders as high (indicator 2.4) it is very important to have excellent skills to facili-
tate multiple stakeholders in a big landscape like Lariang watershed. Course topics should also
include conflict resolution and gender.
c. Creative communication and knowledge skills: although the organisation has a communication
strategy (indicator 3.2) it is very important to disseminate lobby and advocacy results to a wider
constituency and therefore it is needed to have an effective and creative communication strategy.
3.7.4
WALHI
Wahana Lingkungan Hidup Indonesia/WALHI (Indonesian Forum for the Environment) was foun-
ded in 1980. WALHI is the largest and oldest environmental advocacy NGO in Indonesia. WAL-
HI unites more than 479 NGOs and 156 individuals throughout Indonesia’s vast archipelago,
with independent offices and grassroot constituencies located in 27 of the nation’s 31 provinces.
WALHI works on a wide range of issues, including agrarian conflict over access to natural resour-
ces, indigenous and peasants rights, coastal and marine issues, and deforestation. WALHI also
has several cross cutting themes such as climate change, women and disaster risk management.
At present, WALHI put emphasis on the following programs: (a) Advocating people’s rights for
an ecological and gender justice in natural resource management; (b) Addressing the problems
of deforestation, land use change and challenges in natural resources conservation through
the promotion of sustainable community-based livelihoods and intervention in regional spatial
32
planning process; (c) Improving the role and participation of urban poor and local communities
in coastal regions in Java to save critical ecological areas as part of mitigation and adaptation
to ecological disasters.
Top priorities for capacity improvement: WALHI selected three capacity development priorities:
a. Increasing the capacity of human resources: this is a major requirement for WALHI. WALHI
realises that advocacy work and lobbying increasingly requires credibility, and that data and do-
cumentation are important to pillars of this credibility. This credibility must be supported by good
competences so that advocacy work and lobbying do not create doubts about the organisation
(indicators 1.2 and 5.2).
b. Improve leadership skills (indicator 5.8): WALHI as one of the oldest and largest civil society
organizations produces future leaders of the nation. Quite some activists of WALHI proceeded to
politics or the public sector. Therefore, an increase in the capacity of the leadership is an effective
way to contribute to the goals of the organisation.
c. Improve PMEL capacity (indicator 1.2): Monitoring of activities and achievements must be
done in a structured and systematic way so that the agenda of advocacy and lobbying is right on
target and in accordance with the expected results. Therefore PMEL is an important component
of advocacy and lobbying work where WALHI still requires increased capacity.
For each capacity development priority WALHI gives several capacity building options (see annex
6, table 6.4.1).
33
3. ASSUMPTIONS
4.
MONITORING
AND
LEARNING
34
There is need for programme monitoring and learning for the Indonesia GLA partners. Programme
monitoring and learning in the context of the GLA has four objectives:
a. Reflection and learning to improve effectiveness of our strategies
b. Keeping track of progress
c. Collecting evidence and stories for communication
d. Accountability towards the donor and each other
This chapter provides an overview of the capacity and L&A baselines, and of the PME systems the
CSO partners in Indonesia will put in place
4.1
CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT BASELINE
Each of the four CSO partners has analysed its lobby and advocacy capacities using the GLA
Capacity Analysis Tool. The analysis assessed the relevance and capacity level of 18 indicators
grouped under 5 capacities related to lobby and advocacy. On the basis of relevance and capacity
level each partner has identified four or five capacity development priorities. The rationale and
the capacity building options for these priorities have been described in section 3.6. The baseline
of these capacity development priorities is provided in Annex 6. This section will give a summary
analysis of each partner of its core capabilities.
4.1.1
WARSI
WARSI considered most indicators in the capacity analysis tool very relevant. Only few were con-
sidered somewhat relevant. WARSI considered their capacity for two-third of the indicators as
moderately developed and one-third as highly developed. They judge their PMEL system and their
ability to learn and adapt (indicators 1.2, 4.2 and 4.3) as well developed and highly relevant for
their role in the GLA ToC, especially at community level with building relationships with other sta-
keholders (indicator 2.4) , being trustworthy to the communities and other stakeholders (5.2), and
having gender equity on the agenda of the organisation (5.4). Among the other indicators, mo-
derately developed, they have chosen five priorities for capacity development (see section 3.6.1).
4.1.2
TBI INDONESIA
Like WARSI, most indicators in the capacity analysis tool were considered very relevant. Only
some were considered somewhat relevant. TBI Indonesia judged their capacity for half of the
indicators as moderate, some as high or very high, and some as low or as non-existent (see table
6.2.3 in Annex 6). The capacity to generate and use verified evidence in L&A (indicator 1.1) is very
relevant to fulfil the role of TBI Indonesia in the country, especially in relation to providing sug-
gestions/ recommendations for ‘what is going on in the country’ in terms of new regulation, new
policy, or new practice, etc, and TBI Indonesia considers its capability in this field as very “high”.
Through learning from its networks and partnerships and actively requesting feedback from con-
stituency, target group, or other external stakeholders on TBI Indonesia activities, TBI Indonesia
is very well able to adapt its strategies (4.1) . Also, it fosters a very open environment and culture
of learning (4.1), and is well able to convene multiple stakeholders around common themes (2.4).
Some capacities that were considered low or moderately developed but very relevant to fulfil its
role in the ToC were selected as capacity development capacities.
4.1.3.
NTFP-EP INDONESIA
NTFP-EP considers most indicators in the capacity analysis tool to be “very relevant” and only few
as “somewhat relevant”. They considered their capacity for 10 indicators as moderately develo-
ped and 8 as highly developed, especially in the areas of networking (indicator 2.1), convening
multiple stakeholders (2.4), mobilising public support (3.2) and their ability to learn (4.1) and
adapt (4.2). They work closely together with local communities (5.2), and they have policies on
gender (5.4) . Lobby and advocacy is one of the thematic programmes and is led by capable and
experience staff and supervised by NTFP-EP Indonesia leader and senior advisor. NTFP-EP Indo-
nesia leadership together with management committee is always shaping lobby and advocacy
35
strategy with thematic lead to achieve the outcome and goals (5.8). Areas where they feel they
need strengthening they have selected as capacity development priorities (see section 3.6.3)
4.1.4
WALHI
One of the strengths of WALHI is a public trust and a good bargaining position towards policy
makers. WALHI has a strong legitimacy (indicator 5.2) and this capacity can be used to reinforce
the advocacy work of its GLA Indonesian partners and vice versa.
WALHI also has constructive communications with the government, especially with the ministries
and agencies like MoEF, Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries, Ministry of Rural, Ministry of
ATR / BPN, Bappenas and KSP (indicator 2.2). WALHI can help GLA partners to communicate with
the relevant ministries if needed.
Another strength of WALHI is its involved in many coalitions (indicator 2.1) and the agendas and
themes have relevance to the work of GLA. Therefore WALHI can provide information related to
the development of the GLA advocacy coalition.
4.2
LOBBY AND ADVOCACY BASELINE
To track progress of outcomes in the sphere of influence, the GLA distinguishes between different
generic outcome categories: public and private sector actors on the one hand, and Civil actors,
e.g., local CSOs, communities or specific groups (e.g., indigenous people, women) on the other.
[the work on the L&A indicators has progressed but needs further fine-tuning by the programme
committee. In Annex 5, a draft of the current version of the M&E system is provided for informa-
tion purposes only]
4.3
LEARNING
The GLA partners will periodically reflect on the results that have been achieved and the
strategies that have been used. Every year, two meetings will be organised for this purpo-
se. During the annual review & planning meeting in September of each year, learning will
concentrate on progress and strategies. During the annual reflection & learning meeting
around February-March, learning will focus on reflections about the Indonesia Theory of
Change and its assumptions. During some of these meetings, external stakeholders may be
invited to provide for additional insights and critical feedback. During these meetings, the
following questions will be reflected upon:
a. What are the relevant changes (outcomes) to which the GLA partners in Indonesia
have contributed?
b. How much progress did we make in respect of our objectives and targets? Are we satisfied
with the progress? Why or why not?
c. To what extent have our strategies to bring about change been effective? Why/why not?
d. What can we learn from activities/strategies that didn’t work? Did they not deliver the
expected results because of the things we did or the way we did it, because of external
factors or because the underpinning assumption was wrong? Why?
In addition, the GLA partners will reflect on the following learning questions that derive from the
assumptions of the GLA and the Indonesia ToC (section 3.5):
e. Does the coalition of CSOs in Indonesia reach joint goals in lobby and advocacy efforts more
effectively when they work together than when they operate in isolation (assumption 7)?
Why/Why not?
f. To what extent and how are the interests of all stakeholders – public, private, and civil sector
36
actors - equitably represented in governance and decision-making at landscape level? Does

this lead to better results? (assumption 1) How does this influence nature-based and sustai-
nable management of forested landscapes?
g. Which efforts were made to include underrepresented, ignored or excluded stakeholders in
governance and decision-making at landscape level? To what extent were these efforts
successful? Why/Why not?
The following specific learning questions for Indonesia will be considered (others may arise
over time; many of the learning questions related to the assumptions in section 3.5 are covered
under the generic learning questions above.
h. How do outcomes achieved in the three landscapes compare to each other, and what are the
factors that explain possible differences in success between the landscapes?
i. Are forests that are managed by local and indigenous communities subject to less
degradation and deforestation (assumption 5)? Are local communities involved in social
forestry schemes more effective stewards than the state (assumption 13)? And is this related
to the capacity of village governments (assumption 6)? Why/why not?
j. What is the effectiveness of voluntary versus compulsory rules and standards in changing
agrocommodity production practices (assumption 10)
k. Does landscape level conservation planning lead to more effective conservation of
ecosystems and improved livelihoods than HCV approaches in individual management units?
Why/why not? (assumption 11)
l. Is co-management for communities with private sector in agrocommodity landscape an
effective means to improve livelihoods (assumption 12) why/why not?

In principle, learning will be organised at a national level by the partners in Indonesia,
whereby general lessons and landscape-specific lessons will be learned. As the need arises,
the Indonesia programme committee may decide to organise specific learning events
focused on a single landscape.
Based on the insights gained, partners will discuss the need to adjust strategies, and/or to
revise the ToC in a way that it better matches changes in the external environment or internal
strategic considerations.
4.4
PMEL PROTOCOL
A number of methods and tools will be used for data collection and monitoring of progress and
learning:
4.4.1
CAPACITY ANALYSIS TOOL
To analyse the current capacity of TBI Indonesia, Walhi, NTFP-EP and WARSI, and monitor their
capacity development, the capacity analysis tool is used. The first capacity analysis (section 4.1
and annex) provided a baseline for their capacity. Related to their role in the country ToC, `capa-
city development priorities’ have been identified (see section 3.6). The partners will monitor and
reconsider these capacity development priorities each year during the annual review & planning
meeting in September, and agree on new (or renewed) priorities for the next year, using the capa-
city analysis tool for each CSO that is a GLA partner.
Monitoring and reporting will be on the chosen capacity development priorities. This happens
through an annual guided self-analysis of the level of capacity (non-existent to high) and the
relevance of the capacity (not relevant to very relevant), as well as qualitatively by reporting on
the perceived change in capacity.
4.4.2
ENGAGEMENT, COMMITMENT AND ACTION TOOL
In order to monitor progress towards realisation of the desired lobby and advocacy outcomes, the
partners apply the engagement, commitment and action tool developed by the GLA.
37
The tool measures the degree to which targeted actors (such as governments, businesses, local
communities) change their agenda, behaviour, policy or practice as a result of CSO interventions.
The GLA coalition has assessed the baseline situation and has set targets, for their main expected
outcomes during the inception phase (see section 4.2). Monitoring progress will be done on the
basis of harvested outcomes using outcome harvesting, and reflecting where they fit in the scale
developed to assess the level of engagement, commitment and action, and what this means.
4.4.3
OUTCOME HARVESTING METHOD
The GLA has defined an outcome as follows: An observable change in agenda, behaviour, policy
or practice in a social actor that contributes to one or more of the objectives of GLA’s Theory of
Change and to which the GLA has contributed, directly or indirectly.
Outcome Harvesting is an M&E method suitable for contexts where relations of cause and effect
are not fully understood or predictable, as is often the case in lobby and advocacy work. Unlike
some other M&E approaches, Outcome Harvesting does not necessarily measure progress to-
wards predetermined objectives or outcomes, but rather collects evidence of what has changed
and, then, working backwards, determines whether and how an intervention has contributed to
these changes. The outcome(s) can be positive or negative, intended or unintended, direct or indi-
rect, but the connection between the intervention and the outcomes must be plausible.
The individual CSOs in the GLA coalition will engage in outcome harvesting for their own respec-
tive projects prior to the joint review & planning meeting in September of each year. Subsequently,
during joint planning and review meetings, harvested outcomes will be discussed and validated. 8
TABLE 3: ANNUAL PMEL CYCLE WITH OVERVIEW OF PROCESS, TOOLS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
WHEN WHAT WHO FOR WHO

September Outcome Harvesting (OH): TBI Indonesia, Walhi, NTFP-EP and Dutch Alliance members, country pro-
(before joint planning and Draft OH report, draft capacity WARSI individually gramme team
reflection meeting) analysis reports and draft
annual plans finalized
September Joint review & planning meeting Indonesia programme team, Dutch GLA CSOs individually
Country Contact
October 1 Narrative of annual work and TBI Indonesia, Walhi, NTFP-EP Tropenbos International and IUCN
financial plans for the next year, and WARSI individually Netherlands, respectively
progress reports of the current
year (incl. capacity analysis) fi-
nalized and sent to GLA partner.
November 1 Consolidated Indonesia pro- Indonesia focal point with support GLA Programme Coordinator
gramme annual plan finalised from Dutch Country Contact
February 1 CSOs annual financial progress TBI Indonesia, Walhi, NTFP-EP and Tropenbos International, Milieudefensie and
reports + update on progress WARSI individually IUCN Netherlands, respectively
reports (with outcomes on Sept.-
Dec.) finalized
February - March Joint reflection & learning Indonesia programme team GLA CSOs individually
meeting
March 21 Consolidated Indonesia pro- Indonesia focal point with support GLA Programme Coordinator
gramme progress & learning from Dutch Country Contact
reports finalised
8
Validation will take place through triangulation as in this
case discussing the draft outcomes from each CSO with its
partners in the country is similar to a peer review and gives
different perspectives on the outcomes and works also as
fact checking.
38
5.
REFERENCES:
Milieudefensie, 2009. Failing Governance-Avoiding

Responsibilities. European biofuel policies and oil palm
plantation expansion in Ketapang District, West Kaliman-
tan (Indonesia).
Adikerana A.S., Sugardjito, J., 2009. Characterizing forest

reduction in Ketapang district, West Kalimantan, Indone-
sia. Biodiversitas. Volume 11, Number 1, pp. 46-54.
Brinkerhoff, D.W., Crosby B.L, 2002. Managing Policy Re-

form: Concept and tools for decision-makers in developing
and transitioning countries. Bloomfield CT, Kumarian
Press, 269 p.
Friends of the Earth Europe, 2013. Commodity Crimes.

Illicit land grabs, illegal palm oil and endangered oran-
gutans.
Greenomics, 2015. Wilmar’s Palm oil products continue

associated with deforestation. IPOP Observer. 5 Novem-
ber 2015.
Greenpeace, 2013. Certifying Destruction: Why consumer

companies need to go beyond the RSPO to stop forest
destruction, pp. 1 – 8.
Greenpeace, 2016. Why IOI ‘s destruction in Ketapang is a

burning issue for the RSPO and palm-oil plantation sector.
Koh, LP & Wilcove, DS. (2008). ‘Is oil palm agriculture

really destroying tropical biodiversity?’ Conservation
Letters, vol. 1, pp. 60–64.
Kato, T. (1989). Different fields, similar Locusts: Adat

communities and the village law of 1979 in Indonesia.
Indonesia 47, 89–114.
39
Vereniging Milieudefensie
Nieuwe Looiersstraat 31, 1017 VA, Amsterdam
mail address: Postbus 19199, 1000 GD Amsterdam
telephone: 020-5507300
contact person: Inge Vianen

e-mail address: inge.vianen@milieudefensie.nl
40

A4 Indonesia Inception Report

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

A4 Indonesia Inception Report

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

GREEN LIVELIHOODS ALLIANCE: INDONESIA COUNTRY PROGRAMME

2. PROBLEM AND CONTEXT ANALYSIS 8

4. MONITORING AND LEARNING 34

ANNEXES (All annexes are available upon request)

ABBREVIATION AND TERMS

The Green Livelihoods Alliance (GLA) is a five-year (2016-2020) collaborative programme

TABLE 1: FOREST PLANNING IN THE THREE SELECTED LANDSCAPES IN INDONESIA

LANDSCAPE LOCATION OFFICIAL STATUS OF FOREST AREAS

Lariang Central Sulawesi Province 1. Conservation Forest (223,767 Ha)

The shared issues among the three landscapes are:

c. Lack of forest-based sustainable livelihood surrounding conservation areas (national park,

TABLE 2: LIST OF ACTORS AND REASON FOR SELECTION

NO SECTOR ACTORS REASON FOR SELECTION

NO SECTOR ACTORS REASON FOR SELECTION

23 Public Prosecutor carrying out prosecutions against violators, (b)

24 Judiciary Hold jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases.

25 e. Law enforcement RSPO* Its role to enforce sustainable palm-oil plantation

27 Multi-stakeholder Social Its role to resolve land conflicts resolutions of areas

29 National Parks Manage- Its role to synergize conservation actions by invol-

e. Indonesia’s Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC), submitted during UNFCCC

k. Minister of Forestry (currently the Ministry of Environment and Forestry/MoEF) Regulation

b. Participation: formal participation of citizens is legally guaranteed through the represen-

c. Accountability: existing and legally guaranteed mechanisms to ensure accountability to the

e. Implementation: a lack of funding, human resources, institutional capacities; and a legal

Outcome 1: Spatial planning to become more equitable and sustainable

Outcome 5: Local communities have a greater involvement in sustainable

Considering the beneficiary target of SF program is powerless community, mainstreaming SF

FIGURE 1: ToC VISUALIZATION OF MUDIAK BADUO LANDSCAPE

Outcome : Collaborative natural resource management will be able to

Encourage the establishment

• Community management area

FIGURE 2: ToC VISUALIZATION OF GUNUNG TARAK LANDSCAPE

Figure XX. ToC of Gunung Tarak Landscape

SHORT-­‐TERM OUTCOME MID-­‐TERM OUTCOME LONG-­‐TERM OUTCOME GLA IMPACT

1.1 GLA in collaboration with HCVRN provides

3.1. Private sector and government use HCV

1.2. GLA supports CSOs to develop Landscape

2.4. Performance of growers, buyers/traders

2.5. Government, ISPO, RSPO and Northern

1.4. CSOs coalition facilitated to monitor the

1.6.In collaboration with Northern CSOs, national

1.7. National CSOs coalition conducts intensive

2.9. Village government collaborates with

2.10. Directorate Generals within MoEF and

2.11. President issues Presidential Decree or

SPHERE OF CONTROL SPHERE OF INFLUENCE SPHERE OF INTEREST

SHORT-TERM OUTCOME MID-TERM OUTCOME LONG-TERM OUTCOME GLA IMPACT

3.2. Private sector and government use HCV

1.4. CSO coalition trained on collection of 2.5. Performance of growers, buyers/traders

1.5. CSOs coalition investigate growers

2.7. Government, ISPO, RSPO and

1.6. CSOs coalition facilitated to investigate

2.8. Government adopt RSPO's Principle

2.9. Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) drafts

1.9. In collaboration with Northern CSOs,

1.10. CSOs conduct public campaigns to

1.11. National CSOs coalition conducts

2.11. Village Government includes 3.8. Village government manages remaining

4.4. Village Government and community

5.2. Inclusive and sustainable

1.16. CSO coalition at national level facilitate

1.17. CSOs coalition at regional level is

2.17. CSO coalition facilitates Multi-

4.5. Local communities have a greater 5.3. Improved community land

SHORT-‐TERM OUTCOME MID-‐TERM OUTCOME LONG-‐TERM OUTCOME GLA IMPACT