Social Forestry - why and for whom? A comparison of policies in Vietnam and Indonesia

Moira Moeliono, Pham Thu Thuy, Indah Waty Bong, Grace Yee Wong, Maria Brockhaus


Community forestry or social forestry (henceforth referred collectively as SF) programs have become new modes of forest management empowering local managers and hence, allowing integration of diverse local practices and support of local livelihoods.  Implementation of these initiatives, however, face multiple challenges. State-prescribed community programs, for example, will remain isolated efforts if changes in the overall economic and social governance frameworks, including the devolution of rights to local users is lacking. Financial sustainability of these measures remains often uncertain and equity issues inherent to groups and communities formed for SF, can be exacerbated. In this article, we pose the question: Whose interests do SF policies serve? The effectiveness of SF would depend on the motivations and aims for a decentralization of forest governance to the community. In order to understand the underlying motivations behind the governments’ push for SF, we examine national policies in Vietnam and Indonesia, changes in their policies over time and the shift in discourses influencing how SF has evolved. Vietnam and Indonesia are at different sides of the spectrum in democratic ambitions and forest abundance, and present an intriguing comparison in the recent regional push towards SF in Southeast Asia.  We discuss the different interpretations of SF in these two countries and how SF programs are implemented. Our results show that governments, influenced by global discourse, are attempting to regulate SF through formal definitions and regulations.  Communities on the other hand, might resist by adopting, adapting or rejecting formal schemes.  In this tension, SF, in general adopted to serve the interest of local people, in practice SF has not fulfilled its promise.


Community Forestry; Social Forestry; empowerment; rights; Indonesia; Vietnam

Full Text:



Adiwibowo, S., Shohibuddin, M., & Kartodihardjo, H. (2016). Contested devolution: the political ecology of community-based forest management in Indonesia.

Agrawal, A. (2005). Environmentality: Technologies of Government and the Making of Subjects. Duke University Press, Durham and London.

Agrawal, B. (2001). Participatory exclusions, community forestry, and gender: An analysis for South Asia and a conceptual framework. World Development 29(10):1623–1648.

Agrawal, A. and Gibson, C.C. (1999). Enchantment and disenchantment: the role of community in natural resource conservation. World development 27(4):629-649.

Ardiansyah, F., Marthen, A. A., & Amalia, N. (2015). Forest and land-use governance in a decentralized Indonesia: A legal and policy review. Occasional Paper 132. Bogor, Indonesia: CIFOR.

Arnold, J.E.M. (1992). Community Forestry: Ten Years in Review. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organizations of the United Nations.

Arnold, J.E.M. (2001). Forests and people: 25 years of community forestry. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organizations of the United Nations.

Arts, B. (2014). Assessing forest governance from a ‘Triple G’ perspective: Government, governance, governmentality. Journal of Forest Policy and Economics 49:17-22

Barry, D., Larson, A.M., & Colfer, C.J.P. (2010). Forest tenure reform: an orphan with only uncles. In Larson AM, Barry D, Dahal GR and Colfer CJP, ed. Forests for people: community rights and forest tenure reform. London, UK: Earthscan. 19-39.

Beard, V., & Phakphian, S. (2009). Community-based Planning in Chiang Mai, Thailand: Social Capital, Collective Action and Elite Capture. Paper presented at Dialogical Conference ‘Social Capital and Civic Engagement in Asia’, 7-10 May 2009. University of Toronto.

Blaikie, P. (2006): Is Small Really Beautiful? Community-based Natural Resource Management in Malawi and Botswana. World Development 34(11): 1942-1957.

Brockhaus, M., & Di Gregorio, M. (2014). National REDD+ policy networks: from cooperation to conflict. Ecology and Society 19(4):14.

Brockhaus, M., Di Gregorio, M., and Carmenta, R. (2014). REDD+ policy networks: exploring actors and power structures in an emerging policy domain. Ecology and Society 19(4):29.

Brockhaus, M., & Angelsen, A., (2012). Seeing REDD+ through 4Is: a political economy framework. Analysing REDD+: challenges and choices. Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia, pp.15-30.

Brosius, J.P, Tsing, A.L., & Zerner C. (1998). Representing communities: Histories and politics of community‐based natural resource management. Society & Natural Resources 11(2):157-168.

Campbell, J.L. (2002). Ideas, Politics and Public Policy. Annual Review of Sociology 28: 21-38.

Chao, S. (2012). Forest Peoples: Numbers across the world. UK: Forest Peoples Program.

Chomba, S., Kariuki, J., Lund, J.F., & Sinclair, F. (2016). Roots of inequity: How the implementation of REDD+ reinforces past injustices. Land Use Policy 50:202-213.

Chomba, S., Nathan, I., Minang, P.A., & Sinclair, F. 2015. Illusions of empowerment? Questioning policy and practice of community forestry in Kenya. Ecology and Society 20(3):2.

Chomba, S., Treue, T., & Sinclair, F. (2014). The political economy of forest entitlements: can community based forest management reduce vulnerability at the forest margin? Forest Policy and Economics 58: 37-46.

Cooke, B., & Kothari, U. (2001). Participation: The new tyranny? New York: Zed Books.

Dahal G.R., and Capistrano, D. (2006). Forest governance and institutional structure: an ignored dimension of community based forest management in the Philippines . International Forestry Review 8 (4) :377-394. ISSN: 1465-5489

Dasgupta, A., & Beard, V.A. (2007). Community driven development, collective action and elite capture in Indonesia. Development and change 38(2): 229-249.

De Jong, W. (2012). Discourses of community forestry. In Arts B, van Bommel S, Ros-Tonen M and Verschoor G, ed. Forest-people interfaces: from local creativity to global concern, pp. 107-120. Netherland: Wageningen Academic Publishers.

[Dirjen PSKL] Direktorat Jenderal Perhutanan Sosial dan Kemitraan Lingkungan. (2015). Rencana Strategis 2015-2019. Jakarta, Indonesia: Kementrian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan.

Dressler, W., Büscher B., Schoon, M., Brockington, D.A.N., Hayes, T., Kull, C.A., McCharthy, J., & Shrestha, K. (2010). From hope to crisis and back again? A critical history of the global CBNRM narrative. Environmental conservation 37(1):5-15.

Edmunds, D. & Wollenberg, E. (2003). Whose Devolution is it Anyway? Divergent Constructs, Interests and Capacities between the Poorest Forest Users and States. Local forest management: the impacts of devolution policies. Edmunds, D., Wollenberg, E. (eds.) 150-165

Eilenberg, M. (2015). Shades of green and REDD: Local and global contestations over the value of forest versus plantation development on the Indonesian forest frontier. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 56(1), pp.48-61.

Feintrenie, L., Schwarze, S., and Levang, P. 2010. Are local people conservationists? Analysis of transition dynamics from agroforests to monoculture plantations in Indonesia. Ecology and Society 15(4).

Gilmour, D. (2016). Forty years of community-based forestry: A review of its extent and effectiveness. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organizations of the United Nations.

Hakim, I., Irawanti, S., Murniati, Sumarhani, Widiarti, A., Effendi, R., Muslich, M., & Rulliaty, S. (2010). Social Forestry Menuju Restorasi Pembangunan Kehutanan Berkelanjutan. Bogor, Indonesia: Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Perubahan Iklim dan Kebijakan.

Helvetas Vietnam. (2002). Vietnam experience & possible contribution to SDC development goal: Sustainable livelihoods & poverty reduction in the upland. Hanoi, Vietnam: Helvetas Vietnam.

Herriman, N., & Winarnita, M. (2016). Seeking the State: Appropriating Bureaucratic Symbolism and Wealth in the Margins of Southeast Asia. Oceania (2016) DOI:10.1002/ocea.5122

Kallio, M.H, Moeliono, M., Maharani, C., Brockhaus, M., Hogarth, N.J., Daeli, W., Tauhid, W., & Wong, G. (2016). Information exchange in swidden communities of West Kalimantan: lessons for designing REDD+. International Forestry Review, 18(2): 203-217.

Kellert, S.R., Mehta, J.N., Ebbin, S.A., & Lichtenfeld, L.L. (2000). Community natural resource management: promise, rhetoric, and reality. Society & Natural Resources, 13(8): 705-715.

[KEMENLHK] Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan. (2016). Capaian Perhutanan Sosial Tahun 2016. Jakarta, Indonesia: KEMENLHK. Accessed 21 August 2017.

Larson, A.M. (2005). Democratic decentralization in the forestry sector: Lessons learned from Africa, Asia and Latin America. In Colfer CJP and Capistrano D, ed. The Politics of Decentralization: Forests, Power and People. London, UK: Earthscan.

Larson, A.M., & Ribot, J.C. 2007. The poverty of forestry policy: double standards on an uneven playing field. Sustainability Science 2(2):189-204.

Larson, A.M., Barry, D., & Dahal, G.R. (2010). New rights for forest-based communities? Understanding processes of forest tenure reform. International Forestry Review, 12(1): 78-96.

Le, K.C. (2010). Vietnam national forest programme process evaluation report (2nd draft). Available at: [2 February 2012].

Leach, M., Mearns, R., & Scoones, I. (1999). Environmental entitlements: dynamics and institutions in community-based natural resource management. World development 27(2):225-247.

Li, T.M. (2002). Engaging simplifications: community-based resource management, market processes and state agendas in upland Southeast Asia. World development 30.2 (2002): 265-283.

Li, T.M. (2007). Practices of assemblage and community forest management. Economy and society 36(2):263-293.

Lindayati, R., (2002). Ideas and institutions in social forestry policy. Which Way Forward? People, Forests, and Policymaking in Indonesia, pp.36-59

Lund, J.F., & Saito-Jensen, M. (2013). Revisiting the issue of elite capture of participatory initiatives. World development 46:104-112.

[MARD] Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. (2007). Project of forest allocation and lease for the period of 2007–2010. [Attached to Decision No. 2740 /QĐ- BNN-KL.] Hanoi, Vietnam: MARD.

Maryudi, A., Devkota, R.R., Schusser, C., Yufanyi, C., Salla, M., Aurenhammer, H., Rotchanaphatharawit, R., & Krott, M. (2012). Back to basics: considerations in evaluating the outcomes of community forestry. Forest Policy and Economics 14(1):1-5.

Maryudi, A. (2012). Restoring state control over forest resources through administrative procedures: Evidence from a community forestry programme in Central Java, Indonesia. ASEAS – Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies 5(2): 229-242.

McCarthy, J. (2005). Devolution in the woods: community forestry as hybrid neoliberalism. Environment and Planning A 37(6):995-1014.

Meinzen-Dick, R., Di Gregorio, M., & Dohrn, S. (2008). Decentralization, pro-poor land policies, and democratic governance. CAPRi Working Paper No. 80. Washington DC, USA: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Indonesia. (2016). Dataset Lingkungan Hidup Dan Kehutanan Tahun 2016.

Ministry of Forestry and Bureau of Statistics (DepHut and BPS, 2009). Identifikasi Desa di Dalam dan di Sekitar kawasan Hutan. 2009. (identification of villages in and around forest areas).

Moeliono, M., Mulyana, A., Adnan, H., Manalu, P., Yuliana, L., and Balang. (2015a). Village forests (Hutan Desa): empowerment, business or burden. Brief 51. Bogor, Indonesia. World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) Southeast Asia Regional Program.

Moeliono, M., Mulyana. A., Adnan, H., Yuliani, E.L., Manalu, P., & Balang. (2015b). A permit is not enough: community forests (HKM) in Bulukumba. Brief 49. Bogor, Indonesia: World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) Southeast Asia Regional Program.

Nguyen, B.N. 2009. Report on community forest management in Vietnam: status, problems and solutions. IUCN Vietnam Strengthening Voices for Better Choices Project

Nguyen, Q.T., Nguyen, B.N., and Nguyen, N.T. (2008). Forest tenure reform in Vietnam: case studies from the northern upland and central highlands regions. Hanoi, Vietnam: The Center for People and Forests (RECOFTC) and the Rights and Resources Initiative (RRI).

Nygren, A. (2000). Development discourses and peasant-forest relations: natural resource utilization as social process. Development and Change 31(1): 11-34.

Peluso, N.L. 1996. Fruit trees and family trees in an anthropogenic forest: Ethics of access, property zones, and environmental change in Indonesia. Comparative studies in Society and History 38(3): 510-548.

Pham, T.T., Moeliono, M., Nguyen, T.H., Nguyen, H.T., and Vu T.H. (2012). The context of REDD+ in Vietnam: Drivers, agents and institutions. CIFOR Occasional Paper no. 75. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research.

Praputra, A.V, Sahide, M.A.K., & Santosa, A. (2015). Menata Era Baru Kehutanan Masyarakat. Policy Brief Kehutanan Masyarakat. Bogor, Indonesia: FKKM.

Pollock., & David, H. (1973). The Cruel Choice: A New Concept in the Theory of Development. By Goulet Denis. The Americas 29.3 (1973): 395-397.

Pulhin, J.M., Larson, A.M., & Pacheco, P. (2010). Regulations as barriers to community benefits in tenure reform. In Larson AM, Barry D, Dahal GR and Colfer CJP, ed. Forests for people: community rights and forest tenure reform¸pp. 139-159. London, UK: Earthscan.

Purnomo, E.P., & Anand, P.B. 2014. The Conflict of Forest Tenure and the Emergence of Community Based Forest Management in Indonesia. Journal of Government and Politics 5(1).

RECOFTC. (2014). Current status of social forestry in climate change mitigation and adaptation in the ASEAN region: Situational analysis 2013. Bangkok, Thailand: RECOFTC – The Center for People and Forests.

RECOFTC, ASFN & SDC. 2010. The role of social forestry in climate change mitigation and adaptation in the ASEAN region. Assessment 2010. Bangkok, Thailand: RECOFTC – The Center for People and Forest.

Ribot, J.C, Lund, J.F., and Treue, T. (2010). Democratic decentralization in sub-Saharan Africa: its contribution to forest management, livelihoods, and enfranchisement. Environmental Conservation 37(1):35-44.

Sam, T., & Shepard, G. (2011). Community Forest Management. Background Paper for The United Nations Forum on Forests Secretariat UNFF9: “Forests for People, Livelihoods and Poverty Eradication”. UN Headquarters, 24 January to 4 February 2011. New York, USA: UN.

Schusser, C., Krott, M., Movuh, M.C.Y., Logmani, J., Devkota, R.R., Maryudi, A., Salla, M., & Bach, N.D. (2015). Powerful stakeholders as drivers of community forestry—Results of an international study. Forest Policy and Economics, 58: 92-101.

Scott, J.C. (2009). The art of not being governed: An anarchist history of upland Southeast Asia. Yale University Press.

Scott, J.C. (1998). Seeing Like a State. How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. Connecticut, USA: Yale University.

Sikor, T., & Apel, U. (1998). The possibilities for community forestry in Vietnam. Working paper series No.1 (Asia Forest Network). Berkeley, USA: Center for Southeast Asia Studies, University of California.

Sikor, T., & Nguyen, Q.T. (2007). Why May Forest Devolution not Benefit the Rural Poor? Forest Entitlements in Vietnam’s Central Highlands. World Development 35(11): 2010-2025.

Sikor, T., & Müller, D. (2009). The limits of state-led land reform: An introduction. World Development, 37(8): 1307-1316.

Sikor, T., & Nguyen QT. (2011). Realizing Forest rights in Vietnam: Addressing Issues in Community Forest Management. Hanoi, Vietnam: The Center for People and Forests.

Sneddon, C., and Fox, C. (2007). Power, development, and institutional change: Participatory governance in the lower Mekong basin. World Development 35(12): 2161-2181.

Soriaga, R., & Walpole, P. (2006). Forests and Poverty Reduction: Opportunities in Asia-Pacific Region. Paper Presented during the Asia-Pacific Forestry Commission Pre-Session Workshop, 15 April 2006. Dehradun, India: Asia Forest Network.

Streeten, P., Burki, S.J., Haq, U., Hicks, N., & Stewart, F. (1981). First things first: meeting basic human needs in the developing countries.

Sunderlin, W.D. (2006). Poverty alleviation through community forestry in Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam: An assessment of the potential. Forest Policy and Economics, 8(4): 386-396.

Sunderlin, W.D. and Huynh, T.B. (2005). Poverty alleviation and forests in Vietnam. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research.

Thoms, C.A. (2008). Community control of resources and the challenge of improving local livelihoods: A critical examination of community forestry in Nepal. Geoforum 39 (3): 1452-1465.

To, X.P., & Tran, H.N. (2014). Forest Land Allocation in the Context of Forestry Sector Restructuring: Opportunities for Forestry Development and Uplands Livelihood Improvement. Hue, Viet Nam: Tropenbos International Viet Nam.

Todaro, M.P., Smith, S.C. (2012). Economic development. George Washington University. 2012.

Wilshusen, P.R. (2009). Social process as everyday practice: the micro politics of community-based conservation and development in southeastern Mexico. Policy Sciences 42(2): 137-162.

Wode, B., & Huy, B. 2009. Study on state of the art of community forestry in Vietnam. Hanoi, Vietnam: GTZ and GFA Consulting Group.

Wong, S. (2010). Elite capture or capture elites? Lessons from the'counter-elite'and'co-opt-elite'approaches in Bangladesh and Ghana. Working paper 2010, 82. Helsinki, Finland: World Institute for Development Economics Research.

Vietnam regulations and policies

Decision 799/QĐ-TTg dated 27/6/2012 on approval of the National REDD+ Action Program

Decision No. 187/1999/QĐ-CP: on renovation of organizational structure and management mechanism of SFE directing SFEs to give forest lands back to the districts, so that they could be further allocated to households

Decree No. 163/1999/ND-CP: on assigning and leasing forestland.

Decree 29/1998/ND-CP in May 1998, later ammended to Decree 79/2003/ND-CP in July 2003: on grassroots democracy

Decree No. 01/1995/ND-CP: on land allocation for use in agricultural, forestry production, aquatic product rearing within state-owned enterprises.

Decree No. 01/CP/1995: on contracting agricultural land, production forest and surface water for aquacultural production to organizations

Decree No. 02/1994/ND-CP: regulating forest land allocation to organizations, households and individuals for long term and stable use on forestry purpose

Forest Protection and Development Law of 2004: recognizing legal status of village communities in forest management

Land Law of 2003: recognizing and regulating the legal status of village communities in land tenure

Indonesia regulations and policies

Constitutional Court Decree (MK) 35/PUU-X/2012 dated 26/03/2013 about Adat Forest

Government Regulation No. 6/2007 on Forest Systems and the Formulation of Forest Management and Use

Government Regulation No. 3/2008 on Amendments to Government Regulation No. 6/2007 on Forest Systems and the Formulation of Forest Management and Use

Ministerial Decree No. P.83/MENLHK/SETJEN/KUM.1/10/2016 on Social Forestry (Perhutanan Sosial)

Ministerial Decree No. P.52/MENHUT-II/2011 on third amendments of Ministry of Forestry Decree No. P.37/MENHUT-II/2007 on Social Forestry (hutan kemasyarakatan)

Ministerial Decree No. P.53/MENHUT-II/2011 on second amendments of Ministry of Forestry Decree No. P.49/MENHUT-II/2008 on Hutan Desa

Ministerial Decree No. P.55/MENHUT-II/2011 on procedure to request permits to use non timber products in planted forest (tentang Tata Cara Pemohonan Izin Usaha Pemanfaatan Hasil Hutan Kayu pada Hutan Tanaman Rakyat dalam Hutan Tanaman)

Ministerial Decree No. P.49/MENHUT-II/2008 on Village Forest (Hutan Desa)

Presidential regulation no 88, 2017 on solving conflicting claims in forest areas (tentang Penyelesaian Penguasaan Tanah dalam Kawasan Hutan)

Law No 41/1999 dated 30/09/1999 on Forestry

Law No.6/2014 on Village (tentang Desa).



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Forest and Society is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

View My Stats

Forest and Society has been indexed/registered/mentioned in : 


View full indexing services