Dodik Ridho Nurrochmat
Muhammad Alif K. Sahide
Micah R. Fisher3- 1Department of Forest Management, Faculty of Forestry and Environment, IPB University, Bogor, Indonesia
- 2Laboratory on Forest Policy and Entrepreneurship, Faculty of Forestry, University of Hasanuddin, Makassar, Indonesia
- 3Fellow, Research Program, East-West Center, Honolulu, HI, Unites States
Introduction
There is increasing pressure on the conversion of forest areas for food, energy, development, and other purposes. Development that is driven by green growth is being proposed as a solution. The problem, however, is that many ideas driving the notion of “green” growth are trapped in a contradiction that overwhelmingly focuses on the “green” while neglecting the growth, even if there is a compelling case to be made that “green” and “growth” are not two competing paradigms (World Bank, 2012).
Freedom should be the primary element of development. It means that the only acceptable evaluation of human progress is primarily and ultimately enhancement of freedom, and the achievement of development depends on people’s free agency (Sen, 1999). Peacock (2021) argues that the freedom proposed by Sen (1999) is a combination of rationality and commitment. Commitment is essential in development strategy, in addition to the mainstream rational choice theory (Peacock, 2021).
Sustainable development is a global issue and forest regime is currently dominates global sustainability discourses on the management of the world’s forests (Giessen, 2013; Sahide et al., 2015). However, such discourses also pay less attention to the different situations in developed and developing countries. For instance, reducing emission and net-zero deforestation has been promoted as policy ideals to be implemented according to the Paris Agreement (UNFCCC, 2015) is less considering the countries’ social, economic, and ecological differences. Thus, promoting more objective sustainable development principles, i.e., reversibility or limits (Letey, 1973), adaptability or tolerance (Letey, 1973), rational commitment (Kuznets, 1955; Sen, 1999; Peacock, 2021), and legitimacy (Nurrochmat et al., 2016b; Peacock, 2021), is necessary to build more appropriate global perspectives in sustainable development.
The article aims to promote an idea for establishing a more appropriate set of principles of sustainable forests. The argument provides insight into sustainable forest development in ways that are not only determined by the temporary disturbance of forests (environmental degradation) but also the potential for economic growth, which considers the ability of forests to recover (see Silva, 2021) using the concepts of limits and tolerance (Letey, 1973), rational commitment (Sen, 1999; Peacock, 2021) and legitimacy (Nurrochmat et al., 2016b). Scientific arguments support the idea of the article, for instance, Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) theory (1955), limits and tolerance of ecology (Letey, 1973), and also the green development strategies of the World Bank (2012). The argument is laid out for the purposes of practical implementation.
Ecosystem Degradation and Recovery Periods of Development
Economic growth and environmental sustainability are like two sides of a coin inseparable from the sustainable development concept. Studies of contemporary popular natural resource economics tend to apply the Environmental Kuznets’ Curve (EKC) –a modification of the inverted U hypothesis (Kuznets, 1955) that explains the interrelation between economic growth as a function of per capita income and the level of environmental degradation (Figure 1).
FIGURE 1. Environmental Kuznets’ Curve.
It is commonly found in the development approaches in developing countries that rely on intense pressures on land and natural resources, where increasing per-capita income (PCI) is compensated by the depletion of natural resources and environmental degradation. The model then suggests that after achieving a certain level of human welfare, a turning point will occur whereby the higher levels of welfare will initiate broader interests, policies, and outcomes toward environmental sustainability. Environmental degradation thus decreases along with increasing PCI and broadly reflects conditions found in developed countries.
The Reversibility Principle
In the early stages of development, environmental degradation is part of the economic development strategy, as long as the degradation does not exceed the limits or ability of the environment to recover (Letey, 1973) or the natural regeneration’s ability of degraded forests (Silva, 2021). Thus, limits on the exploitation of natural resources must be considered in the development strategy.
A universal illustration of the policy strategy for using natural resources and environmental recovery is presented as a metaphor of choosing a flyover road development strategy. The first policy option is to close the old road temporarily with the consequence that people who want to go through cannot pass. Meanwhile, the second option is to open the road halfway so that people can still pass, but results in more extended traffic jams. The completion of the flyover project can be considered a turning point in achieving smoother traffic patterns, which is similar in this case to support the turning points of environmental recovery. Theoretically, faster transitions to environmental recovery are possible through the first option, whereby total closure of roads to make flyovers are applied. However, this can only succeed with particular prerequisites, namely that there are alternative access points to important places such as hospitals, transportation hubs, and other vital facilities. Still, the benefits of the flyover are quickly completed so that smoother traffic patterns will recover with better quality (Nurrochmat et al., 2017).
In line with this illustration, economic development that causes environmental disturbances, for instance forest degradation or temporary deforestation, can still be considered an option of sustainable development strategies if the disturbance is laid within the limits of being reversible and encourages the acceleration of environmental recovery as welfare increases. In this context, it is clear that the concept of sustainability is bound to and cannot be separated from human welfare.
The Adaptability Principle
Every living thing has limits in facing environmental changes, which Letey, 1973 called “tolerance,” which underpins the adaptability principles. Humans can adapt to different extreme environmental conditions that change over generations. Many other living things such as plants and animals also adjust to different situations, including toxic ones (Letey, 1973) and extreme environments of warming and cooling temperatures. Thus, the concept of sustainability should not (always) mean exactly bequeathing natural resources such as the current state of the generations to come. Likewise, the idea of restoration does not have to be interpreted as restoring conditions to an “original” ecosystem because: first, there is no definition of time considered as the original natural state, and second, human beings and other living things may have adapted to new environments and new human-environment relations, so that restoring environmental conditions can even have the potential of presenting new dangers.
The film “Jurassic Park” describes a powerful critique of people who seek to restore prehistoric beings on Earth. Successfully reviving dinosaurs, in this case, can create dangerous new ecosystems for other species and human life. Thus, the concept of sustainability should be seen in the context of the human and other living things’ ability in the present situation to adapt to environmental changes. Sustainability is a dynamic concept whose conditions may differ according to the context of time and place. Therefore, restoring the environment does not have to become a “zero environmental degradation” principle. Environmental recovery needs to be carried out up to the limits of natural adaptability (Figure 2).
FIGURE 2. The Concept of reversibility and adaptability in environmental management policy strategies.
Many of these questions of environmental change are at the forefront of our understanding and policies around climate change. Climate change results in environmental change at time scales that challenge the notions of irreversibility and adaptability. Thus, many aspects of adaptation should be integrated with mitigation in forest and environmental policy, both at the national and local levels (Di Gregorio et al., 2016; Nurrochmat et al., 2020; Nurrochmat et al., 2021). In this context, restoration for climate mitigation needs to be done at the limit of humans to adapt and not necessarily exceed reasonable social costs. The calculus of this has changed with the increasing immediacy of the detrimental effects of climate change. For this reason, restoration must also consider species adaptation alongside the adaptability of the surrounding social environment. Replacing the existing vegetation with native species or restoring the state of initial vegetation is not always necessarily appropriate to carry out in search of sustainability principles–in terms of ecological, social, economic, technological, and legitimacy aspects (see Ekayani et al., 2015; Sukwika et al., 2016; Nurrochmat et al., 2017; Yovi and Nurrochmat, 2018; Rahmani et al., 2021).
Global Forest-Regimes, National Policies, and Local Interests on Sustainable Development
The strategy for managing forest and environmental resources must be in line with the norms of environmental management and social and economic rationality. In some cases, global regime intervention is an obstacle in implementing the best forest resource and environmental management policy (see Nurrochmat et al., 2016a; Erbaugh and Nurrochmat, 2019). Therefore, land and natural resources management strategy should always consider the principles of people’s prosperity and national sovereignty, which relies on national and local interests (Pribadi et al., 2020; Nurrochmat et al., 2021).
Not all policies outlined by the government manifests as a reality in the field. In particular, the issue of legality is not always congruent with legitimacy. For example, many regulations attempt to determine forest management outcomes. Still, too many regulations are being violated or deemed illegitimate at different governing scales or other notions of authority. Legitimacy starts with trust in someone or something. Credibility, efficiency, and fairness will be enforced if the implementation of policies is in line with the corresponding characteristics and purposes.
International regimes, especially in the forest sector, influence national legal systems. The hegemony of interpretations of interest groups or certain countries on forest boundaries impact the selection and application of policy strategies and benchmarks for the sustainability of forest resources and environmental performance (see Giessen 2013; Nurfatriani et al., 2015; Sahide et al., 2015, 2015a; Nurrochmat et al., 2016a). In choosing a strategy for environmental policy management, in addition to paying attention to economic linkages, leakages and effectiveness must also be considered (see Nurrochmat et al., 2016b; Sheriffdeen et al., 2020).
The case of oil palm plantations expansion is salient. On a local or national scale, there may be some examples that oil palm causes deforestation, but these dynamics are very different (see Sahide et al., 2015; Nurrochmat et al., 2021). The environmental benefits of oil palm plantations are never equal compared to natural forest ecosystems, and therefore, comparing these two conditions is irrelevant. A much fairer comparison is the benefits and environmental damage caused by various world vegetable oil-producing plants when seen from a broader context. The world’s demand for vegetable oils continues to grow. This market is contested by different vegetable oils derived from oil palm, soybeans, rapeseeds, sunflower seeds, and several other vegetable oils (World Growth, 2011). Suppose vegetable oil production from palm oil is halted and substituted by soybean oil, rapeseed, or sunflower seeds whose productivity per land area is only about one-tenth of palm oil (Palm Oil Research, 2017). What are the implications for global deforestation and market demands for vegetable oils? It is by no means an endorsement of palm oil over others, given the different ecologies and economies for which these agricultural products are produced. Instead, this article is trying to highlight the broader context of forest management and sustainability at differing scales of governance.
Contestation of interests has not necessarily created a conflict (Roslinda et al., 2012; Budiono et al., 2017; Astuti et al., 2020). Nurrochmat et al., 2017 promote a concept of changing contestation into collaborative management of forest resources and the environment. Actors or groups of actors each have different interests in resources and the environment. It is impossible to generalize all actors’ diverse interests at the global, national, and local scales in natural resource management (see Pribadi et al., 2020; Nurrochmat et al., 2021). However, it is possible to identify the slices of various interests by exploring the intrinsic interests of each actor–which cannot be determined from the question of what the actors are doing. Instead, it becomes evident of they have done or are doing. A land-swap policy may be an excellent example for compromising interests and goals in local and national development (Nurrochmat et al., 2020).
Discussions
Sustainable forest development can be implemented effectively if and only if a more appropriate sustainability standard is normative and more reasonable, measurable, and implementable. The condition of “sustainability” in natural resource management is thus limited by the ability of nature to recover and the human ability to adapt, which will form a new dimension of human-nature relations in future generations. Therefore, sustainability should not be defined as transferring resources and the environment to future generations with the same conditions as the initial ones. The situation should be based on what enables future generations to adapt and create ways that allow for a better quality of life.
It concludes that the successful implementation of a forest development policy is also largely determined by the rationality of socio-economic-ecological arguments. The rationality is often measured by the benefits received by a particular community, generally determined by the level of legitimacy of a particular policy rather than its legal aspects. The different interests of actors in managing forest resources do not always cause conflict. Identifying the intrinsic interests of various actors in managing resources and the environment is the key to shifting potential conflicts and transitioning them into opportunities for cooperation and legitimate consensus. Thus, it is imperative to improve the green policy paradigm by considering the principles of reversibility, adaptability, rationality, and legitimacy.
Author Contributions
DN discussed the concept; DN collected data and contributed to the analyses; DN and MF drafted the manuscript; DN, MS and MF contributed to revising and refining it.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s Note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Acknowledgments
We wish to acknowledge the WCR Grant of Kemdikbud Ristek 2021–2023, who gave funding for this publication.
References
Astuti, E. W., Hidayat, A., and Nurrochmat, D. R. (2020). Community forest Scheme: Measuring Impact in Livelihood Case Study Lombok Tengah Regency, West Nusa Tenggara Province. Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika, 26 (1), 52–58. doi:10.7226/jtfm.26.1.52
Budiono, R., Nugroho, B., Hardjanto, , and Nurrochmat, D. R. (2017). The Village forest as a Counter Territorialization by the Community forest Village in Kampar Peninsula Riau. Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika 24 (3), 115–125. doi:10.7226/jtfm.24.3.115
Di Gregorio, M., Nurrochmat, D. R., Paavolaa, J., Sari, I. M., Fatorellia, L., Pramova, E., Locatelli, B., Brockhaus, M., and Kusumadewi, S. D. (2016). Climate Policy Integration in the Land-Use Sector: Mitigation, Adaptation and Sustainable Development Linkages. Environ. Sci. Pol. 67, 35–43.
Ekayani, M., Nurrochmat, D. R., Nurrochmat, D. R., Saharjo, B. H., and Erbaugh, J. T. (2015). Assessing Conformity of Scientific Voices and Local Needs to Combat forest Fire in Indonesia. jtfm 21 (2), 83–92. doi:10.7226/jtfm.21.2.83
Erbaugh, J. T., and Nurrochmat, D. R. (2019). Paradigm Shift and Business as Usual through Policy Layering: Forest-related Policy Change in Indonesia (1999-2016). Land Use Policy 86, 136–146. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.04.021
Giessen, L. (2013). Reviewing the Main Characteristics of the International forest Regime Complex and Partial Explanations for its Fragmentation. Int. For. Rev. 15 (1), 2013. doi:10.1505/146554813805927192
Letey, J. (1973). “Reversible and Irreversible Ecological Processes,” in Environmental Administration. Edmund & Letey (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Book Company).
Nurfatriani, F., Darusman, D., Nurrochmat, D. R., Yustika, A. E., and Muttaqin, M. Z. (20152015). Redesigning Indonesian Forest Fiscal Policy to Support forest Conservation. For. Pol. Econ. 61, 39–50. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2015.07.006
Nurrochmat, D. R., Boer, R., Ardiansyah, M., Immanuel, G., and Purwawangsa, H. (2020). Policy Forum: Reconciling palm Oil Targets and Reduced Deforestation: Landswap and Agrarian Reform in Indonesia. For. Pol. Econ. 199, 102291. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102291
Nurrochmat, D. R., Darusman, D. R., and Ekayani, M. (2016b). Kebijakan Pembangunan Kehutanan & Lingkungan: Teori Dan Implementasi. Bogor: IPB Press.
Nurrochmat, D. R., Dharmawan, A. H., Obidzinski, K., Dermawan, A., and Erbaugh, J. T. (2016a). Contesting National and International forest Regimes: Case of Timber Legality Certification for Community Forests in Central Java, Indonesia. For. Pol. Econ. 68, 54–64. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2014.09.008
Nurrochmat, D. R., Nugroho, I. A., HardjantoPurwadianto, A., Purwadianto, A., Maryudi, A., and Erbaugh, J. T. (2017). Shifting Contestation into Cooperation: Strategy to Incorporate Different Interest of Actors in Medicinal Plants in Meru Betiri National Park, Indonesia. For. Pol. Econ. 83, 162–168. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2017.08.005
Nurrochmat, D. R., Pribadi, R., Siregar, H., Justianto, A., and Park, M. S. (2021). Transformation of Agro-Forest Management Policy under the Dynamic Circumstances of a Two-Decade Regional Autonomy in Indonesia. Forests 12, 419. doi:10.3390/f12040419
Palm Oil Research (2017). Untangling the Palm Oil Debate. Statistics. www.palmoilresearch.org/statistics.html (Accessed 03 12 2017).
Peacock, M. (2021). “Amartya Sen and Rational Choice,” in The Concept of Commitment (Oxfordshire (UK): Routledge).
Pribadi, R., Nurrochmat, D. R., Suhendang, E., and Siregar, H. (2020). Enhancing the Role of the District Government in Decentralized forest Management. J. Manajemen Hutan Tropika 26 (2), 114–122. doi:10.7226/jtfm.26.2.114
Rahmani, T. A., Nurrochmat, D. R., Hero, Y., Park, M. S., Boer, R., and Satria, A. (2021). Evaluating the Feasibility of Oil palm Agroforestry in Harapan Rainforest, Jambi, Indonesia. Fs 5 (2), 458–477. doi:10.24259/fs.v5i2.10375
Roslinda, E., Darusman, D., Suharjito, D., and Nurrochmat, D. R. (2012). Stakeholders Analysis on the Management of Danau Sentarum National Park Kapuas Hulu Regency West Kalimantan Province. jtfm 18 (2), 78–85. doi:10.7226/jtfm.18.2.78
Sahide, M. A. K., Burns, S., Burns, S., Wibowo, A., Nurrochmat, D. N., and Giessen, L. (2015a). Towards State Hegemony over Agricultural Certification: From Voluntary Private to Mandatory State Regimes on Palm Oil in Indonesia. jtfm 21 (3), 162–171. doi:10.7226/jtfm.21.3.162
Sahide, M. A. K., Nurrochmat, D. R., and Giessen, L. (2015). The Regime Complex for Tropical Rainforest Transformation: Analysing the Relevance of Multiple Global and Regional Land Use Regimes in Indonesia. Land Use Policy 47 (2015), 408–425. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.04.030
Sheriffdeen, M., Nurrochmat, D. R., Perdinan, P., and Di Gregorio, M. (20202020). Indicators to Evaluate the Institutional Effectiveness of National Climate Financing Mechanisms. Fs 4 (2), 358–378. doi:10.24259/fs.v4i2.10309
Silva, D. (2021). Brazil's Atlantic Forests Are Naturally Regenerating Much Faster than Expected. A Cost-Effective Solution with Impressive Returns. Bogor: CIFOR. Forests News, 1st September 2021 https://forestsnews.cifor.org/74340/brazils-atlantic-forests-are-naturally-regenerating-much-faster-than-expected?fnl=en&utm_campaign=CIFOR_ICRAF_Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Mailchimp_Newsletter_September.
Sukwika, T., Darusman, D., Kusmana, C., and Nurrochmat, D. R. (20162016). Evaluating the Level of Sustainability of Privately Managed forest in Bogor, Indonesia. Biodiversitas 17 (1), 241–248.
UNFCCC (2015). Key Aspects of the Paris Agreement. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement/key-aspects-of-the-paris-agreement (accessed 25 12 2021).
World Bank (2012). Inclusive Green Growth, the Pathway to Sustainable Development. Washington DC: World Bank.
World Growth (2011). The Economic Benefits of Palm Oil to Indonesia. A Report by World Growth. Arlington: World Growth.
Keywords: adaptability, forest development, green growth, reversibility, sustainability
Citation: Nurrochmat DR, Sahide MAK and Fisher MR (2022) Making Sustainable Forest Development Work: Formulating an Idea for a More Appropriate Green Policy Paradigm. Front. Environ. Sci. 10:783718. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.783718
Received: 27 September 2021; Accepted: 04 April 2022;
Published: 25 April 2022.
Edited by:
Mohamed Kefi, Centre de Recherches et des Technologies des Eaux, TunisiaReviewed by:
Mohammad Imam Hasan Reza, Centre for Environment and Sustainability—Presidency Education, BangladeshCopyright © 2022 Nurrochmat, Sahide and Fisher. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Dodik Ridho Nurrochmat, ZG51cnJvY2htYXRAYXBwcy5pcGIuYWMuaWQ=