CC BY
28
DOI 10.18551/rjoas.2019-01.25
ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL FORESTRY PROGRAMS ON COMMUNITY INCOME AROUND THE CONCESSION AREA AT PT. MUSI HUTAN PERSADA
Maryadi*, Asmani N., Minha A., Sari N.S.
Jl. Raya Palembang-Prabumulih KM 32 North Indralaya Ogan Ilir, South Sumatra, Indonesia
*E-mail: maryadi [email protected]
ABSTRACT
Forestry as one of the determinants of the natural life buffer system that has provided great benefits for humanity must be maintained, its existence and its sustainability. Forest resources have an important role economically as a provider of raw materials for the forest products industry, a source of income for the community and the state and are able to create jobs, so that forestry is still considered a superior sector that can spur the country's economic growth. Therefore this research is focused on calculating the direct and indirect contributions of the MHR program to the income of residents around the PT MHP concession. This research was carried out in the village of Seubanjeriji, Muara Enim Regency, which included the work unit of the Subanjeriji region. Based on the results of the study, it is known that 1) There are a variety of sources of income for the respondents, namely farmers, farm workers, company workers, public / private employees, long-time / artisan / contractor owners and traders / sellers of various businesses and services and most are farmers / farm labor 2) The MHR program has contributed directly to the participants in the form of profit sharing as well as from their own sales with an average total of Rp 20,833,333, and indirect contributions in the form of opening new jobs and the establishment of stalls and services services with an average income of IDR 5,785,000 per year, and also from intercropping with an average income of IDR 1,800,700. From the results of this study, for further research it is recommended to conduct a more in-depth study of the usefulness of this MHR program for the community not only in terms of socio-economics but also social, cultural, social and ecological psychology.
KEY WORDS
Contributions, revenues, social forestry.
One of the pioneers of HTI development in South Sumatra was PT Musi Hutan Persada (PT. MHP) located in Muara Enim. The company concentrates on developing and managing Industrial Plantation Forests. Based on the Decree of the Minister of Forestry Number: 038 / Kpts-II / 1996 dated January 29, 1996, PT Musi Hutan Persada was granted as a Concession Right for Industrial Timber Plantation License (Business Permit for Utilization of Timber Forest Products - Plantation Forests) to manage and utilize timber from Industrial Plantation Forests in South Sumatra, covering an area of 296,400 hectares. This business entity was formed in 1991 and is a joint venture between PT Enim Musi Lestari (PT EML), which is one of the business entities within the Barito Pacific Business Group, with PT Inhutani II, a State-Owned Enterprise engaged in the forestry sector. A distinctive feature of PT. MHP has been designed from the beginning to be associated with the pulp mill of PT. Tanjung Enim Lestari, which emphasized its character as a company that built HTI. But at this time the position of the Barito Pacific Business Group was replaced by the Marubeni Group Business Group. With the distribution of shares of PT Inhutani V (Persero) as a State-Owned Enterprise) with 40% shares and Marubeni Corporation (Japan) with 60% shares (Srihadiono and Susatyi Utomo, 2005 in Apriengga, 2011). In order to improve the welfare of the community in and around the concession area of PT Musi Hutan Persada, community empowerment in and around the forest is carried out with the Social Forestry Program. The Social Forestry Program places communities in and around forests as the main actors of community forest management and the main partners of forest management with HTI developers and the government (Maryadi et al, 2011).
The real form of activity of the Social Forestry Program implemented by PT MHP since 2000 is the partnership pattern of Building Community-Based Forests (MHBM) as a form of partnership with communities in its concession area and Managing Community Forests (MHR) as HTI planting programs on community-owned land (Martin, 2008) This pattern was born to overcome the prolonged conflict that occurred between the company and the community around the forest before. In this conflict the community claimed that the company's concession area surrounding their village was land that they recognized as exclan land. The peak of the riots occurred during the reforms from 1998 to 1999 where many company land was occupied and burned by the community which caused significant losses and made the company atmosphere very not conducive (Maryadi et al, 2011). This pattern is at least quite effective in reducing the contradictions that occur in society, besides financially this partnership benefits the company because of the expansion of land. Managing Community Forests (MHR) is a partnership pattern between companies and communities that own forest land. The pattern developed by the company is planting HTI on community-owned land. This partnership pattern was developed with the hope of being able to overcome land ownership conflicts between communities and companies. The area developed is the area around the HTI area. Various agreements and revenue sharing are made in legal agreements between companies and farmer groups (Sjarkowi, 2007).
MHR Partnership Pattern conducted by PT. MHP with the community in its implementation has entered its fourteenth year. A variety of success stories and a series of problems are a part of the community who are participants of the program. Every business development on a large scale should have a positive effect on the local community both directly and indirectly. Likewise what happened to PT Musi Hutan Persada through the partnership pattern of MHR which runs with the community. Of course all parties have high hopes that the implementation of the partnership by PT. MHP can help contribute to community development and increase their income. However, when the community considers this program has not provided optimal satisfaction for them, of course it becomes a question of what happened to the partnership that has been built. The research aims to calculate the direct and indirect contributions of the MHR program to the economy of the residents around the PT MHP concession.
METHODS OF RESEARCH
This research was carried out in two locations in the concession area of PT MHP Subanjeriji Village, Muara Enim Regency. The method used in this study is the survey method. The sample used in this study consisted of 3 layers, namely directly related (TL) who were MHR participants, not directly related (TTL) who were non MHR participants but had an indirect relationship with the MHR program and were not related at all (TTS) who are non-MHR participants and have no connection with the MHR program but get indirect benefits from the MHR program.
Data obtained in the field are processed in tabulation form, analyzed systematically. To answer the first goal, which is to identify the source of income of the surrounding community which is directly, indirectly or not related to the MHR program, is to collect information through observation, in-depth interviews and evaluations which are tabulated and described descriptively. To answer the second objective, which is to calculate the direct and indirect contribution of the MHR program to the economy, it is by calculating the income of the community from the data identified previously.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Direct Contribution of the MHR Program. Managing Community Forests (MHR) is a HTI management program jointly implemented between PT. MHP with the community. The company partners in the MHR scheme are people who are in or around the HPHTI area of PT. MHP, which has legitimate land tenure rights with minimal Land Certificate (SKT) from the village head. The land that can be partnered in the MHR scheme is the area inside and
around the HPHTI area of PT. MHP which is factually and legally controlled by the community (proven by SKT) and the land has never been cultivated by the company (Martin, 2008). The yield that will be obtained is a joint result between the community and PT MHP by dividing the revenue based on a deed of agreement, which is 40% of the farmers and 60% of the company. For samples included in the Direct Related (TL) contributions that can be felt directly by participants through the MHR program, revenue in the form of profit sharing is received after the management process has been completed. PT MHP's acacia HTI harvest period, both controlled by the company and MHR land, is around six years since the planting period. Therefore the implementation of profit sharing with farmers was carried out approximately several months after the felling. The profit sharing given to MHR participants is 40% according to the initial agreement. This amount is the accumulation of revenues after deducting costs during the planting period to logging (planting operational costs, production operational costs and administrative costs).
Income of Respondents Associated Directly is the total family income of MHR participants. Calculation of income structure is used to determine the magnitude of the effect of an income from activities carried out by the community both from farming and not from farming.
In this Direct Respondent respondents for non-acacia farming there are two types, namely eight respondents of rubber farming and one respondent of cassava farming. For rubber farming, it is found in Talang Ubi District, while for cassava farming is in BP Peliung District. For outside farming, only one person in BP Peliung District is a contractor. Average respondents income Directly can be seen in table 1.
Table 1 - Average Income of Respondents Regarding Directly
No Source Avarager Income (Rp/th) Percentage (%)
1 Non-Acacia Farming Akasia 25.573.379 46,36
2 Acacia Farming (MHR) 20.833.333 37,77
3 Non-farming 8.750.000 15,86
Total 55.156.712 100,00
Based on the data in Table 1 above, the average Acacia (MHR) income is IDR 20,833,333. contributed revenue of 37.77% of the total income of the participants' families. This shows that income from acacia farming managed in the MHR program has an influence or contribution to the total family income of participants. This direct contribution from the MHR program provides additional income for separate MHR participants.
Non-acacia farming income contributes the largest revenue, which is 46.36% with an average income of IDR 25,573,379. The farms conducted by the respondents were rubber and sweet potatoes. The reason many respondents are planting rubber because it has become a tradition that has been inherited down and down, besides that according to them rubber certainly produces every week or month, so it provides income that can always be used for daily needs, even though unwittingly fluctuations in rubber prices the non-permanent and ever-changing ones should make them not depend on rubber, because when the price of rubber drops dramatically their income will also decrease drastically. For the reason the respondents who did the cassava farming were because of the market that contained the sweet potato. In addition, the capital needed is not too large but can get a fairly large turnover. For outside farming, the average income is IDR 8,750,000 and contributes 5.92%, this is because only a few of the Direct Related respondents source their income outside of farming.
Indirect Contribution of the MHR Program. In addition to directly contributing in the form of revenue sharing, the MHR program provides indirect contributions, namely the opening of new jobs, the opening of road access, logging access to MHP which makes housing around the road, besides the opportunity to open up business because of the wide access to the concession area, the existence of stalls, workshops, and rented houses and various businesses and services that indirectly become a source of additional income for the community. For the Subanjeriji area because of a conflict, one of MHP's efforts to reduce
tension with the community, because the community living conditions are directly adjacent to the MHP concession area, MHP continues to allow local residents to plant the PT MHP land, because the land is they have not planted acacia, which they call tumpang sari. But provided that the plants that are allowed are not perennials, only crops that are once harvested, such as chili, sweet potatoes, soybeans and others. Many people also take part in this land. In addition, the community also benefits from forest products for firewood from natural wood that is not acacia and acacia wood that dies or burns for carpentry and long wood. There are also people who take grass from this MHP field for their animal feed. From this narrative which is the result of observations from the field, it means that this result is in accordance with the first hypothesis which states that the existence of the MHR program contributed positively to the economic sector of the village surrounding the PT MHP concession area
Income of Respondents Not Directly Related (TTL) is the average total family income of respondents who are not MHR participants but indirectly have links with the MHR program. The respondents classified as TTL are either related to their sources of income which are indirect benefits from the MHR program or there are indirect events that are not related.
Table 2 - Average Income of Respondents Not Directly Related
No Source Avarager Income (Rp/th) Percentage (%)
1 Rubber Farmer 7.430.847 23,91
2 MHP Workers / Employees 7.860.000 25,29
3 Private Civil Servants / Employees 4.620.000 14,86
4 Panglong / driver / artisan 11.172.000 35,94
Total 31.082.847 100,00
Based on Table 2, it can be seen that the average income of rubber farmers is IDR 7,430,847 with contributions of 23.91%. And the smallest average PNS / Employee income is IDR 4,620,000 with a contribution of 14.86%. The biggest average income is the long / driver / artisan, which is Rp. 11,720,000 per year with a contribution to the overall total of 35.94%. Indirectly the MHR contributed to the participants, even though the mushrooming of the trees also had a negative effect that triggered the occurrence of timber encroachment at BP Peliung. Other indirect contributions to income, from those who work as MHP workers / employees, are Rp. 7.860,000 per year with a contribution of 25.29%. The existence of the MHR program indirectly provides an opportunity for the opening of new employment fields that are automatically useful as an additional income for the community. Meanwhile, the income of Respondents Not Associated at All (TTS) is the average total family income of respondents who are not participants of the MHR and have no connection at all with the MHR program, but they get indirect benefits or benefits from MHR programs that have a role as additional income for the community. Because, as stated earlier, the presence of the MHR program has made access to roads that can increase the economy of the community with many stalls, workshops and other services. In addition, the adjacent residential areas with MHP concession areas provide distinct benefits such as intercropping and utilization of firewood.
Table 3 - Average Income of Respondents Not Associated at All
No Source Avarager Income (Rp/th) Percentage (%)
1 Rubber Farmers / Farmers 12.865.301 57,16
2 Private Employees 2.058.000 9,14
3 Various Businesses 5.785.000 25,70
4 Tumpang Sari 1.800.700 8,00
Total 22.509.001 100,00
Based on Table 3, we can see the average income of Rubber Farmers / Farmers is Rp. 12,865,301 per year with a contribution to income of 57.16%. The average income of private employees is Rp. 2,058,000 per year with an income contribution of 9.14%. Income derived from indirect benefits / benefits or positive externalities of the MHR program in the form of
various businesses and services is equal to Rp. 5,785,000 per year. Providing revenue contribution of 25.70%. Even though it only provides the second largest contribution, at least this serves as an addition to their income. Whereas in the form of Intercropping is Rp. 1,800,700 per year with a contribution to income of 8.00%. When seen the contribution given is relatively small because it is only 8.00%. This is because the respondents who did the Tumpang Sari who lived in MHP land only planted an area of 0.25 ha. And the type of plant planted is Chili. Only one respondent planted an area of 1 ha of chili plants and one respondent who planted an area of 1.5 ha with cassava plants. But even though it only provides the smallest contribution, this also serves as an additional income for them. This means that this result is in accordance with the second hypothesis which states that the MHR program has a role in increasing additional income for the community.
CONCLUSION
The MHR program has contributed directly to the participants in the form of profit sharing as well as from their own sales with an average total of Rp 20,833,333, and indirect contributions in the form of opening new jobs and establishing stalls and service services on average income of IDR 5,785,000 per year, and also from intercropping with an average income of IDR 1,800,700.
REFERENCES
1. Anjasari, Risa. 2009. Pengaruh Hutan Tanaman Industri (HTI) Terhadap Kondisi Sosial Ekonomi Masyarakat di Kecamatan Kampar Kiri. Jurusan Perencanaan Wilayah dan Kota. Fakultas Tekni Universitas Diponegoro. Semarang.
2. Apriengga. 2011. Evaluasi dan Pengembangan Strategi Kemitraan Perusahaan dengan Peserta Program Mengelola Hutan Rakyat (MHR) PT Musi Hutan Persada di Desa Subanjeriji Kabupaten Muara Enim. Skripsi S1 (tidak dipublikasikan). Program Studi Agribisnis Fakultas Pertanian Universitas Sriwijaya. Indralaya
3. Dwiastuti, Rini. 2012. Modul Metode Penelitian Sosial: Rancangan Penarikan Contoh (Sampling Design). Agribisnis Fakultas Pertanian Universitas Brawijaya.
4. Martin dan Fitriyanti. 2006. Kelayakan Ekonomi dan Manfaat Sosial Program Perhutanan Sosial pada Hutan Tanaman Industri. Jurnal Penelitian Hutan Tanaman Vol3 No.2 Mei 2006, 117-128
5. Hakim, Ismatul. 2010. Orientasi Makro Kebijakan Social Forestry di Indonesia. E-Book Kebijakan Social Forestry: Menuju Masyarakat Sejahtera. Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Perubahan Iklim dan Kebijakan. Bogor.
6. Nugroho, Rino A. 2007. Pengantar Teori Pembangunan. Development Theory: An Overview Ver 1.1. Universitas Sebelas Maret. Solo
7. Margiati, Tuti. 2009. Kebijakan Pembangunan Hutan Tanaman Industri (HTI). Direktorat Jendral Bina Produksi Kehutanan. http://www.dephut.go.id/ (Diakses 07 Februari 2014).
