CC BY
33
Section 5. Environmental economics
https://doi.org/10.29013/EJEMS-21-63-73
Arif Rahman Hakim, Endang Larasat, Sri Suwitri, Ida Hayu Dwimawanti, Doctoral Program of Public Administration Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Diponegoro University, Semarang, Indonesia E-mail: a12ifhakimb@gmail.com
FACTORS THAT AFFECTING COLLABORATIVE GOVERNANCE IN PEAT RESTORATION IN OGAN KOMERING ILIR REGENCY, SOUTH SUMATRA PROVINCE
Abstract. This study aims to analyze the factors that influence Collaborative Governance of Peat Restoration in Ogan Komering Ilir Regency, South Sumatra Province. This study applies qualitative method. Data collection techniques were conducted through interview, observation and documentation. The data analysis used includes the stage of data condensation, data sorting and data display as well as verification and conclusion. The results of the study are applying three models, namely (Ansell & Gash [1]); (Emerson Nabatchi & Balogh [8]); (Morse Buss & Kinghorn [14]). These models show that the resource factors in which human resources were sufficient, natural resources, budget resources program activities, facilities and infrastructure, institutional factors where there has been involvement of stakeholders in peat restoration. It consist of The Government, NGO, Company or Private, academics and media, there is already a forum (working group) relates on peat management, and stakeholders already understand the basic rules of peat restoration. Then the findings on cultural factors include the revitalization of productive economic assistance to society living around peat lands, namely duck livestock activities and cattle fattening activities in Ogan Komering Ilir Regency.
Keywords: Collaborative Governance; Peat Restoration; Ogam Komering Ilir; South Sumatra Province; and Human Resources.
I. Introduction in the table below:
South Sumatra is one of the provinces in Indonesia that has a large peat ecosystem such as illustrate
Table 1. - Peat land Landscape in Districts / Cities in South Sumatra
No. Districts or Cities Vast (Ha) Percentages
1. Ogan Komering Ilir 1.030.601 49.28%
2. Banyu Asin 563.083 26.92%
3. Musi Banyu Asin 358.938 17.16%
4. Musi Rawas Utara 57.515 2.75%
5. Muara Enim 35.894 1.72%
6. Penukal Abab Lematang Ilir 30.305 1.45%
7. Musi Rawas 15.104 0.72%
Total (Ha) 2.091.440 100.00%
Source: (Arumingtyas [3])
Table 1 above shows that there are 7 (seven) regencies/cities that are half of the administrative area of Ogan Komering Ilir Regency (OKI) with peat land area of 1.03 million hectares or 49.3% of the total peat ecosystem area in South Sumatra. Other districts that have a wide peat ecosystem are Banyuasin Regency (0.56 million hectares or 26.9% of the total peat ecosystem of South Sumatra) and Musi Banyuasin Regency (0.36 million hectares or 17.2%).
Peat ecosystems in South Sumatra province are in a condition that requires comprehensive recovery efforts, where in 2014 cases of forest fires and land were recorded covering an area of274.051 hectares. The area that suffered the most fires is another use
Table 2.- Area of Forest
area (APL) which reaches 126.034 ha and the production forest still reaches 109.622 hectares, the rest occurs in the natural reserves / areas of 5 nature conservation (KSA / KPA), protected forests, limited production forests, and convertible production forests. The largest location that experienced a fire occurred in Ogan Komering Ilir Regency, which is 196.063 hectares. In 2015, the area of forest and land fires increased to 736.500 hectares and the largest fires occurred in peat areas (Work Visit Team monitoring and review of the Legislative Body of the House Representatives, 2016). While the concentration of forest and land fires sites is the largest in Ogan Komering Ilir Regency illustrates in the table below:
and Land Fires in 2015
District/ Cities Space Patterns Vast (ha)
1 2 3
Banyuasin Protected Forest 2.970
Conversion Production Forest 9.069
Fixed Production Forest 7.249
Forest Nature Reserve 74.438
Tanjung Api-Api Area 255
Waters 39
Plantation 37.324
Settlements 328
Agriculture 9.428
Total 141.100
Empat Lawang Protected Forest 363
Forest Nature Reserve 538
Plantation 13
Total 914
1 2 3
Lahat Plantation 2.789
Total 2.789
Muara Enim Conversion Production Forest 10.863
Fixed Production Forest 6.015
Plantation 13.247
Agriculture 167
Total 30.292
Musi Banyuasin Protected Forest 226
Conversion Production Forest 8.191
Limited Production Forest 395
Fixed Production Forest 79.035
Forest Nature Reserve 4.093
Waters 71
Plantation 13.253
Settlements 61
Agriculture 2.961
Total 108.286
Musi Rawas Conversion Production Forest 149
Fixed Production Forest 2.102
Waters 79
Plantation 35.103
Settlements 3
Agriculture 230
Total 37.666
Musi Rawas Utara Conversion Production Forest 160
Fixed Production Forest 4.335
Plantation 2.683
Settlements 181
Agriculture 7.141
Total 14.501
Ogan Ilir Conversion Production Forest 205
Waters 0
Plantation 8.133
Settlements 1.244
Agriculture 2.714
Total 12.297
Ogan Komering Ilir Protected Forest 19.392
Conversion Production Forest 18.267
Limited Production Forest 2.839
Fixed Production Forest 194.438
Forest Nature Reserve 11.702
Waters 717
Fishing 3.740
1 2 3
Ogan Komering Ilir Plantation 114.768
Settlements 1.005
Agriculture 10.463
Total 377.331
Ogan Komering Ulu Fixed Production Forest 358
Waters 2
Plantation 729
Total 1.088
Oku Timur Plantation 3.811
Agriculture 180
Tota l 3.991
Palembang Plantation 3
Settlement 377
Total 380
Pali Fixed Production Forest 1.021
Plantation 4.072
Settlement 1
Agriculture 810
Total 5.904
Source: https://data.dishut.sumselprov.go.id/documents/?limit=5&offset=0
Table 2 above shows that the area of forest and land fires in Ogan Komering Ilir (OKI) district is 377,331 hectares. Forests and land burned in 2015 are 33% in peat land (Peat Restoration Agency, 2016). Burning peat releases tremendous flue and carbon into the air and is particularly harmful to health. Therefore, efforts to restore degraded peat ecosystems should be created. This is stated in (Presiden Republik Indonesia, 2009) on Environmental Protection and Management Article 54 paragraph 2 and (Pemerintah Republik Indonesia, 2014) as well as (Pemerintah Republik Indonesia, 2016). These regulations relate on on Protection and Management of Peat Ecosystems Article 30 paragraph 3, stating that the restoration of environmental functions is carried out by natural succession, rehabilitation, restoration and other means in accordance with the development of science and technology.
Indonesia's commitment to support the reduction of world carbon emissions is demonstrated by the theory from (Susanto & Susila Wibawa [20]) on Peat
Restoration Agency (BRG). A non-structural institution has the task to carry out the restoration and design of peat governance in the future. This institution does not work alone in the process of restoration activities; surely, many parties involved central government, local government, community groups and other professional parties. This shows that the importance involvement of many parties or human resources that must be well coordinated so that sectorial differences and egos in government institutions do not become obstacles in the course of peat restoration activities. In addition to resource factors that affect collaborative governance, other factors based on models from (An-sell & Gash [1]); (Emerson et al. [8]); (Morse et al. [14]) also influence collaborative governance, namely institutional, leadership, and cultural factors.
Based on the description above, researchers are interested in conducting in-depth research on factors that affect collaborative governance in peat restoration in Ogan Komering Ilir Regency, South Sumatra Province.
II. Literature review
A. Collaborative Governance
In theory and practice of collaborative governance, (Ansell & Gash [1]) explained that: "Collaborative Governance is a control model in which one or more public institutions directly involve non-state stakeholders in a collective decision-making process that is formal, consensus-oriented, deliberative and aims to create or implement public policies, manage public programs or public assets".
This definition involves six criterions such as follows.: 1) forums initiated by public institutions;
2) participants in this forum include non-state actors;
3) participants are involved in decision making and not just "consult"; 4) the forum is officially organized; 5) the forum aims to make decisions by consensus; and 6) the focus ofcooperation is public policy or public management (Ansell & Gash [2]). The emphasis is that the forum is officially organized and conducts regular meetings, consisting ofpublic, private, non-state institutions, including the public who are directly involved in decision making (not just consulting).
According to (Emerson et al. [8]), collaborative governance is a structure, process and management of policies involving not only the government, but also the public and private parties to achieve public goals. The definition illustrates that collaborative governance is a series of arrangements in which public institutions directly involve non-government stakeholders such as the public and private parties in achieving public objectives.
B. Model Collaborative Governance
The three Collaborative Governance models put forward by experts are:
1. Model Collaborative Governance by (Ansell & Gash [1]).
This model has 4 (four) variables that serve as the center of attention, namely: Starting Conditions, Institutional Design, Leadership (Facilitative Leadership) and Collaborative Process.
The initial condition of an organization is very determining the basis level of trust, conflict and so-
cial capital can be both an opportunity and a challenge in collaboration. Institutional design can serve as a basic rule in carrying out collaboration, and leadership as a mediator as well as a facilitator in collaboration (Ansell & Gash [2]).
2. Model Collaborative Governance by (Emerson et al. [8]).
This model has several variables, namely Resource Condition, Policy and Legal Framework, Level of Conflict/Trust, Socio-economic, culture and Diversity, Prior Failure to Address Issues, Political Dynamic/ Power Relations, Network Connectedness, Leadership, Consequential Incentives, Interdependence, Uncertainty, Principle Engagement, Shared Motivation, and Capacity for Joint Action.
3. Model Collaborative Governance by (De Seve [6]).
This model has several variables, namely Networked Structure, Commitment to a common purpose, Trust among the participants, Governance, Access to authority, Distributive Accountability/ Responsibility, Information sharing, and Access resources. Based on the three models stated above, the factors that influence Collaborative Governance in this study focus on four variables, namely Resources, institutional, leadership, and culture.
- Peat Restoration
Peat Restoration is an effort to protect and manage peat ecosystems, which include aspects of protection, recovery, and utilization of natural resource wealth in the form of peat ecosystems, which are carried out sustainably and wisely to ensure the continuity of their functions, in order to provide benefits in supporting human life (Suryani [19]).
III. Research method
The type of research used in this study uses a qualitative approach. According to (Moleong [13]; Patten & Patten [15]), qualitative method was a research that produces descriptive data in the form of written or spoken words from people and observable behaviors. The location in this study is the TRG Office, especially peat restoration area in Ogan Komering Ilir Regency,
South Sumatra Province. The research was conducted from May 2019 to August 2019.
Data collection techniques conducted to analyze Collaborative Governance in Peat Restoration in Ogan Komering Ilir Regency, South Sumatra Province by car; Interviews conducted to informants to obtain data or information about Collaborative Governance in Peat Restoration in Ogan Komering Ilir Regency, South Sumatra Province. Observations were made by observing various phenomena, circumstances, actions and events that occurred in the field related to Collaborative Governance in Peat Restoration in Ogan Komering Ilir Regency, South Sumatra Province. Documentation obtained through documents from various records, archives, books and regulations related to Collaborative Governance in Peat Restoration in Ogan Komering Ilir Regency, South Sumatra Province (McLellan, MaCqueen & Neidig [10]).
In addition, the determination of informants or people whose are expected to master and understand the data, information or facts of the subject (Bungin [5]). Determination of informants is determined through purposive method that is the determination of research informants tailored to the needs. This is because not all informants have criterions that match the phenomenon studied. Informants who become the primary source of data are actors authorized in Collaborative Governance in Peat Restoration, namely: 1) Peat Restoration Agency; 2) Regional Peat Restoration Team (TRGD) Of South Sumatra Province; 3) Forest Service of South Sumatra Province; 4) Environment and Land Office of South Sumatra Province; 5) Corporations/Private Parties;
6) Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs);
7) Communities.
The data analysis techniques used in this study are (B. Miles, Huberman, & Saldana, [4]) that were covering three flow of activities, namely data condensation, data presentation, and conclusion drawing. According to (Moleong [12]), to determine the validity ofdata required examination techniques based on the trust degree of division, dependence and certainty, so
that in this study using triangulation techniques that are techniques of checking the validity of data that utilizes something other than that data for the purposes of checking or as a comparison to this data.
IV. Result and discussion
Factors that affect Collaborative Governance in Peat Restoration in Ogan Komering Ilir Regency, South Sumatra Province are as follows:
1. Resources
One of the goals of collaboration is collaboration for resources, meaning that collaboration is implemented to enable resource sharing between stakeholders in solving public problems (Meier [11]). Resources are a substantial aspect of collaborative governance. This is very clearly shown in the Collaborative conveyed from the Model of (Ansell & Gash [2]) which illustrates that the starting conditions in collaboration are influenced by several phenomena, namely imbalance of strength, resources and knowledge.
Furthermore, (Emerson et al. [8]) illustrated that collaborative governance into three dimensions, especially in the resource factor in the dimension of system context, resource conditions are factors that lead to the need to form collaboration activities. The dimension of drivers, the potential of different resources, owned by each stakeholder leads to a condition of interdependence that gives birth to the realization that achieving something cannot be achieved by effort and capacity of one party alone but have to collaborate with the other party. The dimension of capacity collaboration dynamics for shared action leads to the use of shared resources to achieve collaboration goals.
According to (De Seve [6]) one of the success factors of collaborative governance was Access to Resources. Availability of resources, finance, technical, human and other resources needed to achieve network goals. A program or activity can run if supported by resources, especially financial and human availability. The findings of the research on resource factors consist of two discussions, namely the potential of resources in the stakeholder environment and the need to share resources.
A) Potential resources in the stakeholder environment.
The results of research on potential resources in the stakeholder environment related to peat restoration in Ogan Komering Ilir Regency shows that the government has high resources related to human resources, natural resources, budgets, program activities and facilities and infrastructure. This is supported by the reality and data in the field.
B) Resource sharing needs
The results of research on resource sharing need show that there are limited resources concerning various parties in its management. This is supported by the reality and data in the field.
2. Institutional
Institutional in the concept of collaboration is a container or space where collaboration activities between stakeholders able to take place. (Ansell & Gash [2]) stated that institutional design is important dele-gitimize the collaboration process which is characterized by a wide openness for stakeholders to participate inclusively. Along with the forum as a forum for collaboration, the collaboration that occurs has a clear basis.
The findings on institutional factors consist of three discussions, namely participation, limited forums, and the basic rules of collaboration support.
A) Participation.
Peat restoration and rehabilitation efforts are inseparable from the participation approach that is by actively involving the community since the planning or drafting and implementation of restoration activities in that field. The results show that the participation involved in peat restoration is all parties, whether government, NGO, company or private, academicians and media.
B) Limited Forums.
The results shows that there is already a forum (working group) peat management but the role of vacuum occurs. This is supported by data in the field.
C) Basic Rules Of Collaboration Support.
The results shows that stakeholders already understand about the basic rules of peat restoration,
namely first, legislation and related policies governing peat at the central government level including (Pemerintah Republik Indonesia, 2016) on the protection and management of peat ecosystems. Second, local government policies on peat governance of South Sumatra include (Draft P. P. [7]) on the protection and management of peat ecosystems. This is supported by interview data and documentation.
3. Leadership
Leadership roles are a substantial aspect theory from (Ansell & Gash,[2]) on collaborative governance model. Creativity leadership is one of the important factors that support the implementation of the collaboration process. Initial conditions, institutional design, and initiative leadership are the three main drivers of the creation of collaboration dynamics. Thus, the involvement of stakeholders in collaborative governance is not something that happens by itself. However, it comes from a touch of collaborative leadership. This is in line with theory from (Emerson et al. [8]) which positions leadership as one of the driving forces (Driver) that encourages collaboration. Leadership refers to the figure of a leader who is initiative to start and help prepare resources in supporting the implementation of collaborative governance with the capacity owned.
The findings of the research on leadership factors consist of two discussions, namely mediator of collaboration and preservation of public assets.
A) Mediator of collaboration.
The research results on collaboration mediator's show that there is encouragement from the government in this case the Peat Restoration Agency includes the involvement of village communities in monitoring and law enforcement related to degraded peat restoration. This is supported by existing data in the field.
B) Preservation of public assets.
The results of research on the preservation of public assets show that the existence of high groundwater monitoring equipment in South Sumatra Province, stolen by irresponsible persons. The price of the
tool is 100 million rupiah per unit. This is supported by reality and data obtained in the field.
4. Culture
Cultural factors in collaboration are factors related to mindset, behavior and habits that influence collaboration activities. This study is related to the culture in the government environment that dominates or not in the administration and views on the benefits of collaboration.
One of the causes of collaboration can fail is that cultural tendencies depend on procedures and do not dare to take breakthroughs and risks. Cultural factors consist of two indicators including the culture of government dominance and the view of the benefits of collaboration in peat restoration.
- Duck Livestock Activities in 2018
A) Governance dominance culture.
The research results on the government's dominance culture in peat restoration show that the existence of nonstructural institutions formed by the President. It is namely the Peat Restoration Agency in charge of coordinating and facilitating peat restoration in South Sumatra Province, the existence of revitaliza-tion activities that have been implemented in the form ofproductive economic assistance including duck livestock activities in 2018. Moreover, the cattle fattening assistance activities in 2019 in Kedaton village, Sidak-ersa District ofKayu Agung Sub-District Ogan Komer-ing Ilir Regency. This illustrates that there is a culture of government dominance supported by interview data, observations and documentation in the field as follows:
Figure 1. Duck Livestock in Ogan Komering Ilir
Source: Report on the Implementation of Provincial Peat Restoration Activities, South Sumatra, 2018
Figure 1 above shows that there has been a revi- cal Union) can improve the economic level and do
talization of duck cattle in Kedaton village of Ogan not think to burn peat land in order to open their
Komering Ilir Regency in 2018. This productive eco- agricultural land. One of the criteria of villages pro-
nomic assistance is provided by the BRG Agency so vided with assistance is the affected villages due to
that the community around KHG (Peat Hydrologi- the construction of canal barriers.
- Cattle Fattening Activities in 2019
Kediitoii YUH
En*
Figure 2. Figure 2 Preparation of Cattle Fattening Activities in Ogan Komering Ilir
Source: Data Researcher, July 29, 2019
Figure 2 shows that in 2019, Kedaton village received assistance back from BRG in the form of cattle fattening activities where in the first term the funds provided were allocated for the manufacture of cages first. After the cage is neat and finished, term in next when the funds come down from the province, followed by the purchase of cows.
The research results show that there is a tradition of the community in Ogan Komering Ilir Regency in clearing land by burning to grow rice or known as sonar system. The sonar system is difficult to eliminate, economic aspects influence this because it can save time and low costs for land clearing. Furthermore, the communities of Ogan Komering Ilir Regency have a tradition of managing Purun plants that live in peat lands into handicrafts such as mats, sandals and so on. Changes in the way peat land management is
managed with the collaboration of Peat Restoration, people are encouraged to leave the old culture (sonar farming) with productive economic assistance solutions, namely duck livestock activities and cattle fattening activities.
V. Conclusion
Based on the research results, it can be concluded that the supporting factors of Collaborative Governance in peat restoration in Ogan Ilir Regency, South Sumatra Province, namely resource factors that are sufficient for human resources, natural resources, budget resources of program activities and facilities and infrastructure. Moreover, institutional factors where stakeholders have been involved in peat restoration, namely The Government, NGO, Company or private, academics and media, there is already a forum (working group) peat management, and stake-
holders already understand the basic rules of peat restoration.
Then these findings on cultural factors include the existence of a culture of government dominance in peat restoration activities with the establishment of BRG and the revitalization ofproductive economic assistance. It classifies into duck livestock activities and
cattle fattening activities so that the community can abandon the tradition of sonar farming so that forest and land fires in Ogan Komering Illr Regency are reduced. This research contributes input for the government to be able to strengthen BRG and its working period can be extended because it provides many benefits for communities impacted by forest and land fires.
References:
1. Ansell C. & Gash A. Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,- 18(4), 2008a.- P. 543-571. URL: https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032
2. Ansell C. & Gash A. Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 2008 b. URL: https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032
3. Arumingtyas L. Bencana Asap di Sumatera dan Kalimantan, Mengapa Lahan Gambut Terus Terbakar? 2019.
4. Miles B., Huberman A. M., & Saldana J. Qualitative Data Analysis - Matthew B. Miles, A. Michael Hu-berman, Johnny Saldana - Google Books. Sage Publications. 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. revmed.2011.11.010
5. Bungin B. Penelitian Kualitatif: Komunikasi, Ekonomi, Kebijakan Publik, Dan Ilmu Sosial Lainnya. Kencana. 2007.
6. De Seve G. E. The Case for New Federal Budget Concepts and Benchmarks: Defining the Problem... The Journal of Government Financial Management. 2004.
7. Draft P. P. G. Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia tentang Perlindungan dan Pengelolaan Ekosistem Gambut. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling. 1989.
8. Emerson K., Nabatchi T., & Balogh S. An integrative framework for collaborative governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 2012. URL: https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur011
9. URL: URL: https://data.dishut.sumselprov.go.id/documents/?limit=5&offset=0
10. McLellan E., MaCqueen K. M. & Neidig J. L. Beyond the Qualitative Interview: Data Preparation and Transcription. Field Methods. 2003. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X02239573
11. Meier K.J. Collaborative Governance: Private Roles for Public Goals in Turbulent Times by John D. Donahue and Richard J. Zeckhauser. International Public Management Journal. 2011. URL: https://doi.or g/10.1080/10967494.2011.657120
12. Moleong L. J. Metodelogi penelitian. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling. 2006. URL: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
13. Moleong L.J. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif (Edisi Revisi). In PT. Remaja Rosda Karya. 2017.
14. Morse R. S., Buss T. F. & Kinghorn C. M. (2020). Creating Public Value Using Managed Networks Edward DeSeve. In Transforming Public Leadership for the 21st Century. URL: https://doi. org/10.4324/9781315698588-20
15. Patten M. L., & Patten M. L. Qualitative Research Design. In Understanding Research Methods. 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315213033-51
16. Pemerintah Republik Indonesia. Peraturan Pemerintah (PP) No. 71 Tahun 2014 tentang Perlindungan Dan Pengelolaan Ekosistem Gambut (2014). Indonesia. Retrieved from URL: https://peraturan.bpk. go.id/Home/Details/5513/pp-no-71-tahun-2014
17. Pemerintah Republik Indonesia. Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Nomor 57 Tahun 2016 (2016). Indonesia. Retrieved from URL: https://sipuu.setkab.go.id/PUUdoc/175063/PP No 57 Tahun 2016.pdf
18. Presiden Republik Indonesia. Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 32 Tahun 2009 Tentang Per-lindungan Dan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup (2009). Indonesia. Retrieved from URL: https://jdih. esdm.go.id/storage/document/UU32 Tahun 2009 (PPLH).pdf
19. Suryani A. S. Peringatan World Wetland Day Dan Pentingnya Pengelolaan Lahan Gambut. Info Singkat. 2018.
20. Susanto S. N., & Susila Wibawa K. C. The Existence of The Indonesia Peatland Restoration Agency in Perspective of Organization and Authority. Administrative Law and Governance Journal. 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.14710/alj.v3i1.92-103
