CC BY
1
UDC 332; DOI 10.18551/rjoas.2023-04.11
SOCIAL CAPITAL IN THE RESTORATION OF PEATLAND ECOSYSTEMS: A CASE STUDY OF PULANTANI VILLAGE, SOUTH KALIMANTAN, INDONESIA
Pitri Rina Muhayah Noor1*, Hatta Gusti Muhammad1, Kurnain Ahmad2,
Hafizinor1, Kissinger1
Faculty of Forestry, University of Lambung Mangkurat, Banjarbaru, South Kalimantan Indonesia Faculty of Agriculture, University of Lambung Mangkurat, Banjarbaru, South Kalimantan, Indonesia *E-mail: durror2ali@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Social aspects such as coordination, cooperation, trust, concern, information flow affect the success of restoration activities. These elements are part of the social capital. The research aims to analyze the characteristics of individuals and social capital of the community in peatland restoration efforts. The object of this case study was the community of Pulantani village. Six indicators were used to assess individual characteristics, while 75 indicators were used to assess social capital. The number of respondents was determined using the Slovin formula. Data were analyzed using individual characteristic and social capital analysis. The individual characteristics obtained in Pulantani village fall into the moderate (>10 - 14). The indicators of age and length of residence have high values. This indicates the availability of a highly productive workforce and that they are locals, making this strength of the village. The level of social capital in Pulantani village is moderate (score= 233.59). The community of Pulantani village has strengths in trust, social norms, and sympathy and reciprocal action.
KEY WORDS
Individual characteristics, peat land ecosystem, restoration, social capital.
The peatlands in Indonesia are experiencing widespread degradation and loss of function. Kalimantan Selatan is an area in Indonesia that has experienced peatland degradation. The degraded area of peatland in South Kalimantan is 227,857 hectares (Directorate General of Pollution and Environmental Damage Control Decree No. 40, 2018). The degradation of the peatland ecosystem is mainly caused by agricultural activities, plantations, forestry industry, forest and peatland fires (PRA, 2019; MEF, 2021). Other factors that affect the degradation of peatland ecosystems include rapid social and economic changes with development projects that ignore community participation and self-reliance (PRA, 2019).
Efforts to prevent damage and preserve the function of peatland ecosystems are outlined in Government Regulation No. 57 of 2016 concerning the protection and management of peatland ecosystems. Restoration of the peatland ecosystem function is an activity to restore the nature and function of peatland ecosystems as close as possible to their original state through natural succession, restoration (efforts to restore the function of peatland ecosystems as before), vegetation rehabilitation (efforts to restore the function and improve peatland ecosystems through revegetation), and/or other methods in accordance with the development of science and technology (IG, 2016).
Peatland ecosystem restoration efforts in some locations have not yet shown satisfactory results. The "economic revitalization of communities" activity for the restoration of peatland ecosystems in several locations shows that the activities cannot yet be continued independently by the community in the following year (the business is not yet sustainable). Assistance in the form of business capital such as poultry, processed food products, and fish farming (in some locations) has not been well established. The success of revegetation activities (measured by growth success) is also still low. The function of rewetting activities (bore hole drilling or canal blocking) is not yet optimal in some cases.
All peatland ecosystem restoration efforts are closely related to the community as the subject/actor in peatland ecosystem restoration efforts. This activity must be viewed from a broader aspect and adjusted to the characteristics of the local community. Community readiness to accept and implement programs is one of the elements that must be considered. The level of community readiness can be seen from the interactions established within the community. This is done by exploring the trust that is formed within the community both with residents inside and outside the village.
The relationship between human activities (social system) and nature (ecological system) is a key factor that influences changes in forest cover in tropical peatland ecosystems. The complexity of socio-ecological factors is still poorly understood (Medrilzam et al., 2014) and therefore needs further study. Peatland ecosystem restoration activities also need to consider aspects of coordination and cooperation within the community to carry out the activities. This is the basis for exploring the social capital of the community in peatland ecosystem restoration activities. Social capital will describe everything related to cooperation within the community, which provides mutual benefits to achieve a better quality of life. Social capital is supported by elements such as trust, networks, norms, proactive and caring actions, coordination, cooperation, reciprocity, institutions, sympathy, and information channels (Fukuyama, 1995; Hasbullah, 2006; Putnam, 1993; Robinson et al., 2002).
The community cannot solely rely on external aid to overcome economic difficulties; they must collectively think and take the best steps to address these issues by utilizing all of their potential and resources. Thus, social capital emphasizes the need for self-reliance in addressing social and economic problems, while external aid is considered a complement to trigger initiatives and productivity that arise from within the community.
One of the villages that has participated in the peatland ecosystem restoration activities in South Kalimantan is the village of Pulantani. This village has participated in the Rewetting, Revegetation, and Revitalization activities, which are peatland ecosystem restoration programs. Pulantani is a village that has peatland and is part of the Peat Hydrological Area of Sungai Utar - Sungai Serapat. This research seeks to combine social aspects with a social capital approach to the community based on the perspective of social capital elements with the characteristics of the community as an inseparable part of peatland ecosystem restoration activities. This study aims to analyze the characteristics of individuals and social capital in the Pulantani community in the effort to restore the peatland ecosystem.
METHODS OF RESEARCH
This research was conducted in the village of Pulantani, Haur Gading District, Hulu Sungai Utara District, South Kalimantan. The time for the research was from May to November 2022. The objects of this research were the characteristics, behaviors, activities, opinions, appraisal views, pro and con attitude, and sympathies of the people of Pulantani village.
Data collection was done by interview technique. Selection of respondents using random sampling method. Respondents are villagers in Pulantani village. Data collection used a questionnaire and then observation and interviews were carried out using a structured interview technique. The number of respondents was determined based on the Slovin formula approach. The calculation of the sample of respondents based on the Slovin formula (Umar, 2004) is as follows:
N
n ~ 1 + N. d2
Where: n =sample size; N =population size; d = standard error.
The number of family in Pulantani village is 183 families (Central Bureau of Statistics HSU, 2021). The standard error value (d) used is 8%, so the number of respondents used is 85 respondents.
Individual characteristics in Pulantani village were analyzed by using 6 indicators, namely age, formal education, non-formal education, income level, length of residence and
social status in the community. The number of classes for individual characteristics was 3 classes. Description of the individual characteristics indicators of Pulantani village is presented in Table 1.
Table 1 - Indicators for individual characteristics of Pulantani village
Indicators of Individual Characteristics
Information
Age
Formal Education Informal Education
Income Level Long stay/lived Social Status
Not yet productive, productive and unproductive.
Elementary School, Junior High School, Senior High School, Diploma/Bachelor Frequency of participation in non-formal education such as training or technical guidance and others.
Income each month refers to the level of income from Central Bureau of Statistics Judging from the original population or the duration of residence The position seen from the social aspect in society is for example village officials, religious leaders, community leaders, skippers, landlords and others._
The class width in individual characteristics using the Supranto 2000 equation is as follows:
Class width =
The highest observation value — The lowest observation value Number of class
The values used to assess individual characteristics for each indicator are low (score 1), moderate (score 2), and high (score 3). The categories for individual characteristic values used the following approach:
Table 2 - Interval value of individual characteristics
Level of individual characteristic Based on sum of score Based on Percentage
Low < 6 - 10 > 33,33% - 55,55%
Moderate >10 - 14 55,56% - 77,77%
High >14 - 18 > 77,78% - 100%
Social capital will be seen from 11 elements with 75 indicators. The number of classes in social capital is four classes (minimum, low, medium, and high). The elements and the number of indicators in each element can be seen in Table 3.
Table 3 - Elements and indicators of social capital
Variable Number of Indicators Variable Number of Indicators Variable Number of Indicators
Trust 12 Concern/caring 3 Reciprocity 4
Social Networking 6 Coordination 3 Information Flow 13
Norms 6 Cooperation 9 Institutionalization 6
Proactive 10 Sympathy 3
The class width in social capital using the Supranto 2000 equation is as follows:
The highest observation value — The lowest observation value
Class width = ■
Number of class
The values used for assessing each indicator of social capital are 4 categories. The categories of social capital values use the following approach (Uphoff, 2000):
Table 4 - Interval value of social capital
Level of Social Capital Based on sum of score Based on Percentage
Minimum > 75 - 131,25 > 25% - 43,75%
Low > 131,25 - 187,5 > 43,75% - 62,5%
Moderate > 187,5 - 243,75 > 62,5% - 81,25%
High > 243,75 - 300 > 81,25% - 100%
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The results of the assessment of individual characteristics in Pulantani village are as follows:
Table 5 - Individual Characteristics in Pulantani Village
Variable Individual Characteristics Sum of Score Mean of Score
Age 253 2,98
Formal Education 145 1,71
Informal Education 168 1,98
Income Level 139 1,63
Long stay/lived 252 2,96
Social Status 120 1,41
Total Score 1077 12,67
The individual characteristics of the community in Pulantani village fall under the category of moderate value (>10 - 14). The individual characteristics listed in Table 1 explain that the indicators of age and length of residency have high values. The majority of the population (92.59%) falls under the productive age category (15 to 65 years old) and the rest (7.41%) fall under the elderly category (>65 years old).. The length of residency of the respondents also has a high score, which indicates that the respondents are either local residents or migrants who have been living there for more than 31 years. This indicates a high availability of productive labor and a local workforce, which is a strength in Pulantani village.
The indicators that have low values are formal education level,informal education level, income, and social status of the community. Individual characteristics can be improved by increasing non-formal education. Informal education can be provided through training, socialization, and workshops on peatland ecosystem restoration efforts. Increasing skills or knowledge to obtain better income is also necessary for the community. This is expected to increase the income of the community. Based on the level of individual characteristics, the Pulantani village community has sufficient potential to support peatland ecosystem restoration activities.
The social capital assessment in this research uses 11 elements with a total of 75 indicators. Each social capital element has its own indicators that are used to measure the value of the community's social capital. The results of the assessment of individual
characteristics in Pulantani village can be seen at Table 6.
Table 6 - Social capital in Pulantani Villager
Social Capital Calculation
Variable Number of indicators Sum of score mean of score mean of percentage Level
Trust 12 3.455 41,63 86,72 High
Social networking 6 1.389 16,73 69,73 Moderate
Social norms 6 1.792 21,59 89,96 High
Proactive 10 2.327 27,38 68,44 Moderate
Concern/caring 3 790 9,29 77,45 Moderate
Coordination 3 642 7,55 62,94 Moderate
Cooperation 9 2.369 28,54 79,28 Moderate
Sympathy 3 836 9,84 81,96 High
Reciprocity 4 1.123 13,21 82,57 High
Information flow 13 3.425 40,29 77,49 Moderate
Institutionalization 6 1.490 17,53 73,04 Moderate
Total 75 19.638 233,59 77,24 Moderate
The results presented in Table 6 indicate that social capital in the form of trust within the community is classified as high with a score of 41.63. Overall, the average level of trust among the community of Pulantani is 86.72%. The high level of trust in the village of Pulantani is also reflected in the way the community welcomes guests. They have a very open and welcoming attitude towards outsiders and try to facilitate the needs of guests who come to their village.
The community of Pulantani village has strengths in the elements of Trust, Social Norms, sympathy, and Reciprocal Action. The value of trust among the community of Pulantani is presented in Figure 1.
Figure 1 - Score of trust indicators among community of Pulantani Village
Social Norms
Ж
309
Ж
Ж
279
279
303
309
V
V
313 ^
Religious rules Government Informal rules Truthful rules
Norms Indicator
politeness Harmony
Figure 2 - Score of social norms indicators among community of Pulantani Village
The people of Pulantani village have very high levels of trust towards religious figures (in Islam) and towards people from the same ethnic background (Banjar tribe). The community also has high levels of trust towards local community leaders. The result shown in Figure 1 explain that the elements of trust in the community of Pulantani village indicate that 8 or equivalent to 66.67% of the indicators used have high values, while the other 4 indicators (33.33%) are moderate. This indicates that the community has high trust in the surrounding community (both those of the same and different ethnicities), high trust in community leaders, religious figures, and academic institutions. This trust is influenced by strong religious values and noble societal values that emphasize respecting the "elders of the village". The people of Pulantani village also do not easily become suspicious of outsiders
and are willing to cooperate with them while maintaining a sense of kinship. This is a good asset to support peatland ecosystem restoration activities.
The community of Pulantani Village has strength in the aspect of social norms. There are 6 indicators used in the social norms aspect. the average level of social norms among the community of Pulantani is 89.96%. The value of norms elements in society is presented in figure 2.
Social capital is often a by-product of religion, education, tradition, and historical experience that are outside the control of the state. One of the strong foundations of community norms is the indicator of compliance with Islamic rules as a norm for the community, which influences the honesty of the community (Figure 2). The community's harmony is high and can be seen from the fact that deliberation is always conducted as the basis for decision-making.
The community in Pulantani village adheres to religious rules, government regulations, and community norms. The Pulantani village community also has a high value in the element of sympathy. Figure 3 presents the element of sympathy in Pulantani village.
Symphaty
CO (N
l l I
Admiration for individuals/groups Empathy towards others who are in Appreciation for individuals/groups who preserve peatland ecosystem distress. who preserve peatland ecosystem
Norms Indicator
Figure 3 - Score of symphaty indicators among community of Pulantani Village
The community has a high level of admiration for groups that are willing to preserve peatland The Pulantani community also has a high level of empathy, meaning they feel the hardships of those around them. The level of the mutual exchange (reciprocity) element of social capital in Pulantani village is high. The element of mutual exchange among villagers in daily life can be seen in several activities such as exchanging food, borrowing goods, or providing small assistance (Figure 3). The Pulantani community provides each other with both physical and mental support in daily life as well as during events with a level of 87.35% to 88.53%.
There are no elements of low social capital in the community of Pulantani village. The value of social capital is dominated by a moderate value. There is only a small weakness in the Pulantani village community, which lies in the coordination sub-indicator such as taking the initiative to hold formal or non-formal meetings for coordinating activities.
Based on its level of social capital, the Pulantani village has several strengths (elements of trust, norms, sympathy, and reciprocal actions) that have great potential for receiving and implementing peatland ecosystem restoration programs. The social capital possessed by Pulantani village is expected to influence attitudes and beliefs that affect trust and concern, which will drive cooperation in the community to achieve the goal of restoring the peatland ecosystem. Furthermore, with sufficient social capital support (moderate level), the Pulantani village community is expected to develop together with relevant stakeholders to create and succeed in joint activities aimed at peatland ecosystem restoration.
Social capital in Pulantani village is expected to be used as a unifying tool for harmony and cohesion in the community, thereby minimizing gaps, promoting voluntary and independent values for community development, and becoming a tool for encouraging community participation in collective action for common goals
CONCLUSION
The characteristics of individuals in Pulantani village fall into the medium level category (>10 -14). The indicators of age and length of residency have high values that become strength for community of Pulantani village. The indicators that are low include formal education, non-formal education, income, and social status. Increasing formal and nonformal education is needed to increase the knowledge and skills of the community, which is expected to change the mindset of the community in solving problems. Alternative income needs to be developed to improve the welfare of the community and at the same time reduce pressure on peatland so that the community can be part of peatland restoration efforts. The level of social capital in Pulantani village is in the medium category (233.59). Pulantani village has strengths in Trust, Social Norms, and Sympathy. Pulantani village does not have any elements with low values. The value of community social capital can be used as a driver for collective action to achieve the goal of peatland restoration. The community's social capital in Pulantani village needs to be improved, especially in terms of coordination and the initiative to hold formal or non-formal meetings as a means of coordination. Strengthening coordination, institutions, and networks of cooperation is needed to form a community with strong participation in achieving common goals. Strengthening various social capital elements can be done through community empowerment mechanisms so that they have independence. The individual characteristics and the social capital of the Pulantani village support peatland restoration efforts. The community's social capital is part of the determining factors for the success of peatland restoration efforts
ACKNOWLEGEMENTS
The author expresses gratitude to LPPM University of Lambung Mangkurat for supporting the research funding. Thanks also conveyed to all components of the Faculty of Forestry at University of Lambung Mangkurat and all parties who supported the implementation of this research activity.
REFERENCES
1. Abdullah, S. 2013. Potential and Strength of Social Capital in a Community. SOCIUS: Jurnal Sosiologi, XII, 15-21.
2. Central Bureau of Statistics HSU. 2021. Haur Gading sub-District in Figure. Hulu Sungai Utara. Regional Government of Hulu Sungai Utara Regency.
3. Directorate General of Pollution and Environmental Damage Control. 2018. Surat Keputusan Dirjend Nomor 40 Tahun 2018. Directorate General of Pollution and Environmental Damage Control. (DGPED).
4. Flassy, D. J., Rais, S., & Supriono, A. 2009. Social capital: Elements of formation. Bappenas.
5. Fukuyama, F. 1995. Trust: The Sosial Virtues And The Creation Of Prosperity. Free Press.
6. Grootaert, C., Narayan, D., Jones, V. N., & Woolcock, M. 2004. Measuring social capital: An integrated questionnaire. In World Bank Working Paper (Issue 18).
7. Hasbullah, J. 2006. Social Capital: Towards the cultural excellence of Indonesian people. MR-United Press.
8. Indonesian Government. 2014. Regulation Number 57 on Amendment to Government Regulation Number 71 of 2014 concerning the Protection and Management of Peatland Ecosystems Publisher: Government of the Republic of Indonesia.
9. Medrilzam, M., Dargusch, P., Herbohn, J., & Smith, C. 2014. The socio-ecological drivers of forest degradation in part of the tropical peatlands of Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Forestry, 87(2), 335-345. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpt033.
10. Ministry of Environment and Forestry. 2015. Pedoman Pemulihan Ekosistem Gambut. Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MEF) Republic of Indonesia.
11. Ministry of Environment and Forestry. 2021. Reference framework for the formation of community self-reliance in South Kalimantan Province. Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MEF) Republic of Indonesia.
12. Lawang, R. 2004. Social capital in sociological perspective: an introduction. Faculty of Social Sciences and Political Science, University of Indonesia Press.
13. Lee Y., Rianti, I. P., & Park, M. S. 2017. Measuring sosial capital in Indonesian community forest management. Forest Science and Technology, 13(3), 133-141. https://doi.org/10.1080/21580103.2017.1355335.
14. Peat Restoration Agency. 2019. Performance Report 2018. Peat Restoration Agency.
15. Pitri, R. M. N. and Asysyifa. 2021. Cost of Revegetation Based on Specific Characteristics of Peatland. Jurnal Hutan Tropis, 9(2), 454-463.
16. Putnam, R. 1993. "The prosperous community: Sosial capital and public life." The American Prospect, 4(13), 35-42.
17. Putra, R. A. R. S., Ariyadi, B., Kurniawati, N., & Haryadi, F. T. 2017. The Influence of Social Capital on the Welfare Level of Livestock Farmers: A Case Study on the Ngudi Mulyo Free-Range Chicken Farmers Group in Gunungkidul. Buletin Peternakan, 41(3), 349. https://doi.org/10.21059/buletinpeternak.v41i3.18135.
18. Robinson, L. J., Siles, M. E., & Schmid, A. A. 2002. Social Capital and Poverty Reduction: Toward a Mature Paradigm. In Department of Agricultural Economics MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY East Lansing, MI 48824-1039 (Issue 614).
19. Supranto J. 2000. Sampling techniques for surveys and experiments. PT Rineka Cipta.
20. Surahman, A., Soni, P., & Shivakoti, G. P. 2018. Are peatland farming systems sustainable? Case study on assessing existing farming systems in the peatland of Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences, 15(1), 119. https://doi.org/10.1080/1943815X.2017.141232.
21. Susanto, D., Sanusi, & Widyanti, R. 2013. Implementation of Peatland Restoration Policy in South Kalimantan from the Policy Communication Perspective (Case Study in Candi Laras Utara Subdistrict, Tapin Regency). Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 53(9), 1689-1699.
22. Syahza, A., Suswondo, Bakce, D., Nasrul, B., Wawan, & Irianti, M. 2020. Peatland Policy and Management Strategy to Support Sustainable Development in Indonesia. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1655(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1655/1Z012151
23. Syahra R. 2003. Social Capital: Concept and Application. Jurnal Masyarakat dan Budaya, Vol. 5:1 2003.
24. Tata, H. L. 2019. Paludiculture: Can it be a trade-off between ecology and economic benefit on peatland restoration? IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 394(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/394/1/012061.
25. Thoha, A. S., Saharjo, B. H., Boer, R., & Ardiansyah, M. 2018. Strengthening community participation in reducing GHG emission from forest and peatland fire. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 122(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/122/1/012076.
26. Umar H. 2004. Research Methods for Theses and Dissertations. 6th edition. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada.
27. Uphoff, N. 2000. No Title. In P. Dasgupta & I. Serageldin (Eds.), Understanding Sosial Capital: Learning from the Analysis and Experience of Participation. The Word Bank.
28. Vipriyanti, N. U. 2007. Social study on the correlation between social capital and regional economic development: A case study in four regencies of Bali Province. Bogor Agricultural Institute. http://repository.ipb.ac.id/handle/123456789/40817.
29. Yuliani, F. 2018. Community Based Peat Land Management in Siak Regency the Riau Province of Indonesia. Prosiding CELSciTech, 3, 130-136.
