Community Perceptions about Social Forestry Activities In the Working Area of the UPTD KPHP Sub-Watershed Belayan, East Kalimantan Province Forestry Service
Abstract
The research aims to determine community perceptions of the benefits, driving factors, inhibiting factors, and community involvement in social forestry in the Belayan Sub-Watershed KPHP Working Area, Kutai Kartanegara Regency. This research was descriptive and was carried out in the UPTD KPHP Sub-Watershed Belayan Working Area of the Forestry Service of East Kalimantan Province, Indonesia. The stages of research activities are as follows: research preparation, observation, determining samples/respondents, collecting primary and secondary data, data analysis, drawing conclusions, and reporting. Determining the sample (respondents) used the Non-Probability Sampling method with a purposive sampling technique of 80 respondents. The method used is a descriptive approach. Community perception of social forestry was measured using the Likert scale method, namely: 1 = don't know/don't understand/disagree, 2 = don't know/don't understand/don't agree, 3 = unsure, 4 = know/understand/agree, and 5 = very knowledgeable/very understanding/strongly agree. The results of the research show that (1) The public's perception of social forestry knowledge is 27.25% don't know/don't understand and don't know/little understand, 39.38% are unsure, and those who know/understand and really know/very understand as much as 33.38%; (2) people's perceptions about the benefits of social forestry activities, namely don't know/don't understand and don't know/don't understand as much as 7.63%, doubtful as much as 45.00%, and those who know/understand and really know/very understand are 47 .37%; (3) community perception regarding the inhibiting factors and driving factors for social forestry activities, namely don't know/don't understand and don't know/don't understand as much as 8.87%, doubtful as much as 37.63%, and those who know/understand and really know/ very understand as much as 52.60%; (4) community perception regarding community involvement in social forestry activities, namely don't know/don't understand and don't know/don't understand as much as 5.00%, doubtful as much as 34.75%, and those who know/understand and really know/very understand as much as 60.25%.
Downloads
References
[2] Warner, K. 2000. Forestry and sustainable livelihoods. Unasylva 202, Vol. 51- 2000/3. FAO, Rome.
[3] Suyanto, S. and N Specialiyah. 2006. Rewards for Environmental Services for Poverty Alleviation. Journal of Agro Economics. 24 (1) : 1- 28
[4] Senoaji, G. (2011). Socio-Economic Conditions of Communities Around the Bukit Daun Protected Forest in Bengkulu. Sociohumanities, 13(1): 1-18.
[5] Aji GB, Suryanto J, Yulianti R, Wiranti A, Abdurrahim AY, Miranda TI. 2014. Poverty reduction strategies in villages around forests. Development of PHBM and HKm models. Research Report. Population Research Center. Indonesian Institute of Sciences, Jakarta.
[6] Ekawati S, Budiningsih K, Sylviani, Suryandari E, Hakim I. 2015. Critical review study of forest management on the island of Java. Policy Briefs. Vol 9, No. 1 Center for Social, Economic, Policy and Climate Change Research and Development, Bogor.
[7] Minister of Environment and Forestry Regulation Number P.83/MENLHK/SETJEN/ KUM.1/10/2016 concerning Social Forestry.
[8] Firdaus, A.Y. 2018. Practical Guide to Implementing Social Forestry Policy. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.
[9] Sugiyono, P. D. (2015). Educational Research Methods: Quantitative, Qualitative, R&D Approaches (26th Printing). Bandung: CV Alfabeta, 1-334.
[10] Sugiyono, P.D. 2005. Statistics for Research. Alphabeta, Bandung.
[11] Fanani, I., Djati, S. P. & Silvanita, K. (2016) 'The Influence of Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment on Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) (Case Study of RSU UKI)', Fundamental Management Journal, 1(1):40-53.
[12] Director of Social Forestry Assistance, Ministry of Environment and Forestry (2022). Social Forestry Assistance to Avoid Misdirection. https://shorturl.at/iQzAF
[13] Novayanti, D., I.S. Banuwa, R. Safe'I, C. Wulandari, and I.G. Febryano. 2017. Analysis of Factors that Influence Community Perceptions in the Development of Community Plantation Forests at KPH Gedong Wani. Journal of Forests and Society. Vol. 9(2): 61-74.
[14] Wahyudi, A.R. Sundawati, L. Trison and Soni. 2021. Kutamanah Village Community Perceptions of the Social Forestry Program at KPH Purwakarta. https://repository.ipb.ac.id/handle/123456789/110281.
[15] Serkadifat, Y. Y. Loppies, N. D. M. Patty, L.T. Daniel, and Z.K. Wambrauw. 2024 Community Perceptions of Social Forestry Applications for the Village Forest Scheme in Kuadas Village, Makbon District, Sorong Regency. Biopendix Journal. 10(2): 248-258.
[16] Public Relations Bureau of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry. 2023. Press Release. 28 December 2023. https://ppid.menlhk.go.id/berita/siaran-pers/7566/dari-perhutanan-social-untuk-hutan-lestari-dan-community-sejahtera#:~:text=Perhutanan%20Sosial %20not%20only%20only,%20economic%20local%20and%20regional centers.
Author(s) and co-author(s) jointly and severally represent and warrant that the Article is original with the author(s) and does not infringe any copyright or violate any other right of any third parties, and that the Article has not been published elsewhere. Author(s) agree to the terms that the GPH Journal will have the full right to remove the published article on any misconduct found in the published article.
