NAMA : AYUNDA DARATISTA EFENDA HUTAHAEAN

NPM : 19024010151

MATA KULIAH : AGROKLIMATOLOGI

PERUBAHAN IKLIM DENGA SKEMA PENGURANGAN EMISI

Abstrak

Kebijakan perubahan iklim global yang dikeluarkan oleh Konvensi Kerangka Kerja PBB tentang
Perubahan Iklim (UNFCCC) dengan skema Pengurangan Emisi dari Deforestasi dan Degradasi Hutan
(REDD +) tidak hanya akan melibatkan masyarakat dan pemerintah di tingkat nasional, tetapi lebih
khusus akan menyentuh orang dan pemerintah di tingkat lokal. Artikel ini membahas tentang
kesiapan pemerintah daerah dan masyarakat baik di tingkat kebijakan maupun
kelembagaan. Penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian kualitatif metode yang dilakukan di tiga
kabupaten di Sumatra Barat Indonesia, yaitu Pesisir Selatan, Kepulauan Mentawai dan Solok
Selatan.Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Sumatera Barat memiliki potensi untuk mengadopsi dan
menerapkan skema REDD ++. Namun ada kesiapan yang tidak memadai mengenai kebijakan
pemerintah, lembaga dan orang-orang di sekitar. Sebagai kesimpulan, Sumatera Barat masih perlu
menyiapkan aspek-aspek tersebut secara komprehensif.

1. Perkenalan
Protokol Kyoto diperbarui pada tahun 2012. Pada saat itu, Pengurangan Emisi dari Deforestasi dan
hutan Degradasi (REDD +) dipromosikan sebagai salah satu skema pengurangan emisi dari rumah
kaca selanjutnya negara berkembang. Skema ini bertujuan memberi nilai ekonomi pada karbon, yang
diserap oleh hutan dan dengan demikian mengarah pada pengurangan deforestasi. REDD +
memberikan insentif bagi negara-negara yang memiliki hutan tropis untuk mempertahankannya
hutan. Mekanisme ini akan memungkinkan negara-negara maju untuk menangkal produksi karbon
mereka sendiri dengan membeli kredit karbon, dihasilkan melalui pengurangan deforestasi dan
degradasi hutan, dari negara-negara berkembang
Indonesia sebagai salah satu negara berkembang ini telah proaktif dalam berpartisipasi dalam REDD
+ di Indonesia skema terakhir. Total luas hutan Indonesia adalah sekitar 144 juta hektar. Ini adalah
hutan tropis terbesar ketiga di dunia (Kementerian Kehutanan Indonesia;2011). Indonesia
menawarkan pasar potensial dalam mengimplementasikan skema REDD +. Indonesia berpartisipasi
dalam setiap konferensi UNFCCC, mulai dari COP 13 Bali pada 2007 termasuk COP 17 Durban pada
2011. Komitmen Indonesia juga tercermin oleh pernyataan Presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono di
COP 15. Dinyatakan bahwa Indonesia berkomitmen untuk mengurangi emisi GRK-nya dari 26%
menjadi 40% melalui skema REDD + (Purwanto etal ., 2010: 2). Pemerintah Indonesia telah
menanggapi peluang yang disediakan oleh REDD + dengan bekerja sama dengan yang lain pihak
dalam rangka melakukan proyek percontohan REDD +, juga dikenal sebagai Kegiatan Demonstrasi
dan mempersiapkan nasional instrumen kebijakan terkait dengan implementasi REDD +.
Kemungkinan mengurangi deforestasi dan degradasi hutan di Indonesia tampaknya optimis
implementasi REDD + di tingkat pemerintah nasional. Namun, masih banyak tantangan yang harus
dihadapi kesiapan di pemerintah daerah dan masyarakatnya (tingkat lokal). Di mana, ada
kekhawatiran bahwa skema REDD + prioritas pada konservasi daripada pengurangan kemiskinan,
memperkuat kontrol negara terhadap hutan dan semakin terpinggirkan masyarakat yang
menggantungkan hidupnya pada hutan termasuk masyarakat adat. Terlebih lagi, ( DTE , 2008) REDD
+ adalah didanai oleh lembaga yang dikendalikan oleh negara maju atau sektor swasta (melalui pasar
karbon) akan melayani lebih banyak untuk kepentingan negara-negara dan perusahaan, daripada
komunitas yang tinggal di dan bergantung pada hutan untuk penghidupan mereka. Kondisi ini
diasumsikan sejak program dilaksanakan melalui skema kebijakan perubahan iklim
jelas lebih banyak bekerja di tingkat lokal. Ini berarti bahwa aspek lokal adalah bagian penting yang
tidak dapat dipisahkan dari REDD +implementasi skema. Namun, respon lokal terkait skema tersebut
belum komprehensif, tentang inisiasi, adaptasi dan antisipasi dari lokal dalam transaksi praktis pasar
karbon, keduanya secara kelembagaan dan konstitusi. Sumatera Barat misalnya, dengan total luas
hutan 4.228.730 hektar tersebar di 19 kabupaten dan kota (Kementrian Kehutanan Indonesia; 2011)
adalah daerah dengan signifikansi terkait kebijakan skema REDD +. Seperti diberitakan surat kabar
lokal Padang Ekspres (April 2011) beberapa negara seperti Australia dan Singapura berniat
melakukan perdagangan karbon dengan Sumatera Barat. Namun karena regulasi tidak jelas Mengenai
mekanisme perdagangan karbon, pemerintah Sumatera Barat selalu menunda kerja sama. Ini
menunjukkan itu Kesiapan pemerintah daerah masih rendah. Di tingkat masyarakat, ada juga masalah
yang cukup rumit terkait tanah pemilik di Sumatera Barat. Ini terkait dengan hukum adat yang
mengakui hak-hak masyarakat adat / desa
tanah komunal di desa. Sebagaimana dijelaskan oleh Afrizal (2007), masyarakat desa cukup aktif
dalam menentang negara dan bisnis terkait dengan kepemilikan area kelapa sawit. 

2. Kebijakan Publik dan Komunitas

Untuk menjelaskan bagaimana kebijakan global perubahan iklim diadopsi dalam konteks lokal,
penelitian ini menerapkan kebijakan public pendekatan berbasis masyarakat. Di mana kebijakan yang
dibuat menempatkan komunitas sebagai aspek penting sebagai fundamental pertimbangan. Anderson
mendefinisikan kebijakan publik seperti dikutip oleh Islamy, “Kebijakan Publik adalah kebijakan
yang dikembangkan oleh badan dan pejabat pemerintah ”(Islamy, 1997: 19). Selanjutnya, menurut
Islamy, “Kebijakan publik adalah seperangkat
tindakan yang dilakukan dan dilaksanakan oleh pemerintah yang memiliki tujuan atau tujuan tertentu
yang berorientasi untuk kepentingan masyarakat ". (Islamy, 1991: 20). Dari pernyataan di atas, itu
memberikan gambaran bahwa kebijakan pemerintah adalah rantai tindakan

dinyatakan oleh pemerintah demi semua masyarakat. James P. Laster dan Joseph Stewart menjelaskan
bahwa para pihak dalam proses perumusan kebijakan dapat diklasifikasikan
sebagai pihak formal dan informal. Dalam konteks penelitian ini, pihak formal merujuk pada pembuat
kebijakan dan pelaksana di tingkat regional, baik eksekutif atau legislatif. Sementara, pihak-pihak
informal merujuk pada elemen-elemen non-pemerintah seperti,
komunitas masyarakat adat, organisasi non-pemerintah dan organisasi masyarakat lainnya (Lester dan
Stewart, 2000). Dalam konteks ini, masyarakat sangat penting dalam merumuskan kebijakan publik,
di mana itu akan menjadi bertentangan dengan pasar, negara bagian, atau hierarki. Oleh karena itu,
strategi kebijakan publik berbasis masyarakat menjadi penting
untuk mendapatkan kebijakan yang mampu menciptakan kohesi sosial dan menghindari fragmentasi
sosial dalam implementasinya.
kebijakan publik dirumuskan untuk menampung aspirasi dari para pemangku kepentingan. Terlebih
lagi, itu berarti kebijakan itu sudah tujuan untuk menciptakan kondisi masa depan untuk memuaskan
minat para pemangku kepentingan. Untuk membawa kebijakan menjadi nyata akan menjadi hanya
tercapai jika implementasi dilakukan secara komprehensif. Karenanya, kebijakan itu tidak ada artinya.
Glenn (1991) membedakan kebijakan komunitas dalam dua kategori. Kategori pertama adalah
pengembangan masyarakat
pendekatan terkait dengan upaya swadaya masyarakat. Tujuannya adalah untuk menciptakan proses
bottom-up di mana orang-orang masuk masyarakat berpartisipasi dalam mengekspresikan dan
mengakomodasi kebutuhan dan tujuan mereka. Kategori kedua adalah komunitas pendekatan layanan
mengarahkan untuk meningkatkan hubungan antara penyedia output dan klien atau
pengguna. Tujuannya adalah untuk membuat layanan yang lebih responsif kepada masyarakat dan
untuk meningkatkan keterlibatan masyarakat dalam mempromosikan proses kebijakan. Selanjutnya,
Butcher dan Mullard (1993) membedakan tiga pendekatan utama untuk kebijakan komunitas dengan
memfokuskan tentang perbedaan perilaku menuju kewarganegaraan, sebagai berikut: (a) kerangka
kerja warga negara yang menekankan partisipasi dan penilaian rasional, hak dan kewajiban. Dalam
konteks ini, kebijakan masyarakat dipandang sebagai cara untuk melihatnya partisipasi
demokratis. Demokrasi dalam istilah yang luas di tingkat masyarakat dipandang sebagai cara untuk
melibatkan orang proses pengambilan keputusan yang mempengaruhi kehidupan mereka. Pandangan
ini mencakup gagasan yang akan diangkat oleh pluralis liberal demokrasi lokal dan partisipasinya, (b)
berjudul kerangka kerja warga negara, yang menekankan pada produk yang adil distribusi. Tujuannya
adalah untuk keadilan ekonomi dan keadilan yang lebih dengan menggunakan strategi masyarakat
yang lemah
pemberdayaan dan terpinggirkan, (c) kerangka kerja warga negara yang patuh, dalam konteks ini,
tujuannya adalah keterlibatan, tradisi, komunitas perilaku organik. Strategi masyarakat bertujuan
meningkatkan organisasi dan lembaga mediator di Indonesia masyarakat dan memperkuat institusi
sosial-tradisional sebagai alternatif untuk intervensi negara. Dengan demikian, tujuan suatu kebijakan
adalah dianggap sebagai upaya untuk memperluas tugas publik atau sipil, layanan masyarakat, saling
membantu dan mandiri, dan sukarela.

3. Metode Penelitian
Penelitian ini menggunakan metode deskriptif dengan pendekatan kualitatif. Untuk jenis penelitian
ini, kualitatif pendekatan akan bermanfaat untuk mempelajari fenomena sosial, untuk menjelaskan
dan menganalisis perilaku dan kelompok manusia, di Indonesia
perspektif yang sama seperti objek yang diamati untuk melihat materi. Penelitian ini dilakukan di
Provinsi Sumatera Barat, dengan fokus pada tiga kabupaten yang memiliki potensi kawasan hutan
dalam mengimplementasikan skema REDD +, yaitu Pesisir Selatan,
Solok Selatan dan Kepulauan Mentawai. Selain itu, mengenai data, penelitian ini menggunakan data
primer yang diperoleh dari wawancara langsung dari subjek / informan. Persyaratan informan dipilih
berdasarkan relevansi masalah. Di dalam hal ini, ada dua kategori informan. Pertama adalah sektor
pemerintah daerah, baik di daerah maupun di kabupaten
tingkat, seperti kepala daerah, dinas kehutanan, badan pembangunan daerah ( Bappeda ), lingkungan
kantor dan legislatif. Kedua adalah komunitas seperti, media, LSM, orang-orang yang tinggal di
sekitar hutan, asli orang dan tokoh masyarakat. Selanjutnya, data sekunder diperoleh dari file dan
dokumentasi yang relevan untuk
masalah penelitian. Selain itu, teknik purposive sampling diterapkan untuk memilih informan yang
terlibat langsung dengan masalah penelitian di tingkat masyarakat dan pemerintah. Data dikumpulkan
dengan beberapa teknik; secara mendalam wawancara, studi literatur, dan dokumentasi dengan
observasi dan diskusi kelompok fokus (FGD). Selanjutnya, untuk data
Analisis, penelitian ini menggunakan teknik triangulasi data, yang membandingkan dan memeriksa
derajat kepercayaan yang diperoleh melalui waktu dan instrumen yang berbeda dalam metode
kualitatif

4. Temuan dan Diskusi

4.1. REDD + UNFCCC
Rezim internasional perubahan iklim ditandai oleh UNFCCC yang didirikan pada Juni 1992, melalui
KTT Bumi di Rio de Janeiro. Tujuan UNFCCC dinyatakan dalam Pasal 2 Piagam UNFCCC, adalah
untuk menstabilkan tingkat rumah kaca di atmosfer, untuk mencegah gangguan lebih lanjut ke
iklim. Konvensi ini secara resmi dilakukan pada 21 Maret st
1994 setelah persyaratan 50 negara ratifikasi terpenuhi. Secara umum, ada dua pihak dalam
UNFCCC; Annex I- kelompok negara maju dan Non-Annex I- kelompok negara berkembang.
UNFCCC tidak mengikat perjanjian hukum karena tidak memiliki mekanisme yang kuat. Pengaturan
lebih lanjut adalah diperoleh melalui pertemuan COP berikutnya. COP pertama diadakan di Berlin,
Jerman, setahun setelah inisiasi UNFCCC. Salah satu keputusannya adalah membentuk komite ad-hoc
untuk menegosiasikan instrumen hukum yang mencakup aturan dan
komitmen untuk negara-negara maju yang akan disahkan dalam COP 3 pada tahun 1997.
Instrumen hukum yang dirumuskan selama dua tahun oleh komite Ad-hoc disahkan dalam COP 3 di
Kyoto, Jepang pada Desember 1997, yang kemudian dikenal sebagai Protokol Kyoto. Protokol ini
secara efektif berlari pada 16 Februari th ,2005. Protokol Kyoto bertujuan mengurangi emisi gas
rumah kaca secara global sebanyak 5,2% berdasarkan jumlah total
emisi tahun 1990 dalam kisaran 2008-2012. Protokol ini untuk 37 negara maju dan Komunitas Eropa
untuk mengurangi emisi rumah kaca yang mereka hasilkan selama 150 tahun, karena industrialisasi.
Usulan pengurangan emisi dari deforestasi secara resmi diusulkan oleh negara-negara yang
berkolaborasi dalam hujan koalisi negara hutan. Proposal ini kemudian dikenal sebagai REDD +. Inti
dari proposal adalah hutan hujan itu negara-negara yang sebagian besar negara-negara maju diberikan
kompensasi atas upaya mereka mempertahankan hutan di negara mereka daerah. Proposal ini
merupakan upaya untuk memperbaiki kekurangan Protokol Kyoto yang tidak mencakup aturan
penggundulan hutan. REDD + menarik perhatian serius dalam COP 13 yang diadakan di Bali pada
2007. Dalam COP ini, kelompok kerja REDD + dibentuk
dan beberapa perjanjian telah dicapai mengenai aspek teknis, mekanisme dan implementasi
metodologi itu seluruhnya tercakup dalam Rencana Aksi Bali dan Bali Road Map yang akan
diselesaikan dalam COP 15 di Jakarta Kopenhagen pada akhir tahun 2009. Pada awalnya, diskusi
REDD + hanya meneliti masalah deforestasi saja memperluas konservasi, pengelolaan berkelanjutan
dan peningkatan stok karbon di hutan. Negosiasi REDD + setelahnya berfokus pada masalah
implementasi dan kepatuhan seperti,masalah pendanaan, mekanisme implementasi dan tugas masing-
masing negara yang berpartisipasi dalam skema REDD +. Yang pertama dari mekanisme
implementasi, ada dua opsi utama, di mana implementasi melalui mekanisme pendanaan (Berbasis
dana) dan mekanisme pasar (berbasis pasar). Pada akhirnya, pendekatan mekanisme pasar lebih
dominan. Pendekatan mekanisme pasar dominasi dalam negosiasi idealnya diajukan oleh negara-
negara maju pihak lain, yang memandang mekanisme ini sebagai cara negara maju untuk
menghindari tugas yang telah dinyatakan dalam konvensi dan hanya menunjukkan berbasis bisnis
seperti biasa. Dari COP 16, dapat disimpulkan bahwa REDD + adalah bentuk kerja sama yang
dirancanguntuk negara-negara maju bersama dan negara berkembang. Negara-negara maju dipercaya
untuk membantu negara-negara berkembang dalam implementasi REDD + baik perjanjian bilateral
maupun multilateral. Ini adalah kebijakan yang berfokus pada mengatasi masalah deforestasi. Selain
itu, menjadikan negara-negara berkembang sebagai pihak utama dalam perjanjian karena sekitar 60%
total hutan dunia area ada di negara berkembang. Kebijakan Daerah Sumatera Barat tentang
Kehutanan dan REDD + Komitmen nasional juga dilaksanakan secara besar-besaran di tingkat
regional. Untuk mempersiapkan implementasi Skema REDD + di Sumatera Barat, pemerintah daerah
telah memiliki satu set dokumen dalam isu terkait. REDD + Skema disebutkan dalam beberapa
kebijakan umum; Rencana Tata Ruang Wilayah, Rencana Pembangunan Daerah Jangka Panjang
( RPJPD ) dan Rencana Pembangunan Daerah Jangka Menengah ( RPJMD ), dan Rencana Strategis
( Renstra ). Sub nasional pemerintah telah memiliki dua dokumen pendukung implementasi REDD
+; Rencana Aksi Lokal ( RAD ) tentang Pengurangan Emisi Gas Rumah Kaca dan Strategis dan
Rencana Sub Nasional ( SRAP ) REDD +. Namun demikian, implementasi kebijakan tersebut masih
menunggu instruksi dari Gubernur, yang saat ini masih dalam proses pengaturan.
Sumatera Barat juga memiliki komite ad hoc . Namun, implementasi skema REDD + tidak bisa
dilakukan memastikan apakah itu akan menjadi kewenangan pemerintah daerah Sumatera Barat
melalui Pemerintah Daerah terkait Unit Pemerintah ( SKPD ), Badan Kehutanan Daerah atau oleh
lembaga independen tertentu. Selain itu, ada tiga pemerintah daerah yang belum memiliki Rencana
Tata Ruang Wilayah untuk mengaturnya rencana implementasi REDD + di wilayah kabupaten, yaitu
Solok Selatan, Pesisir Selatan dan Kepulauan Mentawai. Ini
menunjukkan bahwa tidak ada sinergi yang baik dari pemerintah daerah ke pemerintah daerah
mengenai tingkat skema REDD + kesiapan, terutama dalam hal kebijakan dan
pelembagaan. Beberapa masalah yang dihadapi oleh pemerintah daerah mengenai Tingkat kesiapan
skema REDD + sebagai berikut: Pertama, tidak adanya Rencana Tata Ruang Wilayah ( RTRW ) di
tingkat kabupaten sebagai kerangka pedoman dalam mengatur Jangka Panjang Rencana
Pengembangan ( RPJPD ) dan Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Menengah ( RPJMD ). Ini
menyebabkan pemerintah daerah kehilangan mengarahkan program untuk membahas masalah
perubahan iklim. Batas anggaran juga menjadi kendala dalam mengatur desain REDD +
skema. Menurut Dinas Kehutanan Mentawai, hanya ada 2,5% dari anggaran daerah yang diterapkan
untuk merancang kehutanan program. Membandingkan area hutan Mentawai yang sangat luas,
pemerintah daerah hanya mendapat anggaran minimum implementasi kebijakan kehutanan.
Kedua, ada kesamaan baik di tingkat lokal maupun regional yang terkait dengan pelembagaan skema
REDD +, bahkan Meskipun Dinas Kehutanan memainkan peran utama, tidak ada kebijakan yang
jelas untuk mengatur lembaga yang akan melakukan Skema REDD + di lapangan.
Ketiga, pemerintah Sumatera Barat belum mensosialisasikan program REDD + secara komprehensif
di pemerintah daerah tingkat, karenanya pemahaman tentang masalah REDD + terkait masih
dipertanyakan. Ini juga ditingkatkan oleh BAPEDDA dari Mentawai menyatakan bahwa:
“ Sejauh ini, pemerintah belum secara langsung melakukan sosialisasi REDD +. Sosialisasi adalah
dilakukan di tingkat regional dengan mengundang BAPEDDA Mentawai. Namun, karena
kekurangan
sumber daya manusia dan transportasi yang tidak memadai, agensi ini jarang menghadiri
sosialisasi ”Kondisi ini juga terjadi di dua kabupaten lainnya. Informasi REDD + tidak menjangkau
masyarakat lokal juga sebagian besar pejabat pemerintah daerah. Bahkan legislator lokal memiliki
kekurangan informasi mengenai masalah-masalah tersebut.
. Kesiapan REDD + Sumatera Barat dengan Pendekatan Berbasis Masyarakat Menurut
Kepala BAPEDDA , Sumatera Barat berkomitmen untuk melibatkan masyarakat dalam REDD +
implementasi karena berjalan di tingkat lokal. Apalagi salah satu program pemerintah yang
melibatkan masyarakat tentang kehutanan adalah skema pengelolaan hutan berbasis
masyarakat. Skema ini memungkinkan masyarakat untuk menggunakan hutan dan bertanggung jawab
atas pelestariannya. Pendekatan berbasis masyarakat menekankan pada setiap kebijakan pemerintah
yang harus menempatkan masyarakat lokal sebagai bagian yang tidak terpisahkan dalam merumuskan
proses dan mekanisme implementasi di tingkat lokal. Dalam konteks penelitian ini, itu
membutuhkan skema pro komunitas kebijakan perubahan iklim global dan bermanfaat bagi
masyarakat. Implementasi REDD + saat ini di Sumatera Barat masih dalam tingkat kesiapan. Di level
ini, sub pemerintah pusat berada pada level mengatur strategi, pembentukan kelompok dan juga
pelatihan untuk fasilitasi masyarakat. Jelas menunjukkan bahwa tidak ada partisipasi nyata dan detail
dari masyarakat baik dalam hal merekatugas dan tanggung jawab. 
5. Kesimpulan
Implementasi skema REDD + di pemerintah daerah Sumatera Barat berjalan pada tingkat
kesiapan. Di di tingkat pemerintah pusat, jumlah dokumen telah berhasil diatur, namun Peraturan
Gubernur adalah masih pada level perencanaan. Dibandingkan dengan tingkat sub nasional,
pemerintah daerah masih menjalankan perencanaan local Rencana Tata Ruang ( RTRW ), sebagai
panduan kerangka kerja untuk menentukan ruang dan program strategis untuk mendukung
implementasi REDD + di masa depan. Ini menunjukkan bahwa tidak ada sinergi yang baik antara
pemerintah daerah dan daerah. Oleh karena itu, sub pemerintah nasional sepenuhnya mendukung
pemerintah daerah untuk membuat peraturan terkait dengan skema REDD +
menjadi langsung nyata dengan mengacu pada peraturan daerah. Ini sangat menentukan karena
implementasi REDD + akan melakukannya dilakukan oleh lokal, dengan demikian serangkaian
persiapan perlu dijalankan. Dalam hal pelembagaan, Sumatera Barat memiliki kelompok kerja tentang
REDD +. Sejauh ini tidak ada peraturan yang jelas apakah skema REDD + dilakukan di bawah unit
kantor pemerintah atau saat independen lembaga. Selain itu, mekanisme atau pembagian kerja belum
dijelaskan secara lebih rinci. Karena itu membutuhkan lembaga-lembaga REDD + tertentu baik di
tingkat regional maupun lokal sebagai pelaksana skema, terutama independen lembaga. Kesiapan di
tingkat masyarakat masih relatif rendah. Dalam langkah kesiapan ini, banyak masalah ditemukan dan
berpotensi menimbulkan konflik baik vertikal maupun horizontal. Sosialisasi yang telah dilakukan
oleh PT pemerintah tidak cukup untuk meyakinkan masyarakat akan urgensi skema REDD
+. Pendidikan berkelanjutan dan
Dibutuhkan advokasi, sehingga masyarakat sebagai mitra kerja pemerintah dapat menerima skema
dan bantuan pemerintah untuk mengimplementasikan REDD +. Namun, implementasi transaksi
karbon secara langsung menyentuh kehidupan
masyarakat, terutama masyarakat adat, bahwa keterlibatan komunitas kelompok akar rumput adalah
mutlak diperlukan.

Ini adalah jurnal asli :

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

Procedia Environmental Sciences 28 (2015) 649 – 656

The 5th Sustainable Future for Human Security (SustaiN 2014)

Local readiness towards REDD+ UNFCCC scheme (Study in Province

of West Sumatera Indonesia)

Apriwana, Anita Afriani S.b*

a b
International Relations Department, Andalas University, Kampus
Limau Manis, Padang 25163, Indonesia
Abstract

Global climate change policy issued by the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC) with the scheme Reducing Emissions from Deforestation
and Forest Degradation (REDD+) will not only involve the community and government
at national level, but more specifically will touch people and government in local level.
This article examines the readiness of local governments and communities both at policy
and institutional levels. This study applies qualitative research methods conducted in
three regencies in West Sumatra Indonesia, namely Pesisir Selatan, Mentawai Islands and
South Solok. The research result shows that West Sumatera has potential to adopt and
implement REDD++ scheme. However, there is insufficient readiness concerning
government policy, institutions and people around. As conclusion, West Sumatera still
needs to prepare those aspects comprehensively.

©2015
© 2015 TheThe Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Elsevier B.V. B.V This is an open access
article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
Peer-review under responsibility of Sustain

(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Peer-review under responsibility of Sustain Society

Keywords: climate change; local policy; deforestation; forestation; carbon market

1.Introduction

The Kyoto Protocol was renewed in 2012. At that moment, Reducing Emission from
Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) was promoted as one of the next schemes of
reducing emission from green house for developing countries. This scheme aims on giving
economic value to carbon, which is be absorbed by forests and thus lead to reduction of
deforestation. REDD+ gives incentives for countries having tropical forest to maintain their
forests. This mechanism would allow developed countries to counteract their own carbon
production by purchasing carbon credits, produced through reduction of deforestation and
forest degradation, from developing countries

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +62-751-25730; fax: +62-751-71266. Mobile:

+6285272208505

E-mail address: apriwan@fisip.unand.ac.id ;nanisinulingga@gmail.com

1878-0296 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article
under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility
of Sustain Society
doi:10.1016/j.proenv.2015.07.076
 Apriwan and S. Anita Afriani / Procedia Environmental Sciences 28 (2015) 649 – 656 65

(Wulansari: 2010). Indonesia as one of these developing countries has been pro-active in
participating in REDD+ in final scheme.
Total forest area of Indonesia is around 144 million hectare. It is the third largest tropical
forest in the world (Indonesia Ministry of Forests; 2011). Indonesia offers potential market in
implementing REDD+ scheme. Indonesia participates in every UNFCCC conference, starting
from COP 13 Bali in 2007 including COP 17 Durban in 2011. Indonesia's commitment is also
reflected by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono statement in COP 15. It is stated that
Indonesia is committed to reduce its GHG emission from 26% to 40% through REDD+
scheme (Purwanto et al., 2010:2). Indonesia's government has responded to opportunity
provided by REDD+ by cooperating with other parties in order to conduct REDD+ pilot
projects, also known as Demonstration Activities and prepare national policy instruments
related to REDD+ implementation.
The possibility of reducing deforestation and forest degradation in Indonesia seems
optimistic through implementation of REDD+ at national government level. However, there
are still many challenges regarding readiness at sub-national government and its people
(local level). In which, there is a concern that REDD+ scheme priority is at conservation than
poverty reduction, strengthen state control to forests and increasingly marginalize community
who depends their lives on forest including indigenous people. Moreover, (DTE, 2008)
REDD+ is funded by institutions controlled by developed countries or private sectors
(through carbon market) will serve more on interest of those countries and corporate, than
community who living in and depending on forest for their livings.
This condition is assumed since the program implemented through scheme of climate
change policy will obviously work more in local level. It means that local aspect is essential
part that cannot be separated from REDD+ scheme implementation. However, the local
respond related to the scheme has not been yet comprehensive, regarding initiation,
adaptation and anticipation from local in practical transaction of carbon market, both
institutionally and constitutionally. West Sumatera for example, with total of forest area of
4.228.730 hectares spreads in 19 regencies and cities (Indonesia Ministry of Forests; 2011) is
an area with significance related the policy of REDD+ scheme. As reported on Padang
Ekspres local newspaper (April 2011) several countries such as Australia and Singapore
intend to do carbon trade with West Sumatera. However, due to unclear regulation
concerning mechanism of carbon trade, West Sumatera government always delays the
cooperation. This shows that local government readiness is still low. At community level,
there is also fairly complex problem concerning land owner in West Sumatera. It is connected
with custom law that admits the rights of indigenous people/village over communal land in a
village.
As explained by Afrizal (2007), village community is quite active in opposing state and
business regarding to the ownership of palm oil area. This conflict is dispersed in villages
(nagari) in several regencies of West Sumatera. Resistance which has been emerging since the
reformation era in 1998 is still remaining unfinished. Therefore, REDD+ scheme related to
forest area use in West Sumatera will directly face communal land ownership that also part
of forest as commodity of carbon trade within scheme of REDD+-UNFCCC.
Concerning those facts above, this research purposes to assess readiness of local
governments and communities towards REDD+ scheme and how its sinergize with the
national commitment. The indication of commitment and great optimism in national level is
somehow become an opposite matter in regional level. In fact, the REDD+ scheme more
widely implemented at local level. Thus, the implementation of REDD+ scheme at local level
 Apriwan and S. Anita Afriani / Procedia Environmental Sciences 28 (2015) 649 – 656 65
should show contribution and has good impact on sustainable development in term of
improving community economy level and ensure environmental sustainability. Furthermore,
to address those issues, this study applies community-based approach to explain existing local
condition in implementing the REDD+ scheme. It is assumed that community has to be a
starting point in formulating policy regarding the REDD+ scheme at local level. It is due to
the fact that scheme implementation will impact to the community directly.

2.Public Policy and Community

To explain how global policy of climate change is adopted in local contexts, this research
applies public policy community based approach. In which the policy made put community as
important aspect as fundamental consideration. Anderson defines public policy as quoted by
Islamy, “Public Policies are those policies developed by government bodies and official”
(Islamy, 1997:19). Furthermore, according to Islamy, “ Public policy is a set of action
conducted and implemented by government that has objective or certain objectives oriented
for the sake of society”.(Islamy, 1991:20). From above statements, it gives delineation that
government policies are chain of actions
stated by government for the sake of all societies.
James P. Laster and Joseph Stewart explain that parties within the process of policy
formulation can be classified as formal and informal parties. In context of this research,
formal parties refer to policy maker and executor at regional level, either executive or
legislative. While, informal parties refer to non-governmental elements such as, community of
indigenous people, non-governmental organization and other community organizations
(Lester and Stewart, 2000). In this context, community is significant in formulating public
policy, in which it will be contradicted with market, states, or hierarchy. Hence, strategy of
public policy community based becomes important at gaining policy which is able to create
social cohesion and avoid social fragmentation in its implementation.
Idea and concept of community have various theoretical backgrounds. This idea emerges as
mode of government ordering alternative provider as formulated by M. Taylor (1987). Taylor
formulates community philosophy adopted from anthropologist observation viewing
community as basis of anarchies society. In general, the idea of community refers to group
living in similar area or physical space with common interests and similar characteristics.
Thus, the concept of community policy is applied in territorial definition or non-territorial
(Wayne Paerson, 2011). Therefore, public policy is formulated for accommodating aspirations
from stakeholders. Moreover, it means that policy has purpose to create future condition to
satisfy the stakeholders’ interest. To bring a policy becoming real will be merely achieved
if implementation is conducted comprehensively. Hence, the policy means nothing.
Glenn (1991) differentiates community policy in two categories. First category is
community development approach in related with effort to self-help community. The purpose
is to create bottom-up process which people in community participate in expressing and
accommodating their needs and objectives. Second category is community service approach
directing to improve relation between output provider and client or user. The objective is to
make more responsive services to community and to improve community engagement in
promoting process of the policy.
Furthermore, Butcher and Mullard (1993) differentiate three main approaches for
community policy by focusing on behavioral differences toward citizenship, as follow: (a)
public citizen framework which emphasizes on participation and rational assessment, rights
and duty. In this context, community policy is seen as way to see democratic participation.
Democracy in broaden term in community level is seen as a way to engage people in process
of decision making which influencing on their life. This view encompasses idea of liberal
pluralist to raise local democracy and their participations, (b) entitled citizen framework, the
emphasizing on fairly product distribution. The aim is for more economic and justice fairness
by using the strategy of weak community empowerment and marginalized, (c) dutiful citizen
framework, in this context, the purpose is engagement, tradition, organic behavioral
community. Community strategy has aim on organization enhance and mediator institution in
society and strengthens social-traditional institution as alternative for state intervention. Thus,
the goal of a policy is assumed as effort to enlarge public or civil duty, community service,
mutual-help and independent, and volunteer.
In addition, Butcher proposes policy synthesizing community based which combine the
above frameworks. The Butcher’s formulation is very relevant to this research, in which the
local policy that will adopt scheme of global climate change policy, like REDD+ mechanism,
should be able to put local community or tradition as composite part in formulation process
and mechanism implementation in local level. Thus, the assumption that sees scheme of
global climate change policy which is not in the side of local community become
unavoidable.

3.Research Method

This research applies descriptive method with qualitative approach. For this type of
research, qualitative approach will be beneficial to learn social phenomenon, to explain and
to analyze human behavioral and group, in similar perspective as observed object to see the
matter. This research is conducted in West Sumatera Province, focusing on three regencies
having potential forest area in implementing REDD+ scheme, namely Pesisir Selatan, South
Solok and Mentawai Islands. Moreover, concerning the data, this research applies primary
data obtained from direct interview from subject/ informant. Requirements of informant were
selected based on relevance of issues. In this case, there are two categories of informant. First
one is local government sector, both at regional and regency levels, such as head of the
region, forestry services, regional development agencies (Beanpvpierodnam), ental
offices and legislature. Second is the community such as, media, NGOs, people living around
the forest, indigenous people and community leaders. Further, secondary data are obtained
from relevant files and documentations to the research issue. In addition, purposive sampling
technique is applied to select informants who are directly involved with research issues in
community and government level. Data are collected with several techniques; in-depth
interview, literatures studies, and documentation with observation and focus group
discussion (FGD). Next, for data
analysis, this research applies technique of data triangulation , which compares and double
check for the degree of trust which obtained through different time and instruments in
qualitative method (Patton in Moleong, 2002:178), that achieved by comparing the opinion
of one informant to another informant.

4.Findings and Discussion

REDD+ UNFCCC

International regime of climate change is marked by UNFCCC establishing on June 1992,

through Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. The goal of UNFCCC is stated in Article 2
UNFCCC Charter, is that to stabilize green house level in atmosphere, to prevent further
distraction to the climate. The convention was formally conducted on March 21st 1994 after
requirement of 50 country ratification fulfilled. Generally, there are two parties in UNFCCC;
Annex I- the group of developed countries and Non-Annex I- the group of developing
countries.
UNFCCC is unbinding legal agreement since it does not have forceful mechanism.
Further arrangement is gained through next COP meeting. The first COP was held in Berlin,
Germany, a year after UNFCCC initiation. One of its point decisions was creating Ad-hoc
committee to negotiate legal instrument which covers rule and commitment for developed
countries to be legalized in COP 3 in 1997.
Legal instrument which formulated during two years by Ad-hoc committee was legalized
in COP 3 in Kyoto, Japan on December 1997, which later known as Kyoto Protocol. This
protocol effectively ran on February 16th, 2005. Kyoto Protocol aims on reducing greenhouse
gas emission globally as many 5.2% based on the total number emission in 1990 in the range
of 2008-2012. The protocol is for 37 developed countries and European Community to
reduce the greenhouse emission that they produce for 150 years, due to industrialization. The
implementation detail of protocol was approved in COP 7 in Marrakesh, Morocco in 2001
in the form of Marrakesh Accord. The first commitment period was begin in 2008 and end in
2012.
In the next period, the discussion about reducing emission in any forum is not only
concerning Kyoto Protocol, but also developing countries participation and deforestation.
During negotiation period of Kyoto Protocol, another issue discussed is the impact of
deforestation to greenhouse gas concentration. Several parties would like to avoid
deforestation becoming one of the issues included as one of mechanism under CDM in the
first commitment period. However, this idea was rejected due to methodology of
implementation. A paper entitled “Winning the Battle Against Global Climate Change”
published in 2005, European commission recommended incentive distribution to developing
countries which participated in the reducing of international emission (Holloway and
Giandomenico, 2009: p.9). In Kyoto Protocol, the participation of developing countries is
stated under CDM mechanism; reforestation and aforestation with the funding from
developed countries as way for those countries to gain carbon credit (Fry; 2008).
The idea of incentive for developing countries was firstly introduced by Papua New Guinea
Ambassador in Seminar of Government Expert forum held in Bonn on May 2005. At the same
years, in COP 11 in Montreal, the proposal of reducing emission from deforestation was
officially proposed by countries which collaborated in rain forest countries coalition. This
proposal was later known as REDD+. The core of proposal is that rain forest countries that
mostly developed countries are given compensation for their efforts to maintain the forest in
their regions. This proposal is an effort to mend the lack of Kyoto Protocol which does not
encompass the rule of deforestation.
REDD+ caught serious attention in COP 13 held in Bali in 2007. In this COP, REDD+
working group is created and several agreements were achieved regarding technical,
mechanism and implementation methodology aspect that entirely encompassed in Bali Action
Plan and Bali Road Map which would be accomplished in COP 15 in Copenhagen at the end
of 2009. At the beginning, REDD+ discussion merely examines deforestation issue then
expanding on conservation, sustainable management and improvement of carbon stock in
forest.
The aftermath REDD+ negotiation focuses on implementation and compliance issue such
as, funding issue, mechanism of implementation and the duties of each countries participating
on REDD+ scheme. At the first of implementation mechanism, there are two major options, in
which implementation through funding mechanism (fund based) and market mechanism
(market based). At the end, market mechanism approach is more dominated.
The domination market mechanism approach in negotiation ideally proposed by developed
countries caused any other parties, which view this mechanism as the way of developed
countries to avoid the duties that have been stated in convention and only point out on
business-as-usual based.
 From COP 16, it can be concluded that REDD+ is a form of cooperation designed to joint
developed countries and developing countries. Developed countries are entrusted to assist
developing countries on implementing REDD+ either bilateral or multilateral agreement. It
is a policy which focused on overcoming deforestation issue. Moreover, it makes developing
countries as main parties in agreement since approximately 60% total of world forest areas
exist in developing countries.
In 2008, UN-REDD+ program was launched as a common initiative of United Nation
organizations such as UNDP, UNEP and FAO. The goal of this cooperation is to assist
developing countries to prepare and implement strategy of national REDD+ (Diamant, 2010:
p.2).

Indonesia and REDD+

In REDD+ negotiation, Indonesia is one step ahead than other countries. Up to now,
Indonesia is the only country which has national regulation regarding REDD+
implementation. The first regulation was issued on Peraturan Pemerintah No. 68/2008,
arrange required procedure to implement REDD+ pilot project after 2012. Final regulation
regarding REDD+ mentioned in Regulation of Forestry Agency No. P.25/Menhut-II/2013 in
giving deforestation issue to sub-national government.
UN-REDD+ Program is officially declared at end of May 2010. Norway is one of
Indonesia’s partners in conducting REDD+. The funding cooperation is provided by Norway
in accordance to Indonesia’s achievement in upcoming 7-8 years. The base line of REDD+
implementation in Indonesia is mentioned in a paper entitled “Strategy of REDD+-
Indonesia’s Readiness Phase 2009-2012”. This program has created document of Strategy of
Indonesia REDD+ National Plan as a guide to arrange Local Action Strategy either in sub
national or regency level.
Moreover, Indonesia has created Indonesia REDD+ Management Board. As form of
responsibility, it is officially reported to President. Further, it is reinforced by Presidential
Instruction No. 63 of 2013. This regulation increasingly shows strong national commitment
on implementing REDD++ as part of Indonesia attempt and participation on mitigating the
impact of climate change.

Regional Policy of West Sumatera on Forestry and REDD+

The national commitment is also massively implemented in the regional level. To prepare
the implementation of REDD+ scheme in West Sumatera, sub-national government has had a
set of document in the related issue. REDD+ scheme is mentioned in several general policies;
Local Spatial Plan, Long-term Local Development Plan (RPJPD) and the Medium-term
Local Development Plan (RPJMD), and Strategic Plan (Renstra). The sub national
government has had two supporting documents of REDD+ implementation; Local Action
Plan (RAD) on Reducing Green House Gas Emission and Strategic and Sub National Plan
(SRAP) of REDD+. Nevertheless, the implementation of those policies still waits for
instruction of Governor, in which now still in arrangement process.
West Sumatera has also had an ad hoc committee. However, the implementation of
REDD+ scheme cannot be ensured whether it will be under authority of West Sumatera sub
national government through related Local Government Unit (SKPD), Regional Forestry
Agency or by particular independent institutions.
 Furthermore, there are three local governments that have not had Local Spatial Plan to
arrange the implementation plan of REDD+ in regency area, they are South Solok, Pesisir
Selatan and Mentawai Islands. This indicates that there is no good synergy from regional to
local government concerning REDD+ scheme level of readiness, notably in terms of policy
and institutionalizing. Several problems faced by local government regarding REDD+ scheme
level of readiness as follow:
First is Local Spatial Plan (RTRW) absence in regency level as guide framework in
arranging Long-term Development Plan (RPJPD) and Mid-term Development Plan (RPJMD).
It causes local government of loosing direct program to discuss climate change issue.
Budget limit is also an obstacle in arranging the design of REDD+ scheme. According to
Forestry Agency of Mentawai, there is only 2.5 % of local budget applied to design forestry
program. Comparing very wide area of Mentawai’s forest, local government merely gets
minimum budget to forestation policy implementation.
Second, there is similarity both in local and regional related to the institutionalizing of
REDD+ scheme, even though Forestry Agency plays major role, there is no obvious policy to
regulate institution that will conduct the REDD+ scheme in the field.
 Third, West Sumatera government has not comprehensively socialized the REDD+
program at local government level, hence the understanding on related REDD+ issue is still be
questioned. This is also enhanced by BAPEDDA of Mentawai states that:
“By far, government has not directly come up to socialize REDD+. The
Socialization is conducted in regional level by inviting BAPEDDA of
Mentawai. However, due to the lack of human resources and insufficient
transportation, this agency rarely attends the socialization”
This condition also occurred in two others regencies. REDD+ information does not reach
local people as well as the most local government officers. Even local legislators have lack of
information regarding to those issues.

REDD+ Readiness of West Sumatera with Community-Based Approach

According to the Head of BAPEDDA, West Sumatera commits to involve community in

REDD+ implementation since it runs in local level. Moreover, one of government programs
that involve community regarding forestry is scheme of community-based forest
management. This scheme allows community to use forest and responsible for its
preservation.
Community-based approach emphasizes on every government policy that should place
local community as inseparable part in formulating process and implementing mechanism at
local level. In the context of this research, it needs pro community scheme of global climate
change policy and beneficial to community.
The implementation of REDD+ today in West Sumatera is still in the level of readiness. In
this level, sub national government is at the level of arranging strategy, group formation and
also training for facilitating community. It obviously shows that there is no real and detail
participation from community both in terms of their duties and responsible. It is inevitably
denied that incomplete discussion on climate change agreement in Doha, Qatar 2012 has
affected on technical implementation details of REDD+ scheme (measurement, reporting and
verification).
Moreover, there are still various perspectives and understandings from stakeholders to
view REDD+ scheme, and yet they have not found equal understanding on how urgent
REDD+ scheme is. Association of Indonesia Forestry Entrepreneur of West Sumatera
(Asosiasi Pengusaha Hutan Indonesia-APHI) is related private sector to REDD+, as the head
of Third Commission in Regional House of Representative (DPRD), Arkadius explains that
forest is regarded as a term of “Monkey” or “Money”. He also argues that forest at least has
three functions: production, environment and hydrology function. According to Akardius,
West Sumatera government captures the function of forest is seen as “Money” in terms of its
productive function. The orientation of West Sumatera government shifts to environment and
hydrology function upon a disaster and blame on forestry sector as the cause of disaster,
later called as “Monkey”. Therefore, it needs to change the mindset of sub national
government to view the function of forest. As a businessman and legislator, Arkadius views
the three functions of forest as mentioned above. This condition portrays the various
perspectives and points of view between official and other stakeholders.
On the other hand, WALHI of West Sumatera poses as opposition by rejecting
implementation of REDD+ scheme. It is more on the REDD+ scheme substantially, neither
to address, even nor to solve climate change issue. In this context, government tries to
highlight more on incentive and compensation problem. WALHI does not totally trust the
preservation purpose of REDD+ scheme, but rather on how to obtain funding from partner on
resolving the climate change.
In addition, there are several parties that involved in arranging RAD of Greenhouse to
support REDD+ scheme. It involves multi-stakeholders: BAPEDDA as coordinator and other
main related sectors to greenhouse emission; industry, energy and mineral resources,
transportation, agriculture, plantation, environmental life, kitchen sector. Those
parties/sectors have not been involved actively. The program formulation has not involved
community participation widely such as, NGOs, media, scholar and particularly local
community or forest circle. As informed by both Padang Ekspress (West Sumatera local
media) and NGOs staff of WALHI- Sanny Ardhi, Padang Ekspress as media partner merely
covers sub national government’s activities, not as place to exchange idea of REDD+ issue.
Even, WALHI is never invited to discuss and to share opinions related to the issue.
Particularly, local communities have not been involved in formulating and arranging local
government regulation.
At local socialization level of REDD+ scheme, it is conducted in the province by involving
regional and local government. As mentioned by BAPEDDA of Mentawai, this condition
indicates that socialization of REDD+ scheme has not been implemented comprehensively
yet, involved multi-sectors and local community. Prof. Afrizal as scholar and researcher of
REDD+ believes that socialization of the REDD+ has not touched the local community
living in the forest.
The lack of socialization on grass root level will effect on the community’s horizon and
understanding regarding REDD+ issue. Moreover, it will make them easily influenced by
parties that want to take advantage of the condition. Basically, the community has had local
genius to preserve culture and nature together. The local ceremony of Arat Sabulungan is a
kind of Mentawai community’s ritual led by Sikirei in cutting down trees. For Mentawai
community, God is nature (including environment and forest), hence they need to appreciate
the existence of the forest.
Furthermore, the regulation like Local Action Plan (RlTocRaWl )goovfernment is still at
the planning level,
started by re-measuring forest area zone. Coordinator of WALHI, Khalid Syaifullah, explains
that division zone of forest area, whether it is production, protecting and conservation forest
that defined by government based on “Naga Bonar” science. It means that the measurement
and the limitation of forest are not based on proper rationalization and calculation.
Discrepancy on measuring the zone of forest area can trigger conflict, either vertical or
horizontal. Recently, conflict emerges due to defining communal land among surrounding
community ethnic living in the forest area. Moreover, the condition becomes worse when
forest is valued with quite high compensation. Therefore, it highly needs the involvement of
indigenous or local community to define the zone of forest area as well as proper and fair
mechanism on the measurement.

5.Conclusion

The implementation of REDD+ scheme in West Sumatera regional government is running

on readiness level. In sub national government level, numbers of documents have been
successfully arranged, yet Governor Regulation is still on planning level. Compare to sub
national level, local government is still running on the planning of Local Spatial Plan (RTRW),
as framework guide to define strategic space and program to support REDD+ implementation
in the future. It shows that there is absence of good synergy between local and sub national
government. Hence, sub national government totally supports to local government to make the
related regulations to REDD+ scheme becoming immediately real by referring to sub
national regulation. This is decisive as REDD+ implementation will be conducted by local,
thus a set of preparation needs to be run.
In term of institutionalization, West Sumatera has a working group concerning REDD+. By
far, there is no obvious regulation whether REDD+ scheme is conducted under the unit of
government offices or upon independent institution. In addition, either mechanism or division
of labor has not been explained in further detail. Therefore, it needs certain REDD+
institutions both in regional and local as executors of the scheme, notably independent
institution.
The readiness at community level is still relatively low. In this readiness step, numerous
problems are found and have potential to create conflict both vertical and horizontal. The
socialization that has been conducted by government is not sufficient to convince community
to the urgency of REDD+ scheme. Sustainable education and advocacy are needed, thus
community as government working partner is able to accept the scheme and help government
to implement REDD+. However, implementation of the carbon transaction is directly
touching the life of community, mainly indigenous community, that the involvement of the
community of grass root group is absolutely required.
References

1. A. Diamant. 2010. “Brazil’s Emerging Sectoral Framework for Reducing Emissions

from Deforestation and Degradation and the Potential to Deliver Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Reductions From Avoided Deforestation in the Amazon’s Xingu River
Basin”. California: Electric Power Research Institute
2. Afrizal. 2007. The Nagari Community, Business and the State: the Origin and the
Process of Contemporary Agrarian Protest in West Sumatera, Indonesia. Sawit Watch
and Forest People Program. Bogor
3.-------. 2006. Sosiologi Konflik Agraria; Protes-Protes Agraria dalam Masyarakat
Indonesia Kontemporer. Padang: Andalas University
Press
4. Angelsen, A., Brockhaus, M., Sunderlin, W.D. and Verchot, L.V. (ed). 2013.
Menganalisis REDD++: Sejumlah Tantangan dan Pilihan. Bogor, Indonesia: CIFOR
5. Wiharani, A. P. Copenhagen Accord: Sebuah Kemajuan Kompromi Politik Hukum
Internasional Perubahan Iklim, Multiversa Journal of International Studies, 02 (1,
2011)
6. Dokumen Strategi dan Rencana Aksi Provinsi (SRAP) REDD++ Sumatera Barat. 2013
7. Dokumen Strategi Aksi Nasional (STRANAS) REDD++ Indonesia. 2012
8. Dokumen Rencana Aksi Nasional (RAN) GRK. 2011
9. Dokumen Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Panjang Provinsi Sumatera Barat 2005-2025
10. Hasenclever, Andreas, Mayer P. and Rittberger V. 1997. Theories of International
Regimes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
11. Fry I. 2008. “Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation:
Opportunities and Pitfalls in Developing a New Legal
Regime” Review of European Community & International Environmental Law. Oxford:
Blackwell Publishing
12. Wulansari I. 2010. Deforestasi di Indonesia dan Mekanisme REDD++, Jurnal
Ilmiah Hubungan Internasional, Vol.6, no.2 PACIS Universitas Katolik
Parahyangan. Bandung
13. Jack M., Hollander. 2003. The Real Environmental Crisis: Why Poverty, Not
Affluence, is the Environment’s Number One Enemy.
Berkeley: University of California Press
14. Keadilan Iklim dan Penghidupan Yang Berkelanjutan, Kompilasi News Letter Down
To Earth (DTE). 2008. KIPPY Print Solution
15. Lester, James P. and Stewart J. 2000. Public Policy and Evolutionary Approach.
Australia: Warsworth, Second Edition
16. Noordwijk M. v., Purnomo H., Peskett L. and Setiono B. 2008. Reducing
Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD++) in Indonesia:
Options and Challenges for Fair and Efficient Payment Distribution Mechanisms.
Working Paper 81. World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF). Bogor, Indonesia. 29
17. Moleong, Lexy. 2000. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Remaja
Rosdakarya
18. Parsons,Wayne. 2005. Public Policy: Pengantar Teori dan Praktik Analisis
Kebijakan. Jakarta: Kencana
19. Porter, Gareth and Brown, J. W. 1991. Global Environmental Politics
20. Purwanto, Semiarto Aji, Iwi Sartika and Rano Rahman. 2010. Kesiapan dan
Kerentanan Sosial Dalam Skema Kebijakan Perubahan Iklim/REDD+ di
Indonesia. Kertas Kerja Epistema No.08/2010, Jakarta: Epistema Institute
21. Safitri, Heni M. 2011. Sistem Pemerintahan Nagari di Minangkabau (Studi Pada
Nagari Guguak VIII Koto Kabupaten Lima Puluh Kota Sumatera Barat). North
Sumatera University Final Assignment
22. Soejachmoen, Moekti H. and Omar Sari (ed.). 2003. Mencari Pohon Uang: CDM
Kehutanan di Indonesia. Jakarta: Pelangi
23. Vivienne Holloway and Esteban Giandomenico. 2009. “Carbon Planet White
Paper: The History of REDD++ Policy”. North Terrace,
Adelaide: Carbon Planet Limited
24. Winnefeld, James A. and Marry, E Morris. 1994. Where Environmental
Concerns and Security Strategies Meet; Green Conflict in Asia and Middle East.
St. Monica: Rand
25. Yamin, Farhana and Joanna Depledge. 2004. The International Climate Change
Regime a Guide to Rules, Institutions and Procedures. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.184-190
26. Republik Indonesia. 2004. Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia no 17 Tahun 2004,
Departemen Dalam Negeri Republik Indonesia. Jakarta.
27.--------1994. Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia No. 06 Tahun 1994, Departemen
Dalam Negeri Republik Indonesia. Jakarta.
28.--------2005. Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 22 Tahun 1999 tentang
Pemerintah Daerah, Departemen Komunikasi dan
Informatika. Jakarta.
29. http://environment.about.com/od/kyotoprotocol/i/kyotoprotocol.htm
30. http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php
31. http://www.REDD+plus.go.id/titik-panas/sumatera-barat
32. http://www.cifor.org
33. http://www.forda-mof.org/
34. http://dishut.sumbarprov.go.id/