Issue

Vol. 2 No. 1 (2018): APRIL

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

From voluntary private to mandatory state governance in Indonesian forest certification: Reclaiming authority by bureaucracies

https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v2i1.3164
Agung Wibowo
Universitas Palangkaraya
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6738-4702
Lukas Giessen
- Chair Group of Forest and Nature Conservation Policy, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Büsgenweg 3, 37077 Göttingen. - European Forest Institute
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4050-0205

Corresponding Author(s) : Lukas Giessen

lgiesse@gwdg.de

Forest and Society, Vol. 2 No. 1 (2018): APRIL

Abstract

Forest certification has been introduced by non-state actors as a voluntary and market-based instrument addressing forest problems, which state policies failed to resolve. Lately, however, state-driven forest-related certification schemes can be observed, e.g. in Indonesia, through the EU FLEGT-VPA negotiation process. It is argued, specific state agencies in a struggle for power and authority develop mandatory certification schemes which are directly competing with private ones. Before this background, the aims of this study are: (i) describing the current trend from voluntary private to mandatory state certification schemes in Indonesia, (ii) mapping the main actors involved in certification politics, and (iii) explaining this trend with the interests of the main actors. The results confirm a trend from voluntary private to mandatory state-driven certification of forest management. The Ministry of Forestry, the Ministry of Trade, the Ministry of Industry, wood producer and processing associations, European Union, local funding organizations, environmental organizations, certification bodies and international buyers are detected as the main coalitions and actors in the certification politics. The stronger coalition develops a mandatorily-timber legality verification system as strategies to counter their voluntary private competitor schemes.

Keywords

competition forest certification private governance state governance bureaucratic politics
Wibowo, A., & Giessen, L. (2018). From voluntary private to mandatory state governance in Indonesian forest certification: Reclaiming authority by bureaucracies. Forest and Society, 2(1), 28-46. https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v2i1.3164
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. Literature
  2. Bartley, T. (2007). How foundations shape social movements: The construction of an organizational field and the rise of forest certification. Social Problems, 54(3), 229-255.
  3. Bartley, T. (2010). Transnational private regulation in practice: The limits of forest and labor standards certification in Indonesia. Business and Politics, 12(3), Article 7. DOI: 10.2202/1469-3569.1321.
  4. Bartley, T. (2014). Transnational governance and the re-centered state: Sustainability or legality?. Regulation & Governance, 8(1), 93-109.
  5. Bauer, S., Andresen, S., & Biermann, F. (2012). International bureaucracies. In: Biermann, F., & Pattberg, P. H. (Eds.). Global environmental governance reconsidered. MIT Press. p.27-44.
  6. Bell, S., & Hindmoor, A. (2012). Governance without government? The case of the Forest Stewardship Council. Public Administration, 90(1), 144-159.
  7. Bellot, F.F., Bertram, M., Navratil, P., Siegert, F. & Dotzauer, H. (2014). The high-resolution global map of 21st-century forest cover change from the University of Maryland (‘Hansen Map’) is hugely overestimating deforestation in Indonesia. Available at: http://forclime.org/images/ documents/FORCLIMEOverestimation%20of%20Deforestation.pdf. [Accessed 14 November 2014].
  8. Bernstein, S., & Cashore, B. (1999). World trends and Canadian forest policy: trade, international institutions, consumers and transnational environmentalism. Forestry Chronicle, 75(1), 34-38.
  9. Bernstein, S. (2011). Legitimacy in intergovernmental and non-state global governance. Review of International Political Economy, 18(1), 17-51.
  10. Blackman, A., Raimondi, A., & Cubbage, F. (2014). Does forest certification in developing countries have environmental benefits? Insights from Mexican Corrective Action Requests. Insights from Mexican Corrective Action Requests (March 31, 2014). Resources for the Future Discussion Paper, (14-06).
  11. Boström, M. (2003). How state-dependent is a non-state-driven rule-making project? The case of forest certification in Sweden. Journal of environmental policy & planning, 5(2), 165-180.
  12. Brack, D. (2005). Controlling illegal logging and the trade in illegally harvested timber: the EU's Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade Initiative. Review of European community & international environmental law, 14(1), 28-38.
  13. Brack, D. (2012). Excluding illegal timber and improving forest governance: The European Union’s Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade initiative. In: High-Value Natural Resources and Peacebuilding, ed: P. Lujala and S. A. Rustad. London: Earthscan. p. 211-220.
  14. Brack, D. (2014). Promoting legal and sustainable timber: using public procurement policy. Chatham House for the Royal Institute of International Affairs.
  15. Burns, S., Yapura, P., Giessen, L. (2016). State actors and international forest certification policy: coalitions behind FSC and PEFC in federal Argentina. Land Use Policy, 52, 23-29.
  16. Cai, Z., & Aguilar, F. X. (2013). Meta-analysis of consumer's willingness-to-pay premiums for certified wood products. Journal of Forest Economics, 19(1), 15-31.
  17. Cashore, B. (2002). Legitimacy and the privatization of environmental governance: How non– state market–driven (NSMD) governance systems gain rule–making authority. Governance, 15(4), 503-529.
  18. Cashore, B., Auld, G., & Newsom, D. (2005). Governing through markets: Forest certification and the emergence of non-state authority. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 48(4), 619–624.
  19. Cashore, B., Egan, E., Auld, G., & Newsom, D. (2007). Revising theories of nonstate market-driven (NSMD) governance: lessons from the Finnish forest certification experience. Global Environmental Politics, 7(1), 1-44.
  20. Derkx, B., & Glasbergen, P. (2014). Elaborating global private meta-governance: An inventory in the realm of voluntary sustainability standards. Global Environmental Change, 27, 41-50.
  21. Dharmawan, A. H., Nugroho, B., Kartodihardjo, H., Kolopaking, L. M., & Boer, R. (2012). SVLK, Jalan Menuju REDD+. Forest Governance and Multistakeholder Forestry Programme, Ministry of Forestry Indonesia–UK Department for International Development.
  22. Durst, P. B., McKenzie, P. J., Brown, C. L., & Appanah, S. (2006). Challenges facing certification and eco-labelling of forest products in developing countries. International Forestry Review, 8(2), 193-200. DOI: 10.1505/ifor.8.2.193.
  23. Espach, R. (2006). When is sustainable forestry sustainable? The forest stewardship council in Argentina and Brazil. Global Environmental Politics, 6(2), 55-84.
  24. Fikru, M. G. (2014). International certification in developing countries: The role of internal and external institutional pressure. Journal of environmental management, 144, 286-296.
  25. Gale, F., & Haward, M. (2011). Global commodity governance: state responses to sustainable forest and fisheries certification. Palgrave Macmillan.
  26. Gan, J., Cashore, B., & Stone, M. W. (2013). Impacts of the Lacey Act Amendment and the Voluntary Partnership Agreements on illegal logging: implications for global forest governance. Journal of Natural Resources Policy Research, 5(4), 209-226.
  27. Giessen, L., & Krott, M. (2009). Forestry joining integrated programmes? A question of willingness, ability and opportunities. Allgemeine Forst-und Jagdzeitung, 180(5/6), 94-100.
  28. Giessen L., Burns S., Sahide A. M. K., Wibowo, A. (2016). From governance to government: The key role of state bureaucracies in forest and agricultural certification. Policy and Society, 35 (1), 71-89.
  29. Gulbrandsen, L. (2003). The evolving forest regime and domestic actors: strategic or normative adaptation?. Environmental Politics, 12(2), 95-114.
  30. Gulbrandsen, L. H. (2004). Overlapping public and private governance: Can forest certification fill the gaps in the global forest regime? Global Environmental Politics, 4(2), 75-99.
  31. Gulbrandsen, L. H. (2014). Dynamic governance interactions: Evolutionary effects of state responses to non‐state certification programs. Regulation & Governance, 8, 74–92.
  32. Hackett, R. (2013). From government to governance? Forest certification and crisis displacement in Ontario, Canada. Journal of Rural Studies, 30, 120-129.
  33. Halperin, S., & Heath, O. (2012). Political research: methods and practical skills. Oxford University Press.
  34. Hawin, M., Nurhayati, I. & Antoni, V. (2010). Analisis hukum teks Voluntary Partnership Agreement antara Indonesia dan Eropa. Jakarta: Forest Governance and Multistakeholder Forestry Programme.
  35. Hutan Indonesia. (2013). Mengejar Tenggat Sertifikasi PHPL Mandatory. Hutan Indonesia, III, 26-27.
  36. Hysing, E. (2011). Transnational environmental governance: the emergence and effects of the certification of forests and fisheries by Lars H. Gulbrandsen (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar). Environment and Planning. C, Government and Policy, 29(3), 567-568.
  37. Kissinger, G., Herold, M., & De Sy, V. (2012). Drivers of deforestation and forest degradation: a synthesis report for REDD+ policymakers. Vancouver: Lexeme Consulting.
  38. Krott, M. (1990). Öffentliche Verwaltung im Umweltschutz. Ergebnisse einer behördenorientierten Policy-Analyse am Beispiel Waldschutz . Wien: W. Braumüller Verlag.
  39. Krott, M., Bader, A., Schusser, C., Devkota, R., Maryudi, A., Giessen, L., & Aurenhammer, H. (2014). Actor-centred power: The driving force in decentralised community based forest governance. Forest Policy and Economics, 49, 34-42.
  40. Lesniewska, F., & McDermott, C. L. (2014). FLEGT VPAs: Laying a pathway to sustainability via legality lessons from Ghana and Indonesia. Forest policy and economics, 48, 16-23.
  41. Malets, O. (2015). When transnational standards hit the ground: Domestic regulations, compliance assessment and forest certification in Russia. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 17(3), 332-359.
  42. Maletz, O. & Tysiatchniouk M. (2009). The Effect of Expertise on the Quality of Forest Standards Implementation: The Case of FSC Forest Certification in Russia. Forest Policy and Economics, 11 (5-6): 422-428
  43. Maryudi, A. (2006). Sertifikasi Hutan: Instrumen Baru Dalam Kebijakan Kehutanan. Rimba Kalimantan, 11(1), 27-35.
  44. Maryudi, A. (2016). Choosing timber legality verification as a policy instrument to combat illegal logging in Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics, 68, pp.99-104.
  45. Maryudi, A. (2009). Forest certification for community-based forest management in Indonesia: Does LEI provide a credible option?. Hayama-mati (Kanagawa-ken): Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Forest Conservation, Livelihoods, and Rights Project.
  46. McDermott, C. L., Noah, E., & Cashore, B. (2008). Differences that ‘matter’? A framework for comparing environmental certification standards and government policies. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 10(1), 47-70.
  47. McDermott, C. L. (2014). REDDuced: From sustainability to legality to units of carbon—The search for common interests in international forest governance. Environmental Science and Policy, 35, 12-19.
  48. McDermott, C. L., Irland, L. C., & Pacheco, P. (2015). Forest certification and legality initiatives in the Brazilian Amazon: Lessons for effective and equitable forest governance. Forest Policy and Economics, 50, 134-142.
  49. Muhtaman, D. R., & Prasetyo, F. A. (2006). Forest certification in Indonesia. In: Cashore, B. et al. (eds). Confronting sustainability: Forest certification in developing and transitioning countries. Yale University Faculty of Environmental Studies Publication Series, 33-68.
  50. Nurrochmat, D. R. (2004). Social forestry to alleviate poverty: concepts and experiences in Indonesia. In: Poverty Alleviation: Concepts and Experiences: Focused on Indonesian Cases. Cuvillier. Verlag Göttingen. p. 39-44
  51. Nurrochmat, D. R., Dharmawan, A. H., Obidzinski, K., Dermawan, A., & Erbaugh, J. T. (2016). Contesting national and international forest regimes: Case of timber legality certification for community forests in Central Java, Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics, 68, 54-64.
  52. Obidzinski, K., Dermawan, A., Andrianto, A., Komarudin, H., & Hernawan, D. (2014). The timber legality verification system and the voluntary partnership agreement (VPA) in Indonesia: Challenges for the small-scale forestry sector. Forest Policy and Economics, 48, 24-32. Overdevest, C., & Zeitlin, J. (2014). Assembling an experimentalist regime: Transnational governance interactions in the forest sector. Regulation & governance, 8, 22-48.
  53. Overdevest, C., & Zeitlin, J. (2014). Assembling an experimentalist regime: Transnational governance interactions in the forest sector. Regulation & governance, 8, 22-48.
  54. Pattberg, P. H. (2005). The Forest Stewardship Council: Risk and potential of private forest governance. The Journal of Environment & Development, 14(3), 356-374.
  55. Pattberg, P. H. (2007). Private institutions and global governance: the new politics of environmental sustainability. Edward Elgar Pub.
  56. Peters, G. (2002). Politics of Bureaucracy. Routledge.
  57. Pohnan, E., & Stone, M. (2013). Can legality verification combat illegal logging in Indonesia? Strategic insights for policy makers and advocates. Issues and Options Brief. IUFRO Task Force on Forest Governance, 16 November 2013.
  58. Potts, J., van Der Meer, J., & Daitchman, J. (2010). The state of sustainability initiatives review 2010: Sustainability and transparency.
  59. Pratiwi, S. (2015). Comparing forest certification and legality verification system and explaining stakeholder preferences in Indonesia. Master Thesis. University of Goettingen.
  60. Pratiwi, S., Wibowo, A., & Giessen, L. (2015). Third-Party Certification of Forest Management In Indonesia: Analysing Stakeholders' Recognition and Preferences. Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika, 21(2), 65-75.
  61. Raharjo, D. (2013). Laporan Akhir Multistakeholder Forestry Programme (MFP2). Ministry of Forestry of Republic of Indonesia, KEHATI, UKAID. Jakarta. pp. 109.
  62. Sahide, A., Burns, S., Wibowo, A., Nurrochmat, D.R., Giessen, L. (2015). Towards state hegemony over agricultural certification: from voluntary private to mandatory state regimes on palm oil in Indonesia. Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika, 21 (3), 162-171.
  63. Sikor, T. (Ed.). (2013). Public and private in natural resource governance: a false dichotomy?. Routledge.
  64. Solutions, S. G. T. (2003). Establishing the foundation for sustainable forest management in Africa: Legal origin of timber as a step towards sustainable forest management. SGS, Geneva. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTFORESTS/Resources/985784-1217874 560960/AFRLegalOrigin.pdf [Accessed 10 January 2015].
  65. Tacconi, L. (2007). Verification and certification of forest products and illegal logging in Indonesia. In: Tacconi, L. (Editor). Illegal logging: law enforcement, livelihoods and the timber trade. London: Earthscan. p. 251-274.
  66. Tosun, J. (2012). Forest certification in Europe: Exploring the determinants of cross-country variation. Marmara Journal of European Studies, 20(1), 177-197.
  67. UNECE (United Nations. Economic Commission for Europe)/FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization (2013). Forest Products Annual Market Review, 2012-2013. New York and Geneva, United Nations, Geneva Timber and Forest Study Paper, 33.
  68. van Heeswijk, L., & Turnhout, E. (2013). The discursive structure of FLEGT (Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade): The negotiation and interpretation of legality in the EU and Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics, 32, 6-13.
  69. van Kooten, G. C., Nelson, H. W., & Vertinsky, I. (2005). Certification of sustainable forest management practices: a global perspective on why countries certify. Forest Policy and Economics, 7(6), 857-867.
  70. van Schaik, L., & Schunz, S. (2012). Explaining EU Activism and Impact in Global Climate Politics: Is the Union a Norm‐or Interest‐Driven Actor?. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 50(1), 169-186.
  71. Wibowo A., Sahide M.A., Pratiwi S., Dharmawan B. & Giessen L. (2015). Ragam Skema Sertifikasi Hutan Global dan Opsi Transformasinya di Indonesia. Risalah Kebijakan Pertanian dan Lingkungan. 2 (1), 1-8.
  72. Wibowo, A., & Giessen, L. (2015). Actor Positions on Primary and Secondary International Forest-related Issues Relevant in Indonesia. Journal of Sustainable Development, 8(3), 10-27.
  73. Wiersum, K. F., & Elands, B. H. (2013). Opinions on legality principles considered in the FLEGT/VPA policy in Ghana and Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics, 32, 14-22.
  74. Empirical materials and regulations cited
  75. Agrofarm (2013). Tidak ada insentif, SVLK bebani APHI. Available at: http://www.agrofarm.co.id /m/kehutanan/121/tidak-ada-insentif-svlk-bebani-aphi/. [Accessed 14 January 2015].
  76. Agroindonesia (2013). Komitmen Indonesia tetap terjaga. Available at: http://agroindonesia.co.id /2013/03/19/komitmen-indonesia-tetap-terjaga [Accessed 14 January 2015].
  77. Agroindonesia (2014). Cukup selipkan satu pasal. http://agroindonesia.co.id/2014/01/cukup- selipkan-satu-pasal/ [Accessed 14 January 2015].
  78. Agroobserver (2015). ISWA: Pemerintah diharap jangan hambat industri barecore dari sengon. Available at: http://agroobserver.com/iswa-pemerintah-diharap-jangan-hambat-industri -barecore-dari-sengon/ [Accessed 14 January 2015].
  79. AMKRI (Asosiasi Mebel dan Kerajinan Indonesia) (2014). Menteri Perindustrian Saleh Husin setujui penundaan pemberlakuan sistem verifikasi legalitas kayu (SVLK). Available at: http://www.amkri.org/berita/menteri-perindustrian-saleh-husin-setujui-penundaan-pemberlakuan-sistem-verifikasi-legalitas-kayu-(svlk)--337.php [Accessed 14 January 2015].
  80. Antara (2015). WWF-Asmindo bantu industri kecil kehutanan peroleh SVLK. Available at: http://www.antarajatim.com/lihat3/berita/149907/wwf-asmindo-bantu-industri-kecil-kehutanan-peroleh-svlk [Accessed 20 February 2015].
  81. Anti Forest-Mafia Coalition (2014). SVLK flawed: An independent evaluation of Indonesia’s timber legality certification system. Available at: http://eyesontheforest.or.id/attach/Anti% 20Forest%20Mafia%20Coalition%20%2818Mar14%29%20SVLK%20Flawed%20FINAL.pdf [Accessed 14 January 2015].
  82. EU FLEGT Facility (2014). VPA countries. Available at: http://www.euflegt.efi.int/vpa-countries [Accessed 14 June 2014].
  83. FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) (2008, 2009, 2011, 2014). Global FSC certificates: type and distribution. Available at: https://ic.fsc.org/facts-figures.19.html [Accessed 14 Mach 2015].
  84. FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) (2010). FSC Directive on FSC Forest Management Evaluations. Available at: https://www.scsglobalservices.com/files/standards/FSC-DIR-20-007_EN.pdf. [Accessed 14 June 2014].
  85. FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) & PEFC (Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification) (2013). Joint statement by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) recommending ISO member to vote against the new work item proposal Chain of Custody of Forest Based Products-Requirements. Available at: http://www.pefc.org/images/documents/external/Joint_StatementFSC_PEFC_July_8 _2013.pdf [Accessed 12 June 2014].
  86. FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) (2014). FSC harmonised certification bodies’ Forest Stewardship Standard for the Republic of Indonesia. Available at: http://www.scsglobalservices.com/ files/standards/fsc-std-idn-01-01-2013_indonesianatural_plantations_and_slimf.pdf [Accessed 14 December 2014].
  87. G8 Action Programme on Forests (2002). G8 action programme on forests—Final report. www.illegal-logging.info/item_single.php?it_id=38&it=document [Accessed 14 January 2015].
  88. Greenpeace (2014). Weaker certification schemes. Other forest industry driven certification schemes fail to meet basic performance indicators. Available at: http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/forests/solutions/alternatives-to-forest-destruc/Weaker-Certification-Schemes/ [Accessed 14 December 2014].
  89. Kemitraan (2014). Terobosan baru dalam SVLK: conformity declaration untuk hutan rakyat dan industri kecil menengah. Available at: http://www.kemitraan.or.id/sites/default/files/ Press%20Release%20Self%20Declare%20SVLK%20Kemitraan-160514final.pdf [Accessed 14 March 2015].
  90. Kompas (2014). Ini aturan baru legalitas kayu. Available at: http://bisniskeuangan. kompas.com/read/2014/12/30/090900326/Ini.Aturan.Baru.Legalitas.Kayu [Accessed 14 January 2015].
  91. LEI (Lembaga Ekolabel Indonesia) (2013). FMU and Manufacture LEI Certified. Updated: July 2013. Available at: http://www.lei.or.id/files/FMU%20&%20Manufacture%20certified%20LEI July%202013.pdf [Accessed 14 November 2014].
  92. LEI (Lembaga Ekolabel Indonesia) (2014). Laporan Kegiatan Lembaga Ekolabel Indonesia 2009-2014. LEI.
  93. MFP (Multistakeholder Forestry Programme). (2014). SVLK: Meningkatkan perdagangan produk kayu legal dari Indonesia. Infobrief, December 2014. Available at: http://www.mfp.or.id/ attachments/article/89/SVLK%20in%20brief_IND_FA.pdf [Accessed 14 January 2015].
  94. MoEF (Ministry of Environmental and Forestry) (2014a). Ministry Regulation No P. 95/Menhut-II/2014 on Ministry Regulation No P. 43/Menhut-II/2014 on performance appraisal of sustainable production forest management and timber legality verification.
  95. MoEF (Ministry of Environmental and Forestry) (2014b). Circular letter from Director General of Forest Enterprises No: SE.14/VI-BPPHH/2014 on concerning obligations fulfillment related to timber legality verification system (SVLK).
  96. MoF (Ministry of Forestry) (2009). Ministry Regulation No P. 38/Menhut-II/2009 on Performance appraisal standard and guidelines of sustainable production forest management and timber legality verification.
  97. MoF (Ministry of Forestry) (2011). Ministry Regulation No P. 68/Menhut-II/2011 on First amendment of Ministry Regulation No P. 38/Menhut-II/2009 on performance appraisal standard and guidelines of sustainable production forest management and timber legality verification.
  98. MoF (Ministry of Forestry) (2012). Ministry Regulation No P. 45/Menhut-II/2012 on Second amendment of Ministry Regulation No P. 38/Menhut-II/2009 on performance appraisal standard and guidelines of sustainable production forest management and timber legality verification.
  99. MoF (Ministry of Forestry) (2013). Ministry Regulation No P. 42/Menhut-II/2013 on Third amendment of Ministry Regulation No P. 38/Menhut-II/2009 on performance appraisal standard and guidelines of sustainable production forest management and timber legality verification.
  100. MoF (Ministry of Forestry) (2014a). Ministry Regulation No P. 43/Menhut-II/2014 on performance appraisal of sustainable production forest management and timber legality verification.
  101. MoF (Ministry of Forestry) (2014b). Circular letter from Director General of Forest Enterprises No: SE.8/VI-BPPHH/2014 on concerning obligations fulfillment related to timber legality verification system (SVLK).
  102. MoF (Ministry of Forestry) (2014c). SVLK development, Commitment to sustainable forests for sustainable trade.
  103. MoF (Ministry of Forestry) (2013b). Keunggulan SVLK sebagai penguat produk nasional. Seminar Kehutanan Indonesia, Jakarta 16 Desember 2013. p.42. (presentation file).
  104. MoF (Ministry of Forestry) (2014). Data PHPL. Available at: http://www.dephut.go.id/ index.php/common/phpl [Accessed 14 March 2015].
  105. MoT (Ministry of Trade) (2012). Ministry Regulation No. 64/M-DAG/PER/10/2012 on Export provision on forest industrial products.
  106. MoT (Ministry of Trade) (2013a). Ministry Regulation No. 81/M-DAG/PER/12/2013 on Amendment on Ministry Regulation No. 64/M-DAG/PER/10/2012 on export provision on forest industrial products.
  107. MoT (Ministry of Trade) (2014). Diplomasi perdagangan Wamendag di London: SVLK berdampak positif bagi ekspor kayu Indonesia. Available at: http://www.kemendag.go.id/id/news/ 2014/06/04/diplomasi-perdagangan-wamendag-di-london-svlk-berdampak-positif-bagi-ekspor-kayu-indonesia [Accessed 14 December 2014].
  108. Neraca (2014). Usaha kecil akan dibantu sertifikasi legalitas kayu. Available at: http://www.neraca.co.id/industri/43685/Usaha-Kecil-Akan-Dibantu-Sertifikasi-Legalitas-Kayu [Accessed 14 January 2015].
  109. The Jakarta Post. (2014a). Indonesia aims long-term timber export growth in EU. Available at: http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2014/03/01/indonesia-aims-long-term-timber-export-growth-eu.html [Accessed 1 January 2015].
  110. The Jakarta Post. (2014b). APKI wants more access to local market. Available at: http://m.thejakartapost.com/news/2014/07/19/apki-wants-more-access-local-market.html [Accessed 14 January 2015].
Read More

Author Biography

Lukas Giessen, - Chair Group of Forest and Nature Conservation Policy, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Büsgenweg 3, 37077 Göttingen. - European Forest Institute
Lukas Giessen has specialised in scientific research on forest policy and politics as well as broader land use governance and regional development issues., with special emphasis on international governance influencing domestic forest-related policies around the globe. This includes scrutiny of international global and regional processes as well as national policies on forests, land use, climate, biodiversity. Methodologically He combines empirical-analytical theories of Policy Analysis (Comparative Government) and International Relations , and draw on qualitative as well as quantitative methods. Analyses centre around developed countries and the EU with its member states, as well as international forest development cooperation and national forest policies in developing countries around the globe.
Download this PDF file
PDF