Advertisement

Human Ecology

, Volume 45, Issue 5, pp 711–717 | Cite as

The ‘Capitalist Squeeze’ and the Rise and Fall of Sumatra’s Krui Agroforests

  • David E. GilbertEmail author
Article

Introduction

Around 1875, forest-farmers in Krui along Sumatra’s southwest coast began cultivating the native rainforest tree species damar (Shorea javanica) to sell its resin as a commodity crop in an area of forested foothills resembling lowland tropical rainforests (Marsden 1783; Rappard 1937; Michon et al. 2000: 178). Their efforts soon attracted the attention of Dutch colonial foresters and researchers struck by Krui forest-farmers’ cultivation methods and the high value of the damar resin they produced (Endert 1935; Verhoef 1937).

By the late 1980s, Krui damar agroforests covered more than 75,000 ha (Budidarsono et al.2000). Collaboration among forest-farmers, academics, and environmentalists protected the agroforests from state plans in the early 1990s to convert much of the area into logging concessions and industrial oil palm plantations (Michon et al. 2000).

In January 2016 I conducted a two-week rapid appraisal of the Krui agroforests to assess the impacts of declining damar...

Keywords

Political economy of environmental change  Agroforestry Deforestation Oil palm Indonesia 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I am grateful for the forest-farmers, researchers, and activists that shared their knowledge and experiences with me during my time in Sumatra. Unfortunately, because of the dangers rural workers and environmentalists face in the countryside, they must remain anonymous. I thank the journal’s three referees for their constructive comments.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Grants from the National Science Foundation (#1524490) and Wenner-Gren Foundation (#8676) funded this research.

Conflict of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Bernstein, H. (1981). Concepts for the Analysis of Contemporary Peasantries. In Galli, R. (ed.), The Political Economy of Rural Development, State University of New York Press, Albany.Google Scholar
  2. Budidarsono S., Arifatmi B., De Foresta H., and Tomich T. P. (2000). Damar Agroforest Establishment and Sources of Livelihood: A Profitability Assessment of damar Agroforest Systems in Krui, Lampung, Sumatra, Indonesia, ICRAF-SE Asia, Bogor.Google Scholar
  3. Colchester M., Ekadinata A., Fay C., Pasya G., Situmorang L., Sirait M., Van Noordwijk M., Cahyaningsih N., Budidarsono S., Suyanto S., Kusters K., Manalu P., and Gaveau D. (2005). Facilitating agroforestry development through land and tree tenure reforms Indonesia, ICRAF Southeast Asia Working Paper no. 2005 2, Bogor, ICRAF.Google Scholar
  4. Colchester M., Jiwan N., Andiko S., Firdaus A., Surambo A., and Pane H. (2006). Promised land: Palm oil and land acquisition in Indonesia - Implications for local communities and indigenous peoples, Forest Peoples Programme, Moreton-in-Marsh.Google Scholar
  5. Contreras-Hermosilla A., and Fay C. (2005). Strengthening Forest Management in Indonesian Through Land Tenure Reform: Issues and Framework for Action, World Agroforestry Center, Bogor.Google Scholar
  6. Denevan W. M., and Padoch C. (1987). Swidden-Fallow Agroforestry in the Peruvian Amazon, New York Botanical Garden, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Endert F. (1935). Het harsonderzoek in Nederlandsch-Indie. Tectona XXVIII: 249–332.Google Scholar
  8. Fay, C., and Sirait, M. (2002). Reforming the Reformists in Post-Suharto Indonesia. In Colfer, C. and Resosudarmo, I. (eds.), Which Way Forward? People, Forests, and Policymaking in Indonesia, Resources for the Future, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  9. Fay C., De Foresta H., Sirait M., and Tomich T. (1998). A policy breakthrough for Indonesian farmers in the Krui damar agro-forests. Agroforestry Today 10: 225–226.Google Scholar
  10. Geertz C. (1963). Agricultural Involution: The Processes of Ecological Change in Indonesia, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  11. Hansen M., Potapov P., Moore R., Hancher M., Turubanova S., Tyukavina A., Thau D., Stehman V., Goetz S., Loveland T., Kommareddy A., Egorov A., Chini L., Justice C., and Townshend J. (2013). High-Resolution Global Maps of 21st-Century Forest Cover Change. Science 342(6160): 850–853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hecht, S. B. (2014). Forests Lost and Found in Tropical Latin America: The Woodland ‘Green Revolution.’ The Journal of Peasant Studies:1–33.  http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2014.917371
  13. Kusters K., De Foresta H., Ekadinata A., and van Noordwijk M. (2007). Towards Solutions for State vs. Local Community Conflicts over Forestland: The Impact of Formal Recognition of User Rights in Krui, Sumatra, Indonesia. Human Ecology 35: 427–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kusters K., Perez R., de Foresta H., Dietz T., Ros-Tonen M., Belcher B., Manalu P., Nawir A., and Wollenburg E. (2008). Will Agroforests Vanish? The Case of damar Agroforests in Indonesia. Human Ecology 36(3): 357–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Li T. M. (2010). Indigeneity, Capitalism, and the Management of Dispossession. Current Anthropology 51(3): 385–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Li T. M. (2014). Land’s End: Capitalist Relations on an Indigenous Frontier, Duke University Press, Durham.Google Scholar
  17. Marsden W. (1783). The History of Sumatra, Thomas Payne and Son, London.Google Scholar
  18. Mary F., and Michon V. (1987). When agroforests drive back natural forests: A socio-economic analysis of a rice-agroforest system in Sumatra. Agroforestry Systems 5: 27–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Michon, G., and De Foresta, H. (1995). The Indonesian Agro-Forest Model. In Halladay, P., and Gilmour, D. (eds.), Conserving Biodiversity Outside Protected Areas: The role of traditional agro-ecosystems, IUCN The World Conservation Union, Gland, p. 229.Google Scholar
  20. Michon, G., De Foresta, H., Kusworo A., and Levang P. (2000). The Damar Agroforests of Krui, Indonesia: Justice for Forest Farmers. In Zerner, C. (ed.), People, Plants and Justice: The Politics of Nature Conservation, Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  21. Michon, G., De Foresta H., Levang, P., and Verdeaux F. (2007). Domestic Forests: A New Paradigm for Integrating Local Communities’ Forestry into Tropical Forest Science. Ecology and Society 12(2):1.Google Scholar
  22. Rappard F. W. (1937). Oorspronkelijke bijdragen: De damar van Bengkoelen. Tectona D1(30): 897–915.Google Scholar
  23. Torquebiau E. (1984). Man-Made Dipterocarp Forest in Sumatra. Agroforestry Systems 2: 103–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Verhoef L. (1937). De toekomst der Nederlandsch Indiche harsen. Tectona XXX: 759–770.Google Scholar
  25. Vincent G., De Foresta H., and Mulia R. (2009). Co-occurring tree species show contrasting sensitivity to ENSO-related droughts in planted dipterocarp forests. Forest Ecology and Management 258(7): 1316–1322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Walker A. (2004). Seeing Farmers for the Trees: Community Forestry and the Arborealisation of Agriculture in Northern Thailand. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 45(3): 311–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Watts, M. J. (1985). Social Theory and Environmental Degradation. In Gradus, Y. (ed.), Desert Development, D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, pp. 14–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Waylen K. A., Fischer A., McGowan P. J. K., and Milner-Gulland E. J. (2013). Deconstructing Community for Conservation: Why Simple Assumptions Are Not Sufficient. Human Ecology 41(4): 575–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wolf E. R. (1957). Closed Corporate Peasant Communities in Mesoamerica and Central Java. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 13(1): 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wollenberg E., Nawir A. A., Uluk A., and Pramono H. (2001). Income Is Not Enough: The Effect of Economic Incentives on Forest Product Conservation, CIFOR, Bogor.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations