Scholarlink

<p>Social forestry has been promoted as a policy innovation aimed at improving the livelihoods of forest-dependent communities. However, the formal allocation of social forestry rights does not automatically translate into access to sustainable and decent livelihoods. Drawing on the Theory of Access and the Full Range Leadership model, this study examines how leadership styles within social forestry groups shape both access to and exclusion from livelihood opportunities within social forestry groups. This study adopts a multiple-case study approach involving three social forestry groups, representing beginner, intermediate, and advanced group categories. The selected cases share relatively similar biophysical conditions and forest utilization regimes, policy histories, and organizational trajectories, enabling closer comparison of how leadership dynamics shape divergent livelihood outcomes. Data were collected through two rounds of in-depth interviews, involving 32 key informants from internal group actors and external stakeholders, and analyzed qualitatively using thematic analysis and triangulation. The overall findings reveal broadly distinct access and exclusion outcomes associated with different leadership styles. Groups led by transformational leaders exhibit higher adaptive capacity and openness to innovation, enabling broader access to higher-value livelihood opportunities such as ecotourism. In contrast, passive transactional leadership tended to maintain procedural access to social forestry programs while constraining innovation, trust, and participation, resulting in limited livelihood diversification. Meanwhile, laissez-faire leadership was associated with weak coordination, organizational stagnation, and increasingly symbolic tenure rights, where formal access existed but meaningful livelihood benefits remained minimal. The findings further indicate that external facilitation can either strengthen or constrain community access depending on whether it reinforces internal agency and collective learning or instead encourages dependency and centralized control. Overall, this study demonstrates that the effectiveness of social forestry depends not only on tenure recognition, but also on leadership dynamics and internal governance processes that shape access to forest-based livelihoods.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Unlocking Access to Social Forestry Through Leadership for Sustainable Livelihoods in Rural Indonesia

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月25日

查看全文
  • An Nissa Herdhaningtyas,
  • Kuncoro Cahyo Aji,
  • Widyanto Dwi Nugroho,
  • Moch Sofiyulloh,
  • Ahmad Maryudi

摘要

Social forestry has been promoted as a policy innovation aimed at improving the livelihoods of forest-dependent communities. However, the formal allocation of social forestry rights does not automatically translate into access to sustainable and decent livelihoods. Drawing on the Theory of Access and the Full Range Leadership model, this study examines how leadership styles within social forestry groups shape both access to and exclusion from livelihood opportunities within social forestry groups. This study adopts a multiple-case study approach involving three social forestry groups, representing beginner, intermediate, and advanced group categories. The selected cases share relatively similar biophysical conditions and forest utilization regimes, policy histories, and organizational trajectories, enabling closer comparison of how leadership dynamics shape divergent livelihood outcomes. Data were collected through two rounds of in-depth interviews, involving 32 key informants from internal group actors and external stakeholders, and analyzed qualitatively using thematic analysis and triangulation. The overall findings reveal broadly distinct access and exclusion outcomes associated with different leadership styles. Groups led by transformational leaders exhibit higher adaptive capacity and openness to innovation, enabling broader access to higher-value livelihood opportunities such as ecotourism. In contrast, passive transactional leadership tended to maintain procedural access to social forestry programs while constraining innovation, trust, and participation, resulting in limited livelihood diversification. Meanwhile, laissez-faire leadership was associated with weak coordination, organizational stagnation, and increasingly symbolic tenure rights, where formal access existed but meaningful livelihood benefits remained minimal. The findings further indicate that external facilitation can either strengthen or constrain community access depending on whether it reinforces internal agency and collective learning or instead encourages dependency and centralized control. Overall, this study demonstrates that the effectiveness of social forestry depends not only on tenure recognition, but also on leadership dynamics and internal governance processes that shape access to forest-based livelihoods.