Digital Advocacy At The

Science-Policy Interface
Resolving Land-use Conflicts in Indonesian Conservation Forests

Presented by : Santi Pratiwi, M.Sc

PhD Candidate at Georg-August-University of Goettingen
At 4th International Forest Policy Meeting
27 April 2022 1
Background
• Global problems urgently need an improvement at the science-policy interface to
produce science-based solutions.
• Increase of advocacy activities, collective action and social movement to
influence policies and promote political change.
• The development of digital technologies such as internet and social media as a
new platform to advocacy and scientific knowledge transfer
• This new media can be used for digital advocacy to claim for scientific
information, protest science-based policy, or even distribute false information.
• General Question  Can digital advocacy be a successful media of policy
change and knowledge transfer?

#Hashtag

2
Case Location
• In Indonesia, the state forests has been assigned to three different function,
protection, production and conservation forests. The Conservation forests
has five different type, Nature Reserve, Sanctuary Reserve, National Park,
Nature Recreation Park, and Forest Park.
• Recently, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF) through
Ministry Decree 25 of 2018 has decreased the forest function of 2.391
hectares Kamojang Nature Reserve into Nature Recreation Park due to
deforestation and land-use changes.
• This triggered negative response from the local grassroots community who
believe that this changes occurred due to the government interests of forest
utilization in form of geothermal and tourism activities.
• Consequently, this parties organized demonstration, long march, and digital
advocacy uses social media and online petition to repeal the Ministry
Decree.

3
Research Questions
How was the used of scientific information in
the digital advocacy? How did the digital advocacy influence the
science-policy interface?

H2: If digital advocacy uses social media bridge

H1: If the grassroots community used scientific science and policy then it improves the
arguments in their digital advocacy then it integration and utilization of science-based
provides problem solution for the land-use policy.
conflicts.

4
Theoretical Framework

The RIU Model (Boecher & Krott, 2014)

• High Quality Research

• Bi-directional Integration
• Practical / Political Utilization

Digital Advocacy (Johansson & Scaramuzzino, 2019)

• Advocacy can be defined as pleas for (or against) a cause and an expression of a particular political position
(Beyers, 2004)
• Three notions of digital access politics, digital information politics, and digital protest politics in and via 5
METHODOLOGY

Data Collection
Data Analysis
Actor Centered
Power Approach
Document Expert (Krott et.al. 2003)
Observation
Analysis interview
The RIU Model
26 actors (Boecher & Krott
Regulation, (Governmen Kamojang 2014)
Policies, t, Private Nature
Reports, company, Reserve, Multiple Triangulation
Articles NGOs, local online FGD
community

6
 Enactment of
Ministry Decree 732
Proposal of functional Field ground check and of 2021 to evaluate
change and Enactment of Guntur-
Establishment of environmental services Papandayan CFMU
integrated team permit on geothermal
project

2012 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Enactment of
Evaluation research Establishment of
MoEF Decree 25
of Kamojang Nature new evaluation team
of 2018
Reserve on Decree 25
Rejection of the
Digital campaign Decree, through Live streaming
to save Nature offline action and FGD in social
Reserve digital advocacy media

The history process of land-use changes by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (Black)

and digital advocacy started by local grassroots community (Red) 7

Results:
Research Criteria Observat Before Advocacy
ion
Assessing current
scientific information
Compliance with the
procedures of sound
scientific practice
Cooperation with
external scientific
projects and institutions
Independent
meaningfulness of
scientific findings
Observat After Advocacy
ion
- The first evaluation process which
held by the MoEF local management
unit in 2012 is considered outdated
- The results of re-evaluation team show
that the initial evaluation report has
low methodology in data collection
and analysis
- The integrated team was consists of
one expert, one researcher, provincial
government, and the Ministry of
Environment and Forestry. This was
lack of participation from the
grassroots community and local
villagers.
- Each scientific finding was not
independent.
+ The re-evaluation team conducted
field observation and ground check to
assess current condition of the new
Kamojang Nature Reserve.
+ The re-evaluation team proposed more
reliable methodology in data
collection and analysis
+ They started to involve various actors,
such as academic, researcher, local
government, geothermal company, and
the grassroots community in the focus
group discussion to have a
comprehensive evaluation report
+ Each scientific finding was
independently implemented.
8
Results:
Govern
ment
science
Re-evaluation
Academic
science Science Policy and Revision of
Decree 25
Citizen
science

Research Integration Utilization

DIGITAL ADVOCACY

248 posts and 28 FGD Online Petition with 300,000 Informative websites
videos in Instagram signatures in Change.Org Sadarkawasan.org
9
Results:
Govern
ment
science
Re-evaluation
Academic
science Science Policy and Revision of
Decree 25
Citizen
science

Research Integration Utilization

Mixed Research Focus Group Discussion Policy Change

10
Conclusion
• The grassroots community has used scientific (based on scientific research) and non-scientific
arguments (socio-cultural perspectives) in their digital advocacy to change political decision.  H1
Approved

• Through digital advocacy, the actors can negotiate with policymakers (access), shape public
opinion through media (information), and express claims through collective manifestations
(protests), which then improve the integration and utilization of science-based policy.  H2
Approved

• The grassroots community, Sadar Kawasan, plays an important role as knowledge broker by
starting digital advocacy and sharing knowledge about protecting conservation forests.

11
Policy Implication
• Different standard of research methodology and principles among actors (government science vs academic
science vs citizen science), which then highlight the use of scientific evidence not false messages or hoaxes.

 Harmonization of research standards and procedures through regulation

• Establishment of new forest policy could shift problems, rather than to solve it from the powerful to the
weaker actors. The existence of informal interests affected the implementation of forest policy.

 Multiple integration involving relevant actors in research and policymaking process

• Lack of transparancy in the policy change process of the conservation forests induced knowledge gap
which then lead to conflicts.

 Intensive knowledge transfer through digital media (due to limited budget)

12
13