Stakeholder Engagement Strategies for the Agrarian Reform and Social Forestry (RAPS) Program in Sigi Regency
A preliminary study conducted in five LTKL member regencies identified Sigi Regency as a potential area for early intervention on Agrarian Reform and Social Forestry (RAPS) as a strategy for poverty reduction. This potential is driven by high levels of agrarian inequality resulting from the dominance of state-controlled land, particularly forest areas, which cover approximately 74.91% of the regency’s territory. This condition limits community access to living space and livelihood resources, underscoring the urgency of implementing RAPS as a structural solution.
Since 2017, the Sigi Regency Government has demonstrated a strong commitment to RAPS by incorporating it into regional development planning documents and establishing a dedicated technical institution. The local government has also actively proposed Land Objects for Agrarian Reform (TORA) and social forestry schemes to the central government through both the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF) and the Ministry of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning/National Land Agency (ATR/BPN), with poor households as the primary target group. Nevertheless, RAPS is widely understood as a long-term policy that will not automatically reduce poverty without strong support and effective synergy among stakeholders.
The study identifies nine key stakeholders with varying levels of influence and interest, requiring differentiated engagement strategies. The Agrarian Reform Task Force (GTRA) and the Regional Development Planning Agency (Bappeda) emerge as the most influential actors, while technical agencies play a supporting role, and the Police (Polres) and District Military Command (Kodim) are positioned at relatively low levels of influence and interest. The case study highlights three major challenges in RAPS implementation in Sigi: weak communication and collaboration across actors, the lack of integration of RAPS commitments into sectoral technical planning by local government agencies (OPD), and limited resource mobilization and local budget allocation to support the program.
