Intergenerational Value Transmission as a Social-Ecological Mechanism for Sustainable Forest Governance: Lessons from the Repong Damar Agroforestry System of Krui, Indonesia

Mansur Hidayat; Bartoven Vivit Nurdin; Syarief Makhya

doi:10.55927/ijis.v5i6.38

Authors

Mansur Hidayat Universitas Lampung
Bartoven Vivit Nurdin Universitas Lampung
Syarief Makhya Universitas Lampung

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55927/ijis.v5i6.38

Keywords:

Intergenerational Value Transmission, Sustainable Forest Governance, Social Ecological Systems, Repong Damar Agroforestry, Local Wisdom, Relational Values

Abstract

The sustainability of community-based forest management systems is often associated with the existence of formal regulations and economic incentives; however, the cultural mechanisms that underpin the intergenerational reproduction of ecological values have received insufficient attention in the literature on natural resource governance. This study aims to analyze how intergenerational value transmission functions as a socio-ecological mechanism in maintaining the sustainability of forest governance within the Repong Damar agroforestry system in Krui, Lampung, Indonesia. Using a qualitative-interpretive approach based on case studies and ethnographic analysis, this research explores the values, customary norms, inheritance practices, and ecological orientations of the Krui community. The findings reveal three primary mechanisms underpinning the sustainability of Repong Damar: (1) customary institutions that function as ecological governance mechanisms linking ownership rights to conservation responsibilities; (2) inheritance processes that do not merely transfer physical assets but also transmit ecological knowledge, cultural identity, and conservation ethics conceptualized in this study as Intergenerational Ecological Stewardship; and (3) a long-term temporal orientation termed “ecological patience,” which refers to the cultural capacity to align economic behavior with the rhythms of natural regeneration. This study offers a theoretical contribution to the study of social-ecological systems and sustainable forest governance by demonstrating that environmental sustainability is not solely determined by policies and economic incentives, but also by communities’ capacity to reproduce relational values that connect humans, nature, and intergenerational responsibilities.

References

REFERENCES

Berkes, F. (2018). Sacred ecology (4th ed.). Routledge.

Chan, K. M. A., Balvanera, P., Benessaiah, K., Chapman, M., Díaz, S., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Gould, R., Hannahs, N., Jax, K., Klain, S., Luck, G. W., Martín-López, B., Muraca, B., Norton, B., Ott, K., Pascual, U., Satterfield, T., Tadaki, M., Taggart, J., & Turner, N. (2016). Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(6), 1462–1465. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1525002113

Díaz, S., Pascual, U., Stenseke, M., Martín-López, B., Watson, R. T., Molnár, Z., Hill, R., Chan, K. M. A., Baste, I. A., Brauman, K. A., Polasky, S., Church, A., Lonsdale, M., Larigauderie, A., Leadley, P. W., van Oudenhoven, A. P. E., van der Plaat, F., Schröter, M., Lavorel, S., ... Shirayama, Y. (2018). Assessing nature's contributions to people. Science, 359(6373), 270–272. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap8826

FAO. (2024). The state of the world's forests 2024. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Fernández-Llamazares, Á., Lepofsky, D., Lertzman, K., Armstrong, C. G., Brondizio, E. S., Gavin, M. C., Lyver, P. O'B., Nicholas, G. P., Pascua, P., Reo, N. J., & Reyes-García, V. (2021). Scientists’ warning to humanity on threats to indigenous and local knowledge systems. Journal of Ethnobiology, 41(2), 144–169. https://doi.org/10.2993/0278-0771-41.2.144

Folke, C., Biggs, R., Norström, A. V., Reyers, B., & Rockström, J. (2016). Social-ecological resilience and biosphere-based sustainability science. Ecology and Society, 21(3), 41. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08748-210341

IPBES. (2019). Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.

Jose, S. (2009). Agroforestry for ecosystem services and environmental benefits: An overview. Agroforestry Systems, 76(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-009-9229-7

Kusters, K., de Foresta, H., Ekadinata, A., & 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(4), 427–438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-006-9055-6

Michon, G., & de Foresta, H. (1999). Agro-forests: Incorporating a forest vision in agroforestry. In L. E. Buck, J. P. Lassoie, & E. C. M. Fernandes (Eds.), Agroforestry in sustainable agricultural systems (pp. 381–406). CRC Press.

Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.

van Noordwijk, M., Duguma, L., Dewi, S., Leimona, B., Catacutan, D., Lusiana, B., Öborn, I., Hairiah, K., & Minang, P. A. (2020). SDG synergy between agriculture and forestry in the food, energy, water and income nexus. Landscape Ecology, 35(8), 1725–1740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-01010-2

World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford University Press.