Perpustakaan Digital ITB

Environmental degradation and its impacts in the world have awakened us to the importance of preserving the environment. In line with this, the Government of Indonesia has released some policies to support the preserving of the environment, such as the establishment of national parks. National parks in Indonesia have the functions of protecting the life support system, preserving biodiversity and its ecosystem, and promoting sustained utilization of natural resources through activities such as research, environmental education, ecotourism, and enhanced breeding activity.The enhancement of the national parks does not mean the existence of the local communities inside and surrounding the national parks can be ignored. Generally, the local communities who live inside and surrounding the national parks in Indonesia are still have minimum welfare. When the functions of the national park conflict with the consequences of the social-economic condition of the local communities, certain problems such as illegal logging, illegal mining, and encroachment, emerge for national park management. To overcome these problems the national parks should make efforts, such as community development, which can improve welfare of the local communities and conserve the national park.This study discusses the community development programs in Gunung Halimun-Salak National Park (GHSNP) as a case study. This study is focused on the following two programs: Incentive for Rural Enterprise (Usped=Usaha Ekonomi Pedesaan) and Conservation Village Model (MKK=Model Kampung Konservasi) to find out the best approach for implementing community development programs.From the study on two sample villages, Curug Bitung Village and Mekarnangka Village, it was found that the Usped seems to use the assumption that the local community is a threat to conservation in GHSNP, because the dependency of the local communities on the natural resources in GHSNP is very high. Based on this assumption, Usped tends to use the top-down approach in its implementation, where the GHSNP authority has the dominant role in this program. As a result, Usped has not yet achieved the output this program expected. The awareness of the local communities on conservation of GHSNP is almost the same as it was before these villages began this program and the welfare of the local communities has not yet increased significantly.On the other side, MKK uses the assumption that the local community is a potential force which can be mobilized to support the conservation of GHSNP. Based on this assumption, MKK uses the bottom-up approach which involves more stakeholders than Usped in its implementation. From the study on two MKK sites, Sirnaresmi Village and Cipeuteuy Village, the participation of the local community in the MKK program has been built based on the participatory process from the beginning of the program until the implementation. Therefore, the participation from the local communities in the MKK program is better than in the Usped program. Support from the local government, Sukabumi Regency, to MKK program begins to appear. It can be concluded that MKK has a greater chance to be successful than Usped in the community development programs in GHSNP. In other words, the approach in MKK (bottom-up) is better than in Usped (top-down) in the implementation of community development in GHSNP.From this study, it is found that (1) participation from local communities and other stakeholders, (2) coordination among stakeholders, and (3) support from the local government are important factors to make the community development program successful in national park management.