INSTITUTION ANALYSIS OF FARMERS GROUP HOLDERS OF SOCIAL FORESTRY LICENSE IN THE FOREST MANAGEMENT UNIT OF BATUTEGI, INDONESIA

Institutions are the rules of the game that can regulate the activities of Farmers Group members to support Social Forestry activities. The study aimed to analyze the structure, roles, and institutional rules of the Farmers Group of Karya Tani Mandiri and the Farmers Group of Karya Bakti in the Forest Management Unit of Batutegi, Indonesia. Data collection was carried out using interviews, observations, and literature studies. The data that has been collected is then analyzed using a Likert scale. The results showed that Farmers Group of Karya Bakti in terms of structure, roles, and complete game rules compared to Farmers Group Karya Tani Mandiri. This is because the Farmers Group of Karya Tani Mandiri at the time in the field did not have Memorandum of Association/Article of Association, Decree of the Regent, institution’s structure, the role of the structure, but the facts in the field Farmers Group of Karya Bakti violated the rules of the game in the Memorandum of Association/Article of Association, namely cutting down trees for personal gain. In forest areas, the application of the game rules to the institution's performance of the Farmers Group of Karya Tani Mandiri and the Farmers Group of Karya Bakti needs to be improved so that forest management can be sustainable by understanding and obeying the rules of the game that apply.


INTRODUCTION
Social forestry is one of the policies issued by the government to resolve conflicts, which maximizes the social, economic, and environmental benefits of forests (Hasnanda et al., 2021 andLaksemi et al., 2019).Social forestry is carried out to consider and pay attention to the social conditions of communities around the forest (Wulandari and Inoue, 2018).Wulandari et al. (2014) also explained that the social forestry efforts being implemented have been going well; this is evidenced by the communities living around the forest being able to optimize the function of the forest in Community Forestry.This social forestry is a system of sustainable forest management carried out for state forest areas or private forests carried out by the local community as the leading actor to improve environmental balance welfare and to overcome conflicts in Village Forests, Community Plantation Forests, Customary Forests, Forests Community, and Forestry Partnership.One of the schemes of the social forestry program is Community Forestry.
Community Forestry (Hutan Kemasyarakatan/HKm) is one of the schemes under the auspices of the Social Forestry Program (Ilfa et al., 2021).The implementation of HKm aims to increase community capacity and access to sustainable forest management to overcome community socio-economic problems (Mulyadin et al., 2016).In addition to strengthening forest communities, HKm also issues community forest management permits (Bijaya et al., 2016).This HKM program is hoped to help reduce poverty, promote development, and provide economic and forest protection incentives (Jong et al., 2018;Yudischa et al., 2014).HKm management can be successful if there is an institution, namely the Association of Farmers Groups or what is commonly called farmers group (Safe'i et al., 2018).The existence of the Farmers Group is designed to control a good strategy in institutional activities (Apriandana et al., 2021).
According to Febryano et al. (2015) institutions are efforts that are considered capable of assisting the government in the development of rural communities or around forests.Institutions aim to create a container or place that includes rules, ethics, and ethical codes in groups that increase resources in activities to be carried out, which is vital to accommodate an activity.The problem in this research is how the institutions' performance of Farmers Group as the holder of social forestry permits to support the realization of sustainable forest management.The research objective was to analyze the institution's performance of Farmers Group in holding social forestry licenses in the Forest Management Unit of Batutegi, Indonesia, to support sustainable forest management.

METHOD
The research was conducted in Sinar Banten Village and Penantian Village, Ulu Belu District, the Forest Management Unit of Batutegi, Indonesia, in July 2022.The research locations were chosen purposely because these locations have active Farmers Group, manage HKm areas, and work closely with PT Nestle.The object of this research is Farmers Group of Karya Bakti and Farmers Group of Karya Tani Mandiri, with a total sample of 30 respondents from each Farmers Group.Data collection was carried out by means of interviews (questionnaires), observations, and literature studies.A literature study is carried out to add to the completeness of research data obtained from various sources (related agencies) and other data sources from internet network access such as journals, reports, and so on related to research.This study uses a quantitative method approach and is analyzed using a Likert scale.The Likert scale in this study measures the results of interview data regarding the structure, roles, and institutional rules of the Farmers Group of Karya Tani Mandiri and Farmers Group Karya Bakti.There are three alternative responses or answers from the Likert scale in this study, namely good, sufficient, and not good which respectively have values of 3, 2 and 1 as shown in Table 1.The data that has been analyzed and the score obtained from the Likert Scale is then searched for the average respondent's answer.The mean value was determined using class intervals.The formula for determining the length of the class interval is as follows:

Farmers Group Institutions Structure, Role, and Rules
Several indicators are used to measure the institution performance of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group in social forestry license holders, namely the institution structure of Farmers Group, the institution role of Farmers Group, and the rules of the game used in Farmers Group.The performance categories of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group in permit holders in social forestry can be seen in Table 2.The first indicator of Farmers Group institutions is the structure of Farmers Group.The score of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group is lower than that of Karya Bakti's Farmers Group.These two Farmer's Groups belong to the sufficient category, as can be seen in Table 2.This is because Karya Bakti's Farmers Group members have a clear organizational structure for the Farmers Group, such as a chairman, treasurer, secretary, departments, and members.In addition to having a complete membership structure, Karya Bakti's Farmers Group also understands the duties and functions of this structure very well.The existence of a structure in the institution's performance of Karya Bakti's Farmers Group greatly facilitates the community in finding information about agriculture.The institution's structure will also make it easier for farmers to obtain more information related to prices and government assistance such as grants, equipment assistance, training, and assistance (Santosa et al., 2017).Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group institution structure in the field at the time was not found (disappeared).This proves that Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group is not optimal for maintaining its management structure.However, the Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group is running quite optimally because the Farmers Group members are very in touch with the chairman and fellow members.
The institutional role of the Farmers Group is the second indicator.Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group score is lower than that of Karya Bakti's Farmers Group.These two farmers' groups fall into the sufficient or sufficient category.This is because Karya Bakti's Farmers Group has a clear structure and function, and Farmers Group members also understand each role held by the management of Karya Bakti's Farmers Group.Unlike the Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group, the role of the Farmers Group institution structure is not understood by members of the Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group.Such a condition causes Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group to be weak in carrying out the role held by the management of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group.The role referred to in Farmers Group institutions is from a series of structures, with each member of the management having a role or authority that is held.This role serves as a legitimate form of governance and decision-making.
The last Farmers Group institutions indicator is the rules of the Farmers Group game.The game rules for Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group have a minor score compared to Karya Bakti's Farmers Group score.This is because the rules of the game used by Karya Bakti's Farmers Group are complete, and each member holds the rules of the game, whereas Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group has rules of the game, but all members do not hold the rules of the game.The rules of the game used in Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group are Memorandum of Association/Article of Association and Decree of the Regent.The game rules held by Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group when they were in the field were not found (lost).This proves that Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group did not properly maintain the rules of the game, so these conditions had an impact on the structure and management role of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group.Indicators of the condition of the institutional structure of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group are presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Institutions Structure Indicators of Farmers Group of Karya Tani Mandiri and Karya Bakti
Structure is a framework of relationships between institutional units in which there are stakeholders or dominant parties so that each of them has a specific role in one unified whole.The existence of a Farmers Group must contain a structure that aims to control the activities of members and administrators within the institution.Schmid (2004) explained that the institution's structure is an institution's alternative for stakeholders in compiling various things in a system.
The completeness of the Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group structure is lower than that of the Karya Bakti's Farmers Group.Completeness of the Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group structure with a value of 76 and Karya Bakti 85 Farmers Group.This is because Karya Bakti's Farmers Group has a clear member structure, and the structure can be seen in Figure 2.Each structure has a chairman, secretary, treasurer, institutions management, area management, business management, and Farmers Group members.Farmers Group's complete and appropriate structure will help accelerate efforts to develop the agricultural sector in every district, sub-district, and village (Gibran et al., 2018).However, knowing the condition of the institution's structure, Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group has been running quite optimally.This is because Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group members are still participating to help the Farmers Group management.In addition, when in the field, the Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group structure was not found because the files belonging to the Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group did not exist (lost).Therefore, the score of Karya Bakti's Farmers Group institution structure is higher than the score of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group.A clear structure will make it easier for members to carry out the basic tasks and functions of the Farmers Group structure.The score for the structural function of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group was 74 and the score for Karya Bakti's Farmers Group was 79, where the structural function of Karya Bakti's Farmers Group was higher than that of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group.This is because, the structure owned by Karya Bakti's Farmers Group is clear and Farmers Group members understand the management of the structure.The function of the Farmers Group institution's structure will facilitate the Farmers Group's performance in assisting communities that manage forests.Many people find it difficult to get information about agriculture, fertilizers, and seeds due to the unclear structure.This causes people to feel confused about obtaining accurate and transparent sources of information.The factor that causes the Karya Bakti's Farmers Group structure to function well is to determine the Farmers Group structure together.Determination of this structure can be through joint deliberations in the forum.
The structure determination by Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group has a score of 71 and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group 75.This is because Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group has already determined the management structure, but many members of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group did not participate in the election.This is because some members only want to be members without participating in the management.Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group members thought that they were afraid that the responsibilities they held could not be carried out.They also felt that if they entered the management, their main job would not be held, so the Farmers Group chairman took the initiative to invite young people to participate in Farmers Group management.The youth in question are youth who own land or parents who own arable land to join the management of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group.The structure determination was carried out by Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group, which carried out the rules of the game and the basic norms that apply to the Farmers Group.
The basis of the norms used in Farmers Group of Karya Tani Mandiri and Farmers Group of Karya Bakti are the guidelines for the Memorandum of Association/Article of Association and the Regent's Decree.The score based on the norms used for Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group is 73.The scores for the two Farmers Groups are the same because the basic norms used are the same, namely the Memorandum of Association/Article of Association and the Regent's Decree.
The Memorandum of Association/Article of Association of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group include prohibitions, sanctions, powers, and obligations.The Regent's Decree contains rights, obligations, and sanctions from granting community forest utilization permits (IUPHKm) to Farmers Group.
The pattern of recruitment of Farmers Group management was seen from the score, namely Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group with a score of 77 and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group with a score of 79.The score for the recruitment pattern of Karya Bakti's Farmers Group management was higher because Karya Bakti's Farmers Group members were very enthusiastic and actively contributed to the management of the Farmers Group.By the opinion of Febryano et al. (2014 ) the community's enthusiasm must be received as the primary concern by policymakers or the government to support all activities.In contrast to Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group, the pattern of recruiting Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group members still exists with a point system.Not all those who are elected or appointed accept it.Some members who were appointed were reluctant to join the management.The recruitment pattern for the management of Farmers Group members often changes several times.In addition to the designation system pattern, someone has been willing or voluntary to become Farmers Group management.However, not many are interested in this pattern because many members are embarrassed, feel inadequate, and fear that they will be unable to carry out their duties if elected.In addition, there is also a direct election by the Farmers Group chairman with several criteria considerations, such as being active while in the Farmers Group.According to Chen et al. (2023), the activity referred to in group discussions is providing suggestions and opinions on programs that have been planned so that they can be implemented as expected.
The selected criteria are members who are active in discussions, active and understand agriculture-related, and active in Farmers Group discussion meetings, so from looking at these considerations, members who are not selected must determine the choice of the best candidate from the best.According to Hermanto et al. (2007), the active participation of farmers in institutional activities has a positive impact, namely in the form of a significant increase in income from farming.Some members are appointed administrators because no one else wants to volunteer as Farmers Group administrators.Several patterns in the selection of management have advantages and disadvantages.The drawback of the appointment system is that many of those appointed need to carry out their duties properly.This is because the selected candidate has no desire to become an administrator, but because he is appointed, the candidate accepts, but the tasks assigned are not fully carried out.There are few of these systems, but some are like that.The advantage of the voluntary pattern is that many candidates are willing and responsible, so they carry out their duties according to what they have chosen.Therefore, Farmers Group members must be more careful in choosing Farmers Group management so that the structure that has been determined can carry out its role.The following indicators of the role of the Farmers Group institution's performance are presented in Figure 3.The institutions roles of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group have quite a comparison of scores, where Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group has a score of 69 and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group has a score of 77.Karya Bakti's Farmers Group has a higher score than the institution role of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group.This is because Karya Bakti's Farmers Group has a clear structure, so its role is beneficial for the community that manages the forest.The role in Karya Bakti's Farmers Group has tasks that are very appropriate to their functions.There are various roles: chairman, secretary, treasurer, managing institutions, managing areas, managing businesses, and members of Farmers Group.Each role of the Farmers Group structure has its main tasks and functions.The Farmers Group chairman is the main actor in making all decisions that will be made on Farmers Group.Farmers Group leaders must reflect a sense of responsibility for everything, be patient and fair to their members, and be able to accept the aspirations given to members.A secretary assists the chairman in carrying out his duties.The secretary assists the chairperson in correspondence, prepares administration books, makes meeting attendance lists, and takes minutes when reaching a consensus.In addition, there is also a treasurer who assists the chairman in carrying out his duties.The treasurer assists the chairman's duties as money manager.The role of the treasurer for Farmers Group is to make a cash book and calculate expenditures, cash receipts, and contributions made by Farmers Group.Then there are the members, where the role of Farmers Group members is as an activator of the work plans carried out by Farmers Group and can help Farmers Group management.
The scores of the decision makers from Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group are not much different.The score obtained by Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group was 73, and the score obtained by Karya Bakti's Farmers Group was 84.This is because Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group has a chairman who makes decisions dominantly, while the chairman of Karya Bakti's Farmers Group goes through consensus first.The chairman of Karya Bakti's Farmers Group considers that the ideas submitted by members are a good decision.However, the chairman is the most dominant decision maker in Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group.The existence of a chairman in Farmers Group management is the highest authority holder.Every decision made by the chairman is a great responsibility.The chairman of Karya Bakti's Farmers Group is more active and understands the management of Farmers Group compared to the chairman of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group.Judging from the information provided about Farmers Group management, agriculture, and the rules of the game that were conveyed, the understanding possessed by the Karya Bakti's Farmers Group chairman was very conveyed and clear when providing information in the field.According to Espada and Kainer (2019), involvement in decision-making during deliberate and active discussions is a good form of enthusiasm.
Determining the rules made by Farmers Group has the same score, namely 78.The rules for Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group are not always taken over by the chairman.Several times, the decision was discussed jointly with the members because the nature of the chairman had accepted the aspirations of the members so that the determination of the rules for Farmers Group was carried out together so that all Farmers Group members understood what was prohibited and allowed.The decisions taken together refer to the rules imposed by Farmers Group.Indicators of rules for playing Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group can be seen in Figure 4. Realization of the use of game rules in Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group, which have scores of 75 and 83, respectively.The high realization score for using rules is 83, namely in Karya Bakti's Farmers Group.This is because every activity carried out by Karya Bakti's Farmers Group always refers to the rules of the game, so the rules of the Farmers Group game are well realized in the activities carried out by Karya Bakti's Farmers Group.Institutions Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group have rules of the game that explain a set of understandings to be understood together about what is not allowed and what is allowed to be done.These rules can be monitored by administrators or certain parties who have the authority to impose sanctions on rule violators.Based on SK.B.258/39/12/2009 and SK.B.258/39/12/2009 dated 11 December 2009 concerning granting Community Forest Utilization Business Permits (IUPHKm) to Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group.The contents contained in this Decree include obligations, prohibitions, the right to revoke institutions and sanctions.The existence of this SK is that the community creates farmer groups so that governance, licensing, and security guarantees for the plants on their land can be realized (Pangestu et al., 2021).Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group as IUPHKm holders have the following rights and obligations (Source SK.B.258/39/12/2009 and SK.B.258/39/12/2009): a.Take advantage of the area b.Utilizing environmental services c.Utilizing Non-Timber Forest Products d. Arrange the boundaries of the work area e. Develop a work plan f.Perform planting, maintenance, and security g.Pay the provision for forest resources according to the provisions, and h.Submit a report on community forest utilization activities to the permit issuer.
IUPHKm grants to Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group institutions will be revoked or deleted if: a.The permit period has expired b.Permits are revoked by the Regent as sanctions imposed on permit holders c.Permits are returned by the permit holder with a written statement to the licensor before the expiry of the period d.Within the given timeframe, the permit holder does not fulfill the obligations according to the provisions, and e. Ecologically, the condition of the forest is getting worse.Compliance with Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Farmers Group with the rules of the game can be seen in the scores they have, where the highest score is in Karya Bakti's Farmers Group with a score of 79 and Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group with a score of 75.Karya Bakti's Farmers Group has a high score because it adheres to the rules of the game used.An example of Karya Bakti's Farmers Group compliance with the rules of the game is that in the Memorandum of Association/Article of Association, it is explained that Farmers Group members are required to plant tall, middle, and low canopy plants.Karya Bakti's Farmers Group adheres to this rule, where Karya Bakti's Farmers Group members plant trees together and create a place for plant nurseries around the back of the Farmers Group member's house.This is one of the proofs that Karya Bakti's Farmers Group complies with the rules of the game in the Memorandum of Association/Article of Association.
The guidelines or rules of the game are contained in the Memorandum of Association/Article of Association.The contents of the Memorandum of Association/Article of Association explain the basics of the institution and what can be done and what can not be done in forest management.The principle adhered to by Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group is Pancasila.The objectives contained in the Memorandum of Association/Article of Association have been carried out according to related regulations by prioritizing the quality of group welfare, especially the people of Penantian Village and Sinar Banten Village, through forestry efforts with a conservation perspective.The following are the prohibitions contained in the Memorandum of Association/Article of Association in Table 3.The fear of Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group sanctions can be seen from the scores obtained.Karya Bakti's Farmers Group has a higher score of 77, and Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group has a score of 69 (Figure 4).These two Farmer's Groups have the same fear, but from this fear, the Farmer's Group that contributes more to the game's rules is Karya Bakti's Farmers Group.Farmers Group's fear of sanctions was carried out because Farmers Group considered the sanctions given to be very bad for Farmers Group.These restrictions have been enforced in Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group (Table 3).
Every administrator and member obey the rules applied, so it is rare to find administrators or members who get sanctions.This proves that the rules of the game are proven to be effectively enforced.The effectiveness score of sanctions on Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group was 68, and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group had a score of 76.The scores are different.This is because the rules of the game above are carried out correctly by a set of Karya Bakti's Farmers Group administrators so that no one is subject to sanctions.Until now, no Karya Tani Mandiri's Farmers Group and Karya Bakti's Farmers Group have been sanctioned by the ban.The supervisory team controls these prohibitions and sanctions.The supervisory team in question is listed in the Memorandum of Association/Article of Association.Based on the Farmers Group Memorandum of

Figure 3 .
Figure 3. Indicators of the institution's role of Farmers Group of Karya Tani Mandiri and Karya Bakti

Figure 4 .
Figure 4. Indicators of institutions rules for Farmers Group of Karya Tani Mandiri and Karya Bakti

Table 1 .
Range of response values/alternative answers

Table 2 .
Category structure, role, and rules of the game Farmers Group

Table 3 .
Prohibition set for Farmers Group members Expanding arable land in the productive forest area or core zone Protect against harmful activities Stealing and storing forest products without permission from Farmers Group Working in the area managed by the Forest Farmers Group Selling and buying arable land Create problems or proportion Farmers Group members Playing Judge Himself Burn the work area Source: Memorandum of Association/Article of Association Farmers Group Karya Bakti