5.1.4. The main target groups of awareness rising activities were community at (sub) village level. It was mainly conducted through: (a) FGD involving 10 - 15 KVC; (b) Installed posters at strategic sites; (c) distributed leaflet; (d) cross-visits to demo-plots and GLH; (e) film screening and interactive dialogs at sub-village level during the night using ‘My Darling’ (environmental awareness) car. During the course of the program in SE Sulawesi Province (60 months), there were 16,409 male, 10,160 female and 5,851 youth have become direct beneficiaries of our environmental awareness program at village and sub-district level. The level of women participation is 38 %. While during 6 months facilitation in S Sulawesi Province, there were 7,522 male and 5,395 female and 1,432 youth have become direct beneficiaries of our environmental awareness. The level of women participation is 42 %. 5.1.5. There were 397 green sub-projects disbursed in SE Sulawesi Province during 5 years (2008-2012). 158 or 40 % of them were the replication of our demo-plots/GLH. Among 8 sub-districts facilitation areas in SE Sulawesi Province, numbers of OWT demo-pilots replication into Green Block-grant sub-projects have been mostly occurred in Ladongi and Pasarwajo Sub-districts; where OWT operated field office in those sub-districts. The establishment of field office at sub-district level enabled us to provide intensive technical assistances and facilitations. We equipped our office with various demonstration pilots, such as tree nursery, mushroom cultivation and display of many awareness products. We also used the office as a Green-shop or Warung Lingkungan, which sell green products produced by farmers and also become show-windows for other farmers. The field office had become a rural community training centre, people gathering site, to discuss various environmental and livelihoods issues. 5.1.6. The green sub-projects in SE Sulawesi were dominated by tree planting. The most preference tree species for Buton and Muna Districts is Jati or teak (Tectona grandis). The areas which are dominated by limestone and marl substrates are highly suitable for the growth of teak forest plantation. Teak is known in Munanese as Kuli Dava, meaning as timbers from Java Island. During 19th century, Dutch Government brought teak seeds and Javanese labours to cultivate teak in Muna and Buton Islands. Unfortunately, the wellknown Muna teak, having similar quality with Java teak, in which the forest plantation areas covers about 50% of the Island, has been logged during the last decade. Realizing the high price of teak timbers, now Muna and Buton people are keen to plant teak. Many rich people have invested the money by planting teak. The most preference tree species in Kolaka District is Jati Putih (white teak) or Gmelina arborea. Agro-climatologically speaking, Kolaka is more suitable for intensive agriculture compared to Buton and Muna. Kolaka has deep and fertile soil. The indigenous tribe in Kolaka (Tolaki) relies on their livelihoods on agroforestry development. In 1970s, many migrants from Bali and Java come to develop irrigated rice field on gentle and flat areas, after 1990s, many migrants from Bugis come to develop cacao plantation. Traditionally, people develop pepper based agroforestry, they plant Gamal (Gliricidae) intercropped with pepper. We introduced Jati Putih to replace Gamal; compared with Gamal Jati Putih has better benefits: (a) Jati Putih grows up faster than Gamal; (b) limited pruning required for Jati Putih compared to Gamal. Since 2009, Gmelina has become the new preference tree crops in PNPMGreen facilitation sub-districts in Kolaka. 70
Dr. Edi Purwanto
5.1.7. The critical issues for tree planting is the presence of intensive maintenance, since 2010, we selected 5-6 villages on each sub-districts to receive tree planting maintenance. The tree planting maintenances were composed of the following: (a) facilitated replanting about 2 months after planting; (b) facilitated the making of organic fertilizer (Bokashi) and its application; (c) facilitated regular (every two months) weeding and soil tillage surrounding the planted trees. Such event is organized in association with regular village voluntary working day. This facilitation is important, since after hand-over meeting (MDST), limited PNPM-Green actors and facilitators who care the fate of Green investment.
5.2. Outlooks 5.2.1. Roles of CSO on the past Green program: Our experience showed that the roles of CSO grew from environmental training and awareness providers (as originally designed), during the course of project implementation, had been developing to cover technical assistances and facilitation of project beneficiaries from preparation, implementation and maintenance of the green sub-projects. The last two tasks, by design, were expected as the tasks of GF, however in most cases they were unable to tacke the jobs, due to capacity and time constrains. 5.2.2. Roles of CSO on future Green program: The most critical part of the green project is how to design the site specific green activities which highly suitable with local specific need. The ‘failure’ on defining local community needs on green activities had led to the dominance of tree planting sub-projects on many pilot sites. In many cases, ‘planting trees seedlings’ had become ‘the easy, simple and logic reasons’ to use the green block grant, while many other green activities were actually opened. In some pilot areas, such as in Tana Toraja District, planting trees still become a dominant sub-projects while there have been little space to plant trees. Green sub-projects, in many cases have been simplified as planting trees. Green technical assistance were highly needed in this program, unfortunately many positions with ‘green’ and ‘environmental’ titles have poor capacity on green program. As a matter of fact recruitment of ‘environmental specialist’ position in a big numbers were not easy, as ‘environment’ is a wide disciplines, while environment technical skill is not easily upgraded through short trainings. Given the conditions, green technical assistance may well-fit to be handled by CSOs, especially those who had long track records on grass-root community empowerment in green activities. 5.2.3. Local CSOs or CBOs? The ideas to involve local CSOs as the way to sustain green initiatives were frequently not confounded on the actual life. It is true that we need the strong roles of local champions/organizations to sustain green sub-projects. Are those local CSOs? Yes, if CSOs are respected by local community with proven long tract records. Many local CSOs have weak experience and ground basis. At the absence of proper local CSOs, the program can use local CBO, such as KVC, farmer group, forest farmer group, women groups etc.
Dr. Edi Purwanto
71