| Popis: |
Illegal logging comprises illegal activities that impact the economy, environment, and social aspects. This situation is addressed by the Forest, Law Enforcement, Governance, and Trade Voluntary Partnership Agreement (FLEGT-VPA) scheme. In 2014, Indonesia and the European Union ratified the FLEGT-VPA and then started the FLEGT Licensing in 2016. This study intended to discover stakeholder satisfaction from the perspectives of the government institutions, civil society organizations, and the private sector on the Indonesia–EU FLEGT-VPA scheme, and it was accomplished by performing a mixed-method sequential explanatory research design. First, the quantitative data, collected through a web-based questionnaire (n = 103), resulted in the stakeholders’ satisfaction (dependent variable), in connection with all of the independent variables, showed that all three stakeholders were satisfied with sustainable forest management, new market opportunities, timber legality, and law enforcement. In contrast, they were slightly satisfied with the social safeguards. From the measurement of the multiple regression model, the results showed that each independent variable has a positive and significant effect on stakeholder satisfaction. We discovered that timber legality performed the highest significance to stakeholders’ satisfaction. Second, qualitative data were collected to briefly explain the preceding quantitative findings through web-based in-depth and focus group interviews (n = 20). All three stakeholders seemed to agree to the scheme implementation that supported the application of sustainable forest management principles, improved the legality and traceability, promoted good governance, and strengthened the social safeguards, while it improved the new market opportunities to a lesser degree. Finally, all three stakeholders explained that there are still main challenges to be solved in improving the scheme implementation such as (1) administrative problems mainly experienced by small and medium enterprises; (2) uncompetitive FLEGT license products that are not well known to buyers; and (3) the absence of incentives given by both parties (Indonesia and the EU) to the FLEGT-licensed product exporters. |
