The regime complex for tropical rainforest transformation: Analysing the relevance of multiple global and regional land use regimes in Indonesia

Increasingly, international agreements, treaties, and conventions address tropical deforestation and specific causes of rainforest transformation. Such international regimes may aim to conserve natural forests or to support the exploitation of lands for a particular purpose, e.g. agricultural commodities. This paper’s goal is to map the international regime complex for rainforest transformation by identifying those global and regional regimes that are relevant for tropical rainforest transformation systems in Indonesia. The relevance of international regimes for rainforest transformation is assessed based on a novel methodology using two criteria: First, international regimes may be relevant in Indonesia because the core problem they address exists in Indonesia (problem dimension). Second, specific international regimes may be made relevant by the actions of specific actors and their coalitions in pursuit of their interests (actor dimension). To achieve the study’s goals we used (1) content analysis of international policy documents and treaty texts, (2) expert interviews with key informants in Indonesia, and (3) own field observations in current Indonesian land use politics. The results indicate that regimes dealing with biological diversity, climate change, trade in endangered species, wetland management, international tropical trade, illegal logging, Southeast Asian (ASEAN) forest and environment, the Asia Pacific free trade, and the southeast Asian rubber trade regime are relevant in both the problem and actor dimensions. The regimes concerned with desertification and international forestry research are relevant only in the actor dimension. In contrast, the following regimes are relevant only in the problem dimension: indigenous rights, forest certification, palm oil certification, agroforestry certification, and international rubber trade. We discuss our results considering global and regional regimes relevant to Indonesian rainforest transformation systems. We conclude that regimes relevant solely due to the engagement of domestic actors and not in respect of the problem dimension are unlikely to maintain their relevance in the long term. In the short term, however, they have the potential for creating substantial political benefits for the actors using them. In contrast, regimes with high problem relevance but low actor backing are unlikely to even enter the political agenda, and therefore will have only limited impact. This suggests that future research should consider that, whilst relevance in the problem dimension is necessary to establish regime influence, it alone does not suffice. We can expect global and regional regimes to have an influence only when powerful actors back them in their agenda setting, domestic policy formulation and actual implementation.