WHOSE CARBON, WHOSE BENEFIT? PANCASILA SOCIAL JUSTICE AND COMMUNITY BENEFIT-SHARING IN INDONESIA'S FOREST CARBON GOVERNANCE
Silverius Yoseph Soeharso, Muhammad Adnan Lira, Adnan Hamid, Soleh Hasan Wahid
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
インドネシアの森林炭素市場における利益配分ルールを、パンチャシラと1945年憲法の社会正義基準から法的に検証した論文。憲法裁判所の「人民の最大繁栄」4指標を用い、大統領令110号・東カリマンタン管轄型排出削減プログラム・林業大臣令6号の3制度を比較。管轄型が分配・手続で最も優れ、プロジェクト型が最劣と評価。慣習権の正式認定に利益アクセスが紐づく構造的課題を指摘し、法定コミュニティ最低配分率など6原則を提案する。
English
This article legally scrutinizes Indonesia's emerging forest carbon benefit-sharing rules against a Pancasila and constitutional social-justice standard, operationalized via the Constitutional Court's four 'greatest prosperity' indicators. Comparing Presidential Regulation No. 110/2025, the East Kalimantan jurisdictional program, and Ministerial Regulation No. 6/2026, it finds jurisdictional approaches perform best on distribution and procedure while project-based trading performs worst. All tie benefits to formal customary-rights recognition, covering ~345,000 ha against a 1.4M ha target, and it proposes six design principles including a statutory community floor share.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本ではJCM（二国間クレジット）や森林クレジットの質的保証が議論されるが、本稿は炭素収益の受益者配分と先住民・地域社会の権利という論点を提示する。JCM案件設計や企業の森林炭素オフセット調達における社会的セーフガード検討の参考になる。
In the global GX context
As Article 6 carbon markets scale and CSRD/ISSB push nature and social safeguards into disclosure, this paper shows how benefit-sharing rules determine the legitimacy of forest carbon credits. It offers a constitutional-justice framework relevant to global debates on carbon market integrity, community rights, and just transition finance.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:炭素市場ガバナンスと環境正義の交差点を、憲法哲学を操作化して実証する手法が参考になる。
🏢実務担当者:森林炭素クレジット調達時に、受益者配分と慣習権認定のリスクをデューデリジェンス項目として組み込む示唆。
🏛政策担当者:炭素収益配分制度設計で、法定コミュニティ最低配分率や事実上の管理に基づく適格性という選択肢を検討できる。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Indonesia is rebuilding its forest carbon market at the same time as it accelerates the recognition of customary forests, yet the rules that decide who receives carbon revenue have received little legal scrutiny. This article asks whether Indonesia's emerging benefit-sharing arrangements meet the standard of social justice that the state's foundational philosophy, Pancasila, and the 1945 Constitution impose on the use of natural resources. It first translates three Pancasila principles (just and civilized humanity, deliberative democracy and social justice) into recognitional, procedural and distributive dimensions of justice, and operationalizes them through the four indicators of "the greatest prosperity of the people" developed by the Constitutional Court. It then applies the resulting standard to three instruments: Presidential Regulation No. 110 of 2025, the benefit-sharing plan of the East Kalimantan jurisdictional emission reductions program, and the project-based rules introduced by Forestry Minister Regulation No. 6 of 2026. The analysis finds that the jurisdictional program performs best on distribution and procedure, that project-based trading performs worst, and that all three tie access to benefits to formal recognition of customary rights, which covered about 345,000 hectares in October 2025 against a target of 1.4 million hectares by 2029. The article proposes six design principles, including a statutory community floor share and eligibility based on de facto stewardship, to close the gap between constitutional promise and carbon practice.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v23.8688first seen 2026-11-07 05:01:14
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。