Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources: Comparative Case Studies in Conservation and Industrial Forests

Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to... | F1000Research "use strict";function _typeof(t){return(_typeof="function"==typeof Symbol&&"symbol"==typeof Symbol.iterator?function(t){return typeof t}:function(t){return t&&"function"==typeof Symbol&&t.constructor===Symbol&&t!==Symbol.prototype?"symbol":typeof t})(t)}!function(){var t=function(){var t,e,o=[],n=window,r=n;for(;r;){try{if(r.frames.__tcfapiLocator){t=r;break}}catch(t){}if(r===n.top)break;r=r.parent}t||(!function t(){var e=n.document,o=!!n.frames.__tcfapiLocator;if(!o)if(e.body){var r=e.createElement("iframe");r.style.cssText="display:none",r.name="__tcfapiLocator",e.body.appendChild(r)}else setTimeout(t,5);return!o}(),n.__tcfapi=function(){for(var t=arguments.length,n=new Array(t),r=0;r 3&&2===parseInt(n[1],10)&&"boolean"==typeof n[3]&&(e=n[3],"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]("set",!0)):"ping"===n[0]?"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]({gdprApplies:e,cmpLoaded:!1,cmpStatus:"stub"}):o.push(n)},n.addEventListener("message",(function(t){var e="string"==typeof t.data,o={};if(e)try{o=JSON.parse(t.data)}catch(t){}else o=t.data;var n="object"===_typeof(o)&&null!==o?o.__tcfapiCall:null;n&&window.__tcfapi(n.command,n.version,(function(o,r){var a={__tcfapiReturn:{returnValue:o,success:r,callId:n.callId}};t&&t.source&&t.source.postMessage&&t.source.postMessage(e?JSON.stringify(a):a,"*")}),n.parameter)}),!1))};"undefined"!=typeof module?module.exports=t:t()}(); dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://f1000research.com/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'research'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); (function(h,o,t,j,a,r){ h.hj=h.hj||function(){(h.hj.q=h.hj.q||[]).push(arguments)}; h._hjSettings={hjid:2318163,hjsv:6}; a=o.getElementsByTagName('head')[0]; r=o.createElement('script');r.async=1; r.src=t+h._hjSettings.hjid+j+h._hjSettings.hjsv; a.appendChild(r); })(window,document,'https://static.hotjar.com/c/hotjar-','.js?sv='); search file_upload Submit your research search menu close search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines Open Data and Accessible Source Materials Guidelines (HSS) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines (PSE) Prepublication Checks Production Process Posters and Slides Guidelines Document Guidelines Article Processing Charges Peer Review Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers Our Advisors Policies Glossary FAQs For Developers Newsroom Contact My Research Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/15-51" }, "headline": "Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources: Comparative Case Studies in Conservation...", "datePublished": "2026-01-13T17:05:25", "dateModified": "2026-01-13T17:05:25", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Rita Rahmawati" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Rusliandy Rusliandy" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Imam Edy Mulyono" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Sri Harini" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Neng Virly Apriliyani" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Euis Salbiah" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Irma Purnamasari" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "R. Akhmad Munjin" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Faisal Tri Ramdani" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Berry Sastrawan" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Evi Satispi" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Andriansyah Andriansyah" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Novel Anak Lyndon" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "F1000Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 480, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 150 }, "description": "The web of power in the struggle for forest resources arose as a response to forest resource conflicts between the state and local communities. In Foucault’s concept, power was not held solely by the state but existed in social relations involving various parties. This study aimed to map the web of power in the struggle for access rights to forest resources. It used a qualitative approach and a comparative case study method. The informants for this study were local governments, forest managers, local communities, and NGOs. Ten informants were selected purposively in each location. Data collection techniques were observation, in-depth interviews, and literature studies. Data analysis was carried out using thematic analysis. The study results showed that in Mount Halimun Salak National Park (TNGHS), conflict occurred due to the policy of expanding the national park, resulting in the loss of local community access to the forest area. Meanwhile, in Sungai Utik, the conflict was triggered by a state policy that issued a business permit to use forest products (IUPHHK) in the customary forest area. Although the IUPHHK has never been revoked, the power relations have shown a more egalitarian pattern based on the state’s recognition and the community’s solidarity. The findings indicated that contestation over access rights to forest resources in two different forests had resulted in two distinct webs of power models. Power relations were not static, but constantly changed depending on the configuration of local communities’ political power, legal support, advocacy networks, and social capital." } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/15-51/v1", "name": "Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources:..." } } ] } Home Browse Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources:... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Rahmawati R, Rusliandy R, Mulyono IE et al. Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources: Comparative Case Studies in Conservation and Industrial Forests [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :51 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171466.1 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Research Article Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources: Comparative Case Studies in Conservation and Industrial Forests [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] Rita Rahmawati https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2225-6261 1 , Rusliandy Rusliandy 1 , Imam Edy Mulyono 1 , [...] Sri Harini 2 , Neng Virly Apriliyani 1 , Euis Salbiah 1 , Irma Purnamasari 1 , R. Akhmad Munjin 1 , Faisal Tri Ramdani 1 , Berry Sastrawan 1 , Evi Satispi https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5326-4646 3 , Andriansyah Andriansyah 3 , Novel Anak Lyndon 4 Rita Rahmawati https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2225-6261 1 , Rusliandy Rusliandy 1 , [...] Imam Edy Mulyono 1 , Sri Harini 2 , Neng Virly Apriliyani 1 , Euis Salbiah 1 , Irma Purnamasari 1 , R. Akhmad Munjin 1 , Faisal Tri Ramdani 1 , Berry Sastrawan 1 , Evi Satispi https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5326-4646 3 , Andriansyah Andriansyah 3 , Novel Anak Lyndon 4 PUBLISHED 13 Jan 2026 Author details Author details 1 Public Administration, Universitas Djuanda, Bogor, West Java, 16720, Indonesia 2 Management, Universitas Djuanda, Bogor, West Java, 16720, Indonesia 3 Public Administration, Universitas Muhammadiyah Jakarta, Jakarta, Special Capital Region of Jakarta, 15419, Indonesia 4 Social, Environment and Development Sustainability Research Center, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Bangi, Selangor, 43600, Malaysia Rita Rahmawati Roles: Conceptualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Rusliandy Rusliandy Roles: Validation Imam Edy Mulyono Roles: Supervision Sri Harini Roles: Writing – Review & Editing Neng Virly Apriliyani Roles: Project Administration, Resources Euis Salbiah Roles: Data Curation Irma Purnamasari Roles: Formal Analysis, Methodology R. Akhmad Munjin Roles: Visualization Faisal Tri Ramdani Roles: Investigation, Resources Berry Sastrawan Roles: Investigation, Resources Evi Satispi Roles: Supervision, Validation Andriansyah Andriansyah Roles: Data Curation, Supervision Novel Anak Lyndon Roles: Supervision, Validation OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS This article is included in the Research Synergy Foundation gateway. This article is included in the Ecology and Global Change gateway. Abstract The web of power in the struggle for forest resources arose as a response to forest resource conflicts between the state and local communities. In Foucault’s concept, power was not held solely by the state but existed in social relations involving various parties. This study aimed to map the web of power in the struggle for access rights to forest resources. It used a qualitative approach and a comparative case study method. The informants for this study were local governments, forest managers, local communities, and NGOs. Ten informants were selected purposively in each location. Data collection techniques were observation, in-depth interviews, and literature studies. Data analysis was carried out using thematic analysis. The study results showed that in Mount Halimun Salak National Park (TNGHS), conflict occurred due to the policy of expanding the national park, resulting in the loss of local community access to the forest area. Meanwhile, in Sungai Utik, the conflict was triggered by a state policy that issued a business permit to use forest products (IUPHHK) in the customary forest area. Although the IUPHHK has never been revoked, the power relations have shown a more egalitarian pattern based on the state’s recognition and the community’s solidarity. The findings indicated that contestation over access rights to forest resources in two different forests had resulted in two distinct webs of power models. Power relations were not static, but constantly changed depending on the configuration of local communities’ political power, legal support, advocacy networks, and social capital. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords Conflict and Contestation, Customary Rights, Inclusive natural resource governance, Indigenous People, Sociology of Governance. Corresponding Author(s) Rita Rahmawati ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Rita Rahmawati Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Copyright: © 2026 Rahmawati R et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Rahmawati R, Rusliandy R, Mulyono IE et al. Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources: Comparative Case Studies in Conservation and Industrial Forests [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :51 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171466.1 ) First published: 13 Jan 2026, 15 :51 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171466.1 ) Latest published: 13 Jan 2026, 15 :51 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171466.1 ) Introduction Power relations are the dynamics between political elites and local communities, shaped by their struggle to control forest resources. These power relations define the balance of power and serve as a community strategy to mobilize other stakeholders in their quest for power in settling disputes over forest access rights. These disputes, which evolve into meaningful conflicts between the involved parties, 1 have made access to natural resources, particularly forests, a pivotal issue in the power dynamics between the state, political elites, and local communities in Indonesia. Beyond their economic significance, forests are repositories of cultural, spiritual, and ecological values indispensable to local communities, especially indigenous ones. However, the unequal power relations in forest resource management often create tension and injustice. Forest resource management is a technical and ecological challenge and a social arena fraught with complex power dynamics and management structures. From a sociological perspective, environmental management is seen as the product of interactions between various parties: the state, companies, local communities, NGOs, and others, each with its own interests, perspectives, and legitimacy methods. 2 In this context, power is relational and distributed, centralized in the state and emerging through narratives, regulatory practices, and even local knowledge that influence forest perspectives. 3 Hegemony sometimes occurs in power relations in forest management, where powerful actors exert hegemony through coercion or unintentional consent, while weaker groups resist through counter-hegemonic actions. 4 , 5 Therefore, a comprehensive understanding of the web of power in the competition for forest access is crucial. It engages us in the struggle for ideas, the distribution of power, and forms of resistance and negotiation at both the local and global levels, and commits us to finding solutions. Research on power relations was often linked to the reciprocal relationship between humans and natural resources. It examined how humans and nature were connected and how humans utilize nature. 6 Power relations significantly determined access to and utilization of resources. 7 In resource control, unequal power relations often led to conflict. The agrarian conflict in Aceh was caused by unequal land ownership between companies, farmers, and the government. 8 Several triggers for conflict exist, including injustice, restrictions on access to forest resources, and a lack of community involvement in forest management. Evictions from forests, acts of violence, and lawsuits were some of the events that contributed to the conflict pathway. 9 Conflicting policies and overlapping ownership arrangements, 10 also contributed to unequal power relations. Unfair utilization of natural resources led to conflict and tension in the struggle for natural resources. Tensions based on unequal power relations and hierarchical structures of actors had zero-sum impacts on humans and the physical environment. 11 History showed that in some regions, land and natural resource grabbing have resulted in the loss of rights for one party over another. Studies of land grabbing in China provided a glimpse into state-society relations in authoritarian versus democratic regimes. 12 In the case of forest resources, power relations became unequal due to differences in power and diverse interests in forest utilization and control. Under these conditions, forest conservation policies were negotiated, manipulated, and reformed in ways that differ significantly from those initially envisioned by policymakers. 13 In Nepal’s case of forest management, forest management plans were a prerequisite for obtaining forest management rights. Users accept the plans to gain access to forest resources, while for the forestry bureaucracy, the plans served as a tool to regain power and authority over the forests. 14 In Laos, land-use planning was crucial for strengthening land tenure security, intensifying agriculture, and conserving forest areas. 10 In Vietnam, restrictions on access rights to forest resources and a lack of alternative livelihoods have been a negative consequence of REDD+. 15 In Norway, rural unrest and center-periphery conflict could be caused by alienation, isolation, or estrangement from one’s community or society, leading to social and political unrest. 16 In Zimbabwe, the concept of local communities being excluded from access to resources in protected forest areas was also found. 17 Power is exercised through various mechanisms, processes, and social relationships, impacting local communities’ access to resources. 17 In India, land and natural resource grabbing are occurring to support ‘growth’. Marginalized groups and local communities were excluded from access to and control over resources. 18 In the Indonesian context, previous research has shown that forest management issues are closely linked to governance, local community livelihoods, and the meaning of natural resources. This situation creates a complex web of power relations; for example, research on edge effects and habitat fragmentation in Mount Halimun Salak National Park, 19 maintaining local livelihoods 20 and the role of forest management in forest management, 20 , 21 forest resource conflicts, 22 which link human pressures to wildlife distribution and the strengthening of local actors’ roles in conservation efforts, 23 which provide concrete evidence of how environmental power relations are produced in field practices such as ecological studies and biological inventories in TNGHS which are based on local knowledge and scientific programs (e.g., the IndoBioSys inventory project), 24 these dynamics illustrate how conservation narratives, scientific legitimacy, and economic interests construct a competitive arena for access. The case of indigenous communities like Sungai Utik also shows a similar pattern. Although the community claims customary rights and practices sustainable management, commercial pressures and national policies shift their position, leading to conflict, local community mobilization, and legal advocacy efforts that lead all elements to form power networks in the struggle for forest access. 22 A recent national review of customary governance and the dynamics between the government and the Dayak Iban Sungai Utik indigenous community on conservation issues, 25 highlights the importance of examining power networks to understand the negotiation process, management dominance, and practices of resistance to such domination. Various previous studies have shown that unequal power relations arise from multiple factors. In Indonesia, historical records indicated inequality in land access and its manifestation in land ownership. 26 However, few studies have examined how marginalized local communities fight for their rights by creating power networks. Imbalances in power distribution and representation of actors within policy networks could hinder the achievement of desired outcomes and progress. 27 This study aimed to map the power relations in the struggle for forest access rights by using Mount Halimun Salak National Park in West Java and the Sungai Utik Forest in West Kalimantan as cases, with a fair and inclusive forest resource management model. Furthermore, this study was also relevant within the sociology of government, political ecology, and public administration framework, highlighting the interdisciplinary nature of the research. This multidisciplinary approach was crucial in renewing equitable and inclusive natural resource governance. A deep understanding of the network of power relations at the local level could be the basis for formulating policies that support environmental conservation and respect community rights. Methods Research approach This research used a qualitative approach 28 ; with an interpretive paradigm. This approach was chosen to deeply understand the social realities and networks of power relations between political elites and local communities in the struggle for access to forest resources. The method used is a comparative case study. This research’s comparative case study approach simultaneously considers the macro, meso, and micro dimensions of case-based research. 29 This approach emphasizes “cross-location exploration,” namely comparing two locations with different orientations, the Mount Halimun Salak National Park, which is more conservation-oriented, and the Sungai Utik forest, which is more industrially oriented. A “case study” is best defined as an intensive study of a single unit that can be generalized to a larger set of units. 30 Case studies make it possible to extract lessons from a particular historical experience. 31 Sampling strategy To elucidate the perceptions of stakeholders (political elites and local communities) regarding the social realities and power relations networks in the struggle for access to forest resources, in-depth interviews with 10 informants in each location, and focus group discussions (FGDs) with representatives of traditional leaders, local communities, government officials, political elites, and environmental activists (NGOs) were conducted. Purposive sampling has been used in research to gain an in-depth understanding of a phenomenon. The interviews were conducted several times (February 2020–September 2020). Meanwhile, the FGD was held on May 15, 2020 in Mount Bogor Halimun Salak National Park, and on June 18, 2020 in Sungai Utik Forest. The Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia and the Directorate General of Higher Education, Research, and Technology have approved this research project and determined that this research project meets research ethics standards. Before participating in the research, the participants were fully informed about the objectives and procedures and provided written consent. Triangulation To reduce data bias and increase validity and reality, triangulation of data sources, methods, and perspectives (theories) was carried out to cross-check data and interpretation. 32 – 34 Triangulation of data sources involves comparing data from various sources using the same technique, through in-depth interviews with various informants, namely community leaders, local communities, NGOs, and government officials. Triangulation of methods was carried out through different data collection methods, namely interviews and FGDs. Triangulation of theory was carried out by using different theories to view the phenomenon of power relations. From the micro side, Foucault’s theory of power relations 35 examines how discourse and knowledge shape the behavior of local communities in responding to conflicts over access rights to forest governance with the state. From the macro side, Gramsci’s theory of hegemony 4 explains how the structure of power and state domination hegemonizes local communities. Participants We involved five categories of participants representing stakeholders: customary leaders, local communities, government officials, political elites, and environmental activists (NGOs) from the Mount Halimun Salak National Park and Sungai Utik Forest areas. These included customary leaders with in-depth knowledge of the history of customary forests. Local communities that have long lived near forest areas (especially those involved in forest conflicts or management). Government officials from the Forestry Service, national park managers, and village/sub-district governments. Local political elites, namely actors involved in forestry policymaking, and environmental activists or NGOs involved in advocating for community rights to forest resources. Data collection methods We conducted in-depth interviews with government officials, village/sub-district governments, political elites, and environmental activists (NGOs). Before conducting the in-depth interviews, 36 we identified the informants who would participate in the research. A purposive sampling method was used in data collection, particularly in identifying government officials, village/sub-district governments, political elites, and environmental activists (NGOs). In addition to in-depth interviews, other informants from traditional leaders and local communities were also interviewed through focus group discussions (FGDs), 36 as informants were not always available due to their busy schedules in the fields. Our procedure for interviewing local communities involved granting research permission to the traditional leaders. With this approval, the conventional leaders recommended that residents participate in the interviews. Technically, we interviewed residents in one village on a rotating basis. We also conducted the same interviews with government officials, village/sub-district governments, political elites, and environmental activists (NGOs). Interviews were conducted offline over two months. Before completing the interviews, we made appointments to schedule interviews with the residents. Interviews were recorded with a digital voice recorder and lasted between 1 and 1 hour and 30 minutes. Interviews took place in residents’ homes. The interview guide was structured into several topics, with general, open-ended, non-leading questions and several follow-up questions. We conducted the FGDs offline at the homes of traditional leaders in each location. These FGDs were conducted for the community only. We sent letters of permission or approval to participate in the research to the traditional leaders in each location. After obtaining approval, we sent discussion materials to each participant to discuss during the FGD. The FGDs lasted three hours. Each FGD participant provided opinions and input on the research topic related to social realities and power relations networks in the struggle to access forest resources. We documented the activities through photographs, participant attendance lists, and FGD minutes, which will be used for analysis in the next stage. Data collection instruments and technologies The following questions guided the interviews: a. What does the forest mean? b. Is there legitimacy for forest ownership by the state/community? c. Are there conflicts in forest management? d. When did these conflicts begin, and what were their causes? e. What forms did these conflicts take? f. Who was involved in the contestation over forest resource management, and what rationales underlie each party’s actions? g. What was the role of each stakeholder in the struggle for forest resources? h. Is there local knowledge about forest management? i. Who holds control over land and forest resources? j. On what basis is ownership defined? k. What rights do communities currently have over forest resources? l. What were the forms and processes of power relations in forest resource management? m. What are the positions of communities and the state in forest resource management following government forest policies? n. How was the conflict resolution process for forest management disputes? Who plays a role, and what were their roles? o. How did communities develop power networks to gain access to forest governance? Some questions posed to local communities were the same as those posed to stakeholders (government officials, political elites, and NGOs). In addition to interviews, modified data collection was conducted through focus group discussions (FGDs). Discussion topics posed to FGD participants focused on the research objective: mapping the power networks involved in the struggle for access rights to forest resources. Furthermore, the contributions and roles of each stakeholder in forest resource management were also discussed. Meanwhile, for government officials and political elites, discussion topics related to their involvement in providing forest resource management services, including their opinions on the power networks involved in the struggle for access rights to forest resources. The FGD Guidelines specifically address the following: a. Forms and processes of power relations. b. Causes of conflict. c. Discourse Clash. d. Power Asymmetry. e. Resistance and Adaptation. f. Object of Contestation. Data analysis Data analysis aimed to describe and map the power networks in the struggle for access rights to forest resources. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed through the following stages: (a) Transcription and organization of interview and observation data; (b) Open coding to identify initial themes; (c) Categorization and arrangement of patterns of relationships between themes (e.g., domination, resistance, negotiation, legal recognition, etc.); and (d) Critical interpretation of the network of power relations based on the socio-political context of each location. We used Braun and Clarke’s (2012) thematic analysis, which is appropriate for identifying, evaluating, and formulating key themes expressed by researchers. 37 In this analysis, we combined deductive and inductive procedures. As a starting point for categorization, we referred to the conditions related to cooperative relationships between stakeholders (government officials, village/sub-district governments, political elites, and environmental activists), including the theory of Power Networks, which is in a struggle for access rights to forest resources. This analysis encompasses all participants’ statements and perceptions regarding the power networks involved in the struggle for access rights to forest resources. These statements were identified based on perspective themes, which were then concentrated, summarized, coded, and categorized into units of analysis. Ethical consideration This research was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Institute for Research and Community Service, Djuanda University (Number for Ethical Consideration: 001/LPPM/KEP/II/2020) on February 5, 2020. After adequate consultation, the researcher provided written consent to all informants in Mount Halimun Salak National Park and Sungai Utik Forest (Number for Consent Forms from Respondents/Informants: 001/IC/LPPM/II/2020). The informants gave their consent without coercion from anyone. Furthermore, to protect the rights and privacy of respondents, all data obtained will be kept confidential. Results The data from the research results, interviews, and FGDs were processed and analyzed thematically. The results of the analysis can be seen in Table 1 . Table 1 explains the stages of thematic analysis using Braun and Clarke’s (2012) concept. Data analysis was carried out through the following stages: (a) Familiarization with Data; (b) Creating Codes; (c) Finding Initial Themes; (d) Review and Develop Themes; (e) Determine and Name the Theme; (f ) Writing a Report. Table 1. Thematic analysis steps according to Braun and Clarke 2012. Steps Activity Output Familiarization with Data Reading and understanding the data Thoroughly Keywords (32 keywords) a. Ancestral heritage b. Life source c. Spirituality d. Valuable assets e. Dayak Iban identity f. Customary legitimacy g. State legitimacy h. Dualism of legitimacy i. Conflict with companies j. Conflict with the state k. Physical l. Latent m. Roots of conflict n. Indigenous peoples o. State/central government p. Local government q. Companies r. NGOs s. Customary zoning system t. Customary rules u. Customary sanctions v. Customary control (de facto) w. State control (de jure) x. Dualism of power y. Management and use rights z. Protection and preservation rights aa. Spiritual rights bb. Formal limited rights cc. Collective resistance dd. NGO advocacy ee. Recognition Country ff. Traditional Rituals Creating Codes Marking sections of data that have significant meaning Initial code (12 codes) a. Dominance b. Forest management c. Collective resistance d. Negotiation e. Legal recognition f. Relationship networks g. Customary zoning systems h. Resistance i. Adaptation j. Contestation k. Power relations l. Participatory maps Finding Initial Themes Group related codes into potential themes Subthemes (6 subthemes) a. Forms and processes of power relations b. Causes of conflict c. Color clashes d. Power asymmetry e. Resistance and adaptation f. Objects of contestation Review and Develop Themes Ensure that the themes identified truly represent the data 3 sub-themes 1. Community Rights 2. Conflict Resolution 3. Power Relations Defining and Naming a Theme Provide a clear label for each theme 2 themes a. Forests as Objects of Contestation b. Power Networks is in a struggle for access rights to forest resources Writing a Report Organizing the analysis results into a clear and compelling narrative Results and discussion Based on the analysis results, two themes were obtained in this study: (a) Forest as an object of contestation; (b) Power Networks are in a struggle for access rights to forest resources. Forests as objects of contestation In the Indonesian context, forests are not merely ecological areas but also political spaces fraught with interests and power. In two research locations, Mount Halimun Salak National Park (TNGHS) in West Java and the Sungai Utik Customary Forest in West Kalimantan, forests have become arenas of contestation between state actors, political elites, corporate permit holders, and local communities. This contestation involved struggles over access, claims to resource ownership, and the legitimacy of conservation, development, and customary rights narratives. Mount Halimun Salak National Park (TNGHS) is a strategic conservation area on the island of Java, serving as a habitat for numerous endemic species and a vital resource for indigenous communities such as the Kasepuhan. Since the national park expansion policy was enacted based on Decree 175/2003, the park’s area has been expanded from 40,000 hectares to 113,357 hectares. 21 The expansion of this national park has transformed the community-managed forest area into a national park area, which has resulted in the loss of local community ( Kasepuhan indigenous community) access rights to the area, due to conservation policies that tend to be centralistic and oriented solely towards ecological protection. Conflicts arose when traditional community practices carried out for generations are considered contrary to modern conservation principles, without considering local community livelihoods and socio-cultural aspects. Forests became objects of contestation, where the state, through national parks, frames forests as ecological assets that local communities must protect from encroachment. In contrast, local communities saw them as cultural heritage that was part of their identity and life system, including a source of livelihood. The state used conservation discourse to legitimize exclusionary policies, while communities used narratives of customary rights and local wisdom to fight for access to forest management. Unlike the TNGHS, the Sungai Utik Forest, inhabited by the Dayak Iban indigenous people, has received formal recognition as a customary forest. The Dayak Iban community was widely known for its success in protecting its forest from encroachment and exploitation by companies holding timber forest product utilization permits (TFPUP). The discourse was that the state grants companies a permit for timber forest utilization (industrial forest), while the community maintains the forest’s sustainability. There are zones designated for conservation and utilization. The conservation issue by indigenous communities against the discourse of industrial forests by the state has resulted in the indigenous community gaining support from various parties. Although the Sungai Utik Forest was recognized as a customary forest, it did not necessarily eliminate the potential for contestation, given that the TFPUP decree has never been revoked. Therefore, the potential for conflict remains, albeit latent. In some cases, local governments have attempted to offer economic cooperation in customary areas with promises of development, which the indigenous community has met with caution. The forest in Sungai Utik was not only a financial or environmental resource, but also a symbol of identity and spirituality. Power networks is in a struggle for access rights to forest resources Several concepts apply in Indonesia when understanding control over land and natural resources. Some land rights were defined as property rights (land rights), while others were defined solely as access rights. Furthermore, the state defined some property and access rights, while others were based on local cultural customs. These differing definitions of rights between the state and indigenous communities led to overlapping recognition of rights by the state and the community. Forestry policies on the conservation and use of timber and other forest products are often directly linked to the traditional rights of communities. It is a fact that local communities often live around the forest and claim control over the forest. However, this community faces a different reality. Legal forest tenure documents do not support traditional community forest ownership. It has undermined the ordinary standing of the community, especially in the face of state interest in the forest. This study demonstrated that all issues related to conflicts between the state and local communities over forest resource management rights stem from conflicts of interest in forest resource management. In the case of TNGHS, multiple stakeholders have an interest in forests. The primary stakeholders of most significant interest are the local and state communities represented by the TNGHS. Possessing these resources is necessary, especially when each party’s interests need to be considered appropriately. The community values the forest for protection and as a source of livelihood. These concerns conflict with the state’s desire to transform the TNGHS into a protected forest. Both claimed control over all natural resources and the right to control everything from above. This force wants to construct a whole in which, teleologically, everything fits and finds its place. The ministry is based on a division of labor, favoring a few people with social skills and the ability to manage production tools. The TNGHS shows that the state has higher authority while the Kasepuhan community is subordinate. These superior and subordinate positions are evident when states seek to exercise power by enforcing laws against those who allegedly violate their rights. This power also includes imprisonment for violations of national park regulations, such as deforestation. However, the antlers were discovered on their farmland, which happened to be in the TNGHS area. The community’s struggle to obtain access rights to the forest resources, which we refer to as the social-environmental movement, shows the superiority of an environmental management system by the community that is more just for the interests of people’s welfare and environmental sustainability. However, the political and economic elite will always win compared to the lower classes in the political arena in developing countries. Knowledge of the environment will determine the direction of social and environmental movements. In this context, actors fighting for natural resources are divided into three regimes. (1) Organic regime, namely local community knowledge in the form of local wisdom that has lived and managed its territory for centuries; (2) Capitalist regime, namely knowledge reproduced by capitalists in carrying out development and providing employment for local communities; (3) Technological regime, i.e., knowledge reproduced by researchers about biodiversity coming to an area to search for potential plants to be used in commercial applications. 38 The three actors with different characters and cultural bases produce three distinct regimes of knowledge about the environment. However, these three bits of knowledge can approach and unite each other, resulting in a common understanding of the environment. In the case of Mount Halimun Salak National Park, the battle of the three regimes in managing and utilizing natural resources forms a particular socio-ecological system. 22 In the Kasepuhan case, the state promoted the power of scientific knowledge by introducing national policies, which directly and indirectly weakened local community knowledge and forced changes in local community attitudes, behaviors, and actions toward forests. It was found. States and local communities may compete and resist to gain power over forest management and use. This conflict created a balance of power. In the case of the TNGHS, the national policy of expanding national parks could only be partially implemented based on the techno-nature concept espoused by the TNGHS. It was hindered by the local community’s knowledge of organic nature ( Kasepuhan customs). Most political ecology concepts assume that nature has causal relationships or “agents” that must be considered to explain social and socioecological phenomena better. 39 – 41 Although there was no overt resistance from local communities, Kasepuhan’s power over forest resources was the reason for the limited implementation of the national park’s conservation concept, which was designed based on scientific knowledge. This limited implementation was evidenced by the fact that there was a negotiation process between local communities and TNGHS centers. However, in this case, although the negotiations were still ongoing, more technicalities were already in play, so the state had already won. Nevertheless, disputes remain regarding borders, access, and zoning. In the case of Sungai Utik , although formally the Dayak Iban community of Sungai Utik does not have property rights according to state concepts, they do have access to the area, including all rights: rights of access, withdrawal, management, exclusion, and alienation. These two cases reflect the diverse forms and processes of power relations between the two locations. Despite their different socio-cultural backgrounds, contestation over the forest exhibits similar patterns in TNGHS and Sungai Utik. Table 2 provides more details. Table 2. Forms and processes of power relations in TNGH and Sungai Utik Forest. No Indicators TNGHS Sungai Utik 1 Forms and processes of power relations. The dominance of state and corporate actors using legal legitimacy to control people's living spaces. Forms of resistance and social transformation have also emerged, championed by local communities to defend their rights and identity. 2 Causes of conflict. Top-down policies that failed to accommodate local wisdom led to resistance from indigenous communities. Recognition of customary systems and active community participation in forest management have created a sustainable and inclusive conservation model. 3 Discourse Clash. The state used the language of conservation and development, while communities used the narrative of customary rights and traditional sustainability. The state used its right to utilize forests, while communities used the narrative of customary rights with conservation issues. 4 Power Asymmetry. The state and elites possessed greater legal, regulatory, and economic resources, while communities rely on social networks, local knowledge, and advocacy. The state and elites possessed greater legal, regulatory, and economic resources, but communities utilize national and international networks to support customary forest management. 5 Resistance and Adaptation. Local communities were not entirely passive; they actively engaged in overt resistance (demonstrations, lawsuits) and symbolic resistance (traditional rituals, historical narratives). Local communities actively seek support from various national and international parties through community-based conservation forest campaigns. 6 Object of Contestation. State conservation interests versus economic exploitation, and the rights of indigenous peoples. State Industrial Forests versus Indigenous Peoples' Conservation Forests. Discussion Forests as an object of contestation Forests were a natural resource, frequently the subject of conflict involving various parties. A frequently raised question regarding natural resources was who has the right to own these resources. To answer this question, Bromley argued that natural resource ownership was divided into four regimes: open access, state ownership, private ownership, and communal ownership. The government had absolute power to determine who had the right to access these resources, and these government policies often created conflicts of interest between its role as an agent of development and a protector of the community. 42 The level of conflict varies from covert to overt. The severity of the conflict is influenced by how threatened the ownership rights to the contested natural resources are. Several situations could lead to overt conflict. First, government-community conflict occurred when the government protects natural resource areas. Using conservation policy instruments, tools, or methods to implement conservation policies, the government determined an area to be a conservation or protected area, as in the case of Mount Halimun Salak National Park. This regulation indirectly eliminated the community’s rights to access and carry out activities in the area. Communities lose their rights to regulate, process, and utilize forest resources. This condition caused a conflict of interest between the government and the community. 22 State-led and supported extractive policies removed the safety valve for a stable future by eliminating the relationship between communities and nature. First, government-community conflict occurs when the government protected natural resource areas. Using conservation policy instruments, the government determined an area to be a conservation or protected area, as in the case of Mount Halimun Salak National Park. This regulation indirectly eliminated the community’s rights to access and conducted activities in the area. Communities lose their rights to regulate, process, and utilize forest resources. This condition caused a conflict of interest between the government and the community. 22 State-led and -supported extractive policies eliminate the safety valve for a stable future by eliminating the relationship between society and nature. 43 Second, the conflict between the government and society occurred when the government acted as a development agent. With its authority, the government involved the private sector in using natural resources. In contrast, these natural resources were de facto controlled and claimed as communal property of indigenous peoples, for example, in the case of the Sungai Utik Forest conflict in West Kalimantan. Sungai Utik Forest was claimed as the customary forest of the Dayak Iban Sungai Utik community. 22 Third, the management of natural resources in the era of modernism ignored local wisdom due to the dominance of science, even though local insight is produced by local communities. Modernization began with marginalizing traditional governance based on local knowledge and techniques. This condition has caused local traditions to be uprooted and pushed into the technocratic world. The state intervened to limit access for various reasons, such as two sides of the coin, as if community-based management, even though the state had greater control, ignores local wisdom. Government intervention in socio-territorial conflicts, accountability mechanisms, and state re-territorialization were paradoxically interconnected in such a way that they hinder the collaborative features and natural resource management capabilities ostensibly supported by community-based approaches. 44 Political and legal changes were mediated by power relations, cultural norms, and economic incentives, highlighting that the double-edged sword of rights could pave the way for greater state control over future benefits derived from community territories classified as forest lands. 10 Forest destruction in the TNGHS was suspected to be related to the power constellation of natural resource (forest) management. 45 A more straightforward definition was needed concerning natural resource management. Principal questions such as: who had the right to manage natural resources? Did the community have room to gain access to natural resource management? The answer to this question was related to the theory of property rights, which was the object of study in ecological politics. Types of property rights were (1) Access rights, namely rights to be able to enter natural resource areas and to take non-extractive rights from the areas; (2) Withdrawal rights, namely rights to produce or utilize natural resources in the area; (3) Management rights, namely the rights to regulate, manage and make rules for the utilization of these natural resources; (4) The right of exclusion, namely the right to determine who is allowed to enter the area, how to access it and how to transfer said access right to another party; (5) The right of transfer, namely the right owned to be able to sell or rent part or all of it to another party. 46 Several factors have been identified as the leading causes of conflicts over forest resources. Safitri points out that the political construction and administrative legalization (territorial politics) of natural resources in space, known as space and forests, cause various conflicts. 47 Conflict as the complexity of power relations between states and non-state actors, including competition for control of access to natural resources, especially forests. Conflict was a reaction to repressive strategies and mechanisms that have led communities to develop resistance strategies and tactics. 47 According to the opinions above, conflicts over forest resources are caused by political structures and administrative legitimacy (territorial politics), conflicts over control of access to natural resources, and strategies of resistance to repressive state measures. It is said that Conflicts in the management and use of forest resources arise because of competing interests, overlapping interpretations of rights and access by states and local communities, and differing underlying knowledge of the parties to the conflict. In the case of TNGHS, introducing new knowledge led to state hegemony over local communities. It changed the community’s knowledge of technical institutions by replacing them with modern knowledge and institutions. Kasepuhan communities no longer have rights and various access to natural resources. Even the battle of knowledge at the bargaining table undermines the functioning of traditional institutions. Community knowledge becomes a subordinate body of knowledge. On the other hand, national knowledge based on technology and capitalism has been prioritized. In this context, Foucault’s approach can be used to see how the collective power of forest management and utilization played a role, where knowledge was seen as power. 35 Foucault emphasized the micropolitics of power. Through this micropolitics, the state incorporated local community knowledge with new knowledge and showed how state knowledge can solve forest-related problems through state institutions and various forms of communication. If there had been cooperation between communities and the government, as in the case of Jambi, this forest resource conflict would not have occurred. The success of the community-government collaboration process will result in the effective use of natural forest resources, educating communities on traditional forest use and conservation of typical forest environments, and the daily use of forest areas in Jambi to develop ecotourism. 48 However, the role of the government in achieving ecological governance is more dominant. 49 , 50 Power networks in the struggle for access rights to forest resources Based on the phenomena demonstrated by the Kasepuhan and Dayak Iban Communities of Sungai Utik , one impact of conflict at the group level was resilience. Conflict causes indigenous communities to develop resilience. Resilience is defined as the ability of people to recover quickly from shock, injury, etc., and their natural resilience helps them overcome the crisis (Oxford Dictionary). In that case, both the Kasepuhan and Dayak Iban Communities possessed resilience. In the case of the TNGHS, the power network model in Mount Halimun Salak National Park can be seen in Figure 1 . Figure 1 described that when state institutions dominated local institutions through state policies on national park expansion and cripple customary institutions, this situation has forced customary institutions to change. On the one hand, customary institutions could not benefit from the forest due to a lack of access. However, the community’s ability to adapt to new circumstances has increased due to the conflict with the TNGHS. This ability was more accurately described as resilience. The resilience of the Kasepuhan community was demonstrated by their ability to avoid attacks by avoiding open conflict and secretly continuing to cultivate the leuweung garapan (cultivated forest) area while still fighting for access rights to the forest. They could also consolidate by forging alliances with other Kasepuhan community groups and forming indigenous community alliances, the ability to buy time by negotiating, re-dialoging about boundaries, access, and even zoning, and the ability to embrace other parties by developing their web of power by embracing not only NGOs but also the local government. When access to forest resources became limited, and demands for change from their community increased, the Kasepuhan community began to develop other abilities to provide access to the Kasepuhan in the local political space, through affiliations they built with local governments or national political elites. In the Kasepuhan community, conflict caused change, and this change was evidence that the Kasepuhan institution had resilience by developing a web of power whose target was political authority at the local level. Figure 1. The web of power model of the Kasepuhan community. Following the completion of the research, researchers continued to discuss the progress of the community’s negotiations. In their fight for forest rights, the Kasepuhan community formed crucial partnerships with local elites and the regional government, demonstrating the potential for collaborative solutions. Constitutional Court Decision No. 35 of 2012 concerning Customary Forests as State Forests raised hopes for the community to gain recognition through regional government regulations. After twenty years of struggle, in 2024, the Sukabumi Regency Government issued Regulation No. 7 of 2024 concerning the Recognition and Protection of Indigenous Communities. This regulation offered hope for the legitimacy of the Kasepuhan community, including its customary territory. Through this regional regulation, the community is allowed to regain access rights. However, as of this writing, the boundaries of their customary territory have not yet been determined. This means the community still has to fight to obtain full access rights, even without ownership rights. This situation implies hegemony 4 within the Kasepuhan community. The Dayak Iban community, distinct from the Kasepuhan community, employed unique strategies in conflict resolution. Rather than avoiding attacks, they resisted, expelling entrepreneurs from the area, confiscating their heavy equipment, and demonstrating resilience in defending the area. In their struggle against the state, the Dayak Iban community had honed its ability to consolidate internally and with other Dayak Iban communities within the Jalai Lintang Ketemenggungan (The Jalai Lintang clan). They had also expanded their web of power by collaborating with non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The power network in Sungai Utik Forest can be seen in Figure 2 . Figure 2. The web of power model of the Dayak Iban Sungai Utik community. Figure 2 described that forest resource conflicts became increasingly complex when local governments entered the conflict arena with their regional autonomy. In the case of the TNGHS, the local government assisted the Kasepuhan community in resolving the conflict with the BTNGHS by supporting the existence of indigenous communities in the TNGHS area. However, in the case of the Sungai Utik Forest, the local government exacerbated the conflict by issuing a palm oil plantation permit to a company on the same land. It was a manifestation of a clientelist system, where entrepreneurs, as local elites, exploit their close ties with the state to reproduce power, often at the expense of state expropriation. 51 This situation highlights the weakness of state institutions, which have the functional effect of reproducing elites who serve the interests of extractive capital. However, this system was fraught with deep contradictions, leading to conflict and violence that repeatedly endanger these interests. 51 In addition to local community actors, the state (Central Government), the state (Regional Government), and business actors, there are also NGO actors. In the case of the TNGHS (National Forest Conservation Area), some NGOs support the BTNGHS program. In contrast, others support the Kasepuhan Community’s struggle to obtain access rights to manage the forest. NGOs are central to power relations between both parties in the contest. The Kasepuhan Community’s network with certain NGOs is formed due to a shared ideology (defending indigenous peoples) and a shared fate among fellow “indigenous peoples” who generally share the same problems related to tenurial conflicts with the state. In the case of the Sungai Utik Forest, the presence of NGOs supports the struggle of the Sungai Utik Dayak Iban Community to gain recognition of their customary forest rights. The Sungai Utik Community’s struggle is voiced mainly by NGOs claiming to represent and act on behalf of the community. This support from national and international NGOs has influenced the shift in local knowledge of the Dayak Iban Sungai Utik Community. These NGOs try to enlighten the community about forest knowledge. NGOs led the community to understand carbon trading, REDD, and demonstrative activity (DA). There was a shift in discourse from the fight for “property rights” to shifting towards global benefits for all parties, the community, the country, and the world. Furthermore, an important achievement of NGO assistance to the Dayak Iban Community of Sungai Utik was facilitating the indigenous community to obtain an ecolabeling certificate, namely an award from the Indonesian ecolabel institution with Certificate Number 08/SCBFM/005 given for forest management by the Sungai Utik Panjae Menua house (forest management unit of the Sungai Utik Panjae Menua house), within the scope of the “sustainable community-based forest management (SCBFM) unit with an area of 9,453.40 hectares”. This ecolabeling certificate proves that community-based forest management ensures social sustainability and conservation. Community-based forest governance creates conditions for achieving better conservation and sustainable use of forest ecosystems, as well as social welfare and poverty reduction for the community. 44 These and many other socio-economic needs are part of the global value chain of environmental justice debates. 52 In addition to eco-labeling, the results of power relations with various parties have produced the following achievements: a. Kalpataru award, July 19, 2019. b. Equator prize, September 24, 2019, in new york. Kapuas Hulu Regent’s Decree No. 561 Of 2019 Concerning The Recognition and Protection of The Dayak Iban Menua Indigenous Community of Sungai Utik, The clan of Jalai Lintang, Embaloh Hulu District, Kapuas Hulu Regency. This research was conducted in 2020, but after its completion, researchers continued to monitor the progress and achievements of the Dayak Iban Sungai Utik community. Other achievements resulting from collaboration with national and international NGOs were as follows: a. On May 20, 2022, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry issued a Decree concerning Customary Forests, and b. on July 19, 2023, the Dayak Iban Sungai Utik community received the Gulbenkian Prize in Portugal. This achievement further strengthened the Dayak Iban Sungai Utik community’s position in obtaining access rights to the Sungai Utik forest. However, their concerns remain unanswered, as the government has never revoked the IUPHHK (Cultivated Forest Management Permit). The Dayak Iban Sungai Utik community has been fighting for the issuance of a Forest Management Permit (IUPHHK) since 1997 and received an ecolabel certificate in 2008. Thus, it took 11 years to achieve their first success in the fight for forest management rights. The Dayak Iban community’s success was supported by its power relations with national and international elites and NGOs. Learning from the two cases above, struggles over access rights were unnecessary when the state was present in community issues. Contrasting human resources with natural resources was unnecessary because, in essence, nature must be able to sustain human life. Likewise, human resources, with all their wisdom, must be able to protect the sustainability of nature. State policies to protect or exploit nature could conflict with humans themselves, namely, local communities. Therefore, policies issued by the government must be transparent, participatory, and equitable. Transparency, encouraging equitable policymaking, and ensuring participatory mechanisms were crucial to resolving agrarian conflicts fairly and sustainably. 53 Conclusions Taking the case of the contestation over forest management in Mount Halimun Salak National Park and Sungai Utik Forest, it was clear that the power relations between local communities and the state were unequal. The state commodifies local knowledge about forest management and other natural resources by introducing new knowledge and development programs (in line with Escobar’s concept of “Knowledge Regimes”). At the intellectual level, state hegemony over local communities occurred (referring to Gramsci’s concept of hegemony). Therefore, contesting natural resources involves three systems: the state, local communities, and corporations, creating a power imbalance where each party fights for rights to forest management (referring to Foucault’s concept of power relations). This contestation gave rise to power networks. The contestation over access rights to forest resources in these two forests produces two different models of power networks. These power networks were formed in response to local communities’ contestation over forest access rights with other parties. Cultural differences, differences in the meaning of forests, and the role of local governments produce different power networks. These different models of power relations also produce different outcomes in conflict resolution. Local communities in Mount Halimun Salak National Park reached a point in negotiations that resulted in limited access rights to activities supporting national park programs. Meanwhile, local communities in Sungai Utik Forest obtained full access rights, not because the state granted them, but because of legal support obtained through collaboration with various national and international parties. This model can be generalized and adopted elsewhere, provided that the location has local communities with similar characteristics: local wisdom, the ability to consolidate internally, the ability to build community solidarity that generates social capital, and the presence of NGOs that accompany them in negotiations, alliances, collaborations, advocacy networks, and legal support. Future research can be conducted on collaborative and innovative governance in sustainable forest management. This study makes a significant contribution to the sociology of governance, political ecology, indigenous peoples’ rights, and forest resource governance. Open data availability (MANDATORY for F1000research and OPTIONAL for Cogent OA) This project content the following underlying data: data set of interviews and FGD from the participants. All data underlying the results of this study are available in https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.30230791 36 Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0). Acknowledgements Acknowledgements to the Chancellor and Rector of Djuanda University and the head of the research and community service institute of Djuanda University, who have provided support facilities for conducting research activities and scientific publications. References 1. Fahrunnisa, Soetarto E, Pandjaitan NK: Kontestasi Akses Sumber Agraria Di Kawasan Hutan Dodo Jarang Pusang, Kabupaten Sumbawa, NTB. Sodality J. Sosiol. Pedesaan. 2016; (Agustus): 145–151. 2. Murray TL: The Will to Improve: Governmentality, Development, and the Practice of Politics. Duke University Press; 2007. Publisher Full Text 3. Foucault M: The Foucault Effect Studies in Governmentality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1991. 4. Gramsci A: Selections from the Prison Notebooks. New York: International Publishers; 1971. 5. Peluso NL: Rich Forests, Poor People: Resource Control and Resistance in Java. University of California Press; 1st ed. 1992. Publisher Full Text 6. Heinze A, Kuyper TW, García Barrios LE, et al. : Tapping into nature’s benefits: values, effort and the struggle to co-produce pine resin. Ecosyst. People. 2021; 17 (1): 69–86. Publisher Full Text 7. Gupta S: Introduction. Contesting Conservation, Advances in Asian Human-Environmental. Springer International Publishing AG; 2018; pp. 1–21. Publisher Full Text 8. Muthallib A: Agrarian Conflict in Aceh: The Intersection of Corporate Interests, Farmers’ Rights, and Government Governance. Jurisprudensi J. Ilmu Syariah, Perundang-Undangan dan Ekon. Islam. 2025; 17 (1): 165–178. Publisher Full Text 9. Alusiola RA, Schilling J, Klär P: Redd+ conflict: Understanding the pathways between forest projects and social conflict. Forests. 2021; 12 (6). Publisher Full Text 10. Broegaard RB, Vongvisouk T, Mertz O: Contradictory Land Use Plans and Policies in Laos: Tenure Security and the Threat of Exclusion. World Dev. 2017; 89 : 170–183. Publisher Full Text 11. Obodai J, Mohan G, Bhagwat S: Beyond legislation: Unpacking land access capability in small-scale mining and its intersections with the agriculture sector in sub-Saharan Africa. Extr. Ind. Soc. 2023; 16 (101357): 1–15. Publisher Full Text 12. Whiting SH: Land Rights, Industrialization, and Urbanization: China in Comparative Context. J. Chin. Polit. Sci. 2022; 27 (2): 399–414. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 13. Gupta S: The Micropolitics of Forest Use and Control: New Spaces for Cooperation and Conflict.2018; (9783319722566). Publisher Full Text 14. Baral S, Hansen CP, Chhetri BBK: Forest Management Plans in Nepal’s Community Forests: Does One Size Fit All? Small-scale For. 2020; 19 (4): 483–504. Publisher Full Text 15. Bayrak MM, Marafa LM: Livelihood Implications and Perceptions of Large Scale Investment in Natural Resources for Conservation and Carbon Sequestration: Empirical Evidence from REDD+ in Vietnam. Sustain. 2017; 9 (1802): 1–23. Publisher Full Text 16. Vik J, Fuglestad EM, Øversveen E: Centre-periphery conflicts and alienation in a resource-based economy. Nor. Geogr. Tidsskr. 2022; 76 (4): 197–208. Publisher Full Text 17. Mutekwa VT, Gambiza J: Forest protected areas governance in Zimbabwe: Shift needed away from a long history of local community exclusion. J. Environ. Manag. 2017; 198 : 330–339. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 18. Rao M: Reframing the Environment in Neoliberal India: Introduction to the Theme. Soc. Secur. Bull. 2018; 67 (3): 259–274. Publisher Full Text 19. Istiadi Y, Priatna D, Widodo W: Analysis of The Edge Effect On Bird And Primate Distribution In The Ecological Corridor Habitat Of Mount Halimun Salak National Park (TNGHS). Eduvest - J. Univers. Stud. 2024; 4 (5): 4104–4110. Publisher Full Text 20. Rahmawati R, Pratidina G, Muarif: Model Adaptasi Ekologis Dan Strategi Nafkah Pada Masyarakat Sekitar Taman Nasional Gunung Halimun Salak. J. Sos. Hum. 2011; 2 (2): 112–121. 21. Rahmawati R, Hernawan D, Darusman D, et al. : Kinerja Implementasi Tata Kelola Hutan Taman Nasional Gunung Halimun Salak. Sosiohumaniora. 2019; 21 (3): 305–315. Publisher Full Text 22. Rahmawati R, Dharmawan AH, Kinseng R, et al. : Conflict of Forest Resources and Ecological Adaptation Strategy. IJASOS- Int. E-journal Adv. Soc. Sci. 2019; 5 (15): 1483–1490. Publisher Full Text 23. Hilwan I, Anggoro P: Studi Populasi dan Distribusi Palahlar (Dipterocarpus hasseltii Blume) di Resort Gunung Salak I, Taman Nasional Gunung Halimun Salak. J. Trop. Silvic. 2023; 14 (03): 229–235. Publisher Full Text 24. de Araujo BC , et al. : Indobiosys – Dna Barcoding As a Tool for the Rapid Assessment of Hyperdiverse Insect Taxa in Indonesia: a Status Report. Treubia. 2017; 44 (December): 67–76. Publisher Full Text 25. Prasetyo D, Suranto: Analisis Faktor Keberhasilan Desa Adat Dayak Iban Sungai Utik dalam Memenangkan Equator Prize Tahun 2019. J. Soc. Policy Issues. 2021; 1 (3): 94–99. Publisher Full Text 26. Putri NA, Sarmilah S, Velda J, et al. : Bridging the Gap by Exploring Inequalities in Access to Land and Disparities in Agrarian Law in Indonesia. J. Ilmu Kenotariatan. 2024; 5 (1): 1–16. Publisher Full Text 27. Ramcilovic-Suominen S, Lovric M, Mustalahti I: Mapping policy actor networks and their interests in the FLEGT Voluntary Partnership Agreement in Lao PDR. World Dev. 2019; 118 : 128–148. Publisher Full Text 28. Creswell JW, Creswell JD: Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 5th ed. 2018. 29. Bartlett L, Vavrus F: Comparative Case Studies: An Innovative Approach. Nord. J. Comp. Int. Educ. 2017; 1 (1): 5–17. Publisher Full Text Reference Source 30. Gerring J: Qué es un estudio de caso y para qué sirve? Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 2004; 98 (2): 341–354. Publisher Full Text 31. George AL: Case Studies and Theory Development: The Method of Structured, Focused Comparison. A Pioneer in Political and Social Sciences. Pioneers in Arts, Humanities, Science, Engineering, Practice. Cham: Springer; 2019; vol 15 . : pp. 191–214. Publisher Full Text 32. Noble H, Heale R: Triangulation in research, with examples. Evid. Based. Nurs. 2019; 22 (3): 67–68. Publisher Full Text 33. Denzin NK: Triangulation 2.0*. J. Mixed Methods Res. 2012; 6 (2): 80–88. Publisher Full Text 34. Turner P, Turner S: Triangulation in practice. Virtual Reality. 2009; 13 (3): 171–181. Publisher Full Text 35. Foucault M: Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977. New York: Pantheon Book; 1980. Publisher Full Text 36. Rahmawati R, et al. : Support data for the article: Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources: Comparative Case Studies in Conservation and Industrial Forests.2025. Publisher Full Text 37. Braun V, Clarke V: Thematic analysis. APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological. 2012; vol. 2 : pp. 57–71. Publisher Full Text 38. Escobar A: After Nature: Steps to an Antiessentialist Political Ecology. Curr. Anthropol. 1999; 40 (I): 1–30. Publisher Full Text 39. Robbins P: Political Ecology: A Critical Introduction. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; Second ed 2012. 40. Galt RE: Scaling Up Political Ecology: The Case of Illegal Pesticides on Fresh Vegetables Imported into the United States, 1996-2006. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 2010; 100 (2): 327–355. Publisher Full Text 41. Galt RE: Placing food systems in first world political ecology: A review and research agenda. Geogr. Compass. 2013; 7 (9): 637–658. Publisher Full Text 42. Bailey S, Bryant R: Third World Political Ecology An Introduction. London: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group; 1st ed. 1997. 43. Deivanayagam S, Maya M, Varma S: Assessing the socio-ecological effects of lakeside gentrification — A case study of two lakes in South India. Urban Gov. 2025; (September 1): 1–17. Publisher Full Text 44. Gutiérrez-Zamora V, Hernández Estrada M: Responsibilization and state territorialization: Governing socio-territorial conflicts in community forestry in Mexico. Forest Policy Econ. 2020; 116 (102188): 1–15. Publisher Full Text 45. Rahmawati R, Darusman D, Hernawan D: Strategi Adaptasi Masyarakat Lokal Untuk Tata Kelola Sumber Daya Hutan Berkelanjutan. Bogor, Indonesia: Unida Press; 2016. 46. Schlager E, Ostrom E: The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System Property-Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis. Land Econ. 1992; 68 (3): 249–262. Publisher Full Text 47. Maring P: Bagaimana kekuasaan bekerja di balik konflik, perlawanan, dan kolaborasi?: sebuah sudut pandang antropologi tentang perebutan sumberdaya ekologi? Jakarta: Lembaga Pengkajian Antropologi Kekuasaan Indonesia; 2016. 48. Arsento M, Hamdi M, Ngadisah, et al. : The Implementation of Waste Management Policy in Creating a Clean, Comfortable and Healty Environment at the City of Jambi Jambi Province. Budapest Int. Res. Critics Institute-Journal. 2022; 5 (1): 1887–1897. Reference Source 49. Purnomo H, et al. : Forest and Land Fires, Toxic Haze and Local Politics in Indonesia. Int. For. Rev. 2019; 21 (4): 486–500. Publisher Full Text 50. Sundari C, Elyta I, Yohanes Y: Traditional Forests Create Government Ecology in Jambi Province. J. ILMU Lingkung. 2023; 21 (3): 487–494. Publisher Full Text 51. Feijó J, Orre A: Domination, Collaboration and Conflict in Cabo Delgado’s History of Extractivism. Kronos. 2024; 50 (1): 1–27. Publisher Full Text 52. Kekana HN, Ruhiiga TM, Ndou NN, et al. : Environmental justice in South Africa: the dilemma of informal settlement residents. GeoJournal. 2023; 88 : 1–17. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 53. Fattarawati F: Networked power and resistance in agrarian conflicts: A case study from Malin Deman, Indonesia. Simulacra. 2025; 8 (1): 141–157. Publisher Full Text Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 13 Jan 2026 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 Public Administration, Universitas Djuanda, Bogor, West Java, 16720, Indonesia 2 Management, Universitas Djuanda, Bogor, West Java, 16720, Indonesia 3 Public Administration, Universitas Muhammadiyah Jakarta, Jakarta, Special Capital Region of Jakarta, 15419, Indonesia 4 Social, Environment and Development Sustainability Research Center, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Bangi, Selangor, 43600, Malaysia Rita Rahmawati Roles: Conceptualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Rusliandy Rusliandy Roles: Validation Imam Edy Mulyono Roles: Supervision Sri Harini Roles: Writing – Review & Editing Neng Virly Apriliyani Roles: Project Administration, Resources Euis Salbiah Roles: Data Curation Irma Purnamasari Roles: Formal Analysis, Methodology R. Akhmad Munjin Roles: Visualization Faisal Tri Ramdani Roles: Investigation, Resources Berry Sastrawan Roles: Investigation, Resources Evi Satispi Roles: Supervision, Validation Andriansyah Andriansyah Roles: Data Curation, Supervision Novel Anak Lyndon Roles: Supervision, Validation Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Article Versions (1) version 1 Published: 13 Jan 2026, 15:51 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171466.1 Copyright © 2026 Rahmawati R et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics Views Downloads F1000Research - - PubMed Central info_outline Data from PMC are received and updated monthly. - - Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Rahmawati R, Rusliandy R, Mulyono IE et al. Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources: Comparative Case Studies in Conservation and Industrial Forests [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :51 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171466.1 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 13 Jan 2026 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Arshad R. Reviewer Report For: Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources: Comparative Case Studies in Conservation and Industrial Forests [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :51 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189076.r450352 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-51/v1#referee-response-450352 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 05 May 2026 Rozita Arshad , Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Kedah, Malaysia Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189076.r450352 Article Summary The study investigates forest resource conflicts in Indonesia between the state and local communities through the lens of Foucault’s power relations and Gramsci’s hegemony theories. It uses a comparative case study of Mount Halimun Salak National Park (TNGHS) ... Continue reading READ ALL Article Summary The study investigates forest resource conflicts in Indonesia between the state and local communities through the lens of Foucault’s power relations and Gramsci’s hegemony theories. It uses a comparative case study of Mount Halimun Salak National Park (TNGHS) and the Sungai Utik customary forest to map different "webs of power". The results show that top-down conservation policies in TNGHS led to community subordination and loss of access, while Sungai Utik achieved a more egalitarian model through strong community solidarity and legal recognition of customary systems. 1. Timely and Relevant Topic: This research is highly timely as Indonesia continues to grapple with the legal implementation of customary forest rights ( hutan adat ) following significant judicial and legislative shifts. The study addresses the globally relevant tension between "fortress conservation" (top-down exclusion) and "inclusive governance," making it pertinent for international readers interested in the 30x30 global conservation targets. By focusing on "webs of power," it provides a contemporary sociological framework for understanding how marginalized communities navigate the "Social Forestry" era in Indonesia. Such an approach is particularly relevant for international policymakers, researchers, and practitioners seeking balanced strategies for achieving global conservation objectives while minimizing conflicts with local and indigenous communities. 2. Comparative Case Study Design : The research effectively employs a comparative case study method to analyze different forest management orientations: the conservation-oriented TNGHS and the industrially oriented Sungai Utik. This design is a significant strength, as it allows for "cross-location exploration" that simultaneously considers macro, meso, and micro dimensions of power. The use of two distinct sites provides a robust basis for generating generalized lessons from specific historical experiences. 3. Theoretical Grounding : The study is strongly grounded in established social theories through a sophisticated triangulation of analytical perspectives. At the micro level, Michel Foucault’s theory of power relations is employed to examine how discourse, knowledge, and institutional practices shape the behavior and responses of local communities, while at the macro level, Antonio Gramsci’s theory of hegemony is applied to explain forms of state domination and their influence on local socio-political structures. The integration of these theoretical perspectives within the Organic, Capitalist, and Technological regimes offers a comprehensive framework for analyzing the socio-ecological systems across both study locations. 3. Methodological Rigor: The study employs a rigorous and transparent methodological approach using purposive sampling involving ten informants from each location representing five categories of stakeholders, including customary leaders, government representatives, non-governmental organizations, and community actors. To enhance the validity and reliability of the findings, the study applies triangulation of both data sources, including interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs), and theoretical perspectives. The data were systematically analyzed using thematic analysis based on the six-stage framework developed by Braun and Clarke (2012), which was clearly operationalized and presented in Table 1. Furthermore, the study demonstrates strong ethical compliance through formal research approval procedures and the acquisition of written informed consent from all informants. 4. Clarity of Contribution: The article makes a clear contribution to the fields of political ecology and sociology of governance. It explicitly addresses a gap in existing literature by focusing on how marginalized communities actively fight for their rights by creating power networks. The identification of two distinct "web of power" models (one state-dominated and one egalitarian/solidarity-based) provides a valuable conceptual tool for future research. 5. Depth of Comparative Analysis: The comparative analysis is detailed and insightful, as summarized in Table 2. It contrasts the "top-down" exclusionary policies in TNGHS with the "inclusive conservation model" in Sungai Utik . The analysis goes beyond simple comparison by examining the "discourse clash" between state narratives of "techno-nature" and community narratives of "organic nature" . 6. Policy Implications: The study offers significant policy implications for natural resource governance in Indonesia. It advocates for a transition from centralistic, exclusionary conservation to more "equitable and inclusive" models. The findings suggest that legal recognition of customary rights and the incorporation of local knowledge are essential for reducing conflict and ensuring sustainable forest management. Peer Review Evaluation 1. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite current literature? Answer: Partly Comment : While the article is clearly presented and provides a strong theoretical foundation using Foucault and Gramsci, it only partly fulfills the requirement for citing current literature. A significant portion of the references and the data collection period (2020) are several years old. To be considered fully current in the context of Indonesian forestry policy and global political ecology studies, the authors should incorporate more recent scholarship and policy updates from the 2023–2025 period. Constructive Detail: Update Literature: The authors should include recent studies (2023–2025) on the implementation of Indonesia's Omnibus Law (Job Creation Law) and its specific impacts on customary forest recognition and national park management. Recent Comparative Studies: Integrate 2024–2025 research regarding global trends in "inclusive natural resource governance" to better contextualize the findings within the current international academic discourse. Policy Context: Update the status of the IUPHHK (timber utilization permits) mentioned in the Sungai Utik case to reflect any regulatory changes or revocations. 2. Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Answer: Yes Comment The qualitative comparative case study design is highly appropriate for mapping the complexities of power. Comparing a National Park with an industrially managed forest allows for a robust analysis of different power configurations. 3. Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication? Answer: Yes Comment: The methodology is transparent, detailing purposive sampling, the list of informants, and the specific interview guiding questions. The thematic analysis stages are well-defined. 4. If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Answer: Not applicable Comment: The study is qualitative; no statistical testing was required. 5. Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Answer: Yes Comment: Table 1 provides an excellent audit trail of the thematic analysis, showing the transformation of raw keywords from the raw data into final themes. This provides sufficient transparency for qualitative reproducibility. 6. Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Answer: Yes Comment: The conclusion that community solidarity acts as a "counter-hegemony" to state power is well-supported by the Sungai Utik case study evidence. Recommendation: To transition this article to a fully "Approved" status, the following points must be addressed: Literature Update (Critical): Integrate at least 5–7 references from 2023–2025. These should specifically focus on the recent evolution of Indonesia’s "Social Forestry" program and the impact of the Job Creation Law (Omnibus Law ) on customary land rights. Refine "Techno-nature" Concept: Clarify how this framework specifically interacts with the "Organic" regime in TNGHS to ensure theoretical robustness. Conflict Status Update: Provide an update on whether the IUPHHK permits in Sungai Utik have faced any recent legal changes to ensure the "latent conflict" analysis reflects the 2026 context. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Yes Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Not applicable Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Yes Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: My research area focuses on the intersection of Public Management, Good Governance, and Social Equity, specifically exploring how institutional frameworks and public policies can be designed to empower marginalized groups such as women and persons with disabilities. By integrating expertise in Public Policy and Public Sector Finance, I analyse the "webs of power" within administrative structures to ensure that governance is inclusive, transparent, and conducive to sustainable economic drivers like entrepreneurship. This background aligns directly with the reviewed article, as it provides a robust lens through which to evaluate the struggle for resource access rights and the role of community solidarity in challenging exclusionary state-led management regimes. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Arshad R. Reviewer Report For: Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources: Comparative Case Studies in Conservation and Industrial Forests [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :51 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189076.r450352 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-51/v1#referee-response-450352 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Pant H. Reviewer Report For: Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources: Comparative Case Studies in Conservation and Industrial Forests [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :51 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189076.r467727 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-51/v1#referee-response-467727 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 09 Apr 2026 Harshit Pant , G.B.Pant National Institute of Himalayan Environment, Almora, Uttrakhand, India Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189076.r467727 The paper investigates how power relations shape conflicts over forest access in Indonesia. Using a qualitative comparative case study approach, the authors analyze Mount Halimun Salak National Park (TNGHS) in West Java and the Sungai Utik customary forest in West Kalimantan. ... Continue reading READ ALL The paper investigates how power relations shape conflicts over forest access in Indonesia. Using a qualitative comparative case study approach, the authors analyze Mount Halimun Salak National Park (TNGHS) in West Java and the Sungai Utik customary forest in West Kalimantan. In TNGHS , expansion of the national park (from 40,000 to 113,357 hectares) restricted indigenous Kasepuhan communities’ access, creating conflict between conservation policies and local livelihoods. In Sungai Utik , conflict stemmed from a state-issued industrial forest permit (IUPHHK) overlapping with customary lands. Despite the permit not being revoked, recognition of customary rights and strong community solidarity fostered more egalitarian power relations. The study highlights that forests are not only ecological assets but also contested political spaces. Power relations are dynamic, shaped by state legitimacy, customary rights, NGO advocacy, and community resistance. The authors conclude that inclusive governance requires recognizing local knowledge, balancing ecological conservation with socio-cultural needs, and addressing asymmetries in power. Timely and relevant topic : The paper addresses pressing issues of forest governance, indigenous rights, and conservation conflicts in Indonesia, with broader implications for global environmental governance. Comparative case study design : Juxtaposing conservation-oriented (TNGHS) and industrial-oriented (Sungai Utik) contexts enriches the analysis and demonstrates the variability of power networks. Theoretical grounding : The integration of Foucault’s relational power and Gramsci’s hegemony provides a strong conceptual lens for analyzing contestation and resistance. Methodological rigor : Use of triangulation (data sources, methods, theories) strengthens validity. Thematic analysis is well-structured, with clear coding and theme development. Clarity of contribution : While the study maps power relations, the paper could more explicitly articulate how its findings advance theory in political ecology or governance studies. Depth of comparative analysis : The two cases are described well, but the cross-case synthesis could be expanded to highlight similarities and differences more systematically. Policy implications : The discussion touches on inclusive governance but could provide more concrete recommendations for policymakers, especially regarding balancing conservation mandates with indigenous rights. Literature engagement : Some references are mentioned broadly (e.g., REDD+ in Vietnam, land grabbing in India), but the connection to the Indonesian cases could be more critically developed. Improve flow in the Introduction , which currently lists multiple global examples; synthesizing them into thematic clusters would enhance readability. Clarify terminology (e.g., “dualism of legitimacy” and “dualism of power”) with consistent definitions. Tables and figures could be used more effectively to visualize the web of power networks. ✅ Overall Recommendation The article presents a valuable and well-structured study on forest governance conflicts in Indonesia. With revisions to strengthen comparative insights and policy relevance, it has strong potential for indexing after peer review. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Partly Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Partly Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Partly Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Forest ecology and biodiversity conservation I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Pant H. Reviewer Report For: Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources: Comparative Case Studies in Conservation and Industrial Forests [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :51 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189076.r467727 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-51/v1#referee-response-467727 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 13 Jan 2026 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 2 Version 1 13 Jan 26 read read Harshit Pant , G.B.Pant National Institute of Himalayan Environment, Almora, India Rozita Arshad , Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Malaysia Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert Browse by related subjects keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 Arshad R. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 05 May 2026 | for Version 1 Rozita Arshad , Universiti Utara Malaysia, Sintok, Kedah, Malaysia 0 Views copyright © 2026 Arshad R. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Article Summary The study investigates forest resource conflicts in Indonesia between the state and local communities through the lens of Foucault’s power relations and Gramsci’s hegemony theories. It uses a comparative case study of Mount Halimun Salak National Park (TNGHS) and the Sungai Utik customary forest to map different "webs of power". The results show that top-down conservation policies in TNGHS led to community subordination and loss of access, while Sungai Utik achieved a more egalitarian model through strong community solidarity and legal recognition of customary systems. 1. Timely and Relevant Topic: This research is highly timely as Indonesia continues to grapple with the legal implementation of customary forest rights ( hutan adat ) following significant judicial and legislative shifts. The study addresses the globally relevant tension between "fortress conservation" (top-down exclusion) and "inclusive governance," making it pertinent for international readers interested in the 30x30 global conservation targets. By focusing on "webs of power," it provides a contemporary sociological framework for understanding how marginalized communities navigate the "Social Forestry" era in Indonesia. Such an approach is particularly relevant for international policymakers, researchers, and practitioners seeking balanced strategies for achieving global conservation objectives while minimizing conflicts with local and indigenous communities. 2. Comparative Case Study Design : The research effectively employs a comparative case study method to analyze different forest management orientations: the conservation-oriented TNGHS and the industrially oriented Sungai Utik. This design is a significant strength, as it allows for "cross-location exploration" that simultaneously considers macro, meso, and micro dimensions of power. The use of two distinct sites provides a robust basis for generating generalized lessons from specific historical experiences. 3. Theoretical Grounding : The study is strongly grounded in established social theories through a sophisticated triangulation of analytical perspectives. At the micro level, Michel Foucault’s theory of power relations is employed to examine how discourse, knowledge, and institutional practices shape the behavior and responses of local communities, while at the macro level, Antonio Gramsci’s theory of hegemony is applied to explain forms of state domination and their influence on local socio-political structures. The integration of these theoretical perspectives within the Organic, Capitalist, and Technological regimes offers a comprehensive framework for analyzing the socio-ecological systems across both study locations. 3. Methodological Rigor: The study employs a rigorous and transparent methodological approach using purposive sampling involving ten informants from each location representing five categories of stakeholders, including customary leaders, government representatives, non-governmental organizations, and community actors. To enhance the validity and reliability of the findings, the study applies triangulation of both data sources, including interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs), and theoretical perspectives. The data were systematically analyzed using thematic analysis based on the six-stage framework developed by Braun and Clarke (2012), which was clearly operationalized and presented in Table 1. Furthermore, the study demonstrates strong ethical compliance through formal research approval procedures and the acquisition of written informed consent from all informants. 4. Clarity of Contribution: The article makes a clear contribution to the fields of political ecology and sociology of governance. It explicitly addresses a gap in existing literature by focusing on how marginalized communities actively fight for their rights by creating power networks. The identification of two distinct "web of power" models (one state-dominated and one egalitarian/solidarity-based) provides a valuable conceptual tool for future research. 5. Depth of Comparative Analysis: The comparative analysis is detailed and insightful, as summarized in Table 2. It contrasts the "top-down" exclusionary policies in TNGHS with the "inclusive conservation model" in Sungai Utik . The analysis goes beyond simple comparison by examining the "discourse clash" between state narratives of "techno-nature" and community narratives of "organic nature" . 6. Policy Implications: The study offers significant policy implications for natural resource governance in Indonesia. It advocates for a transition from centralistic, exclusionary conservation to more "equitable and inclusive" models. The findings suggest that legal recognition of customary rights and the incorporation of local knowledge are essential for reducing conflict and ensuring sustainable forest management. Peer Review Evaluation 1. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite current literature? Answer: Partly Comment : While the article is clearly presented and provides a strong theoretical foundation using Foucault and Gramsci, it only partly fulfills the requirement for citing current literature. A significant portion of the references and the data collection period (2020) are several years old. To be considered fully current in the context of Indonesian forestry policy and global political ecology studies, the authors should incorporate more recent scholarship and policy updates from the 2023–2025 period. Constructive Detail: Update Literature: The authors should include recent studies (2023–2025) on the implementation of Indonesia's Omnibus Law (Job Creation Law) and its specific impacts on customary forest recognition and national park management. Recent Comparative Studies: Integrate 2024–2025 research regarding global trends in "inclusive natural resource governance" to better contextualize the findings within the current international academic discourse. Policy Context: Update the status of the IUPHHK (timber utilization permits) mentioned in the Sungai Utik case to reflect any regulatory changes or revocations. 2. Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Answer: Yes Comment The qualitative comparative case study design is highly appropriate for mapping the complexities of power. Comparing a National Park with an industrially managed forest allows for a robust analysis of different power configurations. 3. Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication? Answer: Yes Comment: The methodology is transparent, detailing purposive sampling, the list of informants, and the specific interview guiding questions. The thematic analysis stages are well-defined. 4. If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Answer: Not applicable Comment: The study is qualitative; no statistical testing was required. 5. Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Answer: Yes Comment: Table 1 provides an excellent audit trail of the thematic analysis, showing the transformation of raw keywords from the raw data into final themes. This provides sufficient transparency for qualitative reproducibility. 6. Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Answer: Yes Comment: The conclusion that community solidarity acts as a "counter-hegemony" to state power is well-supported by the Sungai Utik case study evidence. Recommendation: To transition this article to a fully "Approved" status, the following points must be addressed: Literature Update (Critical): Integrate at least 5–7 references from 2023–2025. These should specifically focus on the recent evolution of Indonesia’s "Social Forestry" program and the impact of the Job Creation Law (Omnibus Law ) on customary land rights. Refine "Techno-nature" Concept: Clarify how this framework specifically interacts with the "Organic" regime in TNGHS to ensure theoretical robustness. Conflict Status Update: Provide an update on whether the IUPHHK permits in Sungai Utik have faced any recent legal changes to ensure the "latent conflict" analysis reflects the 2026 context. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Yes Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Not applicable Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Yes Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise My research area focuses on the intersection of Public Management, Good Governance, and Social Equity, specifically exploring how institutional frameworks and public policies can be designed to empower marginalized groups such as women and persons with disabilities. By integrating expertise in Public Policy and Public Sector Finance, I analyse the "webs of power" within administrative structures to ensure that governance is inclusive, transparent, and conducive to sustainable economic drivers like entrepreneurship. This background aligns directly with the reviewed article, as it provides a robust lens through which to evaluate the struggle for resource access rights and the role of community solidarity in challenging exclusionary state-led management regimes. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Arshad R. Peer Review Report For: Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources: Comparative Case Studies in Conservation and Industrial Forests [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :51 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189076.r450352) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-51/v1#referee-response-450352 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 Pant H. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 09 Apr 2026 | for Version 1 Harshit Pant , G.B.Pant National Institute of Himalayan Environment, Almora, Uttrakhand, India 0 Views copyright © 2026 Pant H. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions The paper investigates how power relations shape conflicts over forest access in Indonesia. Using a qualitative comparative case study approach, the authors analyze Mount Halimun Salak National Park (TNGHS) in West Java and the Sungai Utik customary forest in West Kalimantan. In TNGHS , expansion of the national park (from 40,000 to 113,357 hectares) restricted indigenous Kasepuhan communities’ access, creating conflict between conservation policies and local livelihoods. In Sungai Utik , conflict stemmed from a state-issued industrial forest permit (IUPHHK) overlapping with customary lands. Despite the permit not being revoked, recognition of customary rights and strong community solidarity fostered more egalitarian power relations. The study highlights that forests are not only ecological assets but also contested political spaces. Power relations are dynamic, shaped by state legitimacy, customary rights, NGO advocacy, and community resistance. The authors conclude that inclusive governance requires recognizing local knowledge, balancing ecological conservation with socio-cultural needs, and addressing asymmetries in power. Timely and relevant topic : The paper addresses pressing issues of forest governance, indigenous rights, and conservation conflicts in Indonesia, with broader implications for global environmental governance. Comparative case study design : Juxtaposing conservation-oriented (TNGHS) and industrial-oriented (Sungai Utik) contexts enriches the analysis and demonstrates the variability of power networks. Theoretical grounding : The integration of Foucault’s relational power and Gramsci’s hegemony provides a strong conceptual lens for analyzing contestation and resistance. Methodological rigor : Use of triangulation (data sources, methods, theories) strengthens validity. Thematic analysis is well-structured, with clear coding and theme development. Clarity of contribution : While the study maps power relations, the paper could more explicitly articulate how its findings advance theory in political ecology or governance studies. Depth of comparative analysis : The two cases are described well, but the cross-case synthesis could be expanded to highlight similarities and differences more systematically. Policy implications : The discussion touches on inclusive governance but could provide more concrete recommendations for policymakers, especially regarding balancing conservation mandates with indigenous rights. Literature engagement : Some references are mentioned broadly (e.g., REDD+ in Vietnam, land grabbing in India), but the connection to the Indonesian cases could be more critically developed. Improve flow in the Introduction , which currently lists multiple global examples; synthesizing them into thematic clusters would enhance readability. Clarify terminology (e.g., “dualism of legitimacy” and “dualism of power”) with consistent definitions. Tables and figures could be used more effectively to visualize the web of power networks. ✅ Overall Recommendation The article presents a valuable and well-structured study on forest governance conflicts in Indonesia. With revisions to strengthen comparative insights and policy relevance, it has strong potential for indexing after peer review. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Partly Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Partly Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Partly Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Forest ecology and biodiversity conservation I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Pant H. Peer Review Report For: Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources: Comparative Case Studies in Conservation and Industrial Forests [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2026, 15 :51 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189076.r467727) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/15-51/v1#referee-response-467727 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with F1000Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/15-51/v1" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/15-51/v1&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/15-51/v1" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Rahmawati R et al.'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/15-51/v1/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://f1000research.com/articles/15-51", templates : { twitter : "Web of Power in the Struggle for Access Rights to Forest Resources:.... Rahmawati R et al., published by " + "@F1000Research" + ", https://f1000research.com/articles/15-51/v1" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/171466/189076") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "189076"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "467727": 12, "467726": 0, "465943": 0, "467735": 0, "467734": 0, "467733": 0, "467732": 0, "467731": 0, "467730": 0, "467729": 0, "467728": 0, "465951": 0, "465950": 0, "465949": 0, "465948": 0, "465947": 0, "465946": 0, "465945": 0, "465944": 0, "465952": 0, "450350": 0, "450351": 0, "450348": 0, "450349": 0, "450346": 0, "450347": 0, "450345": 0, "450354": 0, "450352": 3, "450353": 0, "463551": 0, "463550": 0, "463549": 0, "463548": 0, "463547": 0, "463546": 0, "463555": 0, "463554": 0, "463553": 0, "463552": 0, "461415": 0, "461414": 0, "461413": 0, "461412": 0, "469999": 0, "469998": 0, "461421": 0, "469997": 0, "461420": 0, "469996": 0, "461419": 0, "469995": 0, "461418": 0, "461417": 0, "461416": 0, "470004": 0, "470003": 0, "470002": 0, "470001": 0, "470000": 0, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "696f9b7b-87d6-4931-a4e0-b10b32830179"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); An innovative open access publishing platform offering rapid publication and open peer review, whilst supporting data deposition and sharing. Browse Gateways Collections How it Works Contact For Developers Cookie Notice Privacy Notice RSS Submit Your Research Follow us © 2012-2026 F1000 Research Ltd. ISSN 2046-1402 | Legal | Partner of Research4Life • CrossRef • ORCID • FAIRSharing R.templateTests.simpleTemplate = R.template(' $text $text $text $text $text '); R.templateTests.runTests(); var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "f1000research", displayName: "F1000Research", hostName: "f1000research.com", id: "1", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]", usePmcStats: true }); $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-authors, .dropdown-for-about, .dropdown-for-myresearch');}); // $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-referees');}); $(document).ready(function () { if ($(".cookie-warning").is(":visible")) { $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "35px"); $(".devices").addClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); } $(".cookie-warning .close-button").click(function (e) { $(".devices").removeClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "0"); }); $("#tweeter-feed .tweet-message").each(function (i, message) { var self = $(message); self.html(linkify(self.html())); }); $(".partner").on("mouseenter mouseleave", function() { $(this).find(".gray-scale, .colour").toggleClass("is-hidden"); }); }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); });