The Policy Practice is cross-posting some of the blogs from the ‘Ground Rules’ series, an initiative of the Land Facility Decision Support Unit that explores how ‘thinking and working politically’ can support more adaptive and effective programming in land governance and beyond. The series was curated in collaboration with the Land Portal Foundation.

Quick read:

• The Land Facility and Land Equity International (LEI) studied a community in Kampung Naga, West Java, Indonesia to assess how Hak Pengelolaan Lahan (HPL)—a form of customary land management rights—could better deliver on its goals.
• Political Economy Analysis (PEA) helped the researchers understand the power dynamics shaping outcomes and identify pathways for customary land recognition to translate into real benefits for communities.
• Over 18 months, formal recognition improved perceptions of tenure security, but did not lead to clear livelihood improvements.
• Perceptions of tenure security remained influenced by political and economic pressures, including planned infrastructure development in the area and misalignment between formal HPL boundaries and customary land use.
• To turn recognition into real protection, policies and interventions must engage with the wider political economy of land.

A case study from Indonesia offers a useful reminder for those working in land governance reform everywhere: if customary land rights are to translate into real protection and benefits for communities, reforms need to fully account for the wider political and economic forces shaping how land is governed on the ground.

That was the central message of a presentation by Renée Chartres, Senior Land and Legal Specialist at Land Equity International (LEI), at the 5th International Land Management Conference (ILM5) in London earlier this month. Drawing on research in Indonesia conducted under the Land Facility’s country support project, Renée explored how the dynamics of political economy influence whether customary tenure recognition actually delivers greater security and livelihood benefits for communities.

Her presentation spoke to a broader theme running through ILM5, and a message which many land practitioners integrate into their work on a daily basis: that land governance outcomes are shaped not just by public policy, laws, and ordinances, but also by power, incentives, competing land uses, and the institutions responsible for implementation. In other words, even strong legal reforms can fall short if implementation does not reflect local political and land use realities.

This is relevant in Indonesia, where legal pathways exist to claim customary land rights, yet communities still struggle to secure them in practice. Before a community can register its land, it must first be recognised as a Masyarakat Hukum Adat (MHA)— or a customary law community. This is a process that is often bureaucratic and politically driven, requiring extensive evidence and local approval. Where land overlaps with forests, infrastructure, or commercial interests, recognition becomes even harder.

Renée’s presentation focused on land management rights for customary land, set out under Indonesia’s Regulation 14/2024 to help customary communities secure customary land rights outside forest areas. In principle, land management rights or Hak Pengelolaan Lahan (HPL), offers a route for collective recognition and management of customary land, and also has other policy objectives – to improve livelihoods, environmental protections and support economic development across the country. 

But what happens in practice?

To help answer that question, the Land Facility supported a field study led by LEI in Kampung Naga, a traditional settlement in West Java. In May 2024, the community obtained HPL recognition over 1.39 hectares, covering the main settlement. Key livelihood areas, such as agricultural land, remained outside the recognised boundary, leaving much of the customary territory unprotected.

Heightened awareness

One clear takeaway from LEI’s study is that formal recognition improved perceptions of tenure security. The HPL certificate gave the community a level of legal acknowledgement from the state and reinforced its rights over the designated area. But the study also found that this did not lead to clear livelihood improvements during the 18-month research period.

The study also found that external pressures continued to shape local perceptions of security. Planned infrastructure development, including a national toll road near customary ritual sites outside the HPL area, highlights the ongoing vulnerability of surrounding land.

Another important takeaway was that the HPL framework did not fully reflect the community’s own spatial governance system. Kampung Naga follows customary land management principles rooted in the Sundanese philosophy of Tritangtu, which emphasises ecological balance and supports local food and water security. Yet many of the areas governed through these customary rules were left outside the formal designation.

Renée also highlighted several of the political economy dynamics that should be understood when pursuing customary tenure recognition in Indonesia. These include the political nature of MHA recognition, overlapping mandates across government institutions, legal pluralism between customary and state systems, and competing pressures linked to infrastructure, conservation, and investment. Trust also matters. Where there is limited mutual understanding between government actors and communities, implementation gaps can widen. 

Following the HPL recognition in Kampung Naga, government counterparts requested that the Land Facility project help provide a clearer understanding of how the HPL model can better deliver across its multiple objectives. Consistent engagement with government leaders who recognise the need for stronger evidence and data presents an opportunity to refine the model and improve its effectiveness on the ground.

Making sense of complexity

The Land Facility’s conscious and explicit use of political economy analysis (PEA) helps to articulate these underlying dynamics and provide a framework to explain why some reforms that look promising on paper may deliver only partial results in practice. PEA also helps identify what needs to change, whether that is better policy coordination, stronger trust-building, or recognition models that accurately reflect how customary territories are used and governed. Making these dynamics explicit helps move from implicit understanding to more deliberate, effective action.

For the Land Facility, this work is part of a broader effort in Indonesia to support more effective and inclusive customary land recognition. The programme supports the Government of Indonesia to accelerate customary land recognition while also generating evidence on how secure tenure can contribute to food security, sustainable land use, and more resilient livelihoods.

The Kampung Naga study shows that formal recognition is only a first step. To turn recognition into real protection, policies and interventions must engage with the wider political economy of land — including who decides, whose interests prevail, and whether recognition actually maps onto the lands and systems that communities rely on.

Related Links

Read more about Land Facility 

Read more about the Land Facility’s work in Indonesia

This material has been funded by UK International Development from the UK government; however, the authors’ opinions in the ‘Ground Rules’ blog series do not necessarily represent the UK government’s official policies, nor the Land Facility programme’s view on political economy. Rather, these blogs are part of the Decision Support Unit’s mandate to facilitate global learning and knowledge exchange that can inform best practices across the land and development world.

This blog has been cross-posted by The Policy Practice to ensure the Land Facility Decision Support Unit outputs remain accessible once the project closed in 2026. The full blog series can be found here