Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries 2014; 3(4): 299-306 Published online September 20, 2014 (http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/aff) doi: 10.11648/j.aff.20140304.22 ISSN: 2328-563X (Print); ISSN:2328-5648 (Online) Analysis of rules in use the formation of committee boundary (PTB) state forest area in Indonesia Pernando Sinabutar 1 , Bramasto Nugroho 2 , Hariadi Kartodihardjo 2 , Dudung Darusman 2 1 Forest Center for Area Stabilization Region XII, Tanjungpinang, Indonesia 2 Forest Management Department, Bogor Agricultural University, Bogor, Indonesia Email address: damesinab@yahoo.co.id (P. Sinabutar), bramasto2001@yahoo.co.id (B. Nugroho), hkartodihardjo2000@yahoo.com (H. Kartodihardjo), ddarusman@yahoo.com (D. Darusman) To cite this article: Pernando Sinabutar, Bramasto Nugroho, Hariadi Kartodihardjo, Dudung Darusman. Analysis of Rules in Use the Formation of Committee Boundary (PTB) State Forest Area in Indonesia. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. Vol. 3, No. 4, 2014, pp. 299-306. doi: 10.11648/j.aff.20140304.22 Abstract: Forest area gazettment in Indonesia is done through the appointment process, boundary demarcation, mapping and determination of forest area. The process was organized by the Committee Boundary (PTB) with the involvement of several agencies in the area are coordinated by Forest Center for area stabilization (BPKH). This study analyzed the interaction of PTB in decision making and the effectiveness of the rules in-use the formation of PTB. Data were collected through in depth interviews, participant observation and document review, and then analyzed by using content analysis based IAD (Institutional Analysis and Development) Framework. The results show there has been a disparity in the interaction. Types of rules in-use the formation of PTB among others position rules, boundary rules, authority rules, agregation rules, information rules, scope rules, and pay-off rules have not been able to direct of interaction. The formation of PTB has not noticed the involvement of agencies setting, the setting position and authority, setting rights and obligations, and accountability arrangements. For improvements, the configuration of the seven types of rules that can be used because the results of the analysis showed that the seven types of rules that have found substantial weaknesses in the formation of PTB. Keywords: Forest Area Gazettment, PTB, Rules In-Use, Interaction 1. Introduction Characteristics of state forests as common pool resources (CPRs) requires effective arrangements that must be respected and enforced [37, 28]. It was intended to ensure ownership and control. It is a form of guarantee of legitimacy and is one of the important factors in the management of forests [10]. Legitimacy will be served to increase the successful management of natural resources including forests [37, 15], encouraging management to be effective CPRS [23] and encourage agricultural investment and boost economic growth in rural areas [38]. In Indonesia, the guarantees the ownership and control of state forest land is obtained through a confirmation process that starts from the forest area designation, boundary demarcation, mapping and forest area stipulation [32 article 12, 33 article 15, 22] the implementation is delegated to the Committee Boundary (PTB). One of the duties and authorities [21] is to determine the steps to resolve the rights of third parties stretch along the borders and in the forest. Duties and authority are confirmed also in the [22] which not only determines the steps to resolve, but also finishing third party rights (article 23). This means that the duty and authority of the PTB is to realize the legitimacy. However, the Government has not been able to provide the assurance of the control and management [14, 10], even the policy has been raising potential conflict since the very beginning [4]. This proves that the Government had a difficulty in achieving the legitimacy [1, 6, 25, 29]. Some studies suggested some activities which are able to guarantee the legality and legitimacy, for example [24] with claims verification activities, [4] to propose a formal legal approach through the scheme rural forest, community forest and social forestry, and [2] to build partnerships with the government to improve the ownership regime and [3] to strengthen the capacity of the community. The practice in Indonesia, some of the less implementable proposals for the