Forests are central to ecological sustainability and local livelihoods, yet forest governance in Aceh is characterized by persistent contestation between customary institutions, such as Imuem Mukim, Geuchik/Reje, and the Aceh/Gayo Customary Councils on the one hand and state authorities on the other, despite legal formal recognition of customary rights through Constitutional Court Decision No. 35/2012 and the Aceh Governance Law No. 11/2006. This study examines how customary–state authority contestation is produced and negotiated through concrete governance mechanisms rather than overt conflict. Drawing on political ecology, legal pluralism and governance theories, this qualitative case study employs interviews, participant observation, focus group discussions, and document analysis in selected sites in Aceh. The findings suggest that contestation operates primarily through technical and procedural mechanism, including spatial mapping and zoning, permit regimes, documentary requirements, and social forestry programs. While customary authorities govern forests through socially embedded norms emphasizing moral obligation and collective stewardship, state actors exercise authority through bureaucratic instruments privileging legality, documentation, and development-oriented rationalities. These interactions generate an asymmetrical configuration of authority, in which customary institutions persist through negotiated and conditional incorporation. The study contributes to global debates on political ecology and legal pluralism by showing that forest sustainability and local community welfare depend on how institutional pluralism is managed in practice through negotiated co-governance arrangements.
Ilhamsyah et al. (Wed,) studied this question.