ECOPOPULIS PARADIGM IN PEAT LAND MANAGEMENT IN BARITO KUALA DISTRICT

The environmental crisis is getting worse these days, resulting in a debate about the paradigm of natural resource management to emerge. The aspiration for sustainable natural resource management is getting stronger from civil society movements and the wider community. The purpose of this research is to describe eco-populist thoughts and actions in peatland management and to strengthen the position of the eco-populist paradigm as the right paradigm in peatland management. This research is qualitative research with a case study approach, namely research conducted intensively, in detail and in-depth on a problem that is the object of research. The results of this study contribute to a fundamental-philosophical error in peatland management. Promote a sustainable perspective on peatland management based on local knowledge, reinforced by paradigmatic studies. A perspective that harmonizes ecological and human (community) interests. Not a viewpoint that ignores certain subsystems. In natural resource politics, there are at least three paradigms. First, the conservationist paradigm, which places natural resources solely for conservation. Second, the developmentalistic paradigm, which views natural resources as development assets. Third, the eco-populistic paradigm, which is a holistic perspective that humans, flora and fauna and their environment are one ecosystem. The loss of one element shakes the joints of the other component. Peat management is one of the world's highlights today. The critical issue is that climate change is linked to the destruction of peat due to unsustainable management. Until now, peatland management is still dominant with a developmentalism cum conservationist paradigm. So it is necessary to strengthen paradigmatic in sustainable peatland management.


INTRODUCTION
In the midst of the current worsening environmental crisis, debates regarding the paradigm of natural resource management are increasingly emerging. The aspiration for sustainable natural resource management is getting stronger from both civil society movements and from the wider community. According to Naes, the current environmental crisis can only be resolved by changing the way humans perceive and act towards nature fundamentally and radically. This means that an environmental ethic is needed that guides humans to interact in new ways in the universe. Changing the fundamental-philosophical error in understanding the way humans perceive themselves, nature and the position of humans in the entire ecosystem (Keraf, 2010).
Human behavior to policies in environmental management will always depart from a human paradigm or perspective on the functions of the ecosystem as a whole, including humans themselves. Or, the environmental crisis that is happening today is a consequence of a failure to understand the position of man and the ecological function of all material elements in the universe. Therefore, the academic world is required to find a new paradigm or strengthen one that is believed to be able to overcome ethical dilemmas in natural resource management. According to Witter and Bitmer (2005), in natural resource politics there are at least three paradigms. First, the conservationistic paradigm, which places natural resources solely for conservation. Second, the developmentalistic paradigm, which views natural resources as development assets. Third, the eco-populistic paradigm, which is a holistic viewpoint that humans, flora and fauna and their environment are one ecosystem. The loss of one element will shake the joints of the other elements (Cahyono, 2019).
Peat management is one of the world's highlights today. The important issue is that climate change is linked to the destruction of peat as a result of unsustainable management. As a country with a tropical climate, Indonesia is blessed with a vast tropical peatland ecosystem. In 2005, Wetlands International estimated that there were around 20.6 million hectares of peatland in Indonesia (Pantau Gambut, 2019). However, a report from the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (KLHK) shows that the majority of Indonesia's peat ecosystems are in a damaged state. Only around 181,142ha of peatland was in good condition in 2017, the rest was damaged to varying degrees. In fact, peatlands are the most efficient terrestrial ecosystems in storing carbon. Damage to the peat ecosystem will cause it to lose its hydrological and ecological functions which are important for nature (Tirto, 2020). Peatland productivity is highly dependent on human management and action. Peatlands are known as fragile or vulnerable to changes in unfavorable characteristics. Peatland management needs to be careful so as not to change its characteristics that cause a decrease in land productivity, let alone become unproductive (Masganti et al., 2010).
Different perspectives in seeing the peat community give rise to various social issues in the environment and the peat community. Not a few think that peat damage is inevitable because it is faced with the economic interests of the community which are considered contradictory to the interests of their protection. In addition, not a few also view peat as an area that is wide and unproductive. This makes it always a target object for large-scale projects, such as the opening of large-scale plantations, HTI and others. Peat communities are considered far from economic prosperity due to the lack of promising choices for economic activities to be developed on peatlands. Peat communities are also considered not to have the ability to develop technology for peatland management. So that only take advantage of what is obtained directly from nature (mixed style). Including the ability to carry out sustainable management which is considered weak. However, the above description contradicts the fact that peat communities have lived for hundreds of years on peat, manage it, and are able to sustain their lives, one of which is marked by the low rate of migration leaving the peat environment. On the other hand, the population of people living on peatlands is increasing, one of which is influenced by the transmigration program. The decline in the quality of life of the peat community and the degradation of the peat environment is actually significant after the perspective from the outside has increasingly eroded, which is marked by management models that fully carry a developmentalistic paradigm without paying attention to the characteristics of the peatlands. This conflict is an important issue facing the peat community and in the interest of protecting the sustainability of the peat. This matter needs to be studied comprehensively. This research focuses on various ideas and practices of peatland management carried out by the community based on an eco-populist perspective and strategies to defend it.

METHODOLOGY
This research is a qualitative research with a case study approach, namely research conducted intensively, in detail and in depth on a problem that is the object of research. In general, this research is divided into 3 stages, as follows: This stage includes preparatory work before conducting field research. At the beginning, the research team will prepare the needs for research implementation, namely: a) Conducting literature study to gather initial information needed for conducting field research. The information meant includes secondary data which may come from government agencies (Regency, District to Village) or civilian organizations that are active in Barito Kuala Regency. Apart from secondary data, the team will also collect literature relevant to the research topic; b) Designing and developing research instruments in order to be able to record the context of society in a comprehensive manner; c) After the materials have been collected and the instruments have been completed, the next task is to provide supplies or develop the enumerators' abilities that have been formed and will carry out field data search activities.

2)Fieldwork
Fieldwork is the process of conducting field research. The research team collected information based on the instruments that had been designed. Data collection was carried out through observation, focus group discussion (FGD) and in-depth interviews and making field notes. Then, the information found is grouped based on certain categories and variables in order to make it easier to carry out the next stage.

3)Post-fieldwork
The post-work will be carried out by the research team after all data are collected based on the categories that have been created. At this stage, the team will analyze the findings and write them down in the form of descriptions and narratives as well as comparing the two.
The data analysis in this study used the interactive model of Miles and Hubermann, which is a model consisting of three interactive processes. First, data reduction, which is the process of selecting, focusing, simplifying and abstracting data from various sources, for example from documents, field notes and so on. This is followed by the process of emphasizing, simplifying data, removing unnecessary data, determining focus and organizing data for drawing conclusions. Second, the presentation of data which is the process of compiling / assembling data and presenting it properly so that it is easier to understand. The form of presentation is in the form of tables, matrices, pictures / schemes and others. Third, draw conclusions after going through the testing process, which consists of a process of drawing initial conclusions that are still not strong, open and skeptical, and drawing final conclusions that are made after data collection ends and the testing process is carried out through a negotiation / consensus process between subjects, discuss with historians and check data between members.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Policy is a collection of behavior, the pattern of which is determined by the paradigm that exists in humans (society). Until now, the management of natural resources, including peatlands, is still dominant with a developmentalistic cum conservationistic paradigm. Seeing natural resources as merely an economic asset that needs to be managed to generate material benefits, without looking at the interests of the environment in a holistic manner. The condition of peat in Kalimantan, especially South Kalimantan, is experiencing extreme degradation. A management model that is fully oriented towards pursuing economic interests in the end only results in environmental degradation, climate crisis, to natural disasters that present material and material losses to society. It needs paradigmatic strengthening in sustainable peatland management. This is very important because it is the paradigm that forms a collection of behaviors which then creates policies as a tool to unify a sustainable movement (management). This research will explore the eco-populist thinking and behavior that exists in the community as a material basis in conceptualizing the idea of sustainable peatland management from an ecological-political perspective.
Environmental management cannot be separated from human interference, as well as humans are always side by side with their environment. When there is environmental damage or a disaster, it is humans who cause it, as a result, humans experience loss, meaning they return to humans themselves. Therefore, to better understand environmental ethics, it is necessary to explain Anthropocentrism and Ecocentrism as a way of looking at the position of the environment for humans or in life.

Antroposentrisme dan Ekosentrisme
Anthropocentrism is an understanding that colors the interaction between humans and the environment. Can not be separated from excessive human confidence by ignoring natural laws. Because this understanding has a passive character and depends on humans, while humans change with unlimited characteristics. There are 5 human characteristics that cannot be separated from Anthropocentrism, namely: a) The cournoupia view of nature, which is a view that assumes that nature is vast and inexhaustible, so that everyone can freely use it; b) Faith in technology, namely the belief that humans can optimally utilize nature with technology, and technological developments are believed to be able to overcome various natural damages that arise; c) Growth ethic, namely ethics of wanting to move forward, not being satisfied with everything they have, so that companies are challenged to produce new goods with the consequence of being exploited more and more natural resources; d) Materialism, namely an understanding that makes ownership of property and assets a measure of success; and, e) Individualism, namely attitudes and beliefs that emphasize personal encouragement without thinking about the interests and losses of other parties (Usman, 2012).
Anthropocentrism views humans as the center of the universal system. Humans and their interests are considered to be the most decisive in the ecosystem order and in the policies that are taken in relation to nature, either directly or indirectly. The highest value is people and their interests. Glaser distinguishes anthropocentric mind maps into two groups, namely absolute and moderate anthropocentrism. Absolute anthropocentrism views that nature has no purpose, nature only exists through the socio-cultural view of the observer and is a social construction. Meanwhile, moderate anthropocentrism emphasizes the main world view of "human domination over nature" and perceives nature only through its functions in fulfilling human needs as individuals and as a collective society (Glaser, 2006).
The world is not a collection of separate objects, but as a network of phenomena that are interconnected and fundamentally dependent on one another. Ecocentrism ethics recognizes the value of all creatures and views humans as nothing more than one part of the web of life. However, all living organisms in nature are feasible and must be maintained. Ecocentrism does not place all the elements in nature in a hierarchical or subordinated position. Rather, it is an organic unit that is dependent on one another. The environmental management model that carries ecocentrism ethics is when the social system is considered part of the natural system and / or social needs as subordinate to ecosystem requirements. The eco-centrism mind map is divided into two groups, namely absolute eco-centrism and moderate eco-centrism. Absolute ecocentric views man as "just another species" which does not have a higher value than his needs and priorities. It assigns rights and moral values to both the organism and the ecological system which renders its role independent of humanity. Meanwhile, the moderate ecocentric model views the relationship between humans and nature in terms of the influence caused by humans who exploit and degrade nature (Glaser, 2006).

Paradigma Eko-Populis
Behavior in environmental management is formed from a perspective (paradigm) of the environment (nature). The environmental ethics discussed in the previous section constructs a paradigm in natural resource management. Anthropocentrism mind map constructs a developmentalistic paradigm. Meanwhile, the absolute eco-centrism mind map constructs a conservationistic paradigm. The dominant eco-populist paradigm is constructed by a moderate ecocentrism mind map, which departs from deep ecological thinking that sees the function of the whole ecosystem and the position of humans. In this case it is inevitable that humans take advantage of the environment and at the same time degrade the environment. The eco-populist paradigm emphasizes the perspective that humans, flora and fauna and their environment are essentially one ecosystem. Nature is part of the ecosystem between plants and animals, as well as humans as a whole. As an antithesis of the trend of economic growth development patterns, which always emphasizes economic growth and is more of a developmentalistic paradigm, seeing natural resources as economic assets only (Cahyono, 2017).
In contrast to the conservationistic paradigm, the eco-populist paradigm pays more attention to the fate of people whose sources of life come from nature. The eco-populist paradigm is also related to the concept of human ecology, Terry Rambo, who explains that the reciprocal relationship between social systems and ecosystems through the exchange of energy, material and information can run well and orderly because of a balanced flow of input and output (Rambo, 1983). This research is based on the basic principle that in society there are actually various knowledge and wise behavior in natural resource management as a form of adaptation to the characteristics of the environment in which it is located. Communities have lived for hundreds or even thousands of years on peatlands, developing local knowledge and technology that enables them to survive. This is in line with the statement that the village is a conscious and active entity in producing knowledge as well as applying this knowledge for problem solving capacity, meeting needs and the process of responding to the dynamics of change (Salman, 2012). This research focuses on people's thoughts and actions in translating the eco-populist paradigm in peat management. As well as how these thoughts and actions become a value that is upheld and able to be maintained in the face of the expansion of thoughts that are contradictory to the eco-populist paradigm. The factors that strengthen them and the role of social institutions in maintaining these values. In the process, this research will place society as a subject of science, not as an object of experimentation. The final target of the entire research series is a thesis on sustainable peat management from a political ecology perspective that can intervene in peat governance, as well as a rationale for a sustainable community empowerment strategy.

CONCLUSION
After considering this investigation, we can come to the conclusion that solving the ethical dilemma of ecology in peatland management is a big task. Apart from academic interests, the results of this research will serve as a material basis for determining peatland management policies, as well as a basis for implementing community empowerment programs. To put it another way, the challenge is to find ways to formulate peatland management policies that satisfy social and environmental priorities while providing certainty for government.