Geoparks are often recognized as premier tourism destinations due to their geological uniqueness. However, behind their environmentally friendly label and promise of sustainable development, geoparks also harbor serious issues related to land value and the power relations accompanying it.
Research by Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM) and Wageningen University, the Netherlands, indicates a tendency for geopark areas to become a site of land grabbing for tourism industry interests.
Dr. Rucitarahma Ristiawan, a lecturer at the Faculty of Cultural Sciences (FIB UGM), along with a research team from Wageningen University, the Netherlands, conducted research.
They investigated how the tourism industry shapes land value through a process of rural gentrification, which often leaves disparities.
“Geoparks seemingly become an ideal package for development projects, yet within them, a struggle for value and space occurs,” Dr. Ristiawan said on Wednesday (May 21).
In a study titled ‘Apprehending Land Value Through Tourism in Indonesia’, which was internationally published in the Quartile 1 (Q1) journal Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie in 2024, Dr. Ristiawan and the research team dissected how geoparks become new spaces for the commodification of rural landscapes.
This study not only examined spatial planning but also explored the political, economic, and cultural practices involved.
Their research confirmed that changes in land value are not solely due to market mechanisms. Instead, they result from power dynamics enacted within the framework of post-reform decentralized governance.
“We traced how local and regional actors negotiate with each other to benefit from rising land values, and who is actually marginalized in this process,” Dr. Ristiawan stated.
The research took case studies in two geoparks: Gunung Sewu Geopark in Yogyakarta and Ciletuh Palabuhanratu Geopark in Sukabumi, West Java.
Both were chosen because they reflect two contrasting development characters: one initiated top-down by local government, and the other driven by community initiatives supported by state-owned enterprises through corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs.
Despite differing actors, both show a similar pattern: agricultural and coastal lands previously considered unproductive are now transforming into villas, homestays, and tourist resorts.
Road infrastructure built by local governments accelerates access and simultaneously triggers a surge in land prices.
In Gunung Sewu, land prices even jumped from Rp30 thousand to Rp1 million per square meter in less than two decades.
“Geoparks open the door to investment, but also create a gap of inequality between capital owners and small communities,” Dr. Ristiawan noted.
However, this increase in land value does not occur in a neutral space. Local governments and local elite networks play a crucial role in regulating who can participate in tourism development.
The research noted how clientelistic practices, such as informal permits and project allocation to relatives, are commonplace in the dynamics of geopark development.
On the other hand, small-scale farmers and fishermen who lack social or economic capital slowly experience pressure to sell their land.
Or, they are forced to adapt to new conditions they did not choose.
“Those with connections to officials can bargain for land prices, even determine the location of resort development,” Dr. Ristiawan revealed.
Dr. Ristiawan explained that this study categorizes affected residents into three groups: those able to negotiate due to strategic land and political networks.
Next, middle groups who open small businesses while continuing to farm, and vulnerable groups who lack the capital to participate and are not strong enough to refuse.
Those in the latter group often face increased operational costs, disrupted land access, and even accident risks due to tourist traffic.
“We found that many farmers were forced to change their routes to their fields because the main roads had been taken over by tourist properties. Some even had traffic accidents while carrying their harvest because the roads were full of tourist vehicles,” Dr. Ristiawan explained.
Specifically in Gunung Sewu, UGM’s role became very significant, primarily through the participation of lecturers and academics from the Faculty of Geography and the Faculty of Cultural Sciences in the initial geopark planning.
The Gunung Sewu Karst Management Forum, which initiated the development of this geopark, consisted of a combination of local government officials, academics, and community representatives.
However, as the geopark developed, the direction of development shifted from conservation to economic orientation, making socio-ecological challenges more complex.
This study also recommends that universities like UGM continue to maintain a critical and active stance in overseeing social justice in geopark development.
“UGM had been present as a balancer between development needs and sustainability, but when massive investments started coming in, the technocratic approach slowly lost out to market logic,” Dr. Ristiawan explained.
This research highlights the significance of viewing geoparks not merely as tourism projects, but also as a venue for the contest over meaning and land ownership.
Land value is not only shaped by the market but also by narratives, policies, and power relations occurring at local and national levels.
In the Indonesian context, where patrimonial culture and clientelistic relations remain strong, geopark development can be a double-edged sword, opening opportunities while widening inequality.
“We want to open a space for critical discussion that not all development brings equitable benefits. Who benefits, who is marginalized, that must be the main question,” Dr. Ristiawan concluded.
Author: Triya Andriyani
Post-editor: Afifudin Baliya
Illustration: Kompas.com