Decline of forest area in Sabah, Malaysia: Relationship to

state policies, land code and land capability

Author links open overlay panelJuliaMcMorrowaMustapa AbdulTalipb
Show more

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-3780(00)00059-5Get rights and content

Abstract
Forest decline in Sabah has resulted from state policies operating within the federal
context. Approximately two-thirds of Sabah's natural forest remains but estimates vary
with the data source. Logging and shifting cultivation have degraded forest quality but
commercial estate agriculture, especially oil palm, is now the major cause of forest loss,
aided by Sabah's land tenure code and the ethnic equality and modernisation agendas
of national and state agriculture policy. The pattern of forest decline is explained by
partitioning of the land resource between gazetted Forest Reserves and land alienated
to agriculture, guided by the 1976 land capability classification.
 Previous article in issue
 Next article in issue

Keywords
Deforestation
Malaysia
Land tenure
Land use policy

1. Introduction
Loss and degradation of tropical forests is a significant policy issue at global, national
and local scales. Concerns range from economic to environmental and social, focusing
on timber resources, non-timber products, environmental services, biodiversity, wildlife
and human communities (Grainger, 1993; Pearce and Brown, 1994; Turner et al.,
1995). Forest decline or depletion includes true deforestation, defined as the permanent
loss of forest cover to non-forest land cover by agri-conversion, and degradation of
forest condition to other wooded land by shifting cultivation, logging and other forms of
disturbance (FAO, 1981). During the 1980s Asia lost 11% of its tropical forest cover,
more than any other region (FAO (1987), FAO (1995); WRI, 1996). According to the
definition by Wood (1990), Malaysia is one of the 14 major deforesting countries with
over 250,000 ha deforested annually. Malaysia, comprising Peninsular Malaysia and the
large East Malaysian states of Sabah and Sarawak in the island of Borneo, has tropical
moist forests that are floristically the richest in the world. They contain some 10% of all
known plant species. Sabah has 265 of the 390 dipterocarp species in Southeast Asia
(Whitmore, 1984; Collins et al., 1991).
Until 1997 Malaysia experienced very rapid GDP growth, reaching 8% per annum for
the period 1990–1995, which was amongst the highest anywhere in the low latitudes
(Brookfield and Byron, 1990). In Sabah, growth has been achieved by development of
land resources. Agriculture and forestry have been the backbone of the State's
economy (Pang, 1989; Mustapha, 1994). In 1967, they contributed 55% of GDP,
significantly more than industry and services. By 1990 they had declined to 38% and
were projected to decline further to about 32% by the year 2000. Nevertheless, they are
still the largest sector of the economy.
By the late 1980s half of Peninsular Malaysia's forests and a fifth of Borneo's had been
cleared. Brookfield and Byron (1990) identify the three proximal drivers of this land
cover change in the region; the timber industry, shifting cultivation and agri-conversion
to permanent cultivation of cash crops on private estates and government-funded land
development schemes. Their relative importance differs within Malaysia, from agri-
conversion in the Peninsula to shifting cultivation and logging in East Malaysia (Gillis,
1988). These differences arise because states retain autonomy over the land resource
under Malaysia's federal constitution. As political ecologists argue, causes and patterns
of forest decline must be analysed in terms of social, political and economic factors
operating at a local scale (Bryant, 1992; Bryant, 1997; Taylor and Garcia-Barrios, 1997).
The Land Use and Land Cover science/research plan also argues for local-scale
studies of the human drivers of land use and land cover change (Turner et al., 1995).
This paper analyses the extent and causes of forest decline in Sabah. The discussion is
prefaced by an explanation of the federal context, the institutional actors in state land
use planning and the role of three critical policy instruments; land alienation and
gazettement, the land capability classification (LCC) and the land tenure system as
enshrined in the land code. Forestry, shifting cultivation and commercial agriculture are
examined as causes of forest decline. The applicability of global theories of
deforestation to Sabah is discussed and future prospects for Sabah's forests are briefly
examined.

2. Institutional actors
2.1. Federal context

Land use planning operates within the context of federal policy but ultimate control of
the land resource is a state matter. The National Forest Policy 1977 and 1984
recommend that each state designate 47% of its land area as Permanent Forest Estate
in legally enacted Forest Reserves serving three functions: sustainable production of
timber and non-timber products; protection of soil, water and wildlife, and provision of
amenity. Federal recommendations on afforestation are also significant; almost one-
third of the area deemed suitable for plantation forest is in Sabah (IDS online, 1999a).
Sabah's land use planning is indirectly influenced by national economic development
policy. The State Development Department of the Chief Minister's Office formulates
Sabah's economic policy within the context of national policy.1 National agricultural
policy has also influenced the rate of forest loss in Sabah, as will be demonstrated later.
Conflicts can arise between federal and state departments.2
Three main institutional players manage the state's land resource, the Sabah Forest
Department, the Department of Agriculture and the Land and Survey Department.
Fragmentation of responsibility for the land resource between these three departments
has resulted in duplication of land use and land cover mapping and GIS data base
development.

2.2. Sabah Forest Department

The Sabah Forest Department's objective is to manage and use forest resources
rationally to maximise social, economic and environmental benefits for the state. State
forest policy is to preserve as Permanent Forest Reserve (PFR) sufficient forest to
serve the three functions of protection, production and amenity (Fig. 1). Potential conflict
between these functions is minimised by spatially zoning PFRs into seven classes,
although some classes serve multiple functions (Table 1). The department is both
steward and developer of the forest resource.3 Its success in achieving sustainable use
will be addressed later.
1. Download full-size image
Fig. 1. Natural forests, plantation forests and major crops in Sabah. Sources: natural
and plantation forests map in Sabah Forest Department (undated, ca. 1991). Major
crops from map supplied by Department of Agriculture Sabah, May 1998.

Table 1. Functions and area of permanent Forest Reserves in Sabah, 1996a

% of
1996 Area % of permanent
Class Type Function Sabah's
(ha) Forest Reserve
land area
Protection Safeguarding of water supply, soil
I 283,376 8 3.8
Forest Reserve fertility, environmental quality
Commercial Supply of timber and other forest
II 2,743,959 76 37.2
Forest Reserve products to generate state revenue
Domestic Forest Supply of timber and other forest
III 7,355 <1 0.1
Reserve products for local population
Amenity Forest Recreation, education, research,
IV 20,767 1 0.3
Reserve protection of flora and fauna
 % of
1996 Area % of permanent
Class Type Function Sabah's
(ha) Forest Reserve
land area
Supply of mangrove timbers and
Mangrove
V other produce. Protection of marine 316,024 9 4.3
Forest Reserve
life and environment
Virgin jungle Research and conservation of gene
VI 90,366 3 1.2
reserve pools
Wildlife Protection of wildlife (first
VII 132,653 4 1.8
Reserve constituted 1984)
Total 3,594,520 100 48.8

a
Sources: IDS online http://www.ids.org.my/idsonline/Timber/p.9.htm. Sabah Forest Department
(1989). Mannan and Awang (1997, Table 13, p. 67).

2.3. Sabah Department of Agriculture

The Sabah Department of Agriculture (SDoA) is a major institutional actor in the

competition for Sabah's forest land. Its objectives are to accelerate agricultural and rural
development by increasing the efficiency and the growth rate of agriculture; motivate
farmers to increase their productivity and income; diversify into higher value-added agri-
based industry; and improve self-sufficiency in food production (Liew et al., 1994; Sabah
Government, 1991a).4 Whilst improvements in efficiency reduce new forest loss,
accelerating agricultural growth rate exerts further pressure to convert forest.

2.4. Sabah Land and Survey Department

The Land and Survey Department implements government policy to optimise land use,
eradicate poverty through strategic alienation of land and balance development and
conservation of natural resources (Sabah Government, 1999b). It oversees land
alienation in accordance with the land code.5
3. Policy instruments
Three policy instruments help to explain the incentive for and broad pattern of forest
decline in Sabah:
Land alienation and gazettement, the process by which the land resource is partitioned between forestry
(i)
and agriculture;
(ii) Land capability classification (LCC), guiding the allocation of land to these categories;
(iii) The land code, which, in specifying conditions of land tenure, acts as an incentive for forest conversion.

3.1. Land alienation and gazettement

Land is partitioned into five land categories (Table 2) (Thomas et al., 1976).
Gazettement is the process of allocating land to Forest Reserve or other type of reserve
while degazettement is excision of reserves to Stateland (SL).6 Land alienation is the
on-going process of leasing surface rights to land to individuals or companies for
agriculture under one of five types of land title (Table 3). Only SL can be alienated to
private ownership so that the existence of PFRs has limited the extent of forest loss to
permanent agriculture. The land alienation and gazettement map is dynamic; Forest
Reserves are relatively stable but SL is progressively being leased to Alienated Land.
Table 2. Land alienation and gazettement categories in Sabah

Land not allocated for government or private use. Owned by the state and available for use as a
Stateland (SL)
common property resource under native customary right or application for land title.
Land gazetted to Permanent Forest Estate under the 1984 Forest Enactment for timber
Forest
production, water protection, conservation and amenity under the stewardship of the Sabah
Reserve
Forestry Department. Also includes game reserves and national parks.
Stateland allocated to private ownership for agricultural land use only. Land title is granted
under the Land Alienation Policy and Procedures 1963 and the New Land Alienation Policy
Alienated land
and Procedures Act 1976 to the five types of land title or to settlement schemes, village
reserves and Native Reserves for communal use.
Land gazetted for various state use including airports, educational, military, quarry,
Government
agricultural, bird sanctuary, water supply and tamu grounds (rural market places). Includes
Reserve
Native Reserves designated for communal use by natives.

Table 3. Land titles in Sabah

Town Lease Land alienated to highest bidder at a public auction. Normally 60 years with a maximum of 99.
Land alienated for agricultural use for 99 years to any ethnic group or nationality. Rent and
optional premium payable depending on value of timber and quality of the land. Commitment to
Country
cultivate within six months, the minimum proportion being brought into cultivation depending on
Lease
size of the lease: within 3 years for <40 ha, within 5 for 40–250 ha and determined by the
Minister for >250 ha. Disposed of in lots at public auction to any ethnic group or nationality.
Provisional
Country Lease not yet accurately surveyed.
Lease
Land alienated to natives in perpetuity for agriculture. Cultivation must begin within 6 months
Native Title
and complete by 3 years. Normally up to 20 ha per person. Rent-free for 6 years. Title only to be
(NT)
passed to natives.
Field
NT pending. Title recognised but boundaries of area not guaranteed.
Register

The 1963 Land Alienation Policy and Procedures made timber on agricultural land a
state asset. Proceeds of pre-logging on newly alienated land were credited to the
development fund, acting as a fiscal incentive to the State for forest conversion.

3.2. Land capability classification

Land capability classification (LCC) categories and maps (Table 4)7 prepared for the
1976 Land Resources Survey (Thomas et al., 1976) continue to guide the allocation of
land use. LCC mapping rested on the basic assumption that mining was more profitable
than agriculture, and both were more profitable than forestry. The priority of land use
allocation was mining, agriculture, forestry and recreation/wildlife, in accordance with
the perceived order of highest monetary return. The aim was solely to maximise
probable economic gain from the land resource given moderate levels of management.
Factors such as biodiversity, accessibility, social benefit, land ownership and the (then)
current land use did not influence the grading. Despite the fact that environmental
issues have moved up the political agenda, the LCC categories remain unchanged and
continue to be used in land use allocation.
Table 4. Land capability classesa

I High potential for mineral development and therefore best suited to mining
II High potential for agriculture with a wide range of crops and therefore best suited to diversified agriculture
Moderate potential for agriculture with a restricted range of crops and therefore best suited to a limited
III
range of crops with a high tolerance to a range of soil conditions
IV No mining or agricultural potential, but a potential for forest exploitation and best suited to this purpose
No potential for mining or agricultural or forest exploitation and generally best suited for conservation or
V
recreational purposes.

a
Source: Thomas et al. (1976, Vol. 1, p. 26).

The LCC influences the partitioning of Sabah's land resource between agriculture and
forestry by policy-makers and the choice of agricultural land by investors.8 Alienated
land is found mainly on LCC classes II and III. The New Land Alienation Policy and
Procedures 1976 restricted smallholders to pre-planned areas of SL identified as
suitable for agriculture. Applicants were offered lots in these pre-planned areas and
applications for other areas were discouraged unless customary tenure was being
claimed. During the cocoa boom of the late 1970s and early 1980s, LCC maps sold well
to private investors seeking the most suitable land for development. The LCC maps
continue to guide recent degazettement proposals (John Maluda, Yayasan Sabah, pers.
comm, May 1999).

3.3. The land code

The State's land code evolved from the commercial imperatives of securing land title to
plantations for foreign investors, the colonial preference for private ownership over
native communal practices, and the need to expand revenues from forest exploitation
(Cleary and Eaton, 1996; Cleary, 1997). The principal statutory instrument regulating
the occupation of land and its alienation is the Land Ordinance Sabah Chapter 68
(1930) and amendments.9
In addition to five de jure registered land titles (Table 3), the Sabah land code also
recognises de facto Native Customary Land Rights (NCR) of all ethnic groups on all
non-alienated land, including Forest Reserves, provided that occupancy can be proven
to pre-date the 1984 Forest Enactment. NCR includes burial grounds, shrines, rights of
way, grazing land, any land planted with fruit trees or other plants tended for their
economic value and land cultivated or built on within three years by any ethnic group.
NCR also includes land possessed by native Malays (bumiputera) under ‘customary
tenure’, defined as the lawful possession of land by bumiputera either by continuous
occupation or cultivation for three or more consecutive years.10 It confers a permanent
heritable and transferable right of use and occupancy to bumiputerasubject to
obligations of cultivating the land and giving labour free for communal land maintenance
known as gotong-royong.
All three departments participate in the land alienation process.11 Unlike Sarawak, pre-
existing native rights are considered. Before alienating land, notice must be given to
allow NCR claims to be made and those with valid claims are given compensation or
grant of other land under NT or communal land title for village use.
The land code has favoured agriculture over other uses and, more significantly, the
conversion of forest to permanent cash crops. Until recently all categories of alienated
land except Town Lease could only be used for agriculture. NCR permits shifting
cultivation on logged-over forest even in PFRs, but two conditions of land titles
discourage traditional subsistence shifting cultivation. The time limit for bringing
alienated land into cultivation and the requirement that at least a third must be cultivated
for three years to prevent alienated and customary tenure land from being reclaimed by
the state, both discourage the use of alienated land for long fallow subsistence shifting
cultivation and encourage fruit tree cultivation or other cash crops on forest fallow land. 12
Except for Country Lease and NCR, the land code favours bumiputera. The restriction
that NT can only be granted and passed down to bumiputera has helped to prevent land
speculation and restrict foreign land ownership to land under Country Lease. Since the
New Land Alienation Policy and Procedures Act 1976 Country Lease estates must be
49% bumiputera-owned. The motive was to assist natives yet keep land from falling
permanently into non-native hands. Recent 1989 amendments to the Land Ordinance
have begun to reduce the pro-agriculture and ethnic bias.13
 4. Forest decline in Sabah
Having described the institutional actors and key instruments in Sabah's land policy,
forest decline can now be discussed in the appropriate legal context.

Sabah has experienced a decline in both the extent and quality of its forest cover.
Charting deforestation and degradation of forest resource is complicated by the variety
of definitions of ‘forest’ and, consequently, the difficulty of comparing like-with-like
(Melillo et al., 1985; Grainger, 1993). Definitions vary with the organisation and the data
source (Appendix).

4.1. Declining forest area

Prior to the 1890s when colonial exploitation of Sabah's forests began there would have
been an almost complete cover of lowland dipterocarp, montane, swamp and mangrove
forest. Today forest covers about 60% of the state (Fig. 1). Depletion of the forest began
in the 1890–1930 period with logging, tobacco and rubber plantations under the colonial
administration of the British North Borneo chartered company (John, 1974; Cleary,
1992). By 1953, natural forest covered 86% of Sabah (Fox, 1978) but by 1981 this had
fallen to 68% (FAO, 1981) and to 63% by 1984 (Collins et al., 1991). Over a third of the
natural forest had been lost in a century, most of this in the 1970s and early 1980s (Fig.
2).

1. Download full-size image

Fig. 2. Forest Reserve and natural forest in Sabah, 1953–1996. Sources: 1953: Fox
(1978). 1975: Mannan and Awang (1997, Table 1, p. 52). 1980: FAO (1981, p. 35 and
295–305). Gillis (1988, Table 3.5, p. 121). 1982: Collins et al. (1991, p. 206).
1984: Collins et al. (1991, p. 206). 1986: Miller Munang (1987, Annex 1, p. 36). 1990:
Sabah Forest Department (undated, ca. 1991). 1992: Mustapa Talip
(1996). Department of Statistics Malaysia (1993, p. 91). 1996: Mannan and Awang
(1987, Table 13, p. 67).

The introduction of legally constituted Forest Reserves under the Forest Enactment
1968 and 1984 helped to limit conversion of forest to permanent agriculture to SL and
alienated land, slowing the overall pace of forest loss since the mid-1980s. The loss of
natural forest outside the PFR has been dramatic. Analysis of land use tables
in Thomas et al. (1976) shows that in 1973 natural forest cover was equally distributed
between Forest Reserve (49%) and land outside PFRs (51%). By 1992 forest cover
outside PFRs had fallen to 15% (Department of Statistics Malaysia, 1993).
There have been some small losses and gains of Forest Reserve. Some 220,000 ha
(6%) of the 1982 Forest Reserve was lost in the 1984 Forest Enactment. 14 For instance,
in a 3000 sq km study area in eastern Sabah, two thirds of the Forest Reserve was
degazetted between 1970 and 1987. Approximately 10% of the 1970 forest land cover
class was converted to permanent crops in the same period, mostly on the former
Forest Reserve (McMorrow et al., 1996).
By 1984 the forest area inside PFR had stabilised at 45% of the State's land area with a
further 4% in national parks but forest outside continued to be converted. Forest
Department policy has been to increase the PFR to 50% of the land area (Collins et al.,
1991). This was almost achieved by 1996 but current proposals are to reduce it to 46%.

4.2. Declining forest quality

The composition of the forest has changed between its five types: undisturbed high
forests (old-growth); montane forest; mangrove; transitional, beach and swamp forests;
and immature regenerating forests (Fig. 3). Although Sabah is still heavily forested by
regional standards, relatively little undisturbed forest remains (Marsh and Greer, 1992).
Since 1975 the area of primary forest fell from 2.8 m ha (60% of the land area) to
0.3 m ha in 1995, a depletion rate of 125,000 ha pa (Mannan and Awang, 1997).
Disturbed (immature and regenerating) forest doubled over the same period (1.4–
2.8 m ha, 70,000 ha pa) (Fig. 3). There has been even greater loss (98–15%) of virgin
forest in commercial class II Forest Reserves (Fig. 4). If the trend continues, all the old-
growth forests will be worked out by the year 2010.
1. Download full-size image
Fig. 3. Change in natural forest types in Sabah 1975–1995. Source: Source: Mannan
and Awang (1997, Table 1, p. 52).

1. Download full-size image

Fig. 4. Reduction in virgin forest within commercial (class II) Forest Reserves in Sabah,
1970–2000. Source: Mannan and Awang (1997, Table 2, p. 53) and IDS Online
http://www.ids.org.my/idsonline/Timber/page7#Virgin Forest Class II. 1996 provisional.
1998 and 2000 estimated.

5. Logging-led forest decline

Logging has played a significant role in the degradation and loss of Malaysian forests in
direct and indirect ways (Gillis, 1988). Harvesting timber causes degradation rather than
deforestation (FAO, 1981). Extraction rates of up to 90 and even 120 m3 ha−1 are among
the highest rates in the tropics (Collins et al., 1991; Marsh and Greer, 1992). World
demand for Sabah's hardwood timber soared after 1970, especially from Japan's wood-
processing industry. The timber's competitive advantage comes from its density, quality,
ease of access and the similarity of timber properties allowing it to be marketed under a
few commercial groups (Whitmore, 1984).
Trends in volume of timber extraction have been used as a proxy for area deforested
(Brookfield and Byron, 1990). The volume of Sabah's timber exports more than trebled
between 1963 and 1977. It fell in the 1980s but was still more than twice the 1963
volume, confirming the doubling of the area of disturbed forest in Fig. 4.
The Forest Department admit that Sabah's forests have not been managed rationally
and that yield is not sustainable; ‘… by and large, sustainable forest management has
not been practised in Sabah, with the exception of one little corner of her forests,
Deramakot’ (Mannan and Awang, 1997, p. 51). Short licences of 21–25 years in
commercial Forest Reserve and special licences of 5 years outside the PFR on SL have
discouraged sustainable yield management. The old Malayan Uniform monocyclic
logging system of complete extraction on a 70–80 year rotation was replaced by a
selective one, harvesting trees of >60 cm diameter at breast height (DBH) on a 60 year
rotation, but 45–75% of the residual stand is damaged (Whitmore, 1984) and
enforcement has been weak.
The structure of rents has maximised short-term economic benefit but jeopardised long-
term yield and forest quality (Gillis, 1988). Ad valorem progressive royalties on logs and
volume-based cess (export duty) for sawn timber encourage ‘high grading’ or creaming
off of the best timber; larger areas are logged to maintain the required volume, and
lower grade stems are bypassed but damaged (Gillis, 1988). The first forest inventory of
1969/1970 acted as a treasure map. As Mannan and Awang (1997, p. 51) said, ‘We
have chosen to eat dessert first.’ Premature re-entry will ensure the collapse of the
productive capacity of the forests by the year 2020 unless the policy of sustainable
forest management in forest management units developed at Deramakot can be
successfully applied to the whole PFR. The recent introduction of reduced impact
logging, helicopter logging and the ITTO Year 2000 Objective should help to reduce
forest degradation but, unless ‘green timber’ fetches higher prices, rents will fall
drastically to one-sixth of their present level (to Ringgit Malaysia (RM$) 10 million)
(Mannan and Awang, 1997). Given the recent economic crisis, this is likely to reinforce
calls for degazettement of Forest Reserve to oil palm estates.
Logging has been a catalyst to forest degradation and loss in three indirect ways.
Logging creates secondary forest. Under NCR, clearance for agriculture is tolerated on
any secondary forest that is not alienated to private ownership. Thus, logging and the
land code together encourage further disturbance of logged-over forest by shifting
cultivators. Second, logging access roads have been the foci for shifting cultivators and
agri-conversion. Third, timber harvesting makes forests more flammable due to the
increased woody debris, drier microclimate and access roads which act as foci for
accidental ignition (Woods, 1989). Logged-over forest burnt more extensively in the
1982/1983 El Niño drought-related fires (Beaman et al., 1985; Malingreau et al., 1985).
Loss of timber stock in the fires may have been an incentive to degazettement in
eastern Sabah (Douglas et al., 1995).
Forestry has been the backbone of Sabah's economy. Export earnings and revenue
from fiscal levies have indirectly financed agricultural development and forest
conversion on land outside PFRs. Since 1977, logs and, to a much smaller extent, sawn
timber have accounted for about 41% of Sabah's total exports. The timber export boom
lasted from the mid-1970s until 1984 when world timber prices crashed (Gillis, 1988).
The policy of very high rent capture, especially timber royalties, has been even more
important. Fiscal levies accounted for half to two-thirds of state revenue in the 1970s,
61–71% in the 1980s and about 50% or RM578 million in 1996 (Mustapa Talip,
1996; IDS online, 1999b; IDS online, 1999c). Timber revenue is retained by the state
whereas 95% of Sabah's oil revenue goes to the federal government so the importance
of the forest industry to Sabah's economy, and consequently to forest decline, is even
greater than export statistics suggest (Collins et al., 1991).
6. Shifting cultivation–led forest decline
Opinions differ on whether shifting cultivation has been a significant agent of
deforestation in Sabah. While it is of little significance in Peninsular Malaysia, it was at
one time of major significance in Borneo, where it was practiced by a quarter to one-
third of the island's population (Brookfield and Byron, 1990). In 1989 it was estimated
that 30% of Sabah's population were involved in shifting cultivation (Sabah Forest
Department, 1989). Today the figure is probably lower as policies of rural poverty
alleviation and agricultural modernisation encourage a change to permanent cultivation
and cash cropping.
Brookfield et al. (1995) believe that shifting cultivation's contribution to environmental
degradation in Borneo in the past and now is smaller than that of the modern timber
industry. In contrast, Gillis (1988) asserts that in Sabah, as in Sarawak, shifting
cultivation has been generally identified as a leading cause of deforestation, citing FAO
(1981) estimates for 1980 that 3,650,000 ha (60%) of the forest estate had been
affected by shifting cultivation, while logged-over forest covered only 1,280,000 ha
(18%). Yet six years later, Miller Munang's (1987) detailed analysis of natural forest
resources flow for the end of 1986 suggested that logging was more significant in areal
terms; 2,249,400 ha had been logged (50%) and 1,105,000 ha (25%) had undergone
shifting cultivation. The 1991 radar land cover map puts the current area of shifting
cultivation at only 21,550 ha, but this excludes land under forest fallow which is mapped
as scrub forest.
Clearly, the figures depend on how shifting cultivation is defined and the ability of the
data source (typically aerial photography and satellite images) to distinguish it from
other forms of disturbance. Shifting cultivation is an extremely diverse set of agricultural
systems in which patches of forest, usually secondary, are cleared, burned and planted
for 1–3 years before being left to regenerate under forest fallow. The proportion of
cultivated to fallow land can vary from <33 to >75% and fallow may be agro-forestry,
shrub or grassland (Brookfield et al., 1995). Shifting cultivation therefore grades into
other land use classes and is associated with a variety of land cover types. Detection,
recognition and identification of shifting cultivation on remotely sensed images depends
on the spatial resolution of a digital image in relation to the plot size, which is typically
sub-pixel or less than the minimum mappable unit from aerial photography. Not
surprisingly, estimates vary widely with working definition and data source, as well as
with the political agenda of the organisation.
Divergent opinions are partly also explained by the location of case studies. Shifting
cultivation is concentrated on the west coast, Kudat and the interior and is rare in the
east. However, a much more fundamental question is the time scale over which the
disturbance is considered; shifting cultivation destroys forest cover over a short time
scale, but the longer the time scale, the greater the chances of regeneration to old-
growth forest. Miller Munang (1987) refers to 1.1 million ha, 15% of Sabah or 25% of the
1986 forest area as having been ‘destroyed’ by shifting cultivation. However, only 37%
of this was current clearance, 5% was grassland and 58 % was actually regenerating
forest. Shifting cultivation does cause forest disturbance and permanent land cover
change to grassland in some locations. However, only when land use and land cover
trajectories of individual land parcels are traced over time, can firm conclusions be
drawn about the permanence of the forest loss. Ecological consequences depend on
the length of fallow, and hence on population pressure, and on site-specific factors of
soil, climate and slope.
The contribution of shifting cultivation to deforestation is a politically loaded issue
(Brookfield et al., 1995). Some believe it to be extremely wasteful of resources
especially loggers, who criticise it for burning valuable timber, although the cultivators
normally favour secondary forests. Others believe it to be sustainable, at least at low
population densities and as a subsistence system (e.g. Padoch, 1982; Cramb,
1989; Sather, 1990). It is seen as culturally backward, of low agricultural productivity
and associated with poverty. The first New Agricultural Policy 1984 and the second New
Agricultural Policy 1992–2010 aimed to alleviate rural poverty by modernising
agriculture, essentially replacing extensive shifting cultivation with intensive permanent
agriculture and cash crops (Abdul Rahman and Noor, 1993). Small-holders are
increasingly being incorporated into the cash economy through in situ agricultural
extension programmes and crop subsidies from SDoA and KPD, Sabah's rural
development agency (Yapp et al., 1988, Sutton and McMorrow, 1998).
Ironically, the introduction of cash crops such as Shiitake mushrooms that require
regular watering has led to continuous cultivation of hill rice plots close to home to save
time, so reducing their chances of regeneration to forest (Nyuk Wo Lim and Douglas,
1998). Equally, off-farm male labour has meant that women with young children do not
have time to cultivate hill rice plots far from the house and plots close by are over-used
(Nyuk Wo Lim, 1998). In these areas it seems that the introduction of cash crops has
encouraged a less sustainable form of shifting cultivation, resulting in permanent forest
loss concentrated into a smaller area.
7. Commercial agriculture-led forest decline
By definition, agri-conversion is deforestation (FAO, 1981). It has been important in
Peninsular Malaysia but less so in Sabah (Gillis, 1988, p. 119). However, SDoA
statistics show that it has become increasingly important in Sabah in the 1980s and
1990s. The estimated area under cultivation has more than doubled in 14 years from
6% of the state's land area in 1983 to 16% by 1997. (Fig. 5). Land titles had been
registered for 18% of the state in 1995. More than three-quarters of this land was
Country Lease or Provisional Lease (analysis of SDoA statistics from IDS Online,
1999e). Most land must be brought under cultivation within the five year time limit, so
that the projected cultivated area will be at least 18% of Sabah by the new millennium.
 The upper limit for agriculture based on soil suitability is 30%, mainly located in the east
(Thomas et al., 1976), where, agricultural development is already concentrated (Fig. 1).

1. Download full-size image

Fig. 5. Cultivated area in Sabah, 1983–1997. Source: Agricultural Statistics of Sabah
1983–1984, 1985–1986, 1987–1988, 1989–1990, 1991–1992, 1993–1994, Department
of Agriculture, Kota Kinabalu. 1995 figures from analysis of District profiles on IDS
Online (1999d). 1996 and 1997 figures from Final Draft of Agricultural Statistics of
Sabah, 1996–1997. Department of Agriculture, Kota Kinabalu, 1999.

Sabah's rural development policy, and thus its land use, land cover and rate of forest
decline, have been strongly influenced by the first and second New Agricultural Policies.
The twin aims of alleviating rural poverty and revitalising the agricultural sector have
resulted in the commercialisation of agriculture and the conversion of forest on SL to
tree crop estates. The cocoa boom of the late 1970s and early 1980s was replaced by
an oil palm boom in the 1990s in response to higher world prices and lower labour costs
relative to cocoa. In 1997, oil palm occupied 72% of the reported crop area and over
one-tenth of Sabah (Fig. 5). Recently, currency devaluation of the ringgit in 1997 further
strengthened the value of palm oil which is traded in US$, making the oil palm industry
Malaysia's (then) economic saviour. The National Economic Recovery Plan
recommends the planting of more oil palm in Sabah and Sarawak (Institute for
Development Studies Sabah, 1998a) and is likely to be accepted.
In a land use map analysis of eastern Sabah, McMorrow et al. (1996) showed that the
greatest forest loss between 1970 and 1987 was to permanent crops mainly in private
estates on newly degazetted Forest Reserve. In 1987, 10% of the area was actually
under crop. SDoA records show that 32% of the area had been alienated by 1990.
Given the time limit for bringing alienated land into cultivation, most of this will have
been converted to agriculture by 1995.15 Provision of road infrastructure was also a key
factor, most of the conversion being along the Lahad Datu-Sandakan road axis. For
Sabah as a whole, road provision increased over five fold between 1963 and 1995
(Mustapa Talip, 1996; IDS online, 1999e). Road provision is a federal responsibility and
allows a modicum of federal control to be retained over the pace of land use change.
The ethnic equality agenda of national plans has been a factor in forest decline.
Attempts to redress ethnic imbalances in land ownership and wealth in favour
of bumiputera prompted clearance of forest for permanent crops in land settlement
schemes run by the Federal Land Development Agency (FELDA) and the Sabah Land
Development Board (Sutton, 1988, Sutton and Buang, 1995). By 1995, settlement
schemes, co-operatives and other government schemes occupied 28% of the cropped
area (260,000 ha), but still remained less important than private estates (42%) and
smallholdings (30%) (analysis of data from IDS Online, 1999e).
8. Discussion and conclusion
8.1. Applicability of theories of forest decline

Forest loss is best explained by political ecology, the constantly shifting dialectic
between society and land resources (Blaikie and Brookfield, 1987), especially within the
context of state policies (Gillis, 1988; Hurst, 1990, Bryant, 1992, Bryant, 1997; Parayil
and Tong, 1998). In Sabah's case, this paper has demonstrated that forest decline is
strongly related to state forestry and agricultural policies and to long-established policy
instruments such as land gazettement, the Land Capability Classification and the land
code. However, we should briefly examine the extent to which global theoretical
frameworks of deforestation (Parayil and Tong, 1998) are applicable to Sabah.
To what extent is the decline in, Sabah's forest area due to population pressure? The
Fifth Malaysian Plan (MPS) 1985–1990 was pro-natalist, encouraging industrial
development by building human resources to supply a large consumer base and labour
force (Yusof, 1992). Whilst this might be interpreted as support for a Neo-Malthusian
explanation of deforestation as over-exploitation of the land resource due to population
pressure (Allen and Barnes, 1985), it does not fit well with the situation in Sabah. By
regional standards Sabah's population density is relatively low, even though the
population was 2,389,000 in 1995 and growing at 6.2% pa in the 1991–1995 period,
twice the national average and faster than any other Malaysian state according to
Seventh Malaysian Plan (MP7). Population density in 1995 was still only 32/km 2, half
that of Peninsular Malaysia (63/km2) and low in relation to other parts of the Asian
tropics (Thailand 113, Indonesia 103). Indeed, lack of labour has hindered agricultural
development and forestry in eastern Sabah and necessitated the use of immigrant
labour (Sutton, 1988).
Equally, Hardin's (1968) tragedy of the commons thesis that attributes deforestation to
the misuse of communally owned resources, can only explain localised forest loss in
Sabah. Arguably, shifting cultivation on communally owned lands under NCR in Sabah
has caused short-term and reversible degradation of the forest resource, but affecting at
most 15% of the land area. The land code recognises such communal ownership under
NCR but, more importantly, it encourages alienation to private ownership. It is argued
here that land alienation by NT and Country Lease has been a more significant spur to
permanent conversion of forest to agriculture in Sabah than overuse of communal
lands. Similarly, Parayil and Tong (1998) found that forest conversion was associated
with the privatisation of public forest lands in the Amazon and that deforestation could
not be attributed to the absence of property relations and cooperative management of
the commons.
Deforestation and forest degradation in Sabah has less to do with population pressure
or misuse of common property resources than with national and state economic and
social policies. A policy of rapid economic growth based initially on timber and
increasingly on agricultural exports has been the driving force behind decline of forest
area and quality. But economic reductionism alone is not sufficient explanation (Bryant,
1992). This paper supports Taylor and Garcia-Barrios (1995), Taylor and Garcia-Barrios
(19975) view that forest loss is explained by structural factors operating at national and
especially state scale.
8.2. Agents and instruments of forest decline
The largest agent of forest disturbance has been the timber industry (Marsh and Greer,
1992). The Forest Department has faced the common dilemma of state agencies who
are both the steward and the developer of the forest resource (Walker, 1989). Logging
has degraded the forests and indirectly encouraged shifting cultivation and financed
state-led agricultural conversion.
Since the mid-1980s, forest loss has been increasingly due to commercial agriculture.
The pace of conversion increased during the cocoa boom of the late 1970s and early
1980s and the era of land settlement schemes ushered in by the New Agricultural
Policy. The oil palm boom of the 1990s has brought a major new wave of forest
conversion (Fig. 5).16 Policies of agricultural modernisation and commercialisation in
Sabah have resulted in extensification rather than intensification and have thus been
closely linked to deforestation (Brookfield et al., 1995). Interventionist policies of wealth
redistribution via land settlement schemes have also played a part. In comparison,
shifting cultivation has caused comparatively small-scale and temporary forest
degradation, depending on the definition, data source and time scale used.
Three policy instruments have played a significant role in explaining forest decline. First,
land gazettement and alienation serve to partition the land resource between permanent
forestry reserves and agriculture. They effectively set an upper limit to forest loss
although not to forest degradation. Second, the Land Capability Classification guides
the allocation of land; the LCC maps help to explain the location of Forest Reserves and
thus the broad spatial pattern of forest conversion on LCC classes II and III. Finally, the
land code has provided an incentive for individuals and companies to convert leased
forest land to agriculture. Land title rents and the proceeds from pre-logging of timber on
alienated land are an economic incentive to the state to alienate more forested SL to
agriculture.

8.3. Future prospects

The PFRs provide a ceiling on forest loss. However, whether they retain their present
area will be determined by economic and political decisions about the relative
contribution of agriculture and forestry to Sabah's economy. The future of the forest
resource has been brought into sharper focus by the recent economic crisis. The
structural shift from forestry towards agriculture and agri-industry is likely to be
reinforced. Lobbying by conservation groups and ecotourism interests will be a
factor17 but conservation goals take a lower priority at times of national crisis (O’Riordan,
1981).
Sabah was the second wealthiest state in Malaysia in 1970 but the second poorest by
1996, largely because of its open economy dependent on export of primary
commodities (State of Sabah, 1995; IDS Online, 1999e). The Outline Perspective Plan
Sabah addresses this major structural weakness with a development thrust away from
dependence on the primary sector towards an industrialised economy based on
manufacturing and services, especially the food processing industry. Its main objective
is to improve the standard and quality of life through sustained and rapid economic
growth and transition to a diversified industrialised economy. These policies that will
impact upon the land resource including the forests. Forestry and agriculture will
continue to be developed to complement the state's industrialisation drive but most
investment projects will be undertaken by the private sector with the state gradually
reducing its involvement. The land use implications in rural areas are likely to be more
alienation of forested SL to private tree crop estates and plantation forests.
Dauvergne (1997) stresses the role of patron–client relationships between powerful
decision-makers controlling the land resource and businessmen seeking access to
forest resources, in this case, forest logging concessions and Country Leases for
commercial agricultural estates. The reduction of such forest politics is seen as
necessary to attract further foreign investment to Sabah (Mannan and Awang, 1997) but
land remains a very political issue in Sabah particularly in the wake of the recent
economic crisis.
As in Indonesia (Sunderlin, 1998), the economic slowdown since 1997 has reinforced
calls to optimise the use of the land resource to aid recovery (Institute for Development
Studies Sabah, 1998b). Forest land is becoming an ever more contested resource. A
major review of land use and alienation policy is underway with the aim of rationalising
land use (John Maluda, pers. comm., May 1999). The land use and alienation policy
review proposes the degazettement of 200,000 ha of class II Forest Reserve on LCC
classes II and III land and slopes less than 30° and the ingazettement of a smaller
amount of land to Forest Reserve. The land interchange will result in a net loss of 5% of
the current Forest Reserve to agriculture, mainly to oil palm estates managed by Sawit
Kinabalu (formerly the Sabah Land Development Board). The high rents charged for
Country Leases are also being reviewed with a view to encouraging greater foreign
investment. A further 38,000 ha are earmarked for rice production to reduce costly
imports. These proposals must be seen against the trend of rapidly depleting timber and
petroleum resources and the healthy state of the oil palm industry. The stage is set for a
hotly contested debate about the future of Sabah's forests.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge assistance from Dr Yaakub and staff at the Institute
for Development Studies (Sabah); Doria Tai Yun Tyng, Sabah Land and Survey
Department; Daratil Boklyan and staff, Land Use section, Sabah Department of
Agriculture; John Maluda, Yayasan Sabah; Sabah Forestry Department; Universiti
Malaysia Sabah; Keith Sutton and colleagues at Manchester University; Faculty of Arts
and School of Geography, Manchester University for J.M.'s research leave; the
Economic and Social Science ESRC Global Environmental Change Programme 1992–
95 for funding the project ‘Tropical Forests, Communities and Environmental Change in
Malaysian Borneo contract L320243027 from which this paper developed.

Appendix. Comparability of forest area figures

Comparing forest area figures in problematic because of the variation in forest
categories and data sources used. Forest area is best known inside the PFR where the
Forest Department has a remit to map forest resources at 1:50,000 from aerial
photography. The data source for Forest Department figures is consistent over time so
figures should be comparable, but the situation is complicated by whether national
parks and plantation forests are included. Furthermore, PFR is primarily a land use
category in which forest is the dominant land cover class but it also includes non-forest
land cover classes.

Ironically, forest cover is least well quantified outside the PFR where forest conversion
is most significant. Fig. 1 does not show forest on SL. Mapping outside the PFR is
undertaken by the SDoA as part of its state-wide 1:50,000 land use mapping. Forest
categories are physiognomic and, unlike the Forest Department's forest inventory, do
not differentiate between degrees or causes of disturbance. Closed forest may be
primary forest or old-growth secondary forest regenerating from logging or shifting
cultivation. Scrub forest may be secondary forest, or forest at an earlier stage of
regeneration (McGregor et al., 1996). The 1973 estimate of total forest area from the
first land use map series (93%) is so much higher than the Forest Department's 1975
figure (75%) because the former includes all types of forest cover and forest inside and
outside the PFRs.
References

Abdul Rahman and Noor (1993)

A.Z. Abdul Rahman, M.K. Mohd. NoorStrategies and thrusts of the national agricultural policy
Options, 8 (1993), pp. 2-4
Allen and Barnes (1985)
J.C. Allen, D.F. BarnesThe causes of deforestation in developing countries
Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 75 (1985), pp. 163-184
CrossRefView Record in Scopus
Beaman et al (1985)
R.S. Beaman, J.H. Beaman, C.W. Marsh, P.V. WoodsDrought and forest fires in Sabah
Sabah Society Journal, 8 (1985), pp. 10-30
View Record in Scopus
Blaikie and Brookfield (1987)
P. Blaikie, H. Brookfield

Land Degradation and Society, Methuen, London and New York (1987)

Brookfield and Byron (1990)

H. Brookfield, Y. ByronDeforestation and timber extraction in Borneo and the Malay Peninsula: the
record since 1965
Global Environmental Change: human and policy dimensions, 1 (1990), pp. 42-56
ArticleDownload PDFView Record in Scopus
Brookfield et al (1995)
H. Brookfield, L. Potter, Y. Byron

In Place of the Forest: Environmental and Socio-Economic Transformation in Borneo and the Malay
Peninsula, United Nations University Press, Tokyo, New York, Paris (1995)

Bryant (1992)
R.L. BryantPolitical ecology: an emerging research agenda in Third world studies
Political Geography, 11 (1992), pp. 12-36
ArticleDownload PDFView Record in Scopus
Bryant (1997)
R.L. Bryant

The Political Ecology of Forestry in Burma, 1924–1994, Hurst & Company, London (1997)

Cleary (1992)
M.C. ClearyPlantation agriculture and the formulation of native land rights in British North Borneo,
1989–1930
Geographical Journal, 158 (1992), pp. 170-181
CrossRefView Record in Scopus
 Cleary (1997)
M.C. ClearyThe regulation of land in North Borneo under the chartered company
Borneo Review, 8 (1997), pp. 45-62
View Record in Scopus
Cleary and Eaton (1996)
M.C. Cleary, P. Eaton

Tradition and Reform: Land Tenure and Rural Development in Southeast Asia, Oxford University
Press, Kuala Lumpur (1996)

Collins et al
(1991)
N.M. Collins, J.A. Sayer, T.C. Whitmore

The Conservation Atlas of Tropical Forests, Asia and the Pacific, IUCN, Macmillan, London(1991)

Cramb
(1989)
R.A. CrambShifting cultivation and resource allocation and resource degradation in Sarawak;
perceptions and policies
Borneo Research Bulletin, 21 (1989), pp. 22-49
View Record in Scopus
D
a
i
l
y
E
x
p
r
e
s
s
(
S
a
b
a
h
)
(
1
9
9
9
)
D
a
i
l
y
E
x
p
r
e
s
s
(
S
a
b
a
h
)
,
1
9
9
9
.
C
h
o
n
g
l
a
u
d
s
a
w
a
r
e
n
e
s
s
o
f
v
i
l
l
a
g
e
r
s
.
h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
i
n
f
o
s
a
b
a
h
.
c
o
m
.
m
y
/
D
a
i
l
y
_
E
x
p
r
e
s
s
/
j
u
l
/
3
0
-
0
7
-
9
9
 .
h
t
m
#
n
e
w
s
7
D
a
u
v
e
r
g
n
e
(
1
9
9
7
)
P. Dauvergne

Shadows in the Forest: Japan and the Politics of Timber in Southeast Asia, MIT Press, Cambridge MA,
London (1997)
Department of Agriculture Sabah, 1998. Agricultural Statistics of Sabah 1997–1998. Department of
Agriculture, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah.
Department of Statistics Malaysia, 1993. Yearbook of Statistics Sabah 1992. Department of Statistics
Malaysia, Sabah Branch, Kota Kinabalu.
Douglas, I., Sutton. K., King, T., Parnwell, M.J. McMorrow, J.M., Taylor, D., 1995. Tropical rainforests,
communities and global environmental change in Borneo. Final Report to ESRC under contract No.
L320253027.

FAO, 1981. Tropical Forest Resources Assessment Project. Forest Resource of Tropical Asia, Vol. 3. FAO,
Rome.

FAO, 1987. Special Study on Forest Management, Afforestation and Utilization of Forest Resources in the
Developing Regions. Asia-Pacific region, Assessment of Resources in Six Countries. FAO, Bangkok Field
Document 17.
FAO, 1995. Forest Resources Assessment 1990: Global Synthesis. FAO, Rome.

Fox, J.E.D., 1978. The natural vegetation of Sabah, Malaysia: the physical environment and classification.
Tropical Ecology 19, 218–239.

M. GillisMalaysia: public policies and the tropical forest

R. Repetto, M. Gillis (Eds.), Public Policies, the Misuse of Forest Resources, World Resources
Institute, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1988), pp. 115-164
CrossRefView Record in Scopus
A. Grainger

Controlling Tropical Deforestation. Earthscan, London (1993)

G. HardinThe tragedy of the commons

Science, 162 (1968), pp. 1243-1248
View Record in Scopus

P. Hurst

Rainforest Politics: ecological destruction in South-east Asia, Zed Books, London (1990)
Institute for Development Studies Sabah, 1998a. Summary of National Economic Recovery Plan.
Secretariat of Institute for Development Studies Sabah (IDS), Kota Kinabalu, Sabah.
Institute for Development Studies Sabah, 1998b. Optimising land resources for economic recovery. Berita
IDS Development Review, 13. IDS Online
http://www.ids.org.my/HomePage/Publications/BorneoReview/br1.htm

IDS online, 1999a. Malaysia: land area with potential for forest plantation development (ha). Forest
Research Institute of Malaysia (FRIM) and Forest Department.
http://www.ids.org.my/idsonline/Timber/page6.htm#Plantation Development.
IDS online, 1999b. Sabah: forest revenue 1980–1996. Sabah Forest Department.
http://www.ids.org.my/idsonline/Timber/page7.htm#Forest Revenue.

IDS online, 1999c. Sabah: average returns per cubic metre 1980–1996. Sabah Forest Department.
http://www.ids.org.my/idsonline/Timber/page7.htm#Average Returns.
IDS online, 1999d. District profiles. SDoA. http://www.ids.org.my/idsonline/maps/sabah.htm.

IDS online, 1999e. Key facts on Malaysia, Gross Domestic Product by State. Seventh Malaysia Plan, MP7.
http://www.ids.org.my/idsonline/KeyData/malaysia.htm.

D.W. JohnThe timber industry and forest administration in Sabah under chartered company rule
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 5 (1974), pp. 55-81
CrossRefView Record in Scopus
Liew, F.K.Y., Tulas, M.T., Limuddin, A.M.S., Alidin, M.D., 1994. Translating research results into
practice. In: Lim, D. (Ed.). Agricultural Research and Development: The Need To Be User Sensitive.
Konrad Adenatuer Foundation and IDS Sabah, Kota Kinabalu.

J.P Malingreau, G. Stephens, L. FellowsRemote sensing of forest fires: Kalimantan and North Borneo
in 1982–1983
Ambio, 14 (1985), pp. 314-321
View Record in Scopus
Mannan, S., Awang, Y., 1997. Sustainable forest management in Sabah. Proceedings Seminar on
Sustainable Forest Management, Vol. 27, November 1997, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, organised by Sabah
Forest Department, pp. 51–74.
C.W. Marsh, A.G. GreerForest land use in Sabah, Malaysia: an introduction to Danum Valley
Philosophyical Transactions Royal Society of London B, 335 (1992), pp. 331-339
CrossRefView Record in Scopus

D. McGregor, J.M. McMorrow, J. Wills, H. Lawes, M. LloydMapping the environment in south-east

Asia: the use of remote sensing and geographical information systems
M.J.G. Parnwell, R.L. Bryant (Eds.), Environmental Change in South-East Asia; People, Politics and
Sustainable Development, Routledge, London and New York (1996), pp. 190-224
J.M. McMorrow, A.Talip Mustapa, H. LawesMonitoring tropical estate agriculture using Landsat
images and GIS
A. Hassan, C.Y. Mun, N. Rahman (Eds.), Multiple Resources Inventory and Monitoring of Tropical
Forests, ASEAN Institute of Forest Management (AIFM) Kuala Lumpur (1996), pp. 229-244

Miller Munang, 1987. Deforestation and logging. In: Sani, S. (Ed.), Environmental Conservation in Sabah:
Issues and Challenges, IDS Seminar Proceedings. Institute of Development Studies Sabah (IDS), Kota
Kinabalu, Sabah, pp. 31–39.
J.M. Melillo, C.A. Palm, R.A. Houghton, G.M. WoodwellA comparison of two recent estimates of
disturbance in tropical forests
Environmental Conservation, 12 (1985), pp. 37-40
CrossRefView Record in Scopus

Mustapa A. Talip, 1996. Using geographical information system (GIS) to analyse land use changes in
eastern Sabah. Unpublished M.Sc. Thesis, University of Manchester.
Mustapha, A.K., 1994. Opening address by the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries. In: Lim, D. (Ed.),
Agricultural Research and Development; Need to be User Sensitive. Konrad Adenauer Foundation and
Institute for Development Studies (Sabah), Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, pp. ix–xii.

New Sunday Times, 1998. Protected areas shrink: State Govt. actions main reason for 25pc loss over 30
years. Esther Tan. New Sunday Times (Sabah) 6 December 1998.
Nyuk Wo Lim, J., 1998. Changing rural livelihoods and land degradation in a tropical montane
environment; a case study in Sabah, Malaysia. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Manchester.

Lim Nyuk Wo, I. DouglasThe impact of cash cropping on shifting cultivation in Sabah, Malaysia
Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 39 (1998), pp. 315-326

T. O’Riordan

Environmentalism, Pion, London (1981)

C. PadochLand use in new and old areas of Iban settlement

Borneo Research Bulletin, 14 (1982), pp. 3-14
View Record in Scopus

T.W. PangEconomic growth and development in Sabah: 25 years after independence

J.G. Kitingan, M.J. Ongkili (Eds.), Sabah 25 Years Later, 1963—1988, Institute for Development Studies
(Sabah), Kota Kinabalu Sabah (1989), pp. 81-144
View Record in Scopus

G. Parayil, F. TongPasture-led to logging-led deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon

Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Dimensions, 8 (1998), pp. 63-79
ArticleDownload PDFView Record in Scopus

Pearce, D., Brown, K., 1994. Saving the world's tropical forests. In: Pearce, D., Brown, K. (Eds.), The
Causes of Tropical Deforestation. UCL Press, London.
Sabah Forest Department, undated (circa 1991). Forestry and Forest Industry: fact sheets on Sabah. Sabah
Forest Department, Sandakan, Sabah.

Sabah Forest Department, 1989. Forestry in Sabah. Sabah Forest Department, Sandakan, Sabah.

Sabah Government, 1999a. Ministry of Agriculture Development and Food Industry, Objectives,
http://www.sabah gov.my/maf/mafobj.htm

Sabah Government, 1999b. Chief Minister's Department, Land and Survey Department objectives.
http://www.sabah gov.my/jkm.

Sabah Land and Survey Department, undated, circa, 1996. Land tenure in Sabah. Internal Paper. Sabah
Land and Survey Department.

C. SatherTrees and tree tenure in Paku Iban society; management of secondary forest resources in a
long-established Iban community
Borneo Review, 1 (1990), pp. 16-40
View Record in Scopus

State of Sabah, 1995. Outline Perspective Plan Sabah 1995–2010. Dicetak Di Jabatan Cetak Kerajaaan,
Sabah.

Sunderlin, W. D., 1998. Between danger and opportunity: Indonesia's forests in an era of economic crisis
and political change. September 11, 1998. http://www.cgiar.org/cifor/

K. SuttonLand settlement in Sabah; from the Sabah land development board to the federal land
development authority
Malaysian Journal of Tropical Geography, 18 (1988), pp. 46-56
View Record in Scopus

K. Sutton, A. BuangA new role for Malaysia's FELDA

Geography, 80 (1995), pp. 125-137
View Record in Scopus

Sutton, K., McMorrow, J.M., 1998. Land use change in Eastern Sabah, In: King, V.T. (Ed.), Environmental
Challenges in South-east Asia, Nordic Institute of Asian Studies Man & Nature Series in Asia, No. 2.
Curzon Press, Richmond, Surrey: pp. 259–281.
P. Taylor, R. Garcia-BarriosThe social analysis of ecological change: from systems to intersecting
processes
Social Science Information, 34 (1995), pp. 5-30
CrossRefView Record in Scopus

P. Taylor, R. Garcia-BarriasDynamics and rhetonics of socio-environmental change: critical

perspectives on the limits of neo-malthusian environmentalism
Advances in Human Ecology, 6 (1997), pp. 257-292
CrossRefView Record in Scopus

Thomas, P., Lo, F.K.C., Hepburn, A.J., 1976The Land Capability Classification of Sabah. Land Resources
Division. Ministry of Overseas Development, Tolworth, Surbiton, Surrey. Land Resources Study 25, Vols.
1–4.

Turner, B.L. II, Skole, D., Sanderson, S. Fischer, G., Fresco, L., Leemans, R., 1995. Land use and land
cover change science/research plan. IGBP Report No 35, HDP Report No 7. International Geosphere-
Biosphere Programme and Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change. Stockholm and Geneva.

K.J. WalkerThe state in environmental management

Political Studies, 37 (1989), pp. 25-38
CrossRef

T.C. Whitmore

Tropical Rainforests of the Far East, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1984)

W.B. WoodTropical deforestation; balancing regional development demands and global concerns
Global Environmental Change, 1 (1990), pp. 23-41
ArticleDownload PDFView Record in Scopus

P.V. WoodsEffects of Logging, drought and fire on structure and composition of tropical forests in
Sabah, Malaysia
Biotropica, 21 (1989), pp. 290-298
CrossRefView Record in Scopus

WRI, 1996. World resources 1996–1997, a guide to the global environment. Forests and land cover.
Http://www.wri.org/wr/wr-96-97/lc_txt2.htm.
 Yapp, W., Ooi, S.T., Gill, S.S., 1988. Approach to rural development in Sabah. In: Chuan, T.T., Yee, W.
(Eds.), Towards Modernising Smallholding Agriculture in Sabah, Institute for Development Studies
(Sabah). Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia, pp. 15–38.

Khairuddin YusofPopulation and health in Sabah

M.J. Yaakub, A. Ayub (Eds.), Population and Health Issues in Sabah, Institute for Development Studies
(Sabah), Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia (1992), pp. 3-30
1

The Outline Perspective Plan Sabah (OPPS) for the period 1995–2010 is based on the Seventh
Malaysian Plan 1995–2000 (MP7), the Second Outline Perspective Plan (OPP2), Vision 2020
and the National Development Policy (NDP) (State of Sabah, 1995). The Sabah State Liaison
Office monitors the extent to which national policy is enacted at state level.
2

For instance, the federal Environment Ministry launched the national biodiversity policy in April
1998 in an attempt to safeguard officially protected areas and ensure that Malaysia remains one
of the 12 mega-biodiversity countries in the world. It blames the loss of one-quarter of the
Peninsula's protected areas on the failure of states to integrate them into their land use planning
(New Sunday Times 6 December, 1998).
3

The Forest Department does not grant licences to log timber concessions. This task falls to the
Chief Minister and Yayasan Sabah (the Sabah Foundation), the inheritor of most of the British
colonial company forest land.

The Land Use section of SDoA is responsible for 1:50,000 land use mapping from aerial
photography and satellite imagery, including Landsat Thematic Mapper and SPOT HRV.

The Land and Survey Department is also responsible for aerial photography and the base
mapping used to prepare land development maps. In 1991 it commissioned 1:100,000 land cover
mapping from airborne radar and is updating this from 1996 Radarsat images.

Both were formerly the responsibility of the Chief Minister but since the Forest Enactment of 1984
gazettement and degazettement must be ratified by the State Assembly.

7
 LCC maps combine four physical criteria, soil, relief, forest class and geology to produce maps of
mineral, soil and timber resource suitability with four, five and eight suitability classes,
respectively. These maps were manually overlaid to produce 1:50,000 maps published at
1:250,000 scale with five land capability classes, I–V, and up to six land exploitation units per
class.

In the Segama-Kinabatangan lowlands east of Lahad Datu in eastern Sabah it was land of LCC
classes II and II that was degazetted for agriculture in the 1984 Forest Enactment (McMorrow et
al., 1996).
9

Sabah is not required to follow the 1965 National Land Code so the legal framework governing
land tenure differs from other states.

10

Customary tenure is increasingly seen as backdoor way of obtaining tenure. Formerly a letter
from the District Officer confirming that entry to the land was legal was sufficient to obtain NCR.
Now claimants must go through the official process of obtaining native title (NT), but only natives
may apply for NT. Occupancy no longer confers ownership rights and must meet the requirement
of cultivation of a permanent crop for three years (Sabah Land and Survey undated, ca, 1996).
11

Title is granted only after the Land and Survey Department confirm that the plot (i) is on SL (ii) not
earmarked for other uses, (iii) obtain SDoA approval that the land has a suitable LCC class
(usually II or III) and an (iv) obtain assessment of timber value from the Forest Department. Field
register or provisional licence is granted until the Land and Survey Department survey the
boundary.

12

People have been known to transplant mature rubber trees to maintain customary tenure (Doria
Tai Yun Tyng, Land and Survey Department, pers. comm., 1998).

13

In an attempt to increase the value of NT and field register relative to Country Lease, these titles
can now be sub-leased to non-bumiputera for a maximum period of 99 years. The agriculture-
only restriction has been relaxed on payment of a greater rent but, in practice, the 99 year lease
discourages non-bumiputera from building on sub-leased NT land (Doria Tai Yun Tyng, Lands
and Surveys, pers. comm., 1998). The agricultural bias still dominates; normally NT will be
 converted into Country Lease or town lease only on land zoned for non-agricultural use and with
the approval of the Chief Minister (Sabah Government, 1999b).
14

Two of the Forest Reserves, the Sungai Tenegang and Sungai Koyah were excised for the
Tenegang Smallholders Scheme and to rationalise the boundary of the Yayasan Sabah (Sabah
Foundation) forest concession (Doria Tai Yun Tyng, Sabah Land and Survey Department, pers.
comm. December 1998).

15

This example illustrates that degazettement rapidly leads to permanent forest loss. It is a
precursor of the changes proposed by the current land use and alienation policy review.

16

Not all the 843,952ha estimated to be under oil palm in 1997 represents new forest loss. Some
was formerly under rubber, cocoa, coconut or other estate tree crops, as the decrease in their
area in Fig. 5 suggests.
17

For instance Orang Sungei villagers in the Lower Kinabatangan area who have benefited from
ecotourism are now objecting to further clearance of riverine forests for palm oil development
(Daily Express, Sabah, 30 July 1999).