There is increasing pressure on the conversion of forest areas for food, energy, development, and other purposes. Development that is driven by green growth is being proposed as a solution. The problem, however, is that many ideas driving the notion of “green” growth are trapped in a contradiction that overwhelmingly focuses on the “green” while neglecting the growth, even if there is a compelling case to be made that “green” and “growth” are not two competing paradigms (World Bank, 2012).

Freedom should be the primary element of development. It means that the only acceptable evaluation of human progress is primarily and ultimately enhancement of freedom, and the achievement of development depends on people’s free agency (Sen, 1999). Peacock (2021) argues that the freedom proposed by Sen (1999) is a combination of rationality and commitment. Commitment is essential in development strategy, in addition to the mainstream rational choice theory (Peacock, 2021).

Sustainable development is a global issue and forest regime is currently dominates global sustainability discourses on the management of the world’s forests (Giessen, 2013; Sahide et al., 2015). However, such discourses also pay less attention to the different situations in developed and developing countries. For instance, reducing emission and net-zero deforestation has been promoted as policy ideals to be implemented according to the Paris Agreement (UNFCCC, 2015) is less considering the countries’ social, economic, and ecological differences. Thus, promoting more objective sustainable development principles, i.e., reversibility or limits (Letey, 1973), adaptability or tolerance (Letey, 1973), rational commitment (Kuznets, 1955; Sen, 1999; Peacock, 2021), and legitimacy (Nurrochmat et al., 2016b; Peacock, 2021), is necessary to build more appropriate global perspectives in sustainable development.

The article aims to promote an idea for establishing a more appropriate set of principles of sustainable forests. The argument provides insight into sustainable forest development in ways that are not only determined by the temporary disturbance of forests (environmental degradation) but also the potential for economic growth, which considers the ability of forests to recover (see Silva, 2021) using the concepts of limits and tolerance (Letey, 1973), rational commitment (Sen, 1999; Peacock, 2021) and legitimacy (Nurrochmat et al., 2016b). Scientific arguments support the idea of the article, for instance, Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) theory (1955), limits and tolerance of ecology (Letey, 1973), and also the green development strategies of the World Bank (2012). The argument is laid out for the purposes of practical implementation.

Economic growth and environmental sustainability are like two sides of a coin inseparable from the sustainable development concept. Studies of contemporary popular natural resource economics tend to apply the Environmental Kuznets’ Curve (EKC) –a modification of the inverted U hypothesis (Kuznets, 1955) that explains the interrelation between economic growth as a function of per capita income and the level of environmental degradation (Figure 1).

It is commonly found in the development approaches in developing countries that rely on intense pressures on land and natural resources, where increasing per-capita income (PCI) is compensated by the depletion of natural resources and environmental degradation. The model then suggests that after achieving a certain level of human welfare, a turning point will occur whereby the higher levels of welfare will initiate broader interests, policies, and outcomes toward environmental sustainability. Environmental degradation thus decreases along with increasing PCI and broadly reflects conditions found in developed countries.

The strategy for managing forest and environmental resources must be in line with the norms of environmental management and social and economic rationality. In some cases, global regime intervention is an obstacle in implementing the best forest resource and environmental management policy (see Nurrochmat et al., 2016a; Erbaugh and Nurrochmat, 2019). Therefore, land and natural resources management strategy should always consider the principles of people’s prosperity and national sovereignty, which relies on national and local interests (Pribadi et al., 2020; Nurrochmat et al., 2021).

Not all policies outlined by the government manifests as a reality in the field. In particular, the issue of legality is not always congruent with legitimacy. For example, many regulations attempt to determine forest management outcomes. Still, too many regulations are being violated or deemed illegitimate at different governing scales or other notions of authority. Legitimacy starts with trust in someone or something. Credibility, efficiency, and fairness will be enforced if the implementation of policies is in line with the corresponding characteristics and purposes.

International regimes, especially in the forest sector, influence national legal systems. The hegemony of interpretations of interest groups or certain countries on forest boundaries impact the selection and application of policy strategies and benchmarks for the sustainability of forest resources and environmental performance (see Giessen 2013; Nurfatriani et al., 2015; Sahide et al., 2015, 2015a; Nurrochmat et al., 2016a). In choosing a strategy for environmental policy management, in addition to paying attention to economic linkages, leakages and effectiveness must also be considered (see Nurrochmat et al., 2016b; Sheriffdeen et al., 2020).

The case of oil palm plantations expansion is salient. On a local or national scale, there may be some examples that oil palm causes deforestation, but these dynamics are very different (see Sahide et al., 2015; Nurrochmat et al., 2021). The environmental benefits of oil palm plantations are never equal compared to natural forest ecosystems, and therefore, comparing these two conditions is irrelevant. A much fairer comparison is the benefits and environmental damage caused by various world vegetable oil-producing plants when seen from a broader context. The world’s demand for vegetable oils continues to grow. This market is contested by different vegetable oils derived from oil palm, soybeans, rapeseeds, sunflower seeds, and several other vegetable oils (World Growth, 2011). Suppose vegetable oil production from palm oil is halted and substituted by soybean oil, rapeseed, or sunflower seeds whose productivity per land area is only about one-tenth of palm oil (Palm Oil Research, 2017). What are the implications for global deforestation and market demands for vegetable oils? It is by no means an endorsement of palm oil over others, given the different ecologies and economies for which these agricultural products are produced. Instead, this article is trying to highlight the broader context of forest management and sustainability at differing scales of governance.

Contestation of interests has not necessarily created a conflict (Roslinda et al., 2012; Budiono et al., 2017; Astuti et al., 2020). Nurrochmat et al., 2017 promote a concept of changing contestation into collaborative management of forest resources and the environment. Actors or groups of actors each have different interests in resources and the environment. It is impossible to generalize all actors’ diverse interests at the global, national, and local scales in natural resource management (see Pribadi et al., 2020; Nurrochmat et al., 2021). However, it is possible to identify the slices of various interests by exploring the intrinsic interests of each actor–which cannot be determined from the question of what the actors are doing. Instead, it becomes evident of they have done or are doing. A land-swap policy may be an excellent example for compromising interests and goals in local and national development (Nurrochmat et al., 2020).

Sustainable forest development can be implemented effectively if and only if a more appropriate sustainability standard is normative and more reasonable, measurable, and implementable. The condition of “sustainability” in natural resource management is thus limited by the ability of nature to recover and the human ability to adapt, which will form a new dimension of human-nature relations in future generations. Therefore, sustainability should not be defined as transferring resources and the environment to future generations with the same conditions as the initial ones. The situation should be based on what enables future generations to adapt and create ways that allow for a better quality of life.

It concludes that the successful implementation of a forest development policy is also largely determined by the rationality of socio-economic-ecological arguments. The rationality is often measured by the benefits received by a particular community, generally determined by the level of legitimacy of a particular policy rather than its legal aspects. The different interests of actors in managing forest resources do not always cause conflict. Identifying the intrinsic interests of various actors in managing resources and the environment is the key to shifting potential conflicts and transitioning them into opportunities for cooperation and legitimate consensus. Thus, it is imperative to improve the green policy paradigm by considering the principles of reversibility, adaptability, rationality, and legitimacy.