My undergraduate thesis. An analysis of the development narratives of the Institute of Dayakology.

1. DAYAK STORIES OF CHANGE:
An Analysis of the Narratives of The Institute of
Dayakology and its Network
By Cameron Campbell
1

2. INTRODUCTION
In February 2005, I had the great opportunity to spend time in West Kalimantan,
Borneo, Indonesia with the Institute of Dayakology, (Institut Dayakologi), or ID. ID is
part of a network of institutions created and run by the Dayak, the indigenous people of
the island of Borneo. The network consists of several independent yet connected
organizations that respond to various issues facing the Dayak people, and other
masyarakat adat groups in Indonesia.1 The networks are unified under the name Pancur
Kasih, meaning Fountains of Giving, or Fountains of Care. Pancur Kasih is part of a
movement that has attempted to educate and empower the Dayak through a (re)framing,
(re)definition, and (re)construction of Dayak identity, using various narratives, projects
and programs. I was fortunate to be able to spend some time in several urban and rural
Dayak environments in West Kalimantan and East Kalimantan to observe how this
process plays out.
I was given a room in the office of SEGARAK, Serikat Garakan Pemberdayaan
Masyarakat Adat Dayak (The Union of the Movement For the Empowerment of Dayak
People), right next to the main office of the Institute of Dayakology and placed under the
tutelage of Stephanus Djuweng. One of the tasks I was given was to help edit an English
version of a grant proposal for the Danish Government, which requested further funds for
the Pancur Dangeri Rubber Cooperative, one of the major programs started by ID and its
network. I spent long hours at a desk engaging with the rhetoric, meaning and purpose of
Dayak narratives and stories, and the Dayak social movement as a whole. As the Dayak
1
Masyarakat Adat translates as customary communities. It is often used to refer
to the indigenous people of Indonesia.
2

3. story unfolded in front of me, I became increasingly intrigued by its complexity and its
power.
It was this experience, coupled with Djuweng’s sporadic commentary on the
Dayak situation that sparked my interest in the narratives of the Institute of Dayakology
and its network. Having learned that a central feature of the education and empowerment
of the Dayak is ID’s publication of the Kalimantan Review, and various other narratives,
I began to realize just how integral narratives were to the movement. They were essential
tools of identity creation, community formation, and agents of social, political and
ecological legitimacy, education and empowerment.
It was not however until I took a trip to India that I decided to focus on narrative
as a method of analyzing social movements. During my brief study of the Chipko
environmental movement in India I found a book by Haripriya Rangan called Of Myths
and Movements: Rewriting Chipko into Himalayan History. The book argued that the
various narratives describing the Chipko movement had removed the movement from its
historical grounding and created a myth out of it. The book highlighted the importance of
narrative analysis as a means of picking apart very complex social movements. After
reading several other books on narratives and social movements, I realized that my
fieldwork experience with the Dayak social movement provided me with a good
foundation with which to pursue an analysis of the narratives of ID and its network. I felt
that narrative analysis would help unpack the complexity of the movement and
deconstruct the various stories and narratives that collectively define the Dayak people.
This paper is divided into two major sections. The first section seeks to
understand the use of narratives and their analyses as a tool for understanding social
3

4. movement. It also describes the formation and functioning of ID and its network of
organizations. The second section uses narrative analyses to reveal a number of
important themes that emerge through ID’s narratives and to point out the challenging
internal tensions that exist within these narratives. The complexity and tensions within
the Dayak narratives of West Kalimantan, perpetuated by the ID network reflect forces at
work within the culture of Indigenous Peoples in Indonesia and the world. Hopefully this
attempt to deconstruct some of ID’s narratives will help layer the reader’s appreciation
for the struggles of the Dayak.
SECTION 1
NARRATIVES AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
The central body of this exploration into the world of the Dayak of West
Kalimantan is an analysis of various narratives produced by the Institute of Dayakology
and its network of Dayak run Lembaga Swadaya Masyarakat2, or Self-Reliant
Community Institutions (an Indonesian term for what would otherwise be called Non
Government Organizations or NGOs.) On a more general level this paper is about the
power of narrative analysis in studying social movements, and the power of narrative as a
political tool and social agent within social movements themselves. Through my studies
of the various features and purposes of narratives I found that the Institute of Dayakology
and its network of LSM2 provided a perfect example of how and why narrative is an
insightful method of analysis. This section of the paper, therefore, lays out several things.
Firstly, it explains, to a limited extent, why narratives are an insightful method of
4

5. analyzing social movements, and the Dayak social movement in particular, through a
discussion of the centrality of identity and framing in narrative. Through its various
narratives and programs ID and its network attempt to (re)frame Dayak identity. Because
the Dayak are attempting to keep their traditional identity and culture alive, saving it
from its stigmatized past, while at the same struggling to adapt to modern circumstances,
this re(framing) takes on apparently contradictory characteristics within the narratives.
These apparent contradictions within the narratives are a reflection of a complex cultural
situation facing the Dayak. This section also discusses the power of narrative as a
political tool and a social agent, in this context of indigenous social movements. It
focuses on how ID and its network, and the Dayak at large, have adapted and remained
resilient and sustainable in the face of continuous change and pressure from various
political, economic and religious forces.
The Benefits of Narrative in Analyzing Social Movements: The Centrality of
Identity
The narrative sociologist, Alisdair MacIntyre maintains that, “man in his actions
is essentially a story telling animal.” As humans we tell stories, and we live stories in
order to understand ourselves and the world and to situate ourselves in the continuous
change and complexity of it all. As stories are told and lived, they do not only provide
ways of explaining what has happened or what will happen. They provide ways of
reflecting on our experiences and ourselves, and ways of predicting the future. As
MacIntyre says, “enacted dramatic narrative is the basic and essential characterization of
5

6. human actions.”2 The most important feature of narratives is that they are story-telling
devices. Any type of story is a narrative and any type of narrative is a story. Stories, are
as Walter Fisher puts eloquently:
not isolated utterances or gestures but symbolic actions-words, and/or
deeds- that have sequence and meaning for those who live, create or
interpret them. So, understood, they have relevance to real as well as
fictive experiences. Regardless of form, discursive or non discursive texts
are meant to give order to life by inducing others to dwell in them to
establish ways of living in common, in intellectual and spiritual
communities in which there is confirmation for the story that constitutes
one’s life.”3
The variety and diversity of narrative both as form and as a tool of analysis, as
well as in its practical applications, will become apparent, even when understood even in
the in the limited context of a specific social movement such as the Dayak social
movement of West Kalimantan. The narratives of Institute of Dayakology and its
network of organizations, vary in form and application from personal stories to academic
articles and books, from grant proposals to ecological maps and from collective
statements to symbolic actions. ID's narratives establish ways of living in common by
telling a Dayak story that can be shared and experienced by all Dayak, and a diverse
amount of people. Through the variety of their narrative forms ID gives a voice to elite,
educated , urban and rural Dayak alike. As a result, they are able to speak to elite,
educated, urban and rural communities on local, national and international levels. As
these different voices are sewn together as part of the same collective Dayak story, they
2
Alisdaire MacIntyre, After Virtue (Notre Dam, Ind.: Notre Dam University
Press, 1981), pgs, 201 and 194.
3
Walter R. Fisher, “Narrative, Reason and Community” in Memory, Identity
Community: The Idea of Narrative in the Human Sciences, ed. Lewis P. Hinchman,
Sandra K. Hinchman (United States: SUNY Press, 1997), 314.
6

7. gain reality, power and legitimacy and become more beleivable, as they appeal to the
hearts and minds of more people. Like Shakespear’s Hamlet, or the Hindu Mahabarahta,
narratives are also often embedded within other narratives. Smaller stories are weaved
together create and support larger ones. The various individual narratives of ID and its
network cohere to present a collective story of the Dayak people that is also a type of
narrative form. Although ID publishes and edits most of the narratives, they are not
responsible for all of them, and they are derived from different organizations, authors,
sources, places and times.
Narratives in their various forms, produced by and within social movements, such
as the Dayak social movement of West Kalimantan, provide the key elements of the
social movement, such as the values they uphold, and their specific visions and missions
that are needed to understand them. Narratives as a form of story telling also show and
tell us how and why these specific values, visions and missions as well as other ideas
related to them are framed and communicated.
In their classical formation derived from literature, narratives can be understood
as a spoken or literary presentation in which, “past events are selected and configured
into a plot, which portrays them as a meaningful whole with a beginning, middle and
end,” that exists within a specific sense of time.4
However, in the study of narrative within the context of social movements,
narratives diverge from this classical definition. In social movements many narratives do
not have an end in the sense of a final conclusive circumstance that culminates the
4
Joseph Davis, “Narrative and Social Movements: The Power of Stories” in
Stories of Change: Narrative and Social Movements, (New York: SUNY Press, 2002),
11.
7

8. sequence of events in a plot. Many narratives within social movements, like some of
those produced by ID, do however have an “end” in the sense that there is a vision of the
future that the movement seeks to attain. The type of “end” in ID’s narratives does not
necessarily show up at the end of the sequence of events in time, but is often represented
within the body of the narrative by recurring references, examples and thematic motifs.
Joseph Davis quoting Thomas Leitch writes, “Stories do not necessarily promise
(although they may) that conflicts will be definitively resolved or the truth manifested
once and for all; they promise only that something further will happen, or that there is
something else to learn.”5
This type of “end” is more of a goal or an “end in mind”, than an immediate end
and is legitimated by the moral arguments justifying the vision, methods, ideologies and
general struggle of the social movement. Haripriya Rangan explains:
Narratives derive their structure and form from their telos, a chosen end
that does not reside in external nature, but is a moral choice constructed
from within the material realm of social practices and asserted as an
absolute truth. The telos is located in social actions, and these are what
narratives ultimately aim to influence, to change or redirect in one way or
another. Every narrative is an exercise in establishing a particular
morality; and narrators often succeed (they are called charismatic or
compelling when they do) when their narratives exercise a limited and
limiting morality which renders most social and material practices, save
their chosen few, as irrelevant, inauthentic, or illegitimate.”6
Within social movements, especially those involving indigenous people,
narratives arise from and through processes of cultural and political change and
exchange, and through experiences of success and failure. Most often the struggle to
5
Ibid, 13.
6
Haripiya Rangan, of myths and movements: Rewriting Chipko into Himalayan
History, (India: Oxford University Press, 2000), 41.
8

9. reach the “end in mind” is a continuous struggle of resilience and adaptation such as in
the case of the Dayak. Therefore the social and material practices that are considered
relevant, authentic and legitimate within social movement narratives, are always
culturally complex, even in the narratives themselves, often combing the traditional and
the modern to create hybrid answers to complex political, economic, cultural and
ecological problems.
Joseph Davis in his book Stories of Change: Narratives and Social Movements
explains:
The analysis of narratives…overcomes key limitations in the framing perspective and
illuminates core features of identity building and meaning making in social activism. It
also sheds new light on movement emergence, internal dynamics and public persuasion
and addresses cultural aspects of activism that get shrift in social movement research.”7
The most important feature of narratives is identity creation and meaning making.
From the time before modernity, when mythos predominated human epistemology until
the current stage of post-modernity, narratives have always been focused on
understanding individual and collective identity in relationship to the world of the mind,
as well as the geographical, cultural and material world. The creation and communication
of narratives have been part of a universal process by which individual and collective
identities are framed and formed, and reframed and reformed. As human beings we
understand ourselves and how we “fit in” with the rest of existence, through narratives
and storytelling. Narrative analysis clarifies that the “self” is not a static entity, but a
result of continuous processes of definition and redefinition. Narratives often serve as
ways in which multiple selves can be unified and placed into a harmonic balance.
7
Joseph Davis, “Narratives and Social Movements: The Power of Stories” in
Stories of Change: Narrative and Social Movements, 4.
9

10. As events and descriptions are put into a sequenced narrative form individual and
collective identities are given life and meaning in the narratives, and are manifested in the
material and animate world. This process of identity creation occurs through the
development of the characters in the story. The development of a character in narratives
is an essential element. I would even go so far as to say, that there a very few narratives
without a developed character or characters. It is through the development of characters
that narratives appeal to us, and provide us with emotional, moral and even physical
resonance needed to understand them completely.
Narratives play a crucial role in social movements that involve a people
attempting to redefine themselves, such as in the case of the Dayak, or the Native
Americans, whose identities and communities have been drastically altered,
amalgamated, homogenized and most importantly demonized throughout history. In the
process of redefining their own identities through continual cultural exchanges, new
communities built on these new identities are often created through the use of narratives
and story telling. These imagined communities become reified as communities, nations,
and empires. In the process of re(framing) and (re)creating identities and communities
narratives define history, and individual and collective memory, creating a new
consciousness built on clearly articulated values.
Social movement leaders of all kinds whether capitalist, communist, or
indigenous, who are often from the more educated or elite social classes use narratives a
means to solidify individual and collective identities for the sake of perpetuating and
legitimizing their ideological or cultural goals. In narratives, the specific qualities and
10

11. disposition of a character in a story, often typifies and defines the identity of the ideal
social movement participant in the context of their struggle.
The power of narrative to influence the creation of individual and collective
identities, and the formation of communities is a central theme of my narrative analysis
of the Institute of Dayakology and its network. The narratives, both individually and
collectively give rise to a Dayak “character” that is not static, but has some clearly
defined characteristics. One of ID’s primary concerns is defining “Dayakness” in the face
of constant change and pressure. ID are part of a larger Dayak effort called “The
(Re)construction of the “Pan-Dayak Identity” seeking to create a solidified social
movement community of Dayak power.8 An analysis of their narratives illuminates how
“Dayakness” must be defined based on traditional indigenous values that emphasize the
intimate relationship between the human being and the natural environment, but that
these values must incorporate various characteristics that allow for processes of
adaptation with modern scenarios and different value systems.
Analyzing ID’s narratives gives us a sense of how the institutional members are
framing Dayak identity and creating new communities. Due to ID‘s focus on the creation
of Dayak identity and meaning making, the analysis of narrative seemed particularly
fitting. The Institute of Dayakology, is an institution, an NGO (LSM) with its own
hierarchy, power structure, and social organization, collective voice as well as individual
voices. Narrative analysis illuminates how ID speaks to different audiences. It provides a
sense of what controls ID places on its narratives. Being able to compare my field-
8
Ju-Lang Thung, Yekti Maunati, Peter Mulok Kedit. The (Re)construction of the
‘Pan Dayak’ Identity in Kalimantan and Sarawak: A Study on Minorty’s Identity,
Ethnicity and Nationality, (Jakarta: Pusat Penelitian Kemasyarakatan dan Kebudayaan,
LIPI, 2004) 1.
11

12. experience with ID’s narratives has also illuminated the social stratification within the
Dayak ethnic group as well as other cultural particularities, and personal ironies of ID’s
members. It has given me insights as to how rural people feel about the way they are
being presented by ID’s narratives.
Narratives by their very nature essentialize and simplify as they attempt to create
identities and meaning out of a complex world. According to Hariprya Rangan’s book
about the Chipko social movement in India, narratives create a mythical world detached
from history and material reality in their attempt to order the various elements of the
mind or of life into a meaningful sequence. What Rangan’s exploration of narrative tells
us is that the interplay between narrative reality and material reality is complex, and it
often confusing, as to which one is creating the other. The question of what counts as a
narrative and what doesn’t is a continual debate about the reality of narrative, the
narrative nature of reality, and the nature of reality itself. In my opinion the source of
reality is neither purely material nor purely narrative, but a complicated exchange
between these interacting yet connected worlds. In many ways narratives reflect or mirror
cultural complexity as much as they may tend to mythologize, essentialize or simplify it.
Especially in the context of social movements engaged in the production of
narrative as means of individual and collective identity creation and community
formation, the interplay between narrative characterizations or definitions of identity,
community or history, and material reality are very interesting. Narrative analysis reveals
the various tensions, ironies and apparent contradictions as a result of the characterization
of various cultural realities within narratives themselves.
12

13. This paper plays particular attention to the way the narratives of ID and its
network (re)frames, (re)constructs, (re)creates, Dayak identity or “Dayakness” and the
various tensions involved in such a task. It does this through an exploration of the
apparent rhetorical contradictions involved in the process (re)framing the identity, and
creating a community of an indigenous people, who are continually adapting to changing
systems of identification and value.
When analyzing narratives it is important to not raise them to a status they do not
deserve. Narratives are an insightful way of analyzing social movements, but in order to
understand them completely I had to compare them with my experiences with ID’s
members and other social movement participants. Narrative is an important dimension of
sociological analysis, but it must be coupled with fieldwork that includes and
understanding of current political, social and cultural processes. Narrative analysis
becomes most insightful when it can be compared with other theoretical insights and
experiences.
The recent surge in narrative studies has risen because people have begun to
understand the power of narrative as a political and social tool. In fact the increased
interest in narrative studies is partially a result of a movement that disagrees with the
dominant scientific and Cartesian paradigm and its mechanistic and deterministic
conception of the self and culture. The “mechanistic” and “deterministic” approach sees
the self as a point enacted on by external forces, and culture as determined by simple
models. In contrast narratives emphasize “the self-shaping quality of human thought…
13

14. the power of stories to create and refashion personal identity” and culture. 9 Narrative
enthusiasts also attack “the social-scientific project of elaborating a body of
authoritative knowledge, more or less on the order of that which prevails in the natural
sciences.”10 The idea in claiming that there is “ a set of indisputable truths available to an
abstractly conceived “subject” of knowledge” is inherently and historically oppressive,
repressive and imperialistic and is linked to some of the worst cultural and ecological
atrocities in history.11 An emphasis on narrative reaffirms and validates cultural diversity
and the plurality of knowledge available on this multifaceted planet. In this sense
narrative becomes a critique on dominant understandings of rationality, methodology,
and human epistemology.12 In my opinion, narrative analysis provides a deep analysis,
and allows for a revealing reconstruction and deconstruction of complex social
phenomenon.
As a political tool and a social agent, narratives offer opportunities for alternative
forms of knowledge to engage with the discourses of “meta-narratives” created by
political and economic authorities. In this way, narratives engage in theoretical and
quantative elements, through their interactions with other narratives and become methods
of critical political theorizing and forms of resistance, resilience and adaptation. As
Joseph David observes, that narratives in social movements, “engage what Anthony
9
Lewis P. Hinchman and Sandra K Hinchman, introduction to Memory, Identity
Community: The Idea of Narrative in the Human Sciences, ed. Lewis P. Hinchman,
Sandra K. Hinchman (United States: SUNY Press, 1997), xiv.
10
Ibid., xiv.
11
Ibid., xiv
12
Ibid., xiv.
14

15. Giddens calls, “life politics”, a politics which concerns “issues which flow from
processes of self-actualization in post-traditional contexts.”13 Narratives are very
important for people, like the Dayak, who come from oral and interpretive cultures such
and who have a history of understanding and experiencing themselves and the world
through various types of story telling. Through the use of old and new techniques
narratives bring the power of the past, to the power of the future.
Currently Third World (if one can use such a term) development, and its
discourses have taken a more cultural turn and are less defined by the Western standards
of economic growth and conceptions of knowledge that they grew out of. Today’s social
movements, especially indigenous social movements in the developing world, are often a
reaction to development policies or development discourses that disregard traditional
modes of knowledge, production, management of natural resources and cultural
particularities, in favor of what they may call more “productive” methods. The Dayak
suffered greatly under the regime of the authoritative dictator Suharto, when their
traditional practices of slash and burn rice farming were considered less productive than
wet rice techniques, and other forms of natural resource management that were less
community oriented.
However, just as there has been a cultural turn in development policies, opening
up a space for new paradigms of development, Indonesia, since Suharto’s fall, has been
experiencing a gradual process of political decentralization, opening space for previously
marginalized communities to engage in processes of alternative development. NGOs
(LSMs in Indonesia) are playing a large role in these processes. This provides an
13
Joseph Davis, “Narratives and Social Movements: The Power of Stories” in
Stories of Change: Narratives and Social Movements, 5.
15

16. opportunity for alternative development paradigms that are a mixture of traditional and
modern conceptions to have a voice in local, national and international arenas, largely
through the production and publication of various types of narratives. These narratives
are directly tied to a network of institutions that facilitate the empowerment of the Dayak.
They do so through various programs and projects that are a result of alternative
paradigms of development combing traditional knowledge, like systems of natural
resource management with modern economic cooperative systems, and modern media
technologies. ID and its network have been leaders in devising alternative paradigms of
development through processes of resilience and adaptation. The evolving narratives of
ID have played a key role in the collective movement of masyarakat adat communities in
Indonesia. Indeed the linkage of masyarakat adat communities and the global Indigenous
Peoples movement is in itself and appropriation of a larger global narrative.
ID’s narratives provide great examples of what Arturo Escobar calls, “post-
development narratives created in hybrid cultures.”14 Alternative paradigms of
development that arise endogenously from particular cultural situations have become
increasingly important to indigenous people struggling to keep their traditions alive while
adapting to modernity. Arturo Escobar quoting Garci Canclini describes hybrid cultures
as “cultural crossings” that “frequently involve a radical restructuring of the links
between the traditional and the modern, the popular and the educated, the local and the
foreign… what is modern explodes and gets combined with what is not, is affirmed and
challenged at one and the same time.”15 In the narratives, Dayak identity and culture is
14
Arturo Escobar, Encountering Development: the Making and Unmaking of the
Third World. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), 220.
16

17. defined by a deep connection to a traditional cultural heritage grounded by an intimate
relationship with the natural evironment. This sentiment is coupled with the ability to be
resilient and adaptive in the modern world, as a means of creating a livable balance
between two worlds.
In our complex world, nothing is simple and apparent contradictions are more
present than clarity. Cultural exchange has taken on increased visibility. In this context
narratives also reveal aspects of cultural tension and adaptation that appear as rhetorical
contradictions within the narratives themselves. In the cultural interface between the
modern, the post-modern and the traditional, the Dayak are struggling to keep their
traditional identities and cultures while adapting to their marginalized economic and
political situation and removing culturally embedded stereotypes along the way. The
“Dayakness” defined by ID becomes a picture of the past framed by the present for the
sake of the future. As narratives create and inform identities in a changing world, people
in the process of adaptation begin to take on seemingly contradictory qualities, both in
the narratives and outside of them. These so-called contradictions are part of the process
of cultural evolution in the globalized and post-modern age. Cultural hybridity should no
longer be perceived as necessarily contradictory, only complex and continually changing.
This opinion is derived from a post-structuralist understanding of culture. Culture and
identity are not easily determinable concepts. They are part of a continually changing
dialectical and dialogical landscape, a kaleidoscope of human, societal and non human
interactions.
15
Ibid., 220.
17

18. Cultural Tension In Dayak History
In order to understand my analysis of the narratives of the Institute of Dayakology
and its networks a brief history of the term Dayak, and the Dayak people is essential.
The Dayak can be generally categorized as the indigenous people of the island of
Borneo. Borneo is divided into four different areas, Sarawak and Sabah, belong to
Malaysia, the Islamic Republic of Brunei, and Kalimantan, the largest portion, which
belongs to the Republic of Indonesia.
The Dutch colonial authorities and Malay Islamic Sultanates under them had used
Djakker, as a designation of savagery, backwardness and irrational superstition, a
designation that post-colonial nations would adopt as well until the Dayak revival in the
late 1990s.16 However, the etymological roots of the word Dayak may also be from the
Kenyah (an indigenous sub-ethnic group of West Kalimantan) word daya meaning
upriver, or interior, or aja a Malay term for native people.17 Once upon a time the
indigenous people of Borneo had populated the interior and the coastlines, but most of
the coastlines were taken over by foreign powers engaged in trade and colonial
expansion, as a result many Dayak sub-ethnic groups were pushed further into the
interior. For a long time the Dayak rejected this designation and refused to use the term,
this rejection is what lead to the Dayak revival that ID belongs to. As Borneo became
16
The establishment of the Institute of Dayakology played a major role in the
Dayak revival that entailed a redefinition of the word Dayak stripped of its pejorative
connotations.
17
Ju Lang Thung, Yekti Maunati and Peter Mulok Kedit, Reconstruction of the
Pan-Dayak Identity in Kalimantan and Sarawak: A Study on Minority’s Identity Ethnicity
and Nationality, 32.
18

19. populated by an increasing number of different ethnic groups and religions, the term
Dayak, as opposed to Djakker became an ethnic distinction that differentiated them from
other ethnic and religious groups such as the Malay (who were generally Muslim), or the
Tionghwa (Chinese and often Buddhist or Confuscian or Daoist), or the Madurese who
were also Muslim. Because of the inherent pluralism and complex ethnic interactions in
Indonesia, both in Malaysia and Indonesia, disputes over what constitutes any of these
ethnic groups are still debated, but there is still a distinction implied in the ambiguity.
The question of what it is to be Dayak has been an on going question in the lives
of the some 4,500 or more sub-ethnic groups that have been considered Dayak in some
way or another. This question is reflected as contradictions in the narratives of the
Institute of Dayakology. Certainly, the indigenous people of Borneo have had a shared
history, (albeit to different extents) of being socially, culturally, politically and
economically marginalized by different religions, commercial exploitation and
production, economic and development related projects, and subject to the domination of
ruling powers for centuries.
To adopt Janis Alcorn’s term, the Dayak are an “ecosystem people” for whom
natural resources not only provide systems of subsistence, but their customs,
cosmological beliefs and laws.18 Most of the Dayak groups practice slash and burn, or
swidden agriculture (although some practiced wet rice agriculture, or none at all) and
hunting and gathering. As a subsistence agriculture society, the most important
relationship is that between the people and their natural environment. Dayak livelihood,
18
Janis B. Alcorn and Antoinette G. Royo, eds. 2000 Indigenous Social
Movements and Ecological Resilience: Lessons From the Dayak of Indonesia,
(Washington DC: Biodiversity Support Program), 1.
19

20. identity and cosmology continue to be reshaped by different systems of value and the
Dayak are forced to adjust and adapt accordingly.
Throughout history, various religious groups have threatened and altered their
various animistic belief systems, known collectively as kaharingan. The Bornean region
has been part of a long history of trading that introduced many religious influences. Since
the 7th century until the arrival of the Islamic Sultanates, Hindu-Bhuddist Empires of
Indonesia had a presence in Kalimantan through trade.19 Hindu interactions with the
Dayak are a deep and complicated medley of historical, political linguistic and religious
transformations. The influences of Hindu-Bhuddist and Indian culture can be seen clearly
in Dayak animism and in systems of governance. However, it is believed that Hindus let
the Dayaks lead their own lives in peace, never forcing them violently to become Hindus,
nor attempting to dislodge their traditional, beliefs, practices or systems of governance.
The first Muslims to arrive in Borneo were Malay, Arab and Indian traders, in the
12th century. The Dayak who converted to Islam became known as Malays and many of
them lost their traditional Dayak identity, along with their animistic beleifs.20 However a
large sum of Dayak refused to become Muslim partly because their main diet was wild
boar, and the religion of Islam prohibits the consumption of pork. Some Muslims from
Kalimantan will acknowledge their Dayak heritage, but most do not identify with it. The
Islamic Sultanates who arrived in the 15th century were considerably worse towards the
19
Unpublished Dissertation, Larry Kenneth Johnson, The Effect of Dayak
Worldview, Customs, Traditions and Customary Law (Adat-Istiadat) on the Intepretation
of the Gospel in West Kalimantan, Indonesian Borneo, (2000), 28.
20
Ibid., 31.
20

21. Dayak than the Hindus. Under the Islamic Sultanates the Dayak had to pay taxes of boar,
chickens and rice and were often forced to become slaves.
Christianity arrived in Kalimantan in several waves (depending on the region)
beginning in the 1890s as a result of Dutch conquests of Kalimantan. The first Christians
to interact with the Dayak were Catholics (Roman Catholics and later Kapusins, branch
of the Dutch Fransican Order), but Protestant Evangelist sects arrived in 1905 and began
to push into the interior.21 The Christians, both Catholic and Protestant, still have a huge
impact on Dayak identity. Both Christian sects acted differently to the Dayak. The
Catholics were generally more lenient about the practice of certain pagan rituals (after a
Christianization of them) than the Protestants, who forbade all other forms of worship.
They both saw the Dayak as backward savages in need of a civilized ethical code and
cosmology, a similar attitude to that of the Muslims.
Christianity although it has continuously attempted to destroy and de-legitimize
Dayak belief systems in favor of Christian hierarchies and ethics, has been very important
to education among the Dayak. The Dayak social movement in West Kalimantan would
not have begun had Christian educations systems not produced an educated class of
Dayak teachers and priests. As well, Christianity has now become an important
characteristic of identity for some Dayak. Indonesia only recognizes five religions,
Catholicism and Protestantism are two of them. Indonesia is close to 85% Muslim. In this
context, many Dayaks see themselves as being marginalized not only as animists, but
also as Christians.
21
Ju Lang Thung, Yekti Maunati, Peter Mulok Kedit, The (Re)construction of the
Pan Dayak Identity in Kalimantan and Sarawak: A Study on Minority’s Identity,
Ethnicity and Nationality, 24.
21

22. The introduction of Hinduism, Islam and Christianity led to transformations and
disruptions in conceptions of Dayak identity, but Christianity developed the most
importance among the Dayak. The Christian churches (mostly Catholic) gained many
converts, but their converts were not forced to give up their Dayak identity to the same
extent as Muslim converts. However, many of the Dayaks who live in the interior are
only nominally Christian and keep many of their animistic beleifs.22
The Dutch East India Company (Vereenighde Oost-Indische Compagnie) began
the commercially minded natural resource extraction in the name of economic progress in
competition with English and Portugese presences beginning in 1602. After going
bankrupt the VOC was taken over by the Dutch government and through various
alliances established their influence in Kalimantan.23 The Dutch continued the natural
resource extraction begun by the VOC in opposition to the subsistence methods of natural
resource management held by the Dayak. This strategy became reflected in national
development policies that severely altered the ecosystems of the Dayak through (illegal,
according to customary law) strategies of large-scale natural resource exploitation for the
development of economic capital.
The Dutch had a policy that when they annexed an area they would allow the pre-
existing systems of governance to continue until new rulers replaced them. When conflict
between the old and new systems began to compete, the Dutch had a policy of destroying
the pre-existing systems of governance by eliminating their power over people and
22
Larry Kenneth Johnson, The Effect of Dayak Worldview, Customs, Traditions
and Customary Law (Adat-Istiadat) on the Interpretation of the Gospel in West
Kalimantan, Indonesian Borneo, (2000), 27.
23
Ibid., 28.
22

23. natural resources. During World War II, the competing Dutch and Japanese colonial
powers contributed to the disruption of their lifestyles as they added increasing political
control over the Dayak. The Japanese systematically killed Dayak social leaders and
other important community figures. However during the short Japanese invasion a group
of West Kalimantan Dayak fought against the Japanese without any other military forces
and created the independent polity called Madjang Desa, complete with its own King and
system of rule. Majang Desa’s leader agreed that it was politically beneficial that they
join the state of Indonesia in 1947, after its independence from the Dutch.24 After WWW
II from 1945 to 1960 the attempts by Sukarno to create an independent state of Indonesia
worsened and disrupted their lives further as they were forced to join another alien
political and economic authority. The political lives of the Dayak became more
recognized at this time, however Sukarno held the same orientation towards land
acquisition that did not recognize Dayak customary laws (hukum adat in Indonesian).
When elites from Java took over the colonial apparatus and wrote the Constitution in
1945 this policy was adopted into an Indonesian context. The Constitution therefore
recognizes adat institutions and practices only if they do not interfere with development.
The strategy of large-scale exploitation of natural resources for the sake economic
development was implemented in a fierce and uncompromising way during the New
Order regime of the dictator Suharto. The New Order regime was based on a form of
kleptocracy in which the dictator handed out pieces of masyarakat adat land within the
resource rich archipelago of Indonesia to his political and military cronies with belief that
24
Janis B. Alcorn and Antoinette G. Royo, eds. 2000 Indigenous Social
Movements and Ecological Resilience: Lessons From the Dayak of Indonesia,
(Washington DC: Biodiversity Support Program), 38.
23

24. private industries linked to the government would strengthen the economy.25 The
Indonesian elite, a predominantly Javanese group, were the people who had access to
natural resources that belonged to the Dayak. The values of the elite directly affect land
use decisions but are the basis for the development policies.
Suharto’s New Order regime was based on giving out land, that he deemed
suitable for development purposes. Suharto continued with the Dutch colonial policy that
masyarakat adat groups only had rights if they did not conflict with development
policies. This, in addition to the corruption already inherent in the Indonesian
governmental system, left the masyarakat adat with very few rights to land they had
traditionally farmed and by their own customary laws legally owned. He also continued a
project started by Dutch colonials called the Trasmigrasi, in which people from the
“inner islands” of Java and Madura, among others, were transported to the resource rich
“outer islands” such as Kalimantan and Irian Jaya to work in various timber concessions,
mining sights, oil palm plantations and other development projects that extracted
Kalimantan’s natural resources for commercial production of raw materials. The
Transmigrasi severely complicated land rights issues, as sacred land was taken from the
Dayak and given to companies and foreign workers of different ethnic groups.
In the hopes that they would create a better and more equitable economy, The
World Bank and other large development banks like the Asian Development Bank and
the IMF, supported these neo-colonial policies. They did in fact boost the economy
temporarily, through oil exports, but in the process these policies marginalized the
Dayak.
24

25. The Dayak were coerced into giving up their land, as chiefs were often offered
positions of power. They were also offered the benefits of development, such as schools,
hospitals, roads, electricity, and water supplies, in exchange for what were once their rice
fields. In some occasions there was very little discussion and land was taken by military
force. Many rural Dayak did not enjoy the benefits of development, and simply had their
land taken away from them.
The institutions that were given to the Dayak in exchange for their lands belonged
to the same development system and had little interest in placing Dayak culture in the
school curriculums, or using Dayak rituals to heal people in hospitals. The Dayak were
taught to sacrifice their traditions, their identity and their land for the sake of modernity
and development just as they were taught to sacrifice their religious identity and
livelihoods for the sake of civilization.
The government sought to completely destroy swidden agriculture and replace it
with settled agriculture. During this process the neo-colonial government forced the
Dayak to leave their sacred land and resettle elsewhere so that resource-rich patches of
forest could be utilized for mono-crop plantations of oil-palm, and for wet-rice
agriculture, for increased production and economic development.
Suharto’s New Order Regime marginalized the Dayak by perpetuation of
stereotypes representing the Dayak as “backwards” and “uncivilized” “headhunters” that
began with the arrival of the Dutch. These stereotypes legitimized development for the
sake of “civilizing” an “uncivilized” people. The development discourses used the
rhetoric of national unity as a means to pursue economic goals, but ironically national
unity was based on Javanese ideals.
25

26. Suharto was forced from power in 1998 ushering in a new era based on political
decentralization, which made the country vulnerable to social movements and sectarian
problems. The Dayak struggle became increasingly active in the political decentralization
processes in Indonesia since the fall and resignation of the dictator Suharto. After the
dictator fell, a democracy was established and issues of legal pluralism and political
autonomy were brought to the surface. Indonesia’s motto Binneka Ika Tunggal, or
“Unity in Diversity” was slowly turning from a Javanese idiom into a pluralistic reality.
The Dayak were furthered stigmatized by violent interethnic conflicts with the
Madurese in West Kalimantan in 1996, 1999 and Central Kalimantan in 2001. These
clashes brought various violent elements of Dayak culture such as headhunting to viewers
all over the world. However, the Institute of Dayakology eliminated these stigmatisms
through a (re)framing, (re)definition and (re)construction of Dayak identity, and the
creation of a solidified community of Dayak power.
History Of The Institute Of Dayakology
The analysis of the narratives produced by ID and its network must begins with a
summary of the history of the social movement they belong to. This history is derived
directly from several of ID’s narratives, an article by John Bamba, grant proposals
written by Stephanus Djuweng, as well as a book called The (Re)construction of the Pan-
Dayak Identity in Kalimantan and Sarawak: A Study on Minority’s Identity, Ethnicity and
Nationality. The (re)framing, (re)defintion and (re)construction of the Dayak identity is
rooted in the history of ID and its network of Dayak run institutions.
The Institute of Dayakology was born of the Pancur Kasih (Fountains of Care)
26

27. foundation, the mother of the Dayak social movement in West Kalimantan. Started in
1981 by a group of classically Christian educated Dayak school teachers (trained mostly
at the University of Tanjung Pura, and seminary school), Pancur Kasih was established
on the basis that Dayak empowerment depended on better organization, political
mobilization and a strong cultural base.26 These classically educated Dayak perceived the
the Dayak people as a whole, as being largely politically uneducated, disempowered,
politically disorganized, but having the potential and knowledge to change this
predicament. As Dayak with a higher level of social positioning, these teachers thought
they could create a Dayak revival that would empower the Dayak people and deliver
them from the margins of society. Pancur Kasih emphasized, the “spirit of solidarity”,
“self-reliance” and the need for critical awareness among the Dayak.27 These three values
became central to the (re)framing of Dayak identity.
PK began to set up schools that encouraged critical awareness among the Dayak.
Eventually they started a Credit Union, the Pancur Kasih Credit Union, with easily
accessible credit with low interest in 1987. This added an economic dimension to the
empowerment of the Dayak people. However John Bamba (the head of ID) clarifies that:
The core of CU movement is not managing money, but an education
process that aimed at mental and attitude change. It is an education
process the leads to strong spirit of solidarity and togetherness among its
members in solving their financial problems. The key word is
EDUCATION and the motto is that CU started, developed and controlled
26
John Bamba, “The Contribution of Institutional Resilience to Ecological
Resilience in Kalimantan, Indonesia: A Cultural Perspective. (Personal Copy: Date
Unknown), 25. A similar version of this article is featured in Janis B. Alcorn and
Antoinette G. Royo, eds. 2000 Indigenous Social Movements and Ecological Resilience:
Lessons From the Dayak of Indonesia, (Washington DC: Biodiversity Support Program).
27
Ibid., 26
27

28. depending on EDUCATION.”28
Still, the credit unions became a central economic force for empowering the
Dayak people. In 1992, 200 credit union members began BPR-PAN BANK (Bank
Perkreditan Rakyat Pancur Banua Katulistiwa) to provide small business loans to rural
people and to empower people’s economic livelihood and encourage self-reliance.
During the formation of this bank in the late 1980s, a discussion group was established to
address critical political and developmental issues, as well as other social, cultural,
economic and spiritual issues, facing the Dayak. During the 1980s, the Dayak
experienced severe political and cultural marginalization due to the dictator Suharto’s
oppressive governmental and developmental policies. The group became highly
important due to the tension created between the rural Dayak and oppressive government
development programs during the New Order regime that threatened their lives, their
livelihood and their land.
In 1991, the discussion group was formalized and the Institute of Dayakology
Research and Development (IDRD) was established and was later assisted with loans
from BPR-PAN BANK. Because IDRD dealt with a wide range of issue many of which
were extremely critical of the Suharto regime, IDRD joined the less politically oriented
LP3S (Lembaga Pelatihan Dan Penunjanug Pembangunan Sosial), or Institute for
Training and Supporting Social Development. Although IDRD functioned independently
it was technically attached to an organization that was not politically oriented or blatantly
critical of governmental policy.29 Over time IDRD became Institute Dayakology (ID) and
28
Ibid., 27
29
Ibid., 27.
28

29. began to develop its own character, slowly becoming the nexus of the Dayak struggle in
West Kalimantan., If Pancur Kasih, moving with great force and enegery is the mother of
the Dayak social movement, then Institute of Dayakology is the brainchild of that
impetuous mother
The Institute of Dayakology gave birth to several other organizations that
functioned independently but were part of the Pancur Kasih family. Shortly after the
establishment of ID, several other institutions were born in order to deepen the ability to
address all aspects of Dayak life that had been affected. LBBT, (Lembaga Bela Banua
Talino) was established to revitalize the customary law systems of Dayak people and to
empower the people through paralegal training and community organization. PPSDAK
(Pemberdayaan Pengelolaan Sumber Daya Alam Kerakyatan) and PPSHK (Program
Pemberdayaan Sistem Hutan Kerakyatan) were established to advocate indigenous
systems of natural resource management and rights over the management of their original
territory.30 PPSDAK was responsible for the establishment of a community re-mapping
program that documents Dayak land and resource use based on indigenous knowledge.
There are several other organizations that are part of ID’s internal network. Many
umbrella terms are used to emphasize that the multitude of projects supported by the
network are part of the same movement. A SEGARAK (Serikat Gerakan Pemberdayaan
Masyarakat Adat Dayak), The Union of the Movement for the Empowerment of Dayak
Peoples is an organization that deals with funding, facilitation, and planning for all of the
internal networks. It focuses primarly on economic strategies and logistics. One of the
most important children of Pancur Kasih was Kooperasi Pancur Dangeri, also called
30
Ibid., 27, 28.
29

30. Pancur Danger Rubber Cooperative, a cooperative started by Stephanus Djuweng the
Executive Director of SEGARAK. Pancur Danger was a cooperative for Dayak rubber
farmers. established in 1994 in order to improve the economic standards of the Dayak
while retaining its harmonious relationship with nature, and its organic and sustainable
methods of natural resource management. Kooperasi Pancur Dangeri also opened a line
of Dayak owned grocery stores that managed rubber transactions and sold house hold
commodities at affordable prices. All of the organizations, programs, community projects
and cooperatives of the internal networks are part of the Kooperasi Persekutuan Dayak,
the United Dayak Cooperative. According the Djuweng, Kooperasi Persekutuan Dayak
was a strategic change of the acronym KPD (that initially stood for Kooperasi Pancur
Dangeri), in order to strengthen the emphasis on Dayak solidarity.31
Mediums And Messages
ID is a research institution aimed at restoration, revitalization, restitution and
advocacy of Dayak culture and identity. ID is also engaged in a (re)framing,
(re)definition and (re)construction of Dayak identity, largely through the publication and
dissemination of various narratives.
ID’s projects, programs and narratives are grounded in a vision and mission held
by all of the organizations in the internal networks.32 According to their website, The
vision is: Indigenous Peoples, The Dayak Indigenous Peoples iparticular, are able to
31
Stephanus Djuweng, “Pancur Dangeri Grant Proposal to the Danish
Government (Personal Copy).”
32
See Figure 1 for a full list of the networked organizations. The last column is a
list of national level LSMs that that cooperate with the network.
30

31. determine and manage their social, cultural, economic and political lives, towards self
reliance in togetherness in the spirit of love to struggle for their dignity and
sovereignty.”33 And the mission, “To struggle for freedom from dominant culture, social
and economy through critical participatory research, advocacy and facilitation in order to
encourage the growth of critical culture.”34
The Institute of Dayakology produces various types of narratives for various
audiences, but they are all grounded in the same vision and mission and emphasize the
core values of solidarity, self-reliance and education through critical culture with an
underlying emphasis on their intimacy with the natural environment. ID’s narratives are
framed to appeal to all types of Dayak people, the rural Dayak, the classically educated
LSM members and the elite Dayak. Their narratives are also framed to appeal to those
interested in interethnic solidarity in Kalimantan and Indonesia, larger social movement
networks concerning indigenous people on both national and international levels (for
example NGOs and LSMs), as well as academics and cultural tourists interested in Dayak
culture and social movements.
In order to share information about the Dayak while encouraging critical culture,
ID uses a progressive form of anthropological research called Participatory Action
Research. This type of research is common in grassroots social movements as its
emphasis on developing critical analysis is often used as a tool for social and political
mobilization. Participatory Action Research is a type of anthropology that, “involves all
relevant parties in actively examining together current action (which they experience as
33
Brochure published by The Institute of Dayakology (Personal Copy)
34
Brochure published by The Institute of Dayakology (Personal Copy)
31

32. problematic) in order to change and improve it. They do this by critically reflecting on
the historical, political, cultural, economic, geographical and other contexts that makes
sense of it.” 35 This type of anthropology involves what is often called the “subject” in
the anthropological process, as well as in a larger social process of empowerment
through critical awareness. This method ensures the participation of whatever group
or person is being documented, in a larger social movement, giving them a sense of
solidarity as well as fostering a sense of self-reliance, and providing them with a
critical edge. It makes them a radical actor in a social movement that intends to be
educated and critical about the state of the world and, in particular, of the Dayak
situation. In this context, the Dayak can come to understand the process behind the
destruction and permutation of their cultural heritage and identity, giving them a
chance to redefine their identify for themselves while maintaining their “Dayakness”.
Thus, the Institute of Dayakology upholds an understanding of “Dayakness” that is like a
tree, clinging to its roots in nature but branching out and gaining strength and power in
order to position itself in a forest of converging values.
By producing these various forms of media, ID engages with the stories of Dayak
who have either suffered or triumphed, and have in the process provided an example of
the importance of Dayak identity and culture, and the legitimization of its continuance.
The narratives, apart from emphasizing solidarity, self-reliance and education through
critical culture, also emphasize the cultural and ecological resilience and the adaptation
the Dayak have shown throughout history. The narratives often provide alternative
paradigms of development based on a mixture of traditional and modern knowledge.
35
Yoland Wadsworth, (1998) “What is Participatory Action Research?,” Action
Research International , http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/ari/p-ywadsworth98.html.
32

33. Traditional oral narratives in the form of stories and myths that were central to the Dayak
kaharingan, or belief systems, are translated into the narratives of the social movement
for the purpose of creating a dialogue between converging realities and conceptions of
identity. As I will explain later, these converging realities and conceptions of identity
appear as rhetorical contradictions in many narratives.
Their most effective and important tool for documentation, education and
advocacy is the Kalimantan Review (KR), a monthly magazine that “aims at
disseminating the wisdom of indigenous Dayak people and the information on problems
they are facing; providing a forum for mutual learning and empowerment, encouraging
the growth of critical culture; and promoting social reconciliation in Kalimantan.”36 The
Kalimantan Review is published in both English and Indonesian and includes various
descriptions in local dialects. The Kalimantan Review is a major source of Dayak
narratives and continues to tell individual and collective Dayak stories to various
audiences. The Kalimantan Review has a special section called Swara Burung or “Voice
of the Hornbill”, which features articles about Dayak professions and traditional
knowledge, with titles such as “Labour Farmer.”37
The Kalimantan Review is available at ID’s website, www.dayakology.com where
the Kalimantan Review and various books are available through a subscription or by
direct purchase. The websites acts as a narrative hub, where various other publications
from the organizations within the network can be accessed. It contains a collective story
of the Dayak people, available to the world wide web community.
36
Brochure published by The Institute of Dayakology (Personal Copy).
37
Kalimantan Review English Edition Volume VII/June 2002.
33

34. Within West Kalimantan, the Kalimantan Review is delivered to both urban and
rural Dayak environments and is meant for all literate audiences. KR is also available in
credit unions, and in Dayak run grocery stores through out West Kalimantan. Projects,
programs, and facilitations always exhibit copies of the Kalimantan Review to give to
Dayak participants. This way the narratives are not just for elite actors, or educated LSM
members, they are a source for all the Dayak people.
As a research institution ID produces individual and collective Dayak stories
through various mediums. These include books, DVDs, VCDs, videos, audiotapes, Dayak
run radio shows and books in local dialects, Indonesian and English languages These
productions feature rituals, oral stories, and particular responses to the life threatening
destruction and marginalization of the diverse Dayak-sub-ethnic groups of West
Kalimantan. Their narratives also feature stories of resilience, success, protest,
empowerment and community activism that have occurred as a result of various
programs and projects sponsored by the internal network, as well as stories of self
motivated Dayak people and communities working to save their lives, land and culture.
To appeal to more academic audiences, ID has also published several volumes of the
Journal of Dayakology including academic explanations of Dayak issues, and various
academic books.
Other important narrative sources include various grant proposals and project
descriptions that, although not published for the public eye, are visible to a very
important audience of national and international grant givers and donors, and play a very
important role in telling, and selling the Dayak story.
34

35. ID also publishes and presents articles in local and foreign journals, newspapers,
magazines and e-zines. They are often featured during presentations, and forums for
indigenous rights hosted by local, national and international LSMs and NGOs.
ID also have a library and a book shop filled called Budaya Kritis, (Critical
Culture in English) with educational books to keep the Dayak informed and educated
about all of these things. All of the various narratives are available from the shop, and the
newest KR release is readily available. The books featured in the shop include those
published by members of the internal network, as well as translations, both English and
Indonesian of important political theorists, economic thinkers and revolutionaries. The
shop also hosts a variety of merchandise such as bags, T-shirts, and belts that advertise
the Pancur Dangeri Cooperative saying, “Hanya KPD!”, or “Only KPD!” All of these
different commodities assist in creating and perpetuating the Dayak story, they are all
types of narrative communication. Both the website and the shop act not only as narrative
hubs, but as outlets for the selling of the Dayak social movement. Although monetary
profit is not the central aim of the movement, economic empowerment is central, and
selling the Dayak story becomes a means by which it is achieved.
Advocacy and empowerment strategies that promote education through critical
awareness, solidarity and self-reliance are also organized through ID’s collaboration with
a network of internal and external institutions.38 ID is part of various other larger
networks on both national and international scales. Through these social movement
networks,
ID can carry its narratives that tell the Dayak story, and perpetuate Dayak identity
35

36. as well as expand the social movement into the stories of other “eco-system” groups
facing similar problems. These networks provide a space where Dayaks can relate to
other indigenous groups, or masyarakat adat dealing with similar issues on national and
international levels. ID’s connection to larger networks goes back to their vision and
mission.39
The networks of ID are part of a highly sophisticated network that has addressed
all the different facets of Dayak life, culture and identity as part of (re)framing,
(re)defintion, and (re)construction of Dayak identity. As opposed to simply creating one
organization dedicated to Dayak cultural heritage, there are separate institutional units
that can respond to the complex issues facing the Dayak. It is an incredibly progressive,
forward thinking idea that shows their intent is not necessarily to freeze Dayak culture
but to adapt it. The institutions create the power to continue the creation and recreation of
Dayak identity, responding to the changing political, cultural, and ecological landscape
by combining a strong sense of idealism coupled with the power of practical
implementation. These two things, I believe are, the signs of an efficient social
movement.
39
Brochure Published by The Institute of Dayakology (Personal Copy).
36

37. SECTION 2: UNPACKING DAYAK IDENTITY
An Analysis Of The Narratives Of ID And Its Network
An analysis of the narratives of ID and its network reveals the complexity of the
Dayak situation, as they stand in between traditional, modern and post modern worlds.
Through the use of narrative, ID and its network are (re)framing, (re)defining and
(re)constructing Dayak identity. As part of this process the Dayak are changing negative
stereotypes and creating legitimacy and power. They are reviving Dayak identity by
propounding an inherent culture built on positive and appealing values and qualities.
These qualities include critical awareness, self-reliance, solidarity, resilience, adaptation
and a deep intimacy with the natural environment. New values and qualities create a
new community of Dayaks that transcends geographical boundaries and unites them in a
common social movement while connecting them to other people. ID and its network are
also challenging historical oppression and dominant society’s development paradigms, as
a means to regain their dignity and sovereignty while having to adapt to the inevitable
realities of modernity.
In the process of (re)framing, (re)definition and (re)construction, the narratives
reveal internal inconsistencies that can create contradictory messages about Dayak
identity, on collective and individual levels, and perpetuate new and often romanticized
stereotypes. The layers of narrative extend these transformations from the local to the
national and international realm where they are appropriated into larger narratives.
37

38. The Revival Of Dayak Identity
The (re)framing (re)definition and (re)construction of Dayak identity in West
Kalimantan began with the creation of the Pancur Kasih Foundation, and the birth of the
Institute of Dayakology and its internal network of Dayak run organizations. Ju-Lang
Thung writes, “For the Dayak of Kalimantan, the establishment of the Institute or
Dayakology in the mid 1970s represented the revival of the Dayak identity that for so
long -- due to the historical marginalization and embarrassment of the Dutch colonial
period -- had been denied by the Dayak themselves.”40
The concept of the revival of Dayak identity by ID, and the consequent
(re)framing, (re)definition, and (re)construction of it, is based on eliminating the
negative characteristics associated with Dayak identity and culture, and replacing them
with positive characteristics. This process is largely a reaction to the historical
stigmatisms characterizing the Dayak as “primitive”, “backwards” and “savage”
headhunters who are brought easily to violence, incite interethnic tension, and practice an
“unproductive” form of agriculture. ID’s (re)framing of Dayak identity is also part of the
process of delivering them from a position of disempowerment. As Ju-Lang Thung puts it
in an explanation of the Dayak revival:
The Dayak realized the process of subordination by the so-called
“outsiders” was partly supported by their own powerless situation.
Therefore in an effort to change their unfavorable position, empowerment
becomes the key word which is used to create a “New Dayak”, a Dayak
who could stand up to others if necessary and who is able to sit and speak
with non Dayak if necessary. 41
40
Ibid., 2.
41
Ibid., 4.
38

39. These negative stereotypes are linked to the continual oppression and
marginalization practiced by both the colonial and national governments. Ju-Lang Thung
has positioned the Institute of Dayakology within the larger (re)construction of the Pan-
Dayak identity that seeks to redefine perceived characteristics of Dayak identity.42 The
process of (re)constructing and (re)framing of the Dayak identity requires a change in the
perception of the ethnic, local, national and international population as well as the Dayak
themselves.. As Ju Lang Thung says, “Today we are witnessing the emergence of the so-
called Pan-Dayak movement involving not only the Dayak in Kalimantan-Indonesia, but
also those in Sarawak-Malaysia…”43The (re)construction of the Pan-Dayak identity is a
new term that evolved as result of various violent interethnic clashes between the Dayak
and the Madurese in 1996, 1999, and 2001 that reproduced negative stereotypes of Dayak
identity because some of the attacks were started by them. The emergence of the Pan-
Dayak identity is part of an evolving new community of Dayak power, that is being
woven together by a (re)framing, (re)defining and (re)construction of Dayak identity.
In many articles John Bamba, the head of ID, provides a description of what it
means to be a Dayak that is based on their intimacy with the natural environment as an
“eco-system’” people. In one article John Bamba is quoted as saying:
Nature, the soil, rivers and the forest are perceived by the Dayak as the
“common” house where all beings are nurtured and protected…The Dayak
would not think of treating it exploitatively as the soil is our body, the
river is our blood and the forests are the breath of life. These three
42
Ibid., 1.
43
Ju-Lang Thung, Yekti Maunati, Peter Mulok Kedit, The (Re)construction of the
Pan-Dayak Identity in Kalimantan and Sarawak: A Study on Minority’s Identity,
Ethnicity and Nationality. Pusat Penelitian Kemasyarakatan dan Kebudayan, LIPI, 2004),
1.
39

40. elements gives us our identity as Dayak people, give shape to our culture
and beliefs, and also provide us with our livelihoods.44
This is a basic description of Dayak identity tying the Dayak to their traditional
cultural heritage and identity. Similar definitions, mentioning the importance of the
Dayak relationship with nature, soil and rivers appears in many of ID’s narratives. In the
narratives, the various Dayak sub-ethnic groups are also are unified by their common
intimacy with the land, their common state of marginalization and share a common
struggle to regain the dignity and sovereignty they once had.
As a whole, the narratives emphasize the power of a mixture between traditional
and modern knowledge in the creation of a new conception of “Dayakness” as a way of
empowering all Dayak and reviving their identity. Judging from several readings and
from my experience in various Dayak locations from kampung kota to kampung desa
(city villages to rural villages) , staying purely “traditional” (whatever that may mean) is
something neither possible nor a desired goal for most Dayaks.
The destruction of Dayak life is given much attention in the narratives of ID and
the Dayak are often described as a culture that has been “destroyed” or pushed to near
“extinction”. However, in the new narrative, as a people, the Dayak are no longer
defined as a stigmatized ethnic group. They are no longer identified with social, cultural,
political, economic and religious “backwardness” deemed unproductive in thought and
action. Nor are they considered disempowered. In the new narratives, the term Dayak is
one of empowerment, as Dayak identity is defined by the characteristics of self-reliance,
44
Ita Natalia, “Protecting and Regaining Dayak Lands Through Community
Mapping” in Janis B. Alcorn and Atoinette G. Royo, eds. 2000 Indigenous Social
Movements and Ecological Resilience: Lessons From the Dayak of Indonesia,
(Washington DC: Biodiversity Support Program), 61.
40

41. solidarity and critical culture, resilience and adaptation, as well as other positive values.
The narratives weave a new Dayak identity by introducing new values of
empowerment and knowledge. However they also attempt to present these various
qualities as inherent to Dayak culture, as a way of counter-acting the perception of
disempowerment both for the Dayak, and for others.
The narratives also stress the characteristics of justice, egalitarianism, democracy,
gender equality, and non-violence as inherent Dayak qualities. This process becomes
complicated because ID is forced to pick specific examples of these qualities form a
diverse variety of Dayak societies, and present them as being more or less true of all
Dayak people. It requires a form of cultural universalizing that creates new stereotypes in
the place of old ones.
The grant proposals of Stephanus Djuweng, from the office of SEGARAK, have
a specific section where they indicate the values and characteristics central to the
programs. For example, in this grant proposal to the Danish Government we see how
explicitly ID emphasizes various characteristics and values.
2.3. Characteristics
Proactive, Strong and Reliable
2.4. Values of KPD
1. Self-help
2. Responsibility
3. Democracy
4. Justice
5. Equality
6. Solidarity
7. Self-reliant45
45
ICCO Grant Proposal (Personal Copy)
41

42. In sum, the narratives of the Institute of Dayakology are framed to reflect a type
of Dayak that is self-reliant and is capable of critically analyzing the social, cultural,
political, economic and spiritual situations around him or her, while remaining connected
to their traditional cultural heritage and identity defined by his or her intimacy with the
natural environment.
The emphasis on solidarity as a core value does not only refer to a bringing
together of different Dayak sub-ethnic groups under a common struggle, but an attempt to
create some sense of solidarity with other ethnic groups in Kalimantan, such as the
Madurese. Thus, the “New Dayak” is characterized as showing solidarity with other
ethnic groups as opposed to causing ethnic tensions.
They also collaborate with the various organizations involved in the Pan-Dayak
struggle in Sarawak and Sabah Malaysia to increase Dayak solidarity in Borneo. The
Institute of Dayakology is a big player in a larger grassroots movement in Indonesia
struggling for the rights of masyarakat adat all over the diverse archipelago. They have
been responsible for the creation of various institutions, alliances and coalitions that are
at the forefront of indigenous issues.
(Re)framing, (Re)construction and (Re)definition of Dayak Identity
Although ID’s narratives are responsible for the redefinition of Dayak identity in
a rhetorical and discursive sense, they are attached to a social movement that since its
origins has provided an environment in which this (re)framing and (re)definition or
Dayak identity can be (re)constructed and lived out and have practical manifestations. In
this sense the social, political and ecological landscape in which this redefinition is lived
42

43. out becomes a narrative of its own, telling a story about the Dayak struggle. Through its
various projects and programs, ID and its network create an environment where the
Dayak can manifest and realize the characteristics that describe them in the narratives.
The metaphor of a play works well here. The Dayak are actors placed on a stage
where they can develop and empower their character. However the play and the
characters in it have a director, the Institute of Dayakology and its network. As a director,
ID and its network control the ways that Dayak identity is (re)framed, (re)defined, and
(re)constructed, and the way the Dayak story is told. By controlling the narratives, and
the practical implementation of projects and programs, they have a significant influence
over the actions of these actors, and the flow of events. At the same time, as directors, ID
must take special care in trying to tell the Dayak story to multiple audiences, and
therefore have to account for differing perspectives, while creating a cohesive and
universally believable drama.
Embedded Contradictions in Hybrid Realities
Due to the complexity of trying to (re)frame, (re)defined and (re)construct Dayak
identity, the narratives present various apparent contradictions and tensions within the
rhetoric, as a result of conflicting qualities and values. These tensions and apparent
contradictions reveal the complexity of the Dayak situation, on both the individual and
the institutional level, as they try to adapt to modern scenarios while keeping true to their
traditional cultural heritage. Processes of adaptation create interesting realities between
the traditional and the modern, the new and the old. This is especially evident in ID’s
narratives and rhetoric about the evils of “development” and the practical necessity of
43

44. adopting and adapting many elements of the development process. These hybrid realities
exist on individual and institutional levels. In the process of adaptation these tensions
reveal importance of narrative as a political tool and social agent in the process of
adaptation. These embedded contradictions manifest themselves in almost all of the
major narrative themes.
Destruction, Resilience And Adaptation
ID’s narrative present Dayak identity and culture as being destroyed and even
brought to near extinction. They present this destruction and near extinction as a result of
the historical disempowerment of the Dayak that was caused by continual oppression and
marginalization. As a result, a feeling of disempowerment became embedded in the
Dayak consciousness. Regardless of whether the narratives are from ID, SEGARAK,
LBBT, or PPDSAK, as part of the same network and social movement, they all share a
similar vision and mission differing only in terms of their specific focus. All of the
narratives emphasize how Dayak identity and culture have been destroyed, even to the
point of near extinction. The contemporary Dayak situation has been defined by a history
of political and economic marginalization that has attempted to destroy disregard and
discriminate against their traditional methods of agricultural livelihood (particularly slash
and burn), their religious beliefs, their traditional systems of governance and their
identities, resulting in tremendous changes and problems. ID’s website, which acts as a
central connection to the other connected organizations, expresses this emphasis on
destruction clearly. The website says in reference to the creation of Pancur Kasih, the
mother of it all, “the background of this establishment came about from the reality that
44

45. the Dayak culture is in near destruction by the entering of various state development
programs into the many aspects of Dayak’s life.”46 The Kalimantan Review features
many articles on the destruction of Dayak identity, culture and land, especially on the
replacement of sacred Dayak sites and graveyards with oil-palm plantations, and timber
concessions.
However, in their attempt to re(frame) Dayak identity ID’s narratives present a
“New Dayak” that is resilient and adaptive. Resilience implies the ability to spring back
after being changed or destroyed, and adaptation implies being able to change with the
times without sacrificing traditional values through assimilation.
While ID’s narratives pay attention to the near destruction of Dayak culture and
identity, they also emphasize the institutional, cultural and ecological resilience, and
adaptation exhibited by the Dayak throughout their history. The institutional, cultural and
ecological resilience and adaptation of the Institute of Dayakology and of the Dayak,
displayed in the narratives have been used by other NGOs that are part of the vast
network of social change in Indonesia and the world as lessons in resilience. Institutional,
cultural and ecological resilience are tightly connected to sustainable development, and
ID narratives have helped define an alternative development model that builds this
adaptive capacity to respond to change.
Every action, protest or demonstration of resilience or adaptation by the various
Dayak sub-ethnic groups, is presented in a way that it speaks for all of the Dayak. And as
the institutional, cultural and ecological resilience of the Dayak are presented as lessons
in the international arena either by the Institute of Dayakology they begin to speak for
46
Institut Dayakologi, “Institut Dayakologi: History,”
http://dayakology.org/eng/history.htm
45

46. indigenous people as a whole. In this way ID’s narratives are iterative and cumulative in
their world view. The narratives of Institute of Dayakology have been featured in various
discussion papers, journals, and articles by national and international NGOs.
Masyarakat adat groups like the Dayak have customary systems of governance,
and natural resource management that protect and govern both people and the natural
environment they are part of. Being tropical forest people who have traditionally relied
on agriculture, Dayak systems of governance are directly tied to their management of
natural resources. Through it’s narratives, these traditional systems of governance, and
natural resource management are promoted as alternatives to ecological and cultural
degradation. However international and national forces interested in pursuing their own
economic, political and cultural needs threaten the existence of these traditional systems.
Therefore local and national LSMs and NGOs, such as ID and its networks, are needed to
facilitate the revitalization and restoration of traditional practices and cultivate resilience
and adaptation by cooperating with and empowering the people. LSM’s and NGOs play
an important role because they provide the means through which resilience and
adaptation can be sustained. Resilience is sustained not only through community
organization and solidarity but through policy change on local and national levels. The
story of how the Dayak are responding provides a counter narrative to the dominant
development models.
Internal Romanticism
The (re)framing of the Dayak identity was largely a reaction to the negative
stereotypes associated with the word Dayak and the cultural practices it reflected. Many
46

47. of these stereotypes were based on violent practices such as head hunting that were part
of the culture of various Dayak sub-ethnic groups. In (re)framing Dayak identity within
their narratives through a communication of positive Dayak values, ID ends up counter-
stereotyping the Dayak. In the process of rejecting the negative classifications of the
Dayak as “savage”, “uncivilized”, “headhunters” they internally romanticize Dayak
identity and culture. John Bamba’s quote, “the soil is our body, the rivers are our blood,
and the forest is the breath of life,” is a good example of this.47 This internal
romanticization of Dayak indentity can lead to new stereotypes and a presumption of
innocence which absolves Dayaks of wrongdoing. In other words this romanticized
persona can be used to claim that no Dayak could ever be responsible for environmental
destruction, which is clearly not the case. On the other hand, this internal romanticization
of identity can be used as a tool of adaptation and empowerment. I witnessed first hand
the adoption of various stereotypes as a means of invoking a feeling of power and
dominance.
During my stay in Pontianak, West Kalimantan. I was brought to the police
station and interrogated for several reasons. Firstly, I was the only bule (white foreigner)
at a Dayak protest in front of the court building. Secondly my host father, Stephanus
Djuweng had not reported my presence to the police, as he should have according to the
law. The police claimed my presence at the protest was not in line with my
Social/Cultural Visa and that I could not do “penelitian”, research without a letter from
LIPI the government sponsored research program. Djuweng’s failure to report me also
47
Ita Natalia, “Protecting and Regaining Dayak Lands Through Community
Mapping” in Janis B. Alcorn and Antoinette G. Royo, eds. 2000 Indigenous Social
Movements and Ecological Resilience: Lessons From the Dayak of Indonesia,
(Washington DC: Biodiversity Support Program), 61
47

48. intrigued them. The police saw ID as a threat to their bureaucracy, and did not have the
best relationship with them. The policeman began issuing threats of deportation.
During my discussion with a police bureaucrat, Djuweng, who was by my side,
used various cultural stereotypes to scare the policeman. The policeman a Javanese
Muslim, associated the Dayak with ilmu hitam, a type of black magic that was very
powerful and destructive, among other violent and dangerous qualities. Various stories
about the invincibility of Dayak warriors circulated during inter-ethnic tensions between
the Dayak and the Madurese, reinforcing a mythic reputation that had persisted for
centuries. Knowing that the policeman was prone to this kind of stereotyping, , Djuweng
glared into the eyes of the police and held out his left hand. “Do you see this ring?” he
said in a direct manner, “This ring contains the spiritual magic of a Dayak shaman, I have
shamanic powers. This ring has Dayak power.” The policeman stared into the ring, and
shook slightly, acknowledging its power. “I see the magic in the ring, it is very
powerful,” he said. “The Dayak are very powerful.”
This interaction becomes more interesting as it is embedded in additional layers
of cultural complexity. It was never clear to me if Djuweng, even as a Dayak, actually
believed in the magical powers of the ring. However Djuweng co-opted the Javanese
policeman’s stereotype of the Dayak as magical and dangerous as a method of
empowerment and adaptation. Djuweng may have been internally romanticizing his own
culture, but it gave him power and strength. Djuweng used Dayak power as a way of
threatening the political authority. He successfully turned the power dynamic around,
placing the spiritual magic of shamanic Dayak power over the political power of the
Javanese bureaucrat. To me whether or not the magic is “real” or not is much less
48

49. important than the fact that it had an effective power over the policeman and that it was
used as tool of empowerment and adaptation.
Anti-Development Versus Sustainable Development
Janis Alcorn mentions accurately that, “Today, Dayak face two problems typical
of tropical forest people around the world where indigenous peoples are struggling to
adapt to new technologies and need while staving off invaders, international investors, or
national governments that claim their resources.”48 The tension s are evident in the
narratives of the Institute of Dayakology.
In the social context the Institute of Dayakology advocates a for type of Dayak
that is involved in a critical culture capable of understanding the social, political,
economic and cultural processes that have threatened and altered their existence. This
emphasis on critical culture is clearly evident in specific narratives. Most of the articles,
papers and grant proposals written by the executives of the organizations in the internal
network are explicit in terms of their criticisms of modernity and development,describing
how these processes have created changes and problems for the Dayak. This tension
shows itself in the form of apparent contradictions in which ID leaders are critical of
modernity, technology and capitalism that they see as part of the larger force of
“development”, while at the same time admitting the benefits that flow from this force.
Applying a Dayak critique, ID is a proponent of a less harmful, more appropriate, form
of “sustainable development,”, while continuing to engage in some more mainstream
48
Janis B. Alcorn and Antoinette G. Royo, eds. 2000 Indigenous Social
Movements and Ecological Resilience: Lessons From the Dayak of Indonesia,
(Washington DC: Biodiversity Support Program), 1.
49

50. forms of economic development (like credit unions).
The anti-development rhetoric is part of a larger critique of capitalism, modernity
and external influence in Kalimantan that recurs throughout various narratives. ID’s
narratives commonly attribute the changes and problems in Dayak culture to several key
influences: 1) the teaching and spreading of Indonesia’s five major religions, 2) the
introduction of formal education, 3) the expansion of the capitalistic economic paradigm,
4) the influence of advanced (modern) technology and information media and 5) the
enforcement of national laws and regulations. 49 These influences were imposed through
the rhetoric and implementation of Suharto era policies. Ironically, in spite of this
critique, the entrepreneurial spirit, or character of “self-reliance” is actually shared by
both the capitalistic economic paradigm and the Dayak's own narratives. The result is
that access to, and engagement in, private commerce, the use of advanced technology and
information media have been empowering to the Dayak.
In an interview with Inside Indonesia, Stephanus Djuweng the Executive
Secretary of SEGARAK, clarifies the opposition to mainstream development in response
to a question about whom he blames for the loss of Dayak heritage?:
49
John Bamba, “The Contribution of Institutional Resilience to Ecological
Resilience in Kalimantan, Indonesia: A Cultural Perspective. (Personal Copy: Date
Unknown). A similar version of this article is featured in Janis B. Alcorn and Antoinette
G. Royo, eds. 2000 Indigenous Social Movements and Ecological Resilience: Lessons
From the Dayak of Indonesia, (Washington DC: Biodiversity Support Program), and
Stephanus Djuweng, ICCO, Grant Proposal (Personal Copy), CCFD Grant Proposal
(Personal Copy), KPD Grant Proposal to Danish Government (Personal Copy).
50

51. Actually I don't blame only the Indonesian government. Because beyond
the government there is a global dominant force: development. If you read
Indonesian history, local resistance against land acquisition by those in
power has been happening for hundreds of years. Diponegoro led a revolt
against the Dutch when they were taking land to build along the northern
coast of Java. The same thing is happening now in Kalimantan and in
Irian. Local people are protesting against land acquisition, carried out in
the name of development. So I ask myself, what is really the difference
between colonialism and development? It's only that the first was done by
a colonial government, the second by our so- called independent
government. And that's not a significant difference.”50
One the one hand, ID’s narratives take an ecological standpoint toward issues of
development, capitalism and modernity. They see these three forces as destructive
elements that have resulted in changes, problems and destruction of the Dayak lifestyle.
Djuweng understands that the “global dominant force” of development as an extension of
colonialism. He views development as a thread that is tied to land acquisition not only
within the context of Indonesian history and its blatant neo-colonial tactics, associated
closely with the political limitations during the Suharto regaime, but as a larger global
threat to the natural environment and to people who depend on the natural environment
for physical, mental and spiritual sustenance.
The connection between development, marginalization and natural resource
extraction were part of a continuous process that conceptualized the Dayak as a
“primitive and “backwards” people in need of civilization and modernity. Development
was understood as a system to civilize and modernize the “backward” Dayak whose
predominantly nomadic styles of farming (swidden agriculture,) rice in particular,
needed to be replaced by a more productive settled wet rice cultivation that had greater
50
Inside Indonesia, “Stephanus Djuweng: Development is an extension of
colonialism,” http://www.serve.com/~inside/edit47/juweng.htm.
51