Ecology of Indonesian Papua Part One. Andrew J. Marshall
example in the communities of Mimika, Mappi, and Manikion, inheritance is sometimes through the maternal line (Mappi and Mimika) and sometimes through the paternal line (Manikion) according to individual choice (Bruijn 1959; Pouwer 1966).
One additional notable characteristic differs among social structures found in Papua. Some peoples group the community into a phratry (a group of clans tracing descent to a common ancestor) while others practice moiety (dividing the group into two halves for ritual purposes). Among Papuan people who use moiety groups are Asmat (aipmu and aipem), Dani (waita and waya), and Waropen (buriworai and buriferai). However, there are also ethnic groups that do not recognize this principle, for example the people Muyu and Biak (Heider 1979; Held 1947; Kamma 1972).
Land Tenure Systems
Two major types of property rights and land use practices are common among Papuan peoples: communal ownership systems and individual ownership systems. In communal ownership systems the land that provides the main resources necessary for livelihood are owned communally. Two types of communal ownership systems are found in Papua, those based on small clans or lineages and those based on large clans or villages (kampung).
In the communal ownership system based on clans, all members of the clan (marga, keret), including unmarried women, have equal rights to use the clan lands for their livelihood. Although all members have the same rights in principle, individuals do not have the freedom to decide where they want to conduct their economic activities (e.g., to open new agricultural land or collect certain forest products). The clan head (kepala marga) regulates and monitors the clan’s land use, but often makes decisions about land usage in conjunction with other clan members. Importantly, no member of the clan (including the head) has the authority to cede ownership of the land to an outside party (e.g., the government or a private company). Such decisions must be made communally, and any proceeds from the sale or lease of such land are shared equally among all clan members. Clan-based communal ownership system can be found in the following ethnic groups: Dani, Meybrat (Ayamaru), Muyu, Marind-Anim, Auwyu, Wandammen, Simuri, Irarutu, Biak, and Waropen.
In large clan (kampung) based communal ownership systems, land ownership rights are held by the community head, who has the authority to make land-use decisions in conjunction with clan leaders (e.g., in Sentani the authority to manage the land is jointly held by community heads (yo-ondoafi) and clan heads (khoselo). Neither clan nor community leaders can make decisions alone, and plans for community development, land use, and ownership must be made jointly. Any proceeds from land sale are distributed within the village according to the internally recognized differences in land rights and authority of different members. Frequently, individuals deliberately "forget" the relative authority or rights of a particular individual, which can lead to conflict within the community.
Political Systems
Political systems are also highly variable in Papua. To understand the traditional political systems used by the Papua people, Mansoben (1985) applied the continuum model suggested by Sahlins (1963) to available ethnographic data and identified four political systems in Papua. These four systems are big man (or powerful man) systems, kingdom systems, ondoafi systems, and mixed systems.
Sahlins (1963) suggested that political systems could be analyzed along a continuum. On one end of the continuum the political system is characterized by ascription or inheritance; while on the other end the political system is characterized by achievement. On the ascription end of the continuum are chief (head of ethnic group) systems, while on the achievement end are the big man systems. Applying this continuum to the political systems in Papua, Mansoben (1985) found that in addition to the two systems at the extremes of the continuum, some Papuan political systems contain elements of both systems and belong somewhere in between. These systems are called mixed systems. Furthermore, two distinct types can be identified in Sahlin’s ascription leadership system: kingdom and ondoafi.
The major differences between Papuan political systems are the geographical extent of their power and their political orientations. Below I briefly discuss the principle characteristics and major differences among the four most common political systems in Papua.
In big man political systems the leadership position is based on individual achievement. The source of power in this political system is derived from the big man’s personal abilities or achievements, such as success in allocating and distributing wealth, diplomatic or oratory skills, courage on the battlefield, physical strength, or generosity (Sahlins 1963; Koentjaraningrat 1970). Big men characteristically hold a substantial amount of personal power, and have autonomy to make important decisions single-handedly. The Dani, Asmat, Me, Meybrat, and Muyu peoples have big man political systems.
The kingdom system is primarily characterized by ascribed political status or inherited leadership position. Political power is conferred on individuals due to their family membership and birth order. In kingdom systems power is passed patrilineally, and patrilineal lines form traditional bureaucracies in which individuals have clearly-defined roles, responsibilities, and authority. All positions of authority are passed down through the male line, and if a man’s first son is inappropriate for the job, it is passed to another clan member. The kingdom system is common among communities in southwest Papua, including the Raja Ampat Islands, Onin Peninsula (on Bomberai peninsula), McCluer Gulf (Berau Gulf), and Kaimana.
The ondoafi system is similar to the kingdom system in that leadership positions are inherited and traditional bureaucracies are utilized. However, the ondoafi system differs from the kingdom system in its geographic range of power and political orientation. The power of an ondoafi leader is limited to a single village (yo), and the social unit consists of one ethnic group or subgroup. In contrast, the authority of leaders in kingdom systems is not limited to one village, but covers a wider area. Also, in kingdom systems the social units consist of several ethnic groups. Other characteristic of ondoafi is its alliance system, in which several villages act as a unit, trace their ancestry to a single individual, and acknowledge a single leader for the larger community. This "great leader" typically comes from a village in the center of the geographic range encompassed by the larger community. Finally, while the principle focus of the kingdom political system is on trade, in the ondoafi system the center of political orientation is religion. O ndoafi systems are practiced in northeast of Papua, by the people of Sentani, Genyem (Nimboran), Humboldt (Yos Sudarso) Bay, Tabla, Yaona, Yakari-Skou, and Arso-Waris.
The final political system found in Papua is the leadership mixed system, in which leadership is obtained through either inheritance or achievement. In other words, an individual can be a leader based on his personal ability, achievement, or birthright. Leaders that gain their authority based on achievement usually appear during times of stress, such as war, famine, epidemic disease, or cultural decadence. Such leaders are known as situational leaders, since the leader is chosen based on his ability to overcome the particular challenge facing the community. In mixed systems power is usually inherited during "safe" times, when external and internal threats are low. During such stable times, the leaders are chosen from the traditionally powerful family. In contrast to the kingdom and ondoafi systems, bureaucracy is not found in mixed systems. Mixed systems are common in the people who live around Cenderawasih Bay, such as the people of Biak, Wandammen, Waropen, Yawa, and Maya.
Religion and Belief Systems
Before Islam and Christianity were introduced to Papua, each ethnic group had its own traditional belief system. Although traditional belief systems varied among groups, most groups believed in a single Goddess or God that held supreme power over other deities. This God or Goddess had different names in different groups. For example in Biak-Numfoor culture this highest Goddess is called Manseren Nanggi or the Sky God, Moi people recognize Fun Nah, Seget people use the name Fun Naha, Waropen people refer to their supreme god as Naninggi, Wandammen recognize Syen Allah, Marind-Anim people Dema, Asmat people Mbiwiripitsy, and the Me people Ugatame.
Ethnographic accounts of traditional belief systems in Papua indicate that the principal Goddess or the Highest God is considered to be the creator and to have absolute authority over human destiny. In addition, most followers of these traditional religious systems believe that the power of this God is manifest in natural forces, such as wind, rain, and thunder; or believe that the power resides in natural objects near human settlement, such as large trees, streams,