<![CDATA[Environmental fund allocation in decentralized governance is often assessed through budget size, disbursement, and physical outputs, while the stakeholder reasoning that shapes allocation choices receives less attention. This study examines competing stakeholder interests in environmental fund allocation for upland community empowerment programs in Bengkulu Province, Indonesia, using Q-methodology. A concourse derived from document review, field observation, and preliminary interviews was refined into a 36-statement Q-sample covering economic priorities, ecological priorities, governance processes, and equity. Thirty-two purposively selected participants representing village government, environmental agencies, facilitators, farmer and forest-user groups, women's groups, and environmental non-governmental organizations completed Q-sorts. By-person factor analysis identified four coherent viewpoints: Conservation Guardians, Livelihood Pragmatists, Compliance-Oriented Administrators, and Growth-First Developmentalists. Twenty-seven participants loaded significantly on one of these factors, while five displayed mixed or confounded loadings. The strongest disagreements concerned the use of environmental funds for economically oriented infrastructure and the relative authority of technical expertise versus community deliberation. Across factors, transparency and consultation remained shared normative expectations. The findings show that environmental allocation conflicts are structured by distinct institutional and livelihood logics rather than by random disagreement. More legitimate and balanced allocation therefore requires explicit trade-off deliberation, stronger translation across stakeholder perspectives, and ecological reporting that is comparable in visibility to short-term economic outputs.]]>
