Abstract This study would explain and criticize collaborative governance theory. The basic idea of this theory was developing collaboration from consensuses among stakeholders. There was something treacherous when the researcher investigated this objective. Presumably, this theory was too normative and undervalued the character of politicians who tortuous in developing the theory. Imagine that the actors who involved would be satisfied with the consensuses in formal forums. Whereas, the consensuses, which were built in those forums, did not eliminate the self-interest of each character. The effect of the way of normative thinking and insensitivity on ulterior motives, would brand this theory could not explain why did the actors with vary of interests want to do collaboration? It could be suspected that there was a hidden purpose, which was needed to be reached through transaction of interest. To answer the question above, the researcher applied excluding forest collaboration as the evidence medium (REDD+) To prove the motive of the collaborations actors, this study would be guided by rational choice approach. Rational choice approach, every individual would struggle to afford how to gain the high benefit. Their acts were affected by the best existing preferences or the best existing selections. Maximizing the benefit that had been gained from the collaboration was the major destiny. In the context of collaboration, for instance, the individual chose collaboration because it could become the best election that would obtain double benefit for them. An act that was common when the action of the collaboration connected to public business. According to Olson in Collective Action Logic, it would not be rational for every individual to get engage voluntarily in cooperation for public interests. Communal longing when individual hope to get more payment as the willingness to be part of the collective action. Temporary, the implementation of the case study method was adjudicated as the correct method, for the reason that the field that was observed was a single case. So as to the case, it would develop the answer, which were elaborative and profound. Based on the case of REDD+ in Berau, the factor that encourage the stakeholders to do collaboration was economic motive. The goal of their collaboration was to get the payment and maximize their private benefit or selfinterest, which were done by creating consensus silently or illegally (informal). In the informal consensus might be happened transaction-interest, where it had purpose, the purpose was to get more benefit, they made strategy to mean it. With the intention of collaboration with vary of interests and transactional relations, it was inevitably. Hence, by the way of their transaction, they were able to do cooperation. By the result, self-interest and transactional relation would always exist in any collaboration formats. The present of self-interest and transactional relation were common thing. However when the self-interests of the economic motive took over the collectiveinterests (formal organization), it would cause an effect in its collaboration. The consequence of it was reflection of transactional relation where self-interest would become the priority purpose. Keywords: Collaborative Governance, REDD+, Rational Choice Theory