Indigenous peoples oppose oil palm in West Kalimantan

A March meeting of indigenous communities from West Kalimantan discussed the downside of the provincial government's plan for a massive expansion in oil palm plantations. The gathering of around 300 people was called by the province's indigenous peoples' alliance (AMA Kalbar) to celebrate Indigenous Peoples' Day (Hari Masyarakat Adat Nusantara), but also to discuss political participation by indigenous communities, oil palm plantations development and the recognition of indigenous resource rights.

According to research by WALHI (Friends of the Earth Indonesia) West Kalimantan, 3.5 million hectares of land has been earmarked for oil palm plantation development in West Kalimantan (around 24% of the province's total land area) and two million ha of plantations are planned close to the border between East and West Kalimantan. Sixty-six companies have already secured licences for oil palm plantations, covering over 2 million ha. More licences are in the pipeline, including projects covering 240,000 ha in Sintang district (12 companies); 14,000 ha in Landak, Bengkawang and Pontianak districts (for state-owned plantation company PTPN XIII, using the new "KSK" model - see box below), and 304,500 ha in Ketapang district (4 new licences).

WALHI points to research by the Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA) which recommended five years ago that only 1 million ha of West Kalimantan be converted to oil palm plantations, in order to maintain an ecological balance in the province.

WALHI told participants at the Pontianak meeting what they could expect from the different stages of commercial oil palm development, based on the industry's record in the province.

At the land acquisition stage, communities may face intimidation and be forced to hand over their land because it is classified as "state-owned land"*; they may receive misleading information about how oil palm will bring them prosperity; the company is likely to make a lot of promises and bring along alcohol (arak) to assist in negotiations; and the allocation of oil palm plots on land relinquished by communities may be grossly unfair.

At the land clearing stage, community rubber trees may be deliberately burned; crops are bulldozed during the day or at night and then the community is expected to negotiate with the company; the company may sub-contract land clearing; and the communities will have to take on burdensome credit repayments. (In one operation, by a company named as PT MPE, credit repayments amounted to 30% crude palm oil production each month on credit of Rp11.4 million - Rp30 million per oil palm plot.

At the nursery stage, communities may find that newcomers get better deals than local people (for example, newcomers may get housing); labourers get low wages; and pesticides which are potential pollutants may be used.

Next, there may be long postponements to receiving their allotted land and signing the credit agreements (WALHI lists three companies - PT MPE, PT Bonti and PT HSL - where there has been an eight year delay). The plots allocated to local people may be difficult to access, and roads badly maintained. Some people who have handed over as much as 7.5 ha of land have not been allocated any land for oil palm cultivation whatsoever in return.

When the oil palms start producing, the plot-owning farmers cannot determine the price of the crude palm oil they sell; the farmers are not in complete control of how much they sell per month; and they are burdened by debt. Prices of CPO have fluctuated wildly. For example, in 1998-1999 the price was Rp175/kg; in early 2004 it was Rp750/kg and at the end of 2005 Rp614/kg.

In the post-production phase, past experience shows that farmers lose their livelihoods and land reclamation costs are high. Small rivers begin to dry up and there are other ecological impacts: floods in towns, outbreaks of locust/grasshopper pests, plus shortages of drinking water in many places.

WALHI West Kalimantan concludes that oil palm plantations cause conflicts over land, credit, sales of seedlings and labour. All decision-making is in the hands of the company - recruitment of labour, land required and fixing prices for palm oil. Monoculture oil palm plantations also lead to ecological imbalances like drought, floods and pest attacks.

*Despite some recent progress in the recognition of indigenous peoples' customary rights, in practice, many indigenous-owned areas both inside and outside forests are administered as if they were state-owned land.

Indigenous peoples' experiences

However, others stressed the damaging impacts of oil palm development, including the negative effects on indigenous Dayak life. Gambling, prostitution, pregnancy outside marriage and alcohol were all associated with oil palm development. Several participants stressed how oil palm may, on the surface, seem to bring in more money, but that the cultural and environmental costs were high. Oil palm schemes brought a loss of decision-making power and made actual living costs higher. Oil palm cultivation does not allow traditional intercropping (tumpang sari) methods, as does rubber for example - the crop traditionally cultivated by farmers in the region. Tumpang sari involves planting vegetables and other crops together with the main crop, but the but the dense root system of oil palms and their heavy shade prevent this. This means families must buy vegetables, fruit and other forest products, no longer available after conversion to oil palm, thereby increasing family expenditure.

One woman participant expressed concern over these limitations, and the special implications for women's domestic role. "If the rivers dry up, where will we fish?" she asked. A member of the national NGO monitoring oil palm, Sawit Watch, told the participants how women tended to suffer more from the pesticides used on plantations, since they were typically given the job of spraying even when women are more vulnerable to the chemicals than men.

(Source: Sawit: Jalan Menuju Tanah Tertindas, Yohanes RJ, WALHI Kalbar, Pontianak 16/Mar/05; DTE meeting report)