Indonesia packages tree plantation expansion as emissions reduction strategy

Down to Earth No.84, March 2010

Indonesia's forestry minister has announced that millions of hectares of 'new forests' will be planted.

The aim is to help the country meet the commitment of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) to slice 26% off Indonesia's projected greenhouse gas emissions level by 2020. But the planned massive expansion of tree plantations could well do more harm than good for local communities as well as the climate.
 

Half a million hectares of new forests will be planted each year from now till 2020 at a cost of IDR 2.5 trillion (USD$269 million) per year, according to Forestry Minister Zulkifli Hasan. He said that Indonesia could expand forest cover by up to 21 million hectares by 2020 (see table 1).¹

Officially, there are 130 million hectares of forests in Indonesia, but by the minister's own admission, only 48 million hectares are in good condition.²

In September last year, President SBY promised that Indonesia would reduce emissions by 26% against business as usual projections by 2020. He said that cuts could reach 41% with international support.³

A new Ministry of Forestry document shows how it aims to follow up SBY's commitment and it fills in some of the detail to the minister's January announcement on new forests. Based as it is on targets for reducing emissions, the main focus is on targets for achieving a range of forestry department sub-programmes, broken down by province, year and target land to be covered. The end result is a sea of figures.

It is hard to see how this top-down target-driven approach squares with the complex local realities on the ground, where land classified as forests by the forestry ministry in Jakarta may be part of an indigenous community's customary territory, or where other overlapping claims for access and resources may make any forestry programme extremely problematic to implement or sustain on the ground. It is also difficult to see how such an approach can accommodate the demands for consultation and participation from civil society and fulfil the country's international obligations relating to human rights (including indigenous rights) and economic and social.⁴

Whether or not planting new forests will do anything to help cut emissions is seriously doubtful too: plantation companies are still getting permits to develop plantations in existing forests, so they actually destroy efficient carbon storage systems, rather than create new ones. Going on past experience, the success rate for developing new timber plantations is very low, so that original carbon absorption capacity is not even being replaced in a limited way. Even then, it is not as if these much-reduced carbon stores will be left untouched. First they will be used for industry (pulp, ply, other wood products, biomass energy) and there is no guarantee that they will be replanted, if it no longer suits the developer to do so.

An August 2009 article by Chris Lang, the editor of www.redd-monitor.org focuses on another important argument against plantations as carbon sinks - the risk of fire.

"Imagine the following situation: a polluting company in the North pays a "carbon neutral" seller that promises to "offset" its emissions by planting trees. Let's assume that the trees are in fact planted and that they do absorb the entire amount of carbon emitted by the polluting company. Six years later, the plantation goes up in fire. The result will be that the burnt plantation will have released the entire amount of carbon that is was supposed to "offset". Which means that the plantation's only use was to allow polluting the company to avoid investing in what is most necessary from a climate perspective: cutting emissions."⁵

Of course forests can't just be seen as carbon stores: viewing them in this way is to make the same mistake made in the past which viewed them merely as timber stands. If all forests' social, economic, cultural, biodiversity and ecological functions are taken into account, it becomes even more obvious how vital it is to prevent their destruction in the first place. When they are lost, the impacts on local communities are devastating and multifaceted - on top of the loss of carbon involved. Yet more destruction is embedded in the forestry ministry's plans, including 420,000 hectares per year to be converted to oil palm plantations and other uses (see below).

More details of MoF plans

The following information is taken from Ministry of Forestry (MoF) discussion document: Program Kehutanan Untuk Mitigasi Perubahan Iklim & pengukuran, pelaporan serta verifikasinya (Forestry Programme for Climate Change Mitigation & Measuring, Reporting and Verification). It was posted on the MoF website on January 8th, with comments invited before Jan 12th, in preparation for a meeting between the president and provincial governors at the end of the month.⁶

The information is presented as the ministry's follow-up to SBY's commitment of 26% reduction on business as usual (BAU) projections by 2020. The forestry sector has been asked to reduce emissions on BAU by 14% (=52% of the 26% target).

According to the document, this follow-up includes:

1. Increasing the carbon stock through the following programmes operated by the forestry ministry: HKm & Hutan Desa (Community and Village Forests), RHL DAS (Rehabilitasi Hutan dan Lahan Daerah Aliran Sungai - Rehabilitating Forests and Land in Water Catchment Areas), HTI & HTR (Industrial Timber Plantations and People's Timber Plantations), HPH Restorasi (Logging Concession Restoration), and Hutan Rakyat Kemitraan (People's Partnership Forest - partnerships with companies);^v
2. Reducing emissions from deforestation through eradicating illegal logging, preventing fires and forest encroachment; regulating, permitting the use of forest areas [eg for mining], and the release of forest areas for conversion to other functions [eg plantations];
3. Reducing emissions from degradation through lowering the allowable cut and through restoring conservation areas;
4. Sustainable Forest Management through Intensive Silviculture, Selective Logging and Planting (TPTI), Reduced Impact Logging (RIL) and the certification of Sustainable Management of Production Forests (PHPL); ⁸
5. Protection Area and Conservation Area Management.

The targets for increasing carbon stock are broken down per year and per forestry scheme (see table 1) and then again per province per year per scheme. The figures indicate that industrial timber and people's timber plantations (HTI & HTR) have the highest 2020 target of 5.8 million hectares, followed by logging concession restoration (5.75 million ha), and community and village forests (5.5 million ha).

Details of the timber plantation schemes (HTI & HTR) show that for the first five years (2010-2014), a total of 2,698,800 hectares is targeted for planting. Of the nineteen provinces targeted, West Kalimantan has by far the highest allocation of 585,000 hectares, followed by Papua with 250,000 ha, South Sumatra with 412,550 ha, and then jointly East Kalimantan and Riau with 240,000 ha each (see Table 2).⁹

It is not clear whether the HTI target replaces or overlaps with an earlier target of 9 million hectares of timber plantations by 2013 to support the pulp industry.¹⁰ 

Forests for mining, plantations and military facilities

The MoF document includes projections for the conversion of production forests to non-forestry uses. The projection is 420,000 hectares per year from 2010 to 2019 - a total of 4.2 million hectares. It notes that 8.9 million hectares of Indonesia's forest zone is classified as production forests for conversion (HPK), of which 4.7 million hectares have already been released. Of this area, 2.4 million hectares are covered by land use permits (HGU). So, the 2010-2019 projection of 4.2 million hectares means converting all the remaining production forests classified as for conversion.¹¹

The MoF document also gives projections for "use of forest areas" for gold, nickel, oil & gas, coal, tin and other minerals, plus non-mining land uses such as roads, communications and defence and security facilities for the Indonesian military.

The 2004-2009 total for this kind of forest use is given as 1,197,727 hectares and the projection for 2010-2020 is 200,000 hectares per year, bringing the overall total to 3,397,727 hectares. The MoF is therefore working on the basis that an additional 2.2 million hectares will be given over to such uses between now and the end of the current decade.

Forest fires are also scheduled to decline from a projected 25,566 "hotspots" in 2010 to a mere 2,745 in 2020. In terms of CO2e reductions this is estimated at a gradual decline from 0.8 million tonnes of CO2e in 2009 to 0.2 million tonnes CO2e in 2015. Overall, the MoF scenario shows how the forestry sector becomes a net carbon sink rather than net emitter, if the MoF strategic plan is followed. Total emissions from forests are put at 1.24 Gigatonnes of CO2e, whereas forests will be able absorb 1.31 Gigatonnes under this plan.

REDD schemes

Overseas funding for one element of the MoF plan - Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD) - has been welcomed by the Indonesian government. Jakarta has agreed REDD projects with several foreign governments as well as the UN, and remains in negotiation with the World Bank's Forest Carbon Partnership Facility.¹² US$18 million has been committed so far, of which the FCPF will contribute $3.6 million.¹³

Three pieces of REDD legislation have been passed¹⁴ in the last two years and five pilot projects, (from over 20 planned REDD projects across the country) have formally recorded by the MoF (see box). These five schemes were officially launched in January 2010.

However, there has been vociferous opposition from civil society organisations to REDD related to carbon trading and offsetting, as well as to the government's plans for managing REDD projects in Indonesia. As well as serious concerns over corruption of REDD money,¹⁵ there are deep-seated fears that local communities could end up worse off under REDD.

Bernadinus Steni, from the Jakarta-based CSO, HuMa, visited a REDD pilot project in West Kalimantan recently. He reported that things are getting "messy" there, "with promises of large inflows of money and infrastructure development creating both great hope and extreme concern among local communities".¹⁶

"No REDD without rights!" was the campaign slogan of indigenous and civil society activists from around the world at the Bangkok and Copenhagen UNFCCC climate talks last year, and this applies especially well to the situation in Indonesia. One of the basic concerns with REDD is that indigenous rights are likely to be sidelined, or ignored completely, because at national level, recognition and protection of these rights is still sorely inadequate. Indonesia's REDD regulations do in theory allow indigenous communities to manage REDD projects, but in practice, the lack of national-level legislation to recognise such communities means that this is all but impossible to put into practice.¹⁷

Indonesia's Civil Society Forum for Climate Justice (CSF) accused the official Indonesian delegation to Copenhagen of being more interested in grabbing funding than addressing the impacts of climate change or rescuing the country's remaining forests for its own people. In a statement issued at the Copenhagen summit, CSF called on Jakarta to stop using COP15 as a fundraising opportunity and to stop using forests as a commodity. It said the delegates should "stop humiliating [their] own people by promising to reduce emissions through REDD while the existing domestic forestry problems have not been sorted."¹⁸

Indonesia's poor record on upholding indigenous rights, and on consulting indigenous peoples and local communities affected by development schemes was also highlighted by CSOs last year. The indigenous peoples alliance AMAN and oil palm advocacy network Sawit Watch wrote to the FCPF arguing that Indonesia's R-PP (the plan which demonstrates that a country has prepared for REDD) did not meet the FCPF criteria and should not be accepted until improvements had been made.¹⁹ They also critiqued the FCPF approval process which failed to take into account key World Bank safeguard policies which offer some protections for communities.²⁰

The Indonesian CSO HuMa also wrote to the FCPF to underline the R-PP's failure to recognise the lack of recognition for indigenous rights in the Indonesian forestry law. The group also raised concern about the Forestry Department's mandate, considering its notoriously bad record in governance and persistence in continuing with damaging policies left over from the Suharto era.

Indonesia's R-PP plan has still not been accepted, although CSOs suspect that the FCPF is planning to accept it soon, after compromise procedures have been worked out that make it easier for controversial cases like Indonesia to fulfil acceptance criteria. The signs are that FCPF wants Indonesia in its scheme despite all the objections and problems, because it is too important a player not to be in it.

Progress reports both from FCPF and Indonesia's Ministry of Forestry posted on the FCPF website indicate that key issues remaining to be resolved include consultation with affected communities. According to the FCPF, remaining issues include agreement on what the FCPF grant will cover, agreement on the application of a Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment and Agreement on a plan for consultation and participation. Under a section called "main remaining issues" the FCPF reports lists participation of indigenous peoples and CSOs, and says that customary and land access rights have been highlighted by groups as the main issue. It also mentions a request for more qualitative participation, capacity-building and coordination of activities.²¹ A corresponding MoF report only mentions that stakeholder communication is "ongoing".²²

Signs of progress on recognition?

There is some indication that the pressure on Indonesia may be opening some room for negotiation on the legal obstacles facing indigenous peoples in the country.

Following a sustained lobbying effort, the Poznan climate summit (COP 14) in 2008 first saw Indonesia's delegation leader Rachmat Witoelar mention the importance of respecting Indigenous Peoples rights in schemes to halt deforestation, though this did not translate to action at national level.²³

A December 2009 workshop on communal rights co-hosted by AMAN and the Ministry of Environment resulted in the new environment minister saying that the government was likely to recognise communal rights and the role of indigenous people in environmental management and protection.²⁴ The step follows the country's new Environment Law (No 32/2009), which stipulates that attention should be paid to recognising indigenous peoples and their traditional knowledge and rights in environmental management and protection.²⁵

The following month, AMAN and the environment minister signed an agreement committing AMAN and the ministry to work together to "increase the role of indigenous people in protecting and managing the environment". The cooperation includes: identifying indigenous peoples and their rights, empowering indigenous peoples and exchanging information about them.²⁶ The agreement was signed in front of 35 indigenous leaders, according to a ministry press release. This also said that follow up would include draft policies to empower and to recognise local expertise; developing criteria and methods to identify indigenous communities; setting up a database of adat (indigenous) communities and local knowledge, plus a range of activities to empower indigenous communities.²⁷

Ancestral Domain Registration Agency

Another step on the road to better recognition of indigenous territories has been taken by AMAN, in cooperation with JKPP - the Participatory Mapping Network and Forest Watch Indonesia (FWI). In early March, AMAN, JKPP and FWI launched an independent body to register indigenous communities' traditionally-managed territories. AMAN noted that over the last decade indigenous communities have been making participatory maps of their customary areas covering millions of hectares across the archipelago. However, there is nowhere to house the results of these efforts in the national land administration system, the national development planning agencies, or in the forestry ministry (where there is no department that deals with adat forest data). The same goes for the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, despite provisions for recognising indigenous rights in the marine law (No 27/2007). So, AMAN and its supporters took the decision to set up this registration body and to develop a registration system that is low cost and easy to use for indigenous people, and that facilitates mutual recognition of claims. The hope is that in future, the state too, will recognise the claims. AMAN launched the Ancestral Domain Registration Agency (BRWA) on Indigenous Peoples of the Archipelago Day, March 17th, 2010. BRWA's website is at www.brwa.or.id/.²⁸

Thanks to Bernadinus Steni from HuMa, www.huma.or.id who offered advice on this article. He is drafting a report on REDD in Indonesia for the next Accra Caucus meeting.

Thanks also to Patrick Anderson for his comments.

Note: this article has been slightly amended from the version in the print and PDF edition of the newsletter. 
 

Notes

¹ Reuters 6/Jan/10
² Reuters 6/Jan/2010
³ see DTE 83
⁴ See DTE document on Indonesia's obligations under international law.
⁵ Plantations as sinks: the carbon fraud at its worst, Chris Lang, 25/Aug/09 on www.redd-monitor.org.
⁶ www.dephut.go.id/index.php?q=id/node/6036
⁷ See also www.kontan.co.id/index.php/nasional/news/23065/Pemerintah-Kembangkan-Hutan-Rakyat-Kemitraan accessed 2/Mar/2010. Director General of Land Rehabilitation and Social Forestry Bambang Jaka Wibawa said that efforts to expand the area of people's partnership plantations was being implemented to close the deficit of timber raw materials of around 71.85 million m³ per year. The current national demand for wood is estimated at 80 million m³ per year, while the average annual cut set by the government was only 8,152,250 m³ per year. The deficit had caused the wood-based industries to collapse and even go out of business, he said.
⁸ A recent report by Greenpeace exposes the myth that sustainable management schemes for forest such as reduced impact logging can achieve emissions reductions - see summary in WRM bulletin No 151, 25/Feb/10.
⁹ For the full breakdown see PDF attachment to www.dephut.go.id/index.php?q=id/node/6036
¹⁰ See DTE 80/81 for pulpwood targets
¹¹ Forestry Ministry data shows that a total of 32.1 million hectares of forest were slated for conversion during the 1980s, of which 13.8 hectares is left, not including Central Kalimantan, Riau and Riau Archipelago provinces which are still in the process of padu serasi - having their forest maps integrated with other ministries, provincial and district level development plans. (Bisnis Indonesia 21/Jan/10)
¹² See DTE 82 & 83 for more background.
¹³ As reported in FCPF document: Progress with due diligence work in Indonesia, October 27-28, 2009.
¹⁴ See redd-indonesia.org/en/laws-regulations/
¹⁵ A recent CIFOR report recommended that Indonesia set up new mechanisms to monitor money flowing into REDD and strengthen existing oversight bodies such as the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK). The report said that significant ongoing problems since the large-scale corruption of the Suharto days raise fundamental questions about how future REDD payment schemes will be managed. Senior forestry officials are among those suspected of taking bribes, according to the KPK. Source: Reuters 6/Nov/09. For further background on forestry and corruption see, for example DTE's Forests, People & Rights.
¹⁶ B. Steni, pers comm.
¹⁷ See also DTE 79 for more background
¹⁸ CSF press release 10/Dec/09.
¹⁹ Some of these comments are posted on the FCPF website www.forestcarbonpartnership.org.
²⁰ see DTE 82
²¹ Progress with due diligence work in Indonesia, October 27-28, 2009, on www.forestcarbonpartnership.org
²² Progress on REDD Readiness in Indonesia: report to 4th FCPF-PC meeting, 28/Oct/2009 on www.forestcarbonpartnership.org
²³ B.Steni, pers comm.
²⁴ Jakarta Post 4/Dec/09, summarised in DTE 83
²⁵ B. Steni; for information on the new environment law see www.menlh.go.id
²⁶ The MoU is on www.aman.or.id
²⁷ adat-nusantara-hadiri-mou-klh-aman&catid=43%3Aberita&Itemid=73&lang=id">www.menlh.go.id/home/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4392%3Atigapuluh-lima-tokoh-adat-nusantara-hadiri-mou-klh-aman&catid=43%3Aberita&Itemid=73&lang=id
²⁸ www.aman.or.id