WRI Stories Feed: Project POTICO: Sustainable Palm Oil on Low Carbon Degraded Land

Indonesia Extends its Forest Moratorium: What Comes Next?

Kemen Austin — Wed, 15 May 2013 15:51:28 -0400

Indonesia’s President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono made a bold and courageous decision this week to extend…

A Conversation with Nirarta “Koni” Samadhi on Indonesia’s Forests

James Anderson — Tue, 07 May 2013 11:32:06 -0400

How can Indonesia—the world’s fourth-most populous country and an emerging economic powerhouse—reduce deforestation and promote sustainable…

The False Choice Between Palm Oil and Indonesian Forests

Nigel Sizer — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 10:51:58 -0500

This post originally appeared in the Jakarta Post.

…

2 New Tools Can Cut Deforestation and Support Sustainable Palm Oil in Indonesia

Craig Hanson — Tue, 30 Oct 2012 16:17:56 -0400

Can the world have its palm oil and forests, too? This is an issue that my colleague and I discussed a while back. I am pleased to say that we recently moved a step…

RELEASE: Two New Online Mapping Applications Launched to Support Sustainable Palm Oil in Indonesia

James Anderson — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:08:26 -0400

Forest Cover Analyzer and Suitability Mapper to be used by business and government to reduce deforestation

The World Resources Institute (WRI) is launching two powerful online mapping applications that offer unprecedented capabilities to support industry and government efforts to achieve more sustainable palm oil production in Indonesia. WRI developed these web tools in consultation with the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) and many of its members.

The Suitability Mapper empowers companies and government planners to use a standard, easily replicable method to find potential sites for sustainable palm oil production and plan field assessments for further investigation. The Forest Cover Analyzer provides a unique set of monitoring tools to help buyers, investors, and governments strengthen incentives for avoiding deforestation when developing new plantations.

“Palm oil holds tremendous opportunities for people and business in Indonesia—and should be produced in a way that avoids destruction of vibrant lands and forests,” said Andrew Steer, President of WRI. “These dynamic new online tools will enable companies to better identify the best places for palm oil production and assess deforestation and other factors that are critical for long-term sustainability of this industry.”

Palm oil is the world’s most traded vegetable oil and a major agricultural product of Indonesia, the world’s leading producer. Last year, Indonesia exported 23.5 million tons of crude palm oil, worth about US$19.7 billion. The rapid expansion of oil palm plantations has contributed in places to the loss of Indonesia’s biodiversity and carbon-rich natural forests. At the same time, Indonesia has become the world’s leading producer of RSPO-certified sustainable palm oil, which is produced according to a set of principles and criteria that include avoiding forest loss.

The RSPO was formed in 2004 with the objective of promoting the growth and use of sustainable palm oil products through credible global standards and engagement of stakeholders. The RSPO aims to transform markets to make sustainable palm oil the norm.

“Development of technology and tools such as WRI’s Suitability Mapper and the Forest Cover Analyzer enables RSPO members to practice sustainable oil palm production in a more credible way by identifying the land areas with the least impact to the environment,” said Darrel Webber, Secretary General of the RSPO.

“These two websites make it quick and easy to answer questions that we hear over and over again from industry and government officials” said Beth Gingold, POTICO Research Lead, WRI.

The Suitability Mapper helps users find potential sites for sustainable palm oil production, using a customizable map. The Forest Cover Analyzer allows users to view change in forest cover over time in areas of their choice, using up-to-date satellite data.

Both applications currently cover Kalimantan, the Indonesian portion of the island of Borneo, and will expand to other areas in the months to come.

The following are examples of data derived from the new applications:

There are more than 14 million hectares of potentially suitable land for sustainable palm oil in Kalimantan.
Kalimantan experienced more than 2 million hectares of forest cover loss from 2005 (the RSPO cut-off date for primary forest clearing) to 2010.
There are more than 33 million hectares of high conservation value forest and wetland in Kalimantan with high likelihood of containing high carbon stocks and levels of biodiversity.

The applications were developed in partnership with Sekala, Rainforest Alliance, SarVision, University of Maryland, South Dakota State University, and Puter Foundation. They were designed with Blue Raster and are powered by ESRI.

This project has received generous support from: The United Kingdom Climate Change Unit Indonesia, Johnson & Johnson Family of Consumer Companies, NewPage Corporation, Walmart, The Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, and the International Finance Corporation - Biodiversity and Agricultural Commodities Program. (The International Finance Corporation is not responsible for the implementation or administration of this project).

Visit the website http://www.wri.org/project/potico for more information and to access the web tools.

Watch a video preview of the two tools here.

# # # #

Degraded Land for Sustainable Palm Oil in Indonesia: Practical Guidance

Beth Gingold — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 13:30:37 -0400

This post was co-authored with Anne Rosenbarger, a POTICO Fellow at Sekala.

In Indonesia, policy-makers and industry leaders are developing policies and practices in support of low-carbon palm…

New Study Highlights Opportunities and Challenges for Indonesia Forest Moratorium

Kemen Austin — Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:50:51 -0500

Today WRI releases a working paper that provides new information about Indonesia’s moratorium on new forest concessions. Our analysis concludes that the…

Indonesia’s Ambitious Forest Moratorium Moves Forward

Beth Gingold — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 15:49:11 -0400

A summary of key elements, and unanswered questions, in Indonesia’s recent moratorium on new forest permits.

On May 20, 2011, Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono signed a Presidential Instruction (“decree”) putting into effect a two-year moratorium on issuing new permits for use of primary natural forest and peatland.

The highly anticipated moratorium is part of a broader $1 billion Indonesia-Norway partnership to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation (known as REDD+).

According to government statements, the decree applies to between 64 and 72 million hectares of primary forest and peatland, shown in a map attached to the decree. The decree highlights governance as a key area for improvement, critical in addressing the underlying causes of forest loss. The President calls on ministries and agencies to work together nationally and locally to implement the moratorium.

It is difficult to assess the likely effectiveness of the moratorium in achieving its goal of reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, since the decree includes a number of exemptions (such as cases in which licenses are pending) without providing details on the exempted areas’ location or size.

In order for the public to fully assess the impact of the decree, the government would need to make all exemptions public in such a way that a quantitative spatial analysis can be independently prepared and published. Only with this information can the various partners in Indonesia’s efforts to reduce GHG emissions see whether the spirit of the decree is being met.

In the meantime, this article provides a summary of how key elements are addressed, identifies unanswered questions to be further explored once the digital maps and additional information are publicly available, and suggests priority actions for the two-year moratorium period that can produce lasting benefits to Indonesia’s forests and the people and businesses that depend on them.

The moratorium makes progress in some key areas…

Despite stiff opposition from advocates of business as usual, a moratorium has been signed and issued.
It highlights the importance of improved governance.
It recognizes the importance of ministries and agencies working together to make implementation of the decree successful.
It includes a map of areas that should not be deforested. The representation of this decree in map form makes it easier for stakeholders to carry out monitoring and support law enforcement.

…but some important issues remain:

Areas of secondary forest are not covered. These are widespread and valuable for carbon, biodiversity and livelihoods.
There is no mention of the Minister of Mines and Energy in the decree, and it is not clear how permits for non-exempted mining activities (i.e. coal and minerals) will be addressed. The Ministry of Agriculture is also not mentioned in the decree.
Community-based forest management and other sustainable activities that do not result in forest conversion are not included in the exemptions.
No information is provided on the extent and location of existing permits that are exempted from the moratorium.
It is unclear what will happen with the many permits that may have been issued illegally.

What is addressed in the Presidential Decree?

The Presidential Decree gives instructions to specific government agencies regarding a two-year suspension of new permits on areas of primary natural forest and peatland shown in an attached “Indicative Map of New License Suspension” (Indicative Map).

The Presidential Decree addresses key elements in the following ways:

Objectives: Does the preamble clarify the objectives of a temporary suspension of new permits to achieve long term improvements in land use planning and permitting processes

The decree itself states that the objective is to balance economic, social, and cultural development and efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. The explicit inclusion of governance is notable and should be applauded, as this starts to get to the root causes of Indonesia’s high rates of forest loss. It will be especially important in the coming months to reach agreement on what specific improvements in governance are needed most and how these improvements can be achieved.

Definitions: Are terms clear and consistent with achieving the stated objectives

The decree does not include definitions of terms. The decree refers to primary natural forest and peatland, but not secondary forest. Large areas of secondary forest, with high carbon content and important biodiversity, will therefore likely not be covered by the decree.

The terms primary natural forest and peatland have not been defined in Indonesian law. In this context they have been interpreted as descriptions of vegetative cover and soil characteristics, as distinct from legal designations. The decree also refers to legal designations such as conservation forest, protected forest, and production forest, which have been previously defined in Indonesia’s 1999 Forestry Law. Media reports suggest there is ongoing confusion regarding whether or not primary natural forest refers to a legal designation.

Data: Are the data and maps that will be used or created to determine the areas impacted by the moratorium accurate and adequate

There is insufficient information on the data and methods used to develop the Indicative Map, and indeed, on who produced it. This map shows peatland and primary forests, yet there are no definitions of these terms. It is also not clear which areas are under which forms of protection, and whether any information on existing or already exempted permits was used to generate the map. Crucially, no information is provided on the extent, location, and status of existing and exempted permits.

A more detailed analysis can be conducted only once the digital maps, source data layers, associated methods, and accurate information on the extent, location, and status of existing and already exempted permits, are made publicly available.

Permits: Which permits are included and excluded from the moratorium?

The moratorium applies to “new permits” (e.g. for the clearing of land to start oil palm, timber or other large estate crops) in the areas specified by the Indicative Map, with a considerable number of notable exemptions, including those for:

forest area release and use permits that have been approved in principle by the Ministry of Forestry;
geothermal, oil and gas, electricity, rice and sugar cane development;
extension of existing and valid forest use permits (e.g. logging permits); and
ecosystem restoration concessions.

No exemptions are provided for the multiple types of use or management rights that can be issued to communities, even though community based forest management and monitoring has been recognized as an effective strategy for achieving sustainable forest management and balancing economic, social, and environmental development goals.

The types of permits which will not be exempted include loan use and business permit use for timber in natural forests issued by Ministry of Forestry, lease rights and use rights issued by the National Land Agency, and recommendations for and location permits issued by Governors and Regents/Mayors. There is no mention of exemptions or inclusion of forest use for mineral or coal mining.

The process for determining the validity of existing forest use permits is unclear. It is also not clear what the implications are for companies that have existing location permits (which are exempted) but not business use permits (called HGU permits). These existing permits may cover millions of hectares (an estimate from Daemeter Consulting is at least three million hectares).

Agencies: Which government agency is responsible for producing the relevant maps associated with the moratorium

Instructions to suspend issuing permits apply to all areas in the Indicative Map. This applies to the Ministry of Forestry, National Land Agency, as well as to all Governors, Regents and Mayors. The Minister of Interior is instructed to coach and supervise Governors and Regents in implementation.

For new permits that are exempted and may still be issued inside the Indicative Map areas, the Minister of Environment is instructed to reduce emissions of the business activities by issuing environmental licenses. It is assumed to mean that these licenses will restrict allowable GHG emissions.

The Ministry of Forestry is given primary responsibility for reviewing and updating the Indicative Map and reporting to the president at least once every six months, in cooperation with the Head of the National Spatial Planning Coordinating Agency, Head of the Coordinating Body for National Survey and Mapping, Governors, Regents, Mayors, and the Head of the REDD+ Task Force. The Head of the REDD+ Task Force is instructed to monitor implementation and submit a report to the president.

This updating process does not only have consequences on the physical delineation of primary forest and peatlands, it also moves the licensing authority on non-forested lands (other usage areas) to the Ministry of Forestry as stated in Section Four of the decree.

This decree does however involve many of the important ministries and agencies and specifies their role and the need to work together. This is an important step forward in managing lands and forests more efficiently and sustainably. This is also consistent with indicators of ‘good governance’.

Process: What processes will be put in place regarding reviewing permits, cooperation and coordination of government agencies, increasing transparency and participation, making maps and spatial data publicly available, and settling disputes

The decree includes some instructions to agencies regarding improving governance. For example:

The Minister of Forestry is instructed to: (1) improve policies on issuing permits on the use of timber in natural forest areas and (2) improve management of lahan kritis (“critical” or degraded forest) through ecosystem restoration concessions.
The Minister of the Environment is instructed to improve governance of business activities within the areas shown on the Indicative Map through environmental permits.
Multiple agencies are instructed to coordinate the map revision process and provide information to monitor and report to the President on a regular basis.
The Head of the National Spatial Planning Coordinating Agency is instructed to accelerate the consolidation of the Indicative Map into the spatial planning map revision as part of land use governance reform, in cooperation with other agencies. This could ensure that primary forest and peatland that is not already under some form of legal protection is appropriately zoned through the spatial planning process, with the status change lasting beyond the two-year moratorium period.

The decree does not make any specific provisions for reviewing or revoking permits, increasing transparency and participation, or making maps and spatial data publicly available.

The omission of an exemption for community forestry permits—when many exemptions were made including for industrial activities— is a major weakness in the decree.

Addressing Unanswered Questions

An effective moratorium would help to improve land use planning and permitting processes that contribute to Indonesia’s development goals and respect local rights, continuing beyond the two-year suspension period.

Important unanswered questions include:

What specific areas are included in the moratorium and what data and methods were used to identify them? What are the extent, location, and status of existing and already exempted permits? How will this information be made publicly available?
What instructions will be given to the Minister of Mines and Energy?
How will provisions be made to allow legal community-based forest management during the two-year period, and to strengthen local management options in the future?
How will government agencies interpret and by what process will they implement the instructions provided regarding ‘improving governance’?
What additional actions will be taken regarding the governance of areas not identified on the Indicative Map?

The Indonesian government can begin to help answer some of these questions by ensuring that a digital version of the Indicative Map, source data layers, associated methods, and accurate information on the extent, location, and status of existing and already exempted permits, are made publicly available.

What are additional priorities for the two-year moratorium period?

In addition, as acknowledged by the government, achieving these goals will require taking many actions in the two-year moratorium period that are not addressed in the Presidential Decree. This includes putting in place REDD+ policies such as improved land use planning and permitting processes, reviewing or revoking illegal permits, encouraging expansion of agriculture and timber plantations onto degraded land instead of forested land (e.g. sustainable palm oil expansion on degraded land) and developing incentives for existing permits on forested lands to be swapped for permits on degraded lands (e.g. voluntary land swaps).

The main purpose of this decree, as identified in a previous article, is to create time for the government, business and civil society to develop and implement changes that will lead to more sustainable land management while stimulating economic growth, such as:

Comprehensive, accurate, and regularly updated spatial data and maps on land cover and forest type, land use, land status, and land rights—including permits—made publicly available through easily accessible websites.
Revised land use plans (zoning) such that appropriate natural forest and peatlands are classified for conservation or sustainable management and appropriate degraded lands are classified for agricultural or other uses, through a process that incorporates best practices in participatory spatial planning.
Transparent and participatory processes for reviewing, revoking, reissuing, or relocating permits that are illegal or are in areas that are inappropriate for development, incorporating best practice stakeholder engagement and including the free prior and informed consent of relevant communities.

Whether this Presidential Decree contributes to achieving the goals of the Indonesia-Norway agreement on REDD+ is highly dependent on how remaining unanswered questions are addressed and what additional actions the Indonesian government takes—with the participation of industry and civil society—during the two-year period.

Global Well-Being: Rooted in the World's Forests

Jonathan Lash — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 13:25:40 -0400

This piece originally appeared in the Washington Post Environmental Leadership supplement on April 20, 2011, and is reposted with permission.

This year, 2011, has been declared the International Year of Forests, and while a few bright spots exist, forests today face a host of challenges. Mounting pressures from agricultural expansion, rapid economic development, and growing demand for products are leading to deforestation and degradation of forests at alarming rates. The expanding global population— expected to reach 9 billion people by mid-century—is increasing demand for food, encroaching on forests and the value they hold.

Globally an estimated 1.5 billion hectares have already been lost to deforestation. Countries like Brazil and Indonesia face critical situations as millions of acres of rainforest are felled or burned each year to make room for cattle ranches, soybean and oil palm plantations, and the production of pulp and paper. Closer to home, the United States Forest Service predicts that more than 30 million acres of forests in the southern U.S. could be lost to suburban sprawl in the coming generation.

Forests, which cover one-third of the world’s land, are a precious natural resource. They offer food, shelter and income for around a billion of the world’s poorest people. More than half of land-based animal and plant species live in forests. And trees absorb vast quantities of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and protect vital freshwater sources.

The challenges are clear, but solutions have been harder to find. Certainly there is no single magic bullet, but evidence is growing from remote corners of the world— Colombia, Brazil, Niger, Nepal, Indonesia, and beyond— that offer reasons for hope and hold the promise for further success.

In Niger, West Africa, tree cover has increased dramatically across a vast swath of the southern landscape. This turnaround came after political leaders and forestry officials began to recognize the property rights of local farmers to manage trees on their land. Now, forests are being restored, erosion is being reduced, water tables are rising, soil is becoming more fertile, and crop yields are increasing.

In Latin America, some governments, including those in Colombia and Brazil, have been handing back vast forest reserves to the descendants of their original owners, including indigenous Amerindians and other local communities. Evidence is emerging that forest cover is preserved when coupled with ancestral land rights.

After decades of deforestation, Nepal has also begun to reverse course, especially in areas where local “community forests” have been established. Community forests account for approximately 20 percent of forested land in Nepal, where decision- making is accomplished locally by empowered villagers and supported by the national government. Over 12,000 Community Forest User Groups have engaged local communities in the business of protecting, rejuvenating and managing forested landscapes to produce fodder, wood and other products to use and sell.

Increased rights and recognition of land tenure can be a win-win, benefitting both people and forests.

Local control and decisionmaking is the common thread connecting these stories. Nearly a decade ago, the authors Andy White and Alejandra Martin proposed that the recognition of indigenous rights and community ownership offer “an historic opportunity for countries to dramatically improve the livelihoods of millions of forest inhabitants.” While there is still a long way to go to fulfill this vision, growing evidence suggests that increased rights and recognition of land tenure can indeed be a win-win, benefitting both people and the forests on which they depend.

Creative thinking around governance is also playing a hand in one of the best and most innovative opportunities to restore forests. In West Kalimantan, Indonesia, the World Resources Institute is working with local partners to encourage the restoration and reuse of degraded lands, including for palm oil production. By some estimates, more than half of oil palm expansion in Indonesia since 1990 occurred at the expense of forests. This project, which has growing support from the Indonesian government, would help divert some planned oil palm plantations away from natural rainforests and toward degraded lands instead.

Recent analysis by WRI and its partners shows that about three billion acres worldwide—an area larger than Brazil—of previously forested land ~~have become deforested or degraded over the last decade~~ provide opportunities for restoration. While some of these areas could be restored as healthy forests, other areas could be converted to food production. This, in turn, can bring a multitude of benefits, such as creating jobs, easing pressure to clear more forests, reducing carbon emissions, and protecting biodiversity.

While none of the actions alone is enough, together they offer strategies that would help restore and protect forests for future generations. Governments, international development agencies, and nongovernmental organizations—together with local communities—must now build on these approaches and expand the number of success stories in the years to come.

Indonesia’s Moratorium: An Opportunity for Forests and Industry

Beth Gingold — Fri, 22 Apr 2011 14:57:49 -0400

A highly anticipated two-year moratorium on new forest conversion permits could bring fundamental improvements to forest and land management in Indonesia.

Baca dalam Bahasa Indonesia | Read in Indonesian
Download PDF versi Bahasa Indonesia (PDF, 516 Kb)

In mid-2011, Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono is expected to sign a Presidential Decree for the implementation of a two-year moratorium on issuing new permits for conversion of natural forest and peatland. This planned moratorium was announced in May 2010 as part of a $1 billion Indonesia-Norway partnership agreement on reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (known as REDD+).

An effective moratorium will allow time for the government—with participation from industry and civil society—to develop improved processes for land use planning and permitting, create information systems and build institutions that can achieve Indonesia’s ambitious low carbon and agricultural development goals. These goals include both reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 26 percent and doubling palm oil production by 2020.

What is “conversion?”

Which permits are included in the moratorium will depend on how “conversion” is interpreted and defined. Conversion has been defined in different contexts to refer to a physical change in land cover (i.e. from forested to non-forested), to include a change in land use (i.e. from forestry to agriculture) or to a change in legal status (i.e. from inside to outside the Forest Estate). According to international definitions, timber harvesting or logging is not considered to result in deforestation unless it is followed by a long term change in land use.

Implementing an effective moratorium will require a well-deliberated, clear Presidential Decree that is consistent with Indonesia’s development goals, results in cooperation between government agencies and provides public access to relevant information. A several month delay has allowed time for the government to address concerns raised by industry and to reconcile several draft decrees submitted by multiple national government agencies. The drafts contain different interpretations of how the moratorium should be implemented, with different implications for forests and people.

The following analysis of the content of the publicly available draft presidential decrees identifies key elements of the expected decree and recommends priority actions for the two-year moratorium period that can produce lasting benefits to Indonesia’s forests and the people and businesses that depend on them.

What can an effective moratorium accomplish?

An effective moratorium would produce improved land use planning and permitting processes that achieve Indonesia’s development goals and respect local rights, continuing beyond the two-year suspension period.

The Current State of Land & Permit Allocation

Current processes have resulted in inefficient and inequitable land and permit allocations that are inconsistent with Indonesia’s development goals. For example:

In many areas, land that is not forested is legally classified as “forest” and therefore unavailable for agricultural expansion, while forested land is legally classified as “non-forest” and therefore at risk of conversion.
According to the Indonesian Palm Oil Producers Association, half of all existing concessions cannot be utilized because the land is inappropriate for plantations or inhabited by people who may claim the land as theirs.
Timber and oil palm plantations have been associated with costly ongoing social conflicts when expansion has occurred without respecting local rights.
Permits often overlap and have been issued in high conservation value forest and protected areas.

A common misperception reflected in the media is that the moratorium is designed to immediately halt all deforestation and prevent the expansion of industries such as palm oil, timber, and mining. However, according to the text of the Indonesia-Norway agreement, the moratorium is a two-year suspension of new permits for the conversion of natural forest and peatland.

Revoking existing permits—many of which may be illegal—appears to be outside the scope of the proposed moratorium. In addition, since the moratorium would only apply to new permits that result in conversion of natural forest or peatland it will likely not include selective logging permits or permits for oil palm cultivation in other areas.

The two-year period in which no new forest conversion permits are issued would provide the time for the Indonesian government to begin putting in place REDD+ policies such as improved land use planning and permitting processes, reviewing or revoking illegal permits, encouraging sustainable palm oil expansion on degraded land, and developing incentives for voluntary land swaps.

What are main elements of the anticipated Presidential Decree?

As of February 2011, at least three publicly available drafts had been submitted to the Indonesian president by different national government agencies.

All of the drafts contain the following:

Two-year suspension of new permits related to forest conversion.
Instructions to specific government agencies to suspend activities on issuing new permits related to natural forest and peatland conversion.
Exemptions for existing legal permits and activities in the national interest (e.g. energy generation).
Reference to a map that will guide implementation and be updated on a regular basis. These maps are not available for analysis, and may not yet exist.

However the draft decrees also differ substantially. The impact of the forthcoming Presidential Decree will depend on how it addresses the following key elements:

Objectives – Does the preamble clarify the objectives of a temporary suspension of new permits to achieve long term improvements in land use planning and permitting processes?
Definitions – Are terms clear and consistent with achieving the stated objectives? Key terms which have not yet been defined include: conversion, natural forest, primary forest, secondary forest and peatland.
Data – Are the data and maps that will be used or created to determine the areas impacted by the moratorium accurate and appropriate? Appropriate data will depend on definitions, but at a minimum would include information on land cover and forest type, land use, legal status, and land rights—including but not limited to permits.
Permits – Which permits are included and excluded from the moratorium? This will determine the project development options of companies, communities, and local governments, each with different economic, environmental, and social costs and benefits. If the moratorium exempts existing “legal” permits there will need to be a clear definition or process for reviewing legality.
Agencies – Which government agencies are given instructions, and which government agency is responsible for producing the relevant maps associated with the moratorium? Cooperation, coordination, and commitment to transparency by all relevant agencies will be critical to the success of the moratorium.
Process – What processes will be put in place regarding reviewing permits, cooperation and coordination of government agencies, increasing transparency and participation, making maps and spatial data publicly available, and settling disputes? The current lack of easily accessible public data on the appropriate national and sub-national scales is a major barrier to transparent and participatory policy-making.

What do the differences between the draft decrees mean?

Recent media reports reflect ongoing confusion regarding the objectives, content, and implications of the various draft decrees. Much of the public debate regarding the options has focused on how much and what type of land will be affected by the moratorium. Questions include: Will it apply to secondary or “degraded” forest and shallow peat (peat less than three meters deep)? Will forested land outside the “Forest Estate” (Kawasan Hutan) be included?¹

These options have significant implications for forests, people, and climate change. According to government statistics:

58 percent of forests (58 million hectares) in Indonesia are secondary forests.²
80 percent of peatlands (17 million hectares) in Sumatra, Kalimantan, and Papua are shallow peat.³
8 percent of Indonesia’s forests (8 million hectares) are located outside of the “Forest Estate.”⁴

Since none of the drafts contain definitions or provide the maps and data that the government will use during implementation, it is unclear how much and what type of land will be affected by the moratorium. The government has suggested that the moratorium could apply to 64 million hectares, although this estimate likely includes forested areas that are already under some form of protection.

An important factor that has received much less media attention is which permits will be included in the moratorium. Since the moratorium is only a suspension of new permits for conversion, the area that will be affected is not the total amount of natural forest and peatland, but rather the amount of natural forest and peatland that is not already under some form of legal protection and is not already covered by existing permits.

All of the drafts exempt existing legal permits from the moratorium, which is consistent with the text of the Indonesia-Norway agreement. Some drafts refer to legal permits for specific activities including timber, plantations, and mining, while others refer only to new permits related to forest conversion. None of the drafts refer to community timber plantations or other community rights.

None of the drafts clarify the definition of a “legal” permit or provide a review process for determining legality. Likewise, none of the drafts include procedures for revoking permits or refer to existing procedures such as those which have been recently implemented by the Ministry of Forestry.

Ambiguity regarding permits—combined with a lack of accurate public data on the extent, status, and location of all existing permits issued by different agencies, levels and geographical jurisdictions of government—makes it impossible to quantitatively assess the options presented by the various drafts. However the area affected by the moratorium is significantly reduced when available data on existing permits is considered.

What are priority actions for the two-year moratorium period?

Whether the moratorium is ultimately a success depends not only on the text of the Presidential Decree, but on what the Indonesian government—with the participation of industry and civil society—accomplishes within the two-year period.

In order to achieve its ambitious low carbon development goals, the Indonesian government can use the two-year moratorium period to begin to implement the following priority actions:

Produce comprehensive, accurate, and regularly updated spatial data and maps on land cover and forest type, land use, land status, and land rights—including permits—made publicly available through easily accessible websites.
Revise land use plans (zoning) such that appropriate natural forest and peatlands are classified for conservation or sustainable management and appropriate degraded lands are classified for agricultural or other uses, through a process that incorporates best practices in participatory spatial planning.
Develop transparent and participatory processes for reviewing, revoking, reissuing, or relocating permits that are illegal or are in areas that are inappropriate for development, incorporating best practice stakeholder engagement and including the free prior and informed consent of relevant communities.

A clear, well-deliberated Presidential Decree that results in an effective moratorium on new forest conversion permits can help Indonesia “buy time” in which to implement fundamental policy changes, ensuring that there is no return to ‘business as usual’ at the end of two years. If done effectively, this will bring long-term benefits for forests and industry.

[Top]

Moratorium Indonesia: Kesempatan bagi Hutan dan Industri

Sebuah moratorium yang akan menghentikan pengeluaran izin baru konversi hutan selama dua tahun sedang ditunggu-tunggu. Kebijakan ini dapat memperbaiki tata kelola hutan dan penggunaan lahan di Indonesia.

Pada pertengahan 2011, Presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono diperkirakan akan menandatangani sebuah Instruksi Presiden (Inpres) yang menghentikan sementara pengeluaran izin-izin baru untuk konversi hutan alam dan lahan gambut. Rencana pembuatan moratorium ini diumumkan bulan Mei 2010 dan merupakan bagian dari kesepakatan kerjasama antara Indonesia dan Norwegia senilai 1 milyar dolar Amerika, untuk mengurangi emisi dari deforestasi dan degradasi hutan (juga dikenal dengan sebutan REDD+).

Apa yang dimaksud dengan “konversi”?

Izin yang akan dimasukkan ke dalam moratorium sangat bergantung pada penafsiran dan definisi “konversi”. Konversi telah diartikan dalam beberapa konteks sebagai perubahan fisik suatu tutupan lahan (misalnya dari daerah berhutan menjadi daerah tidak berhutan), untuk menandai adanya perubahan dalam penggunaan lahan (seperti dari hutan menjadi perkebunan), atau untuk mengubah status legal suatu kawasan (seperti dari Kawasan Hutan menjadi Areal Penggunaan Lain – APL). Menurut definisi internasional, penebangan kayu atau “logging” tidak dianggap deforestasi apabila tidak diikuti dengan perubahan penggunaan lahan jangka panjang.

Sebuah moratorium yang efektif dapat memberikan waktu bagi pemerintah Indonesia – tentu saja dengan dukungan dari sektor industri dan lembaga swadaya masyarakat – untuk memperbaiki perencanaan penggunaan lahan dan proses mengeluarkan izin baru baik di kawasan hutan maupun areal penggunaan lain (APL), menciptakan sistem informasi yang memadai, serta membangun lembaga-lembaga yang dapat mendukung target Indonesia yang pro-growth dan pro-green. Target yang dinilai cukup ambisius ini termasuk mengurangi emisi gas rumah kaca sebanyak 26 persen dan meningkatkan produksi kelapa sawit sebanyak dua kali lipat pada tahun 2020.

Moratorium ini harus dipikirkan secara matang. Instruksi Presiden tersebut harus jelas dan konsisten dengan rencana pembangunan Indonesia. Berbagai instansi pemerintahan perlu mendukung dan bekerja sama supaya peraturan ini berjalan dengan efisien. Penundaan penandatangan selama beberapa bulan ini telah memberikan waktu bagi pemerintah untuk mempertimbangkan kekhawatiran sektor industri dan merundingkan jalur tengah atas beberapa rancangan Inpres yang diserahkan oleh berbagai kementerian dan mengandung penafsiran berbeda tentang bagaimana moratorium ini akan dijalankan. Kebijakan yang dibuat akan sangat mempengaruhi kehidupan masyarakat setempat dan kelestarian hutan.

Berikut adalah kajian dari beberapa rancangan Inpres yang dapat diakses publik. Analisa ini mengidentifikasikan elemen-elemen penting dari Inpres yang akan ditetapkan dan merekomendasikan langkah-langkah yang perlu dilakukan dalam moratorium dua tahun ini, supaya menghasilkan manfaat yang berkelanjutan bagi hutan Indonesia, masyarakat setempat dan dunia usaha yang bergantung pada sektor ini.

Apa yang bisa dicapai oleh moratorium yang efektif?

Moratorium yang efektif dapat memperbaiki proses pemberian izin dan perencanaan penggunaan lahan yang mendukung target pembangunan ekonomi nasional dan menghormati hak-hak masyarakat setempat. Diharapkan efek moratorium ini bisa dirasakan lebih dari dua tahun.

Keadaan saat ini tentang lahan dan pengalokasian izin

Proses yang dilakukan selama ini dalam pengalokasian konsesi lahan dapat dinilai kurang efektif dan adil. Pemberian izin dilihat tidak konsisten dengan target pembangunan Indonesia. Sebagai contoh:

Di banyak daerah, lahan yang tidak berhutan berstatus “hutan” atau berada dalam Kawasan Hutan sehingga tidak dapat digunakan untuk ekspansi pertanian dan perkebunan. Sementara itu, banyak lahan berhutan tapi secara hukum berada di daerah yang diklasifikasikan sebagai Areal Penggunaan Lain (APL) dan secara legal dapat dikonversi.
Menurut Gabungan Pengusaha Kelapa Sawit Indonesia (GAPKI) setengah dari semua konsesi yang diterbitkan tidak dapat digunakan karena lahan tersebut tidak sesuai untuk dijadikan perkebunan kelapa sawit atau ditempati oleh warga yang sering kali menyatakan lahan tersebut milik mereka.
Banyak laporan terjadinya konflik sosial di Hutan Tanaman Industri (HTI) dan perkebunan kelapa sawit ketika adanya ekspansi industri-industri ini dimana hak masyarakat setempat sering tidak dihormati.
Izin-izin sering tumpang-tindih dan dikeluarkan di daerah hutan dengan nilai konservasi tinggi (HCV) dan daerah hutan yang sebenarnya dilindungi secara hukum.

Persepsi salah yang sering disebut dalam media adalah moratorium ini dibuat untuk menghentikan semua penebangan hutan di Indonesia dan menghambat ekspansi industri-industri seperti industri kelapa sawit, HTI, dan tambang. Namun, menurut isi dari kesepakatan Indonesia-Norwegia, moratorium ini adalah suspensi atas pemberian izin baru konversi hutan alam dan lahan gambut.

Pencabutan izin-izin yang sudah dikeluarkan – banyak di antaranya yang mungkin ilegal – sepertinya berada di luar rancangan moratorium ini. Selain itu, karena moratorium hanya diberlakukan pada izin baru konversi hutan alam dan lahan gambut, kemungkinan besar peraturan ini tidak mencakup izin penebangan pohon selektif (selective logging permits) atau izin perkebunan kelapa sawit di daerah APL.

Jangka waktu dua tahun, di mana tidak ada izin baru konversi hutan, memberi kesempatan bagi pemerintah Indonesia untuk mulai menjalankan kebijakan REDD+, seperti memperbaiki perencanaan penggunaan lahan, mengkaji dan mencabut izin ilegal, mendorong ekspansi perkebunan kelapa sawit yang berkesinambungan di “lahan terdegredasi”, dan mengembangkan insentif untuk melakukan “landswap” untuk pembangunan antara daerah berhutan dengan lahan yang tingkat karbonnya rendah.

Apa elemen-elemen utama dalam rancangan Instruksi Presiden?

Setidaknya tiga rancangan Inpres dapat diakses publik sejak bulan Februari 2011. Draft-draft tersebut telah diserahkan kepada Presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono oleh beberapa lembaga pemerintah.

Semua draft mengandung hal-hal berikut:

Penghentian pengeluaran izin baru konversi hutan selama dua tahun.
Instruksi kepada lembaga-lembaga pemerintah terkait untuk menghentikan pemberian izin baru yang berhubungan dengan konversi hutan alam dan lahan gambut.
Pengecualian atas peraturan ini terhadap izin legal dan kegiatan yang dinilai menyangkut kepentingan nasional (seperti di bidang energi).
Sebuah peta yang menjadi panduan pelaksanaan moratorium yang dapat di-update secara teratur. Perlu dicatat bahwa peta ini belum ada sehingga tidak dapat dianalisa.

Namun, terdapat beberapa perbedaan mendasar pada rancangan-rancangan Instruksi Presiden tersebut. Dampak Instruksi Presiden yang akan ditetapkan akan bergantung pada beberapa hal penting berikut, yaitu:

Tujuan – Apakah peraturan ini dapat menjelaskan tujuan penghentian sementara pemberian izin baru untuk memperbaiki proses perencanaan penggunaan lahan dan pemberian izin baru di masa yang akan datang?
Definisi – Apakah istilah dan terminologi yang digunakan cukup jelas dan konsisten dengan pencapaian tujuan yang ada? Beberapa istilah yang belum didefinisikan dengan baik termasuk: konversi, hutan alam, hutan primer, hutan sekunder, dan lahan gambut.
Data – Apakah data dan peta yang digunakan atau yang akan dibuat untuk menentukan daerah yang termasuk dalam moratorium ini akurat dan sesuai? Data yang sesuai akan tergantung pada definisi yang ditentukan. Namun setidaknya data yang dimasukkan mencakup penutupan lahan, fungsi kawasan hutan, penggunaan lahan, status legalnya, dan persoalan-persoalan mengenai kepemilikan lahan.
Izin – Kejelasan tentang izin mana yang termasuk dan tidak termasuk dalam moratorium ini. Hal tersebut menentukan peluang-peluang bisnis dan pembangunan yang dimiliki oleh perusahaan, komunitas, dan pemerintah daerah (masing-masing dengan keuntungan dan kerugian ekonomi, lingkungan, dan sosial yang berbeda).
Lembaga dan Institusi – Lembaga/Institusi/Kementerian mana yang akan diberikan wewenang untuk mengimplementasikan moratorium ini? Institusi/Kementerian mana yang akan membuat peta-peta yang berhubungan dengan moratorium ini? Apabila terdapat pengecualian terhadap izin yang sudah dikeluarkan dan yang dinilai “legal”, perlu ada definisi yang baik atau proses yang jelas untuk mengkaji ulang legalitas izin tersebut.
Proses – Proses apa saja yang akan digarap untuk mengkaji ulang legalitas izin, kerjasama dan koordinasi dengan berbagai lembaga pemerintah, meningkatkan transparansi dan partisipasi, membuat peta dan data spasial publik, dan menyelesaikan konflik lahan?

Apakah arti dari perbedaan beberapa rancangan Instruksi Presiden?

Beberapa laporan media menggambarkan kebingungan mengenai tujuan, isi, dan implikasi beberapa rancangan Inpres. Sebagian besar debat publik mengenai pilihan-pilihan yang ada terpusat pada berapa banyak dan tipe hutan yang akan terkena dampak dalam moratorium ini. Pertanyaan-pertanyaan yang beredar termasuk: Apakah moratorium ini akan berlaku pada hutan sekunder atau hutan terdegredasi, dan lahan gambut dangkal (gambut dengan kedalaman kurang dari tiga meter)? Apakah daerah berhutan di luar kawasan hutan akan dimasukkan dalam moratorium ini?

Hal-hal ini mempunyai pengaruh yang signifikan bagi hutan, manusia, dan perubahan iklim. Menurut statistik yang dikeluarkan oleh Kementerian Kehutanan:

58 persen hutan (58 juta hektar) di Indonesia adalah hutan sekunder.
80 persen lahan gambut (17 juta hektar) di Sumatera, Kalimantan, dan Papua adalah lahan gambut dangkal.
8 persen daerah dengan tutupan hutan di Indonesia (8 juta hektar) berada diluar Kawasan Hutan.

Karena tidak ada satupun rancangan Inpres yang menjelaskan definisi tersebut ataupun petunjuk mengenai peta atau data yang akan digunakan oleh pemerintah untuk menjalankan moratorium ini, maka tidak jelas berapa banyak dan tipe hutan apa yang akan terkena dampak. Pemerintah Indonesia memperkirakan moratorium ini dapat diberlakukan pada 64 juta hektar area di Indonesia, meskipun kemungkinan prediksi ini termasuk daerah berhutan yang sudah dilindungi.

Sebuah faktor penting yang tidak mendapat banyak sorotoan media adalah izin mana yang akan dimasukkan dalam moratorium ini. Karena moratorium ini hanya merupakan penghentian sementara konversi hutan, daerah yang akan terkena dampak bukan semua daerah hutan alam dan lahan gambut, melainkan daerah hutan alam dan lahan gambut yang tidak dilindungi oleh peraturan tertentu dan belum ada izin atas daerah tersebut.

Semua rancangan Inpres membuat pengecualian atas izin yang masih berlaku. Hal ini konsisten dengan isi kesepakatan Indonesia-Norwegia. Beberapa draft menyebutkan izin-izin tertentu seperti izin pemanfaatan kayu, izin perkebunan, dan izin pertambangan, sementara terdapat draft lainnya yang menyebutkan izin baru yang hanya berhubungan dengan konversi hutan saja. Tidak satupun draft yang membahas persoalan hutan masyarakat atau hak-hak masyarakat lainnya.

Tidak ada draft yang menjelaskan apa yang dimaksud dengan izin “legal” atau mengacu pada sebuah proses yang dapat digunakan untuk mengkaji tingkat legalitas suatu izin. Prosedur bagaimana caranya untuk mencabut izin yang dinilai melanggar hukum, sebagaimana dilakukan baru-baru ini oleh Menteri Kehutanan, tidak dimasukkan pula dalam draft-draft yang ada. Ketidakjelasan tentang izin – ditambah dengan kurangnya data publik yang akurat tentang status hutan dan lokasi izin yang telah diterbitkan oleh lembaga-lembaga pemerintah di berbagai tingkat (pusat, propinsi, dan kabupaten) – membuat analisa kuantitatif pada rancangan Inpres sangat sulit dilakukan. Namun, daerah-daerah yang masuk dalam moratorium ini benar-benar berkurang ketika data publik mengenai izin yang masih berlaku dimasukkan.

Apa kegiatan utama yang perlu dilakukan ketika moratorium dua tahun ini keluar?

Kesuksesan moratorium ini tidak hanya bergantung pada isi dari Instruksi Presiden yang ditandatangani, tapi juga pada apa yang akan dicapai oleh pemerintah Indonesia – dengan partisipasi dari industri dan lembaga swadaya masyarakat – dalam dua tahun ke depan. Supaya Indonesia dapat mencapai target ambisiusnya untuk melakukan pembangunan ekonomi dengan beremisi karbon rendah, pemerintah dapat memanfaatkan moratorium dua tahun ini untuk mulai melaksanakan kegiatan-kegiatan berikut ini:

Memproduksi data spasial dan peta-peta yang lengkap, akurat, dan yang diperbarui secara teratur mengenai tutupan lahan dan tipe hutan, penggunaan lahan, status lahan, dan hak-hak atas tanah – termasuk informasi tentang lokasi izin yang telah diberikan – yang dapat dengan mudah diakses publik melalui internet.
Merevisi perencanaan penggunaan lahan (zoning) sehingga hutan alam dan lahan gambut yang sesuai diklasifikasikan untuk konservasi atau dengan tata pengelolaan yang berkesinambungan. Lahan terdegredasi juga harus diidentifikasikan sehingga dapat digunakan untuk kegiatan perkebunan atau penggunaan lainnya melalui proses yang menggunakan praktek-praktek terbaik dalam kegiatan perencanaan tata ruang secara partisipatif.
Mengembangkan proses yang transparan dan partisipatif untuk mengkaji ulang, mencabut, menerbitkan kembali izin-izin yang ilegal atau yang dilihat tidak sesuai untuk pembangunan, dan menggunakan praktek-praktek terbaik untuk berhubungan dengan instansi-instansi yang berkepentingan termasuk terjaminnya pemberian informasi kepada masyarakat setempat secara bebas, sebelum terjadinya “konversi” laha (prinsip FPIC).

Instruksi Presiden yang jelas dan benar-benar dipikirkan secara matang akan menghasilkan moratorium efektif yang menghentikan sementara pemberian izin baru konversi hutan dapat membantu Indonesia “menarik nafas sejenak” untuk membuat perubahan kebijakan fundamental dan memastikan tidak terjadinya skenario “business as usualbisnis seperti biasa” pada akhir dua tahun tersebut. Apabila dilakukan secara efektif, moratorium ini akan membuat keuntungan jangka panjang bagi hutan dan industri di Indonesia.

In Indonesia, “Forest Estate” is a legal designation referring to land under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Forestry (regardless of whether or not the land contains trees or forests). Land that is zoned Non-Forest Estate in some cases includes forest cover and peat. ↩
Source: Ministry of Forestry using Landsat imagery 7 ETM+ of 2005/2006 (217 scenes). Interpreted in 2007 and published in 2008. ↩
Source: Indonesian Development Planning Agency. 2009. Reducing carbon emissions from Indonesia’s peat lands. Table 1: “Land Use allocation (conservation, protection or development) and land cover in Indonesia’s peat land by main island with peat in 2006.” Data provided is for Sumatra, Kalimantan, and Papua only. These three regions contain the majority of peat in Indonesia. ↩
Source: Ministry of Forestry using Landsat imagery 7 ETM+ of 2005/2006 (217 scenes). Interpreted in 2007 and published in 2008. ↩