Smallholder Farmers and the Dynamics of ...

29 downloads 0 Views 3MB Size Report
project of the Governments of Indonesia and Australia. The KFCP began in the case ...... (CARE International and Borneo Orangutan Survival Foundation), who.
Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ecological Economics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon

Analysis

Smallholder Farmers and the Dynamics of Degradation of Peatland Ecosystems in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia Medrilzam Medrilzam a, Carl Smith b, Ammar Abdul Aziz b,⁎, John Herbohn c, Paul Dargusch a a b c

School of Geography, Planning and Environmental Management, The University of Queensland, Australia School of Agriculture and Food Sciences, The University of Queensland, Australia Forest Industries Research Centre, University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 1 October 2016 Received in revised form 23 January 2017 Accepted 1 February 2017 Available online xxxx

© 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Over the last three decades, the tropical peatland ecosystems in Indonesia have been under intense pressure from anthropogenic activities. Clearing of the peat swamp forests for agricultural activities, logging and drainage, local roads and mining activities have been widespread throughout Indonesia (mostly in Sumatra and Kalimantan Islands) causing ecological disasters in the form of biodiversity loss, deforestation, forest and peat fires, peatland degradation and resulting in massive carbon emissions (Murdiyarso et al., 2010; Miettinen et al., 2012a; Miettinen et al., 2016; Osaki et al., 2016). The destruction of tropical peatlands has also caused socio-economic problems for the country, particularly for the communities living around and within the peatland areas, because their livelihoods depend upon the natural resources provided by this ecosystem (Anshari and Armiyarsih, 2005; Silvius et al., 2008; Laterra et al., 2012; Law et al., 2015). Various actors, ranging from private companies, different levels of government and communities, play a role in peatland conversion with each having different objectives and levels of impact. The adverse impacts of private company operations (such as palm oil plantations and logging concessions) on peatland areas have been widely discussed in the literature (e.g. Carlson et al., 2012; Miettinen et al., 2012b). Meanwhile, many studies (e.g. Page et al., 2002; Fuller et al., 2004; Hooijer et al., 2009) have examined the impacts of government initiatives, such as the Mega Rice Project (MRP) in Central Kalimantan (Noor et

⁎ Corresponding author at: School of Agriculture and Food Sciences, The University of Queensland, Gatton Campus, Gatton, QLD 4343, Australia. E-mail address: [email protected] (A.A. Aziz).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.02.017 0921-8009/© 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

al., 2005), on the deterioration of peatland ecosystems. The MRP was a centralised Indonesian Government project aimed at increasing national rice production and simultaneously supporting the goal of rice selfsufficiency by dividing and converting 1.2 million ha of peat swamp forest into five large blocks of rice fields. Recognising that peatland conversion has contributed to more than half of Indonesia's terrestrial greenhouse gas emissions (MoE, 2009), and the ambitious target of Indonesia's President to reduce carbon emissions by 26% by 2020, the Indonesian Government has released a 2-year Moratorium Policy on Primary Forest and Peatland Conversion (Presidential Instruction No. 10/2011). Besides banning any new licenses to private companies to exploit peatland areas and primary forests for any purpose (including for palm oil plantations, pulp wood and logging concessions), the moratorium policy also aims to allow time for the Government to improve its forestry management and land-use planning practices and improve its data on forests and peatlands (Austin et al., 2012). However, the moratorium does not preclude the clearing of peatlands and primary forests by other actors such as communities practicing traditional agriculture practices. In the peatland ecosystems of Kalimantan, the communities commonly grow their crops (i.e. rice paddies using shifting cultivation and rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) agroforestry on mineral and shallow peat soil on a small scale (Page et al., 2009a). The communities use fire as the main mechanism for land clearing activities. In the past, this method has been relatively safe because the peatland was always wet throughout the year, preventing fires from spreading into peatland areas. However, recent land cover change on many peatland areas has made them susceptible to fire. The construction of canals to drain the peatland has caused extreme changes to the hydrological system (Hooijer et al.,

102

M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

2006) and peat surface subsidence (Wösten et al., 2008), which has increased their susceptibility to fire in dry seasons (Page et al., 2002). Communities have also changed their livelihood practices in response to limited and degraded agricultural land, such as reducing the fallow length of shifting cultivation (Setyawan, 2010; Akbar, 2011), opening new cropping areas on mineral soils exposed along peatland drainage canal banks, converting more non-irrigated rice paddy fields (ladang) to permanent rubber agroforestry, and intensifying land claiming around built infrastructure (such as roads) in order to claim compensation from others wanting to use the land. Most of these activities use fire as the preferred method to clear land. Unless strict burning controls are applied by the communities, the fires may spread and cause severe forest and peat fires that further degrade the peatland. The MRP in Central Kalimantan is a clear example of how an initial disturbance to peatland, through clearing and draining, has changed the way communities conduct traditional agriculture and other livelihood activities, and the magnitude of their impact on the peatland. The implementation of the MRP began in 1996 based on the Presidential Decree No. 82/1995. Dephut (2007) recorded that, within the first 2 years (1996–97) of the MRP, 187 km of primary drainage canals (Saluran Primer Induk/SPI) were built. These connected the Kahayan, Kapuas and Barito Rivers. In addition, about 958 km of sub-primary canals (Saluran Primer Utama/SPU) were built on Block A, B, C and D of the MRP. In Block A, an area strongly affected by the MRP and where the whole canal network was completely built, only 30,000 ha of rice paddy fields were eventually developed out of a total block area of 315,894 ha (Dephut, 2007; Suyanto et al., 2009). Instead of producing land suitable for agriculture, the MRP had a range of disastrous impacts on the peatland ecosystems and community livelihoods. The construction of drainage canal networks destroyed peat swamp forests that were previously used by the local communities for collecting latex from the jelutung tree (Dyera sp.), collecting bark from the gemor tree (Alseodaphne spp.), collecting commercial rattan species, fishing in traditional ponds known as beje, and hunting wild animal (Galudra et al., 2011). The MRP also eliminated the traditional community canal system known as Handel and Tatah, which had been used by the community as a drainage system and to gain access to their livelihood areas. The MRP drainage canals also created unstable peatland hydrology that produced extreme changes in the water table between dry and wet seasons. In 1997, a dry El-Nino year, the drainage canals allowed the peat to dry and a massive forest and peat fire occurred within the MRP. The fires in the MRP area was estimated to have emitted between 0.12 and 0.15 Gt of carbon to the atmosphere and resulted in the dense smog that affected much of Southeast Asia during that time (Page et al., 2002; Page et al., 2009b). Following the rapid political transformation in Indonesia, the MRP was terminated by the new Indonesian Government in 1999 and most of the MRP land were abandoned. From the time the MRP was terminated to 2009 (before the commencement of the Kalimantan Forest Carbon Partnership), the Indonesian central government's focus within the MRP area was peatland rehabilitation planning (Presidential Instruction No 2/2007). However, conflict arose between the centrally controlled Ministry of Forestry, the provincial government and a number of local governments over land tenure due to the ambiguity of new forestry and decentralisation laws and regulations (McCarthy, 2004; Galudra et al., 2011). As a result, the local governments within the MRP area continued to improperly issue licenses to palm-oil and small scale mining companies without approval from the Ministry of Forestry, which claimed that the MRP land was still under its jurisdiction. According to the MRP Rehabilitation Secretariat in Bappenas (2011, personal communication), most of the central government agencies are reluctant to implement the peatland rehabilitation plan until land tenure disputes are resolved. With stalled peatland restoration activities as a result of land tenure disputes, peatland within the MRP continued to degrade. Recurrent fires and the existence of drainage canals have caused the peat to subside and release greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere (Harrison et al., 2009;

Page et al., 2009b; Moore et al., 2013). The recurrent fires have been caused by the peatland clearing activities of private companies and local communities. While private companies use fire to clear peatland primarily for financial benefit realized through the plantation crops developed on the land, local communities, on the other hand, uses fire to clear peatland mainly because this method is the only affordable option for them to create areas suitable for subsistence activities. The local community, almost an annual basis, use uncontrolled fire to burn vegetation to allow boats to locate and access fish habitats during the wet season, to create pools of water that provide refuge for fish and to provide flushes of nutrients to stimulate algal growth and maintain high levels of fish populations (Chokkalingam et al., 2005). Understanding the dynamics of the trade-offs between conservation and livelihood goals in the tropical peatland ecosystems in Central Kalimantan is crucial to the efforts of promoting sustainable livelihoods, developing benefit sharing mechanisms and reducing emissions (Luttrell et al., 2014; Jewitt et al., 2014; Suwarno et al., 2016). In this study we investigate the dynamics of peatland change in two blocks previously assigned for the MRP as a result of local community livelihood activities. We focus on what has occurred subsequent to the MRP, that is, from 2000 to 2009. Therefore, our study does not cover the peatland degradation directly caused by the MRP (which has already been covered in previous studies), but the peatland degradation indirectly caused by the MRP post-abandonment. Our study targets the drivers influencing community livelihood activities such as shifting cultivation, rubber planting, land claiming and the shift to permanent agroforestry, and highlights the associated changes to land cover and above-ground carbon stocks. We do not measure the impact of community livelihood activities on total carbon stocks (above plus below ground carbon) because there is limited data on below ground carbon stocks (such as peat) within the study area. Therefore, the impact of community livelihood activities on carbon stocks presented here only represents a partial impact on the total carbon stock. 2. Case Study Area: Block A-NW and Block E of the Mega-Rice Project Region in Central Kalimantan We selected Block A-NW (North West) and Block E (Eastern part) of the MRP as our study area because both of these blocks have been free from small or large scale private company or government activities post MRP termination in 1999 (Fig. 1). Hence, any peatland degradation that has occurred within both blocks post MRP termination has been caused by local community livelihood activities. Block A-NW represents a peatland area that was heavily deforested and was drained by the MRP between 1996 and 1998, while Block E represents an area that was only slightly disturbed by the MRP. Although there was only one drainage canal that extends into Block E, it but it worth noting that there are smaller canals (tatas) that was constructed to facilitate timber extraction activities. These blocks are the same as those used by the Kalimantan Forest Carbon Partnership (KFCP), which is a Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation + (REDD+) demonstration project of the Governments of Indonesia and Australia. The KFCP began in the case study area in 2007 and it had no direct impact on the results presented in this paper. Block A-NW and Block E are separated by the MRP's primary twin drainage canals (Fig. 2). Administratively, the whole of Block A-NW and about three-quarters of Block E are located within the Mantangai sub-district, and the remaining quarter of Block E is located within the Timpah sub-district of the Central Kalimantan Province. The Kapuas River is the boundary of both blocks on the western side and the Mantangai River runs along the southern and eastern boundary of Block A-NW and along the eastern boundary of Block E. The total study area covers about 120,000 ha: 44,000 ha in Block A-NW and 76,000 ha in Block E. In 2009, there were 14 settlements found in the study area, comprising seven villages and seven hamlets, with a total population of about

M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

103

Fig. 1. Location of study area in Central Kalimantan.

10,000 people (about 2600 families). All settlements are spread across the western side of both Block A-NW and E, along the bank of the Kapuas River. The Mantangai village in the southern part of Block ANW and the Petak Puti village in the northern part of Block E are the ‘entry gates’ to the study area by road. People usually travel among the villages or hamlets within the study area using small motor boats known as klotok or small motorised canoes called ces. The klotoks and ces are also used by the communities to travel to and from sites where they conduct livelihood activities such as cropping and fishing. Ninety-five per cent of the population is local Dayak Ngaju who have already been exposed to ‘modern living’, such as the use of mobile phones and television. As with the other Dayak people in Kalimantan described by Hudson et al. (1967), traditional shifting cultivation practices have naturally diminished in both blocks. Before the late 1960s, traditional shifting cultivation, with its long fallow periods, was the common agriculture practice of Dayak Ngaju communities (Miles, 1970; Page et al., 2009a). In addition, fishing, hunting, rubber cultivation (known as the ‘jungle rubber’ agroforestry), and gathering forest products, such as rattan and gemor tree bark for mosquito repellent, were major sources of food and income for the communities. However, during the timber concessions era from 1969 to 1996, and the MRP era from 1996 to 1998,

legal and illegal logging gradually changed the community livelihoods in both blocks (Suyanto et al., 2009). Traditional shifting cultivation declined and new values introduced by outsiders slowly influenced the social capital of local communities. After the MRP was terminated in 1999, the Indonesian Government intensified law enforcement activities to curb illegal logging within the MRP area. This had caused the larger community in Block A-NW to shift their focus back to shifting cultivation, latex collection and fishing for a source of income. Instead of using traditional long fallow shifting cultivation, communities established short fallow cultivation to grow nonirrigated subsistence rice along the banks of the MRP drainage canals (known locally as ‘lading’). Most communities also increased the area of rubber plantation on poor mineral and shallow peat soils, and sold non-timber forest products, such as rattan and gemor tree bark, and fish to mid-traders for cash income. This was more profitable compared to traditional shifting cultivation (Suyanto et al., 2009). In Block E, an existing logging road, which was unofficially upgraded to a mining road after the MRP era, provided better access for communities to sell fish and non-timber forest products to Northern villages. Because the rubber trees that were passed down by their ancestors were getting old and unproductive, the communities also started to change from jungle rubber agroforestry to rubber monoculture. By

104

M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

Fig. 2. Study area in Central Kalimantan.

2009, only a few families in Block E were practicing traditional shifting cultivation (Suyanto et al., 2009). 3. Methods To investigate the dynamics of peatland change attributed to local community livelihood activities in the study area, we assessed three key factors: 1) The socio-economic condition of the community; 2) the trajectory of land cover change and its associated impact on

above-ground carbon stocks between 2000 and 2009; and 3) fire locations and the probability of fire occurrence within both blocks. In the following sub-sections we describe the methods used to analyse these three factors. 3.1. Assessment of Community Socio-Economy Condition We conducted group interviews in three villages (Mantangai Hulu and Kalumpang villages in Block A-NW and Petak Puti village in Block

M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

E) and a household survey (n = 50) in four villages (Kalumpang and Sei Ahas villages in Block A-NW, and Kanjarau hamlet and Petak Puti village in Block E). The questions used in the group interviews and the household survey were designed to collect basic information on community welfare (income, expenditure and savings), land ownership, the main livelihood activities undertaken (such as rubber agroforestry, rice cultivation, fishing and fuel wood collection) and the causes of forest and peat fires. We also obtained population statistics for seven villages from census data (PODES) collected during 2003, 2005 and 2008, and from CARE International data collected during 2009 (unpublished report).

105

class, as described by Hergoualc'h and Verchot (2011) (Table 1), to estimate the change in above ground carbon stocks associated with the change in land cover class stocks between 2000 and 2009 (Eq. (1)). dC it ¼ dAit  AGBi

ð1Þ

where,dCit: Change in carbon stock for land cover class i over time t (tons C).dAit: Change of area for land cover class i over time t (hectare).AGBi: Average above ground carbon for land cover class i (tons C/ha).i: Land cover class.t: Time of simulation. 3.3. Assessment of Fire Occurrence Probability

3.2. Assessment of Land Cover Change and Greenhouse Gas Emissions We used land cover data and maps covering 2000, 2005 and 2009 from Siegert et al. (unpublished report) and the KFCP GIS database to measure the impact of community livelihood activities on land cover change. The KFCP land cover data were based on Landsat images (39 Landsat ETM+, 10 Landsat TM5). To simplify the assessment, the nine land cover classes used by the KFCP were reclassified into six classes: primary peat forest, secondary peat forest, swamp shrubs, shrub– mixed dryland farms, settlement and water (Table 1). From these six land use classes, we developed a land cover transformation matrix for both blocks between 2000 and 2005, and between 2005 and 2009 by assessing the net land cover change for each land cover class between these two observation periods. Then, we determined the average rate of change (ha/year) from one land cover class to another over the period 2000 to 2009. The overall rates of land cover change between forest, shrub and farmland for both blocks are shown in Fig. 3 (changes in the area of settlement and water were small so are not shown). Based on the average rates of change between land cover classes, we constructed two land cover change simulation models (one for Block ANW and one for Block E), in the form of stock and flow models, using iThink version 9.1.4 system modelling software. The area of each land cover class in the year 2000 was used as the initial value of each land cover class stock and the average rates of change between land cover classes where used as flows between the land cover class stocks. We then used the average above ground carbon values for each land cover

Land cover for years 2000, 2005 and 2009 (see Section 3.2), fire hotspots for years 2001, 2005, and 2009 (mapped from Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) data), peat depth, and the location of roads, rivers and drainage canals were obtained from KFCP (Fatkhurohman, personal communication). In addition, rainfall data was obtained from the Center for Climate Risk and Opportunity Management/CCROM (Boer, Personal Communication). Before the analysis, the land cover was classified into six classes (see Section 3.2) and peat depth into three classes (mineral soils and shallow peat 0.0–1.0 m, medium depth peat 1.0–3.0 m, and deep peat N3.0 m). To estimate fire occurrence probability, we used Maximum Entropy (Maxent) version 3.3 (Phillips et al., 2006; Elith et al., 2011), which was originally developed to estimate species distribution probability using species presence data and the spatial distribution environmental variables. We applied Maxent to estimate fire occurrence probability as a function of land cover (six classes), rainfall (continuous in mm/year), peat depth (three classes), distance from rivers (continuous in meters), and distance from drainage canals (continuous in meters) using fire hotspot presence data. The modelling was conducted at a spatial resolution of 0.01km2 (100 × 100 m grid cells). We performed five Maxent model runs: (1) one for 2000 (using 2000 land cover, 2001 rainfall and 2001 fire hotspot data), (2) one for 2005 (using 2005 land cover, 2005 rainfall and 2005 fire hotspot data), (3) one for 2009 (using 2009 land cover, 2009 rainfall and 2009 fire hotspot data), (4) all combined (using 2000, 2005 and 2009 land

Table 1 Change of land-cover, hotspots and above-ground biomass. No

Land-covera

1

Primary peat forestb

2

Secondary peat forestc

3

Swamp Shrubsd

4

Shrubs-mixed farmlande

5

Settlementf

6

Waterg

Block

A-NW E A-NW E A-NW E A-NW E A-NW E A-NW E

Area (in ha)

Hotspots

2000

2005

2009

2001–2004

2005–2009

5343.40 40,171.49 4008.58 29,901.09 26,747.1 3412.07 8213.17 1594.24 1.78 16.50 111.24 216.59

4960.28 38,410.33 3793.07 30,013.00 23,401.48 2557.59 12,149.55 4076.08 1.78 16.50 119.10 218.97

4312.26 37,767.84 2012.70 30,901.18 22,335.27 2484.2 15,639.10 3960.10 1.78 16.50 124.17 198.66

22 31 26 51 739 55 882 80 0 0 0 1

74 89 48 73 837 52 837 83 1 0 4 1

Above-ground biomass (Tons C/hectare)h 181.9i 85.1j 4.8k 12.4l

Source: Recalculated from KFCP database in 2012 (Fatkhurohman, personal communication); Hergoualc'h and Verchot (2011). a Characteristic of each land-cover is explained in the footnotes. b Dense, large diameter trees (more than 30 cm diameter), rich biodiversity, difficult to access, some areas experienced logging activities prior to MRP. c Dense, but small diameter of tree (less than 30 cm diameter), some areas experienced logging activities prior to MRP. d Dominated by high ferns, swamp and combined with early pioneer trees. e Combination of shrubs, jungle rubber, dry land paddy field. f Dominated by housing and building areas. g MRP canals, community canals, Kapuas river branches h Only cover above-ground biomass, does not include necromass, below ground, and peat soil biomass soil. i Mean value of virgin peat swamp forest carbon biomass. j Mean value of logged forest carbon biomass. k Mean value of rice carbon biomass. Rice paddies were mostly located around the swamp shrubs in both blocks. For consistency, we used rice biomass for the swamp shrubs from the same study. l Mean value of mixed cropland and shrubland carbon biomass.

106

M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

Fig. 3. The flows of land use transfer from 2000 to 2009 (in Hectare/year).

cover; 2001, 2005 and 2009 rainfall data and 2001, 2005 and 2009 fire hotspot data) and finally (5) all combined but excluding those land cover years that were significantly correlated (using Pearson's correlation p N 0.01) with the land cover year that had the highest percentage contribution to fire occurrence in the fourth (all combined) model run. Peat depth, distance from roads, distance from rivers and distance from drainage canals were also included in all model runs but remained constant. Each model run was evaluated using AUC (area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve), sensitivity (true positive rate), specificity (true negative rate) and the True Skilled Statistics (TSS) (sensitivity + specificity – 1). The percentage contribution of each variable

to fire occurrence was also recorded for each model run (Evangelista et al., 2009). 4. Results 4.1. Community Livelihood Activities in the Study Area The results of the household survey (Table 2) found that the average income of households living within both blocks was approximately Rp. 1.9 to 2.1 million per month and the average basic household expenditure was approximately Rp. 1.5 to 1.6 million per month. In Block A-NW,

M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

107

Table 2 Socio-economic survey results. Block A-NW

Block E

Welfare - Total number of household (hh) - Average income (Rp/hh/month) - Average expenditure (Rp/hh/month) - Main sources of income (%)

30 1,897,667 1,649,333 Rubber (68.7%)

20 2,059,000 1,463,000 Rubber (80.0%)

Rubber tapping - Number of households - Average rubber area per household (ha/hh) - Rubber tree density (number of trees/ha) - Method of land clearing - Latex sold to middle men (kg/transaction/hh) - Average prices (Rp/kg)

27 2.8 319 Fire (100%) 17.8 9521.0

18 2.9 412 Fire (100%) 4.8 8441.0

Rice cultivation - Number of households - Number of households implement shifting cultivation - Methods of land clearing - Paddy field area (ha/hh) - Paddy area planted (%) - Average fallow period (years) - Productivity (tons/ha/year) - Number of harvests per year

17 12 Fire (100%) 2.4 38.50% 1.9 1.3 1

– – – – – – – –

Fishing - Number of households - Days of fishing (days/week) - Production (kg/day) - Self-consumed (%) - Average raw fish price (Rp/kg) - Average dried fish price (Rp/kg)

1 3 3.5 70% 15,000 27,000

9 4 14.7 12% 12,500 26,111

rubber latex collection (68.7% of income) and rice cultivation are the main sources of livelihood. In Block E, the community collected fish as the other main livelihood activity in addition to rubber cultivation (80% of income). In general, the community produced low quality rubber latex, with the price being controlled by middle men. Almost 57% of households in Block A-NW produced rice for self-consumption but none of the households in Block E produced rice. Among the farmers in Block A-NW, 70.5% used shifting cultivation practices with an average fallow period of 1.9 years. Most shifting cultivation was conducted on the mineral soil and shallow peat, including that along the banks of the MRP drainage canals and the Mantangai River. The community in Block E explained that the practice of shifting cultivation significantly declined during 2000 to 2009, because the community preferred fishing, collecting rattan and gemor bark, and tapping the existing old rubber plantations for their livelihood. From our survey which was conducted in 2011, we found that the community stopped collecting gemor bark because they could not find any gemor trees close to their villages. The communities used fire (100% of the respondents) for land clearing, known as Manusul, to develop new rubber plantations and rice cultivation areas. During interviews, the communities clearly stated that they never light fires deliberately to burn the peatland. Instead, they were aware of the adverse impact of wildfires within the peatland and to their livelihood. The communities also stated that they commonly used fire breaks, known as Batas Kehu, to avoid the spread of fires from their livelihood areas to other areas. Hence, they know how to reduce the risk of wildfire during land clearing, however, they acknowledged that on a few occasions in the dry season fires escape to the shrub land, and further spread to burn the forest and peat soils. In these cases, wildfire was unintentionally caused by escaped fires. When forest and peat fires occurred, the communities stated that they had limited capacity to suppress them. Other livelihood activities involving fire were Mangaruhi (clearing vegetation in order to collect trapped fish in an uprooted tree pond or canal during dry seasons) and drying gemor bark. Although both activities could potentially cause wildfires, the communities stated that the intensity of Mangaruhi

Notes

Only for food and school

Two to three transactions in a week Depends on the quality and world price

and gemor bark drying fires were far less than that of the fire used for land clearing. 4.2. Land Cover Change and above Ground Carbon Emissions Deforestation (loss of primary forest) and forest degradation (conversion of primary forest to secondary forest) had occurred in both blocks between 2000 and 2009 (Fig. 4a and b). The rate of primary forest loss reached approximately 1.8% and 0.53% per year in Block A-NW and Block E respectively. All of the deforestation and degradation rates (solid lines in Fig. 3) were higher than natural regeneration rates (Fig. 3), except for the rates between swamp shrub and secondary peat forest in Block E. The conversion of other land covers to shrub–mixed dryland farms occurred at rates higher than the forest could regenerate, resulting in a net increase in the area of shrubs–mixed dryland farms. Because there were no logging concessions or palm-oil plantations in both blocks, we presume that the increase in shrubs–mixed dryland farm area occurred to meet community livelihood needs. The overall changes in above-ground carbon in both blocks are shown in Fig. 4c. We found that the net above-ground carbon emissions from 2000 to 2009 in Block A-NW and Block E were 266,834 t C (26,683.4 t C/yr or 0.61 t C/ha/yr) and 285,454 t C (28,545.4 t C/ yr or 0.38 t C/ha/yr), respectively. However, we believe that the total carbon emissions per year would be greater when all carbon pools, including below-ground carbon, are included in these estimates. We did not estimate the total carbon emissions because of the lack of detailed data on the below-ground biomass and peat soil degradation. Nonetheless, over 10 years, the community activities in Block A-NW and Block E reduced the above-ground carbon by about 17% and 3%, respectively. The reduction in carbon in Block A-NW was lower than in Block E, however, the small areas of deforestation and forest degradation in Block ANW caused a larger percentage reduction in the above-ground carbon stock. Recurrent fires also made it difficult for the vegetation to regenerate in Block A-NW. In Block E, the reduction of above-ground carbon stock in the primary forest was offset by an increase in secondary forests.

108

M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

Fig. 4. The trends of land cover change and above ground carbon stock.

4.3. Land Cover Change and Fire Post MRP, the conversion of swamp shrubs to shrub–mixed dryland farms in Block A-NW has been the dominant land use change. One of the reasons for this was land clearing caused by shifting cultivation. Instead of rotating agricultural land with forest using long fallows, local communities expanded agriculture onto swamp shrub land dominated by grass (Imperata cylindrica) and ferns (Pteridium) using short fallows (2–3 years). The community also actively searched for suitable places

for rice paddy fields and made use of the fertile soils that were dug up and placed along the banks of the MRP drainage canals. The soil adjacent to the MRP drainage canals mostly overlies deep peat and this has resulted in an increase in shrubs–mixed dryland farm area overlying deep peat (Fig. 5c) and a high number of fire hotspots occurring on shrubs–mixed dryland farm and swamp shrub land areas overlying deep peat (Fig. 6a and b). Conversion of forest to shrubs–mixed dryland farms and to swamp shrubs also occurred in Block A-NW (Fig. 3a), although during group

M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

109

Fig. 5. Land cover change over various peat depths.

discussions the community stated that the current forests were far from community settlements and they were afraid to practice agriculture within the forests because they may be accused of illegal logging. In any case, unintentional fires caused by uncontrolled burning did occur at forest edges and played a significant role in forest cover reduction. The construction of the MRP drainage canals meant that the forest areas, which were mostly located on deep peat, were made accessible and the community moved into the forest area to grow crops on the mineral soils fringing the canals. The result has been a significant reduction in peat forest cover (Fig. 5a, b) and high fire occurrence within peat forest

overlying deep peat (Fig. 6c, d). The MRP drainage canals have also enabled the community to fish further inside Block A-NW, and fishing can also introduce fire because it is used to clear fishing canals of vegetation. In Block E, the total increase in shrub–mixed dryland farm area was small compared to Block A-NW. However, primary peat forest is still being converted into shrub–mixed dryland farms, and degraded to secondary peat forest (Fig. 3b). From our field observations, we discovered that most of the conversion from forest and swamp shrubs to shrub– mixed dryland farms in Block E was concentrated along an old logging road that was built over mineral soils. On the shallow peat areas

110

M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

Fig. 6. Number of fire hotspots on various peat depths and land cover.

surrounding the road, community activities converted the primary forest edges and swamp shrubs into shrub-mixed dryland farms. Meanwhile, natural vegetation regeneration from shrub-mixed dryland farms and swamp shrubs to secondary peat forest occurred over the deep peat areas, which are not suitable for cropping (Fig. 5e, f, g and h). Fire hotspots in Block E were detected over mineral soil and shallow peat, medium depth peat and deep peat areas in both primary and secondary forest (Fig. 6c and d). It is highly possible that escaping fires from land claiming activities on both sides of the logging road spread to adjacent secondary and primary forest overlying the deep peat areas.

The results of Maxent modelling runs 1, 2 and 3 (Fig. 7) clearly show that increased community access provided by the MRP drainage canals and annual precipitation have had a major influence on the probability for fire within the study area. For all model runs, annual precipitation and distance from drainage canals were the dominant contributors (N 75%) to fire hotspot occurrence (Table 3). The influence of a dry year (2009, Fig. 7c) can clearly be seen as a larger area of increased fire probability. All models had good fire hotspot discriminating power (AUC's above 0.8), were reasonably specific and sensitive (above 0.75) and performed around 51

M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

111

Fig. 7. Fire occurrence probability in 2000, 2005 and 2009.

to 78% better than random (TSS ranging from 0.514 to 0.780) (Table 4). 5. Discussion Due to the formulation and execution of poor government policy, the MRP resulted in the initial and substantial deforestation and degradation of the peat forest within the study area. Our study focused on the post MRP period and demonstrates that the negative impacts of this flawed policy are still continuing. We found that the improved access provided by the MRP drainage canals in Block A-NW and the mining road in Block E, as well as changes in the shifting cultivation practices of local communities, resulted in a net loss of forest cover and above ground carbon. Previously, the traditional Dayak community used mineral soils along the higher river banks for shifting cultivation and rubber agroforestry (jungle rubber). They rarely ventured into the deep peat areas because those areas were inaccessible and commonly covered by dense peat forest. However, when they did venture into those areas, it was for mainly for fishing, hunting and collecting non-timber forest products such as rattan, gemor bark and honey. In this manner, traditional shifting cultivation, combined with jungle rubber and other subsistence activities, were undertaken in harmony with the natural peatland ecosystems (Hudson et al., 1967; Setyawan, 2010) for centuries (Hudson

et al., 1967; Arrow et al., 1995). It has been generally recognised that traditional shifting cultivation with adequately long fallow periods is an appropriate method of soil management and suits the local economy and socio-environment (Arrow et al., 1995; Barlas, 1996). With the establishment of the drainage canals in Block A-NW by the MRP, local communities suddenly had access to new areas and this allowed them to expand their livelihood activities into deep peat and forest areas. The areas adjacent to the MRP drainage canals, where mineral soil were deposited on top of peat during canal dredging, became new land for short fallow shifting cultivation (ladang) (Fig. 4), rubber planting and the growing of fruit such as banana and pineapple. The fire occurrence probabilities in Fig. 7a, b, and c indicate that land clearing with fire occurred intensively around the drainage canals within Block A-NW. This was a dual consequence of both land use activities involving fire and lower moisture content of the peat immediately adjacent to the canals which made it more susceptible to peat fires. In Block E, a mining road improved access for the community to adjacent forest overlying deep peat areas. This access allowed the community to claim land and convert the forest edges to permanent agriculture, in particular rubber monoculture plantations. During field observations in 2010 and 2011 in Petak Puti village, we found burn scars and newly erected timber signs along both sides of the road. The signs indicated that land was being claimed in order to obtain compensation from the mining company, road contractors or the government.

Table 3 Contribution of Canals, Road, Peat Depth, Rainfall and Land Cover on Hotspots Occurrence. Annual rainfall

Land cover

No

Scenario

Canals

road

Peat depth

2001

2005

2009

2000

2005

2009

1 2 3 4 5

Hotspot01 Hotspot05 Hotspot09 Hotspot010509 Hotspot010509 vs LC 2009

44.7 6.5 54.9 43.5 39.6

7.9 9.8 6.7 5.4 5.1

4.8 6.2 4.2 1.1 0.9

34.5 – 54.9 32.5 34

– 70.4 – 1.8 4.6

– – 21.2 6.1 6.4

8.2 – – 1.1 –

– 7 – 3.5 –

– – 13.1 5.2 9.4

112

M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

Table 4 Sensitivity tests on Maxent simulation results. No

Scenario

Number of variables

AUC

Fractional predicted area

Specificity

Training omission rate

Sensitivity

TSS

1 2 3 4 5

Hotspot01 Hotspot05 Hotspot09 Hotspot010509 Hotspot010509 vs LC 2009

5 5 5 9 5

0.926 0.949 0.85 0.84 0.841

0.143 0.11 0.23 0.243 0.243

0.857 0.89 0.77 0.757 0.757

0.142 0.11 0.23 0.243 0.243

0.858 0.89 0.77 0.757 0.757

0.715 0.78 0.54 0.514 0.514

According to the communities, for a payment of Rp 150,000–250,000/ha or about US$ 15–25/ha, one can obtain a Surat Keterangan Tanah (SKT) or land ownership statement from the Village Head to own and clear land. A similar type of land claiming process has also occurred in West Kalimantan (Anshari and Armiyarsih, 2005). With fire as the main method employed by the community for land clearing, the increased probability of fire can be clearly seen along the western boundary of Block E, which is where the road is located (see Fig. 7c). The change in shifting cultivation toward shorter fallow periods is a typical driver of deforestation in Southeast Asia. It occurs where farmers look to find the ‘best’ short-term solution to maintaining their subsistence regardless of the long-term consequences (Angelsen et al., 2014). In our study area, a change from traditional shifting cultivation and jungle rubber toward short crop rotations and rubber monoculture plantations occurred because farmers believe that plantations will provide them with better production and income. With the desire to improve their quality of life, and the destruction of local livelihoods caused by the MRP, the pressure to crop land instinctively escalated leading to shorter fallows. For some households in Block A-NW, shifting cultivation is their routine livelihood activity and cannot be separated from their local custom. We concur with Sulistyawati et al. (2005) on the role of shifting cultivation as a food safety net in response to factors such as; rubber price fluctuation which are affected by changing market fundamentals and the decline in fishing yields which has been caused by unsustainable practices (overfishing, use of poison and electricity) and pollution from the gold mining activities (Suyanto et al., 2009). In Block A-NW, the communities practiced at least three methods of ‘shifting cultivation’. The first method involves searching for mineral soils adjacent to the MRP drainage canals and cultivating the identified area adopting a fallow period of 2–3 years. This method is similar to the traditional shifting cultivation method, but with a much shorter fallow period. In the second method, the community applies a ‘harvest and replace’ rotation whereby rice is grown in the identified areas with mineral soils, and after the rice harvest, the rice paddies are replaced with other crops (mostly rubber) after a one to two-year fallow. Once the rubber trees are planted, the land became permanent agricultural land. In the final method, the community practices a ‘back and forth’ rotation, whereby they establish a rice paddy field on half of the land area, leaving the other half to fallow for 2–3 years. After the rice harvest, they move the rice paddy to the fallowed half for the next planting. As they rotate between fallow and cultivated areas in quick succession, the fallow areas become dominated by ferns and grasses and suppressing the ability for the forest to naturally regenerate. This is one of the reasons why the rate of land cover change from swamp shrubs to shrub– mixed dryland farms were so dominant in Block A-NW (Fig. 3). The uncontrolled use of fire for land clearing, particularly in dry seasons, is one of the main causes of tropical peatland degradation. Communities in our study area admitted that fire was the only affordable means they had for clearing land, whether for rice paddies or crops such as rubber. Land clearing by fire (Manusul) is a tradition in Dayak Ngaju communities inherited from previous generations. It is part of the yearly planting cycle and is usually conducted in the dry months from July to September. Traditionally, the community conducted Manusul as a collective task involving community groups. However, since the release of a series of Central Kalimantan provincial regulations prohibiting the use of fire for land clearing, only some community

members still use Manusul. As a result, individual (non-collective) land clearing with fire became more prevalent and secretive because community members were afraid of getting caught by others. Individuals find it difficult to keep fires under control and this is presumed to be one of the reasons for the occurrence of wildfires within forest and shrub areas within the study area. A survey conducted by CARE in 2009 (unpublished report to KFCP) found that 56% of fires in 2009 were caused by land clearing. Other causes of fire were found to be land claiming, opening access to forest and agriculture plots, protests against government policies, and the tradition of Mangaruhi (collecting fish by clearing the vegetation surrounding swamp shrubs or canals using fire). Extreme dry years caused by ENSO (El Nino Southern Oscillation) in 2002, 2006 and 2009 also amplified the number of uncontrolled fires within the study area. The fire probability maps in Fig. 7 show that 2009 had an increased extent of high fire probability (Fig. 6c), particularly in Block E, due to 2009 being a dry ENSO year. Another underlying factor driving local communities to exploit peatland is poverty. Poverty is known to be one of the underlying causes of deforestation and is widespread within communities in tropical peatland areas (Silvius et al., 2008), including those within our study area. Although the historical data on income and household expenditure between 2000 and 2009 was unavailable, we believe that the communities have been living around the poverty line (US$ 1.00 per day) for a long time. During interviews, most community members stated that they had struggled to maintain their subsistence for many years and this situation worsened after the MRP era because many of the places they depended on for their livelihood were destroyed. Suyanto et al. (2009) reported that poverty was still a problem in 2009 and this was confirmed by our survey in 2011. However, post abandonment, we found that the MRP had inadvertently improved the livelihood opportunities for local communities by providing them with access to land that they previously could not use. From field observations it was evident that there was an increase in land used for shifting cultivation along the banks of MRP drainage canals. Despite the increase in shifting cultivation area, local rice production has yet to meet the local communities' demand for rice due to low productivity (about one ton per hectare per year). Our observations found that community members were buying rice from the local market or floating kiosk boat. As such, it seems that the improved land access provided by the MRP is not enough to compensate for the loss of the original livelihoods that were in place before the MRP. The resulting increase in poverty is likely to also increase pressure on the community to find other alternative livelihoods, such as illegal fishing and illegal gold mining, in the Kapuas River. In the past, poverty has forced some communities to carry out illegal logging, known as ‘mencari kayu’. During the logging era in the 1980s and mid-1990s, legal and illegal logging became one of the main income sources in the study area. The community sold timber to three logging concession operators and to outsiders. Those logging activities stimulated the local economy and connected the Dayak with the outside world. As a result, local communities began abandoning their traditional farming practices (shifting cultivation and jungle rubber) and turned to logging as their primary source of income. When the government enforced illegal logging laws, many community members were reluctant to go back to shifting cultivation and preferred to plant more rubber trees, intensify fishing, and collect forest product such as rattan and gemor tree bark.

M. Medrilzam et al. / Ecological Economics 136 (2017) 101–113

6. Conclusions Triggered by the demise of the Mega Rice Project and the construction of logging roads, land clearing, land claiming and a shift toward shorter fallows within farming systems by local communities has led to large areas of deforestation, forest degradation and large carbon emissions from the tropical peatlands of Central Kalimantan. In addition, the inability of local communities to prevent fire escaping form their cropping areas has led to unintended forest and peat soil fires. Poverty and a reduction in social cohesion triggered by the MRP have also led local communities to shift toward more exploitative livelihood practices. Although this study focuses on the MRP area in Central Kalimantan, there are many tropical peatland areas throughout Indonesia experiencing similar situations. Simply enforcing regulations, as stipulated in Indonesia's forest and peatland moratorium policy, to protect peatland and primary forest will not be effective in reducing deforestation and carbon emissions from these degraded tropical peatlands. An integrated approach that improves the livelihoods and the social capital of local communities is needed, along with efforts to stabilise water tables and revegetate degraded peatland areas. Without policies to tackle these underlying drivers of deforestation and peatland degradation (such as poverty and a change in farming practices), any peatland restoration efforts will have a high risk of failure. Acknowledgement We thank the KFCP and Indonesia-Australia Forest Carbon Partnership (IAFCP) staff members, including the supporting organisations (CARE International and Borneo Orangutan Survival Foundation), who have facilitated data collection and field work activities for this study. Special thanks goes to Mr. Fatkhurohman, the KFCP-GIS specialist who provide us with land cover, fire hotspot and peat depth data, Professor Rizaldi Boer who provided us with rainfall data, and Mr. Sanjiwana for his advice on data processing. Special thanks also goes to Mr. Basah Hernowo, the Technical Director of IAFCP/KFCP who permitted us to use and release KFCP data in this paper. We confirm that the analysis in this paper is unbiased and free from any intervention and influence of the IAFCP/KFCP. References Akbar, A., 2011. Studi Kearifan Lokal Penggunaan Api Persiapan Lahan: Studi Kasus di Hutan Mawas, Kalimantan Tengah (Study of Local Wisdom in Using Fire for Site Preparation: A Case Study at Mawas Forest Area, Central Kalimantan). 8. Penelitian Sosial dan Ekonomi Kehutanan, pp. 211–230. Angelsen, A., Jagger, P., Babigumira, R., Belcher, B., Hogarth, N.J., Bauch, S., Wunder, S., 2014. Environmental income and rural livelihoods: a global-comparative analysis. World Dev. 64, S12–S28. Anshari, G.Z., Armiyarsih, 2005. Carbon decline from peatlands and its implications on livelihood security of local communities. In: Murdiyarso, D., Herawati, H. (Eds.), Carbon Sequestration and Sustainable Livelihoods. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia, pp. 112–123. Arrow, K., Bolin, B., Costanza, R., Dasgupta, P., Folke, C., Holling, C.S., Jansson, B.-O., Levin, S., Mäler, K.-G., Perrings, C., 1995. Economic growth, carrying capacity, and the environment. Science (Washington) 268, 520–521. Austin, K., Sheppard, S., Stolle, F., 2012. Indonesia's moratorium on new forest concessions: key finding and next steps. World Resources Institute, Washington DC. Barlas, Y., 1996. Formal aspects of model validity and validation in system dynamics. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 12, 183–210. Carlson, K.M., Curran, L.M., Ratnasari, D., Pittman, A.M., Soares-Filho, B.S., Asner, G.P., Trigg, S.N., Gaveau, D.A., Lawrence, D., Rodrigues, H.O., 2012. Committed carbon emissions, deforestation, and community land conversion from oil palm plantation expansion in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 109, 7559–7564. Chokkalingam, U., Kurniawan, I., Ruchiat, Y., 2005. Fire, livelihoods, and environmental change in the middle Mahakam peatlands, East Kalimantan. Ecol. Soc. 10 (1), 26. Dephut, 2007. Rencana Induk (Master Plan) Rehabilitasi dan Konservasi Kawasan Pengembangan Lahan Gambut di Propinsi Kalimantan Tengah. In: Kehutanan, B.P. (Ed.), Pusat Rencana dan Statistik Kehutanan. Badan Planologi Kehutanan, Jakarta. Elith, J., Phillips, S.J., Hastie, T., Dudík, M., Chee, Y.E., Yates, C.J., 2011. A statistical explanation of MaxEnt for ecologists. Divers. Distrib. 17, 43–57. Evangelista, P., Stohlgren, T., Morisette, J., Kumar, S., 2009. Mapping invasive tamarisk (Tamarix): a comparison of single-scene and time-series analyses of remotely sensed data. Remote Sens. 1, 519–533.

113

Fuller, D.O., Jessup, T.C., Salim, A., 2004. Loss of forest cover in Kalimantan, Indonesia, since the 1997–1998 el niño. Conserv. Biol. 18, 249–254. Galudra, G., Van Noordwijk, M., Suyanto, S., Sardi, I., Pradhan, U., Catacutan, D., 2011. Hot spots of confusion: contested policies and competing carbon claims in the peatlands of Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Int. For. Rev. 13, 431–441. Harrison, M.E., Page, S.E., Limin, S.H., 2009. The global impact of Indonesian forest fires. Biologist 56 (3), 156–163. Hergoualc'h, K., Verchot, L.V., 2011. Stocks and fluxes of carbon associated with land use change in Southeast Asian tropical peatlands: a review. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 25, GB2001. Hooijer, A., Silvius, M., Jauhiainen, J., Canadell, J.G., Page, S., Kwadijk, J., Wösten, H., 2009. Current and future CO2 emissions from drained peatlands in Southeast Asia. Biogeosci. Discuss. 6, 7207–7230. Hooijer, A., Silvius, M., Wosten, H., Page, S., 2006. PEAT-CO2, assessment of CO2 emissions from drained peatlands in SE Asia. Delft Hydraulics Report Q3943 (2006). Hudson, A.B., Hudson, J.M., Koentjaraningrat, 1967. Telang: a Ma'anjan village of Central Kalimantan. Villages in Indonesia. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, pp. 90–114. Jewitt, S.L., Nasir, D., Page, S.E., Rieley, J.O., Khanal, K., 2014. Indonesia's contested domains. Deforestation, rehabilitation and conservation-with-development in Central Kalimantan's tropical peatlands. Int. For. Rev. 16 (4), 405–420. Laterra, P., Orúea, M.E., Boomana, G.C., 2012. Spatial complexity and ecosystem services in rural landscapes. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 154, 56–67. Law, E.A., Bryan, B.A., Meijaard, E., Mallawaarachchi, T., Struebig, M., Wilson, K.A., 2015. Ecosystem services from a degraded peatland of Central Kalimantan: implications for policy, planning, and management. Ecol. Appl. 25 (1), 70–87. Luttrell, C., Resosudarmo, I.A.P., Muharrom, E., Brockhaus, M., Seymour, F., 2014. The political context of REDD+ in Indonesia: constituencies for change. Environ. Sci. Pol. 35, 67–75. McCarthy, J.F., 2004. Changing to gray: decentralization and the emergence of volatile socio-legal configurations in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. World Dev. 32, 1199–1223. Miettinen, J., Hooijer, A., Tollenaar, D., Page, S., Malin, C., Vernimmen, R., Shi, C., Liew, S.C., 2012a. Historical Analysis and Projection of Oil Palm Plantation Expansion on Peatland in Southeast Asia. CRISP National University of Singapore, Deltares, ICCT, Washington. Miettinen, J., Shi, C., Liew, S.C., 2012b. Two decades of destruction in Southeast Asia's peat swamp forests. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10 (3), 124–128. Miettinen, J., Shi, C., Liew, S.C., 2016. Land cover distribution in the peatlands of peninsular Malaysia, Sumatra and Borneo in 2015 with changes since 1990. Global Ecology and Conservation 6, 67–78. Miles, D., 1970. The Ngadju Dayaks of Central Kalimantan, with special reference to the upper Mentaya. Cross-Cult. Res. 5, 291–319. MoE, 2009. The second national communication to the UNFCCC. In: M.O. (Ed.), Environment. Ministry of Environment, Indonesia. Moore, S., Evans, C.D., Page, S.E., Garnett, M.H., Jones, T.G., Freeman, C., Hooijer, A., Wiltshire, A.J., Limin, S.H., Gauci, V., 2013. Deep instability of deforested tropical peatlands revealed by fluvial organic carbon fluxes. Nature 493 (7434), 660–663. Murdiyarso, D., Hergoualc'h, K., Verchot, L.V., 2010. Opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in tropical peatlands. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107 (46), 19655–19660. Noor, Y.R., Heyde, J., Suryadiputra, I.N., 2005. Community-based approach to peatland adaptation and Management in Central Kalimantan, Jambi and South Sumatra, Indonesia. In: Murdiyarso, D., Herawati, H. (Eds.), Carbon Sequestration and Sustainable Livelihoods. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia, pp. 124–138. Osaki, M., Nursyamsi, D., Noor, M., Segah, H., 2016. Peatland in Indonesia. Tropical Peatland Ecosystems. Springer, Japan, pp. 49–58. Page, S., Hoscilo, A., Langner, A., Tansey, K., Siegert, F., Limin, S., Rieley, J., 2009a. Tropical peatland fires in Southeast Asia. In: Cochrane, M.A. (Ed.), Tropical Fire Ecology: Climate Change, Land Use, And Ecosystem Dynamics. Springer and Praxis Publishing Ltd., Chicester, UK., p. 263. Page, S., Hosciło, A., Wösten, H., Jauhiainen, J., Silvius, M., Rieley, J., Ritzema, H., Tansey, K., Graham, L., Vasander, H., Limin, S., 2009b. Restoration ecology of lowland tropical peatlands in Southeast Asia: current knowledge and future research directions. Ecosystems 12 (6), 888–905. Page, S.E., Siegert, F., Rieley, J.O., VanBoehm, H.-D., Jaya, A., Limin, S., 2002. The amount of carbon released from peat and forest fires in Indonesia during 1997. Nature 420, 61–65. Phillips, S.J., Anderson, R.P., Schapire, R.E., 2006. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol. Model. 190, 231–259. Setyawan, A.D., 2010. Review: biodiversity conservation strategy in a native perspective; case study of shifting cultivation at the Dayaks of Kalimantan. Nusantara Bioscience 2, 97–108. Silvius, M., Joosten, H., Opdam, S., 2008. Peatlands and people. In: Parish, F., Sirin, A., Charman, D., Joosten, H., Minayeva, T., Silvius, M., Stringer, L. (Eds.), Assessment on Peatlands, Biodiversity and Climate Change: Main Report. Global Environmental Centre and Wetlands International, Kuala Lumpur and Wageningen. Sulistyawati, E., Noble, I.R., Roderick, M.L., 2005. A simulation model to study land use strategies in swidden agriculture systems. Agric. Syst. 85, 271–288. Suwarno, A., van Noordwijk, M., Weikard, H.P., Suyamto, D., 2016. Indonesia's forest conversion moratorium assessed with an agent-based model of Land-Use Change and Ecosystem Services (LUCES). Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, pp. 1–19. Suyanto, S., Khususiyah, N., Sardi, I., Buana, Y., Van Noordwijk, M., 2009. Analysis of Local Livelihoods from Past to Present in the Central Kalimantan Ex-Mega Rice Project Area. Working paper 94. World Agroforestry Centre, Bogor, Indonesia, p. 70. Wösten, J.H.M., Clymans, E., Page, S.E., Rieley, J.O., Limin, S.H., 2008. Peat–water interrelationships in a tropical peatland ecosystem in Southeast Asia. Catena 73, 212–224.