Search

Tropical deforestation in Southeast Asia is one of the leading causes of carbon emissions and reductions of biodiversity. Spatially explicit analyses of the dynamics of deforestation in Indonesia are needed to support sustainable land use planning but the value of such analyses has so far been limited by data availability and geographical scope. We use remote sensing maps of land use change from 2000 to 2010 to compare Bayesian computational models: autologistic and von Thünen spatial-autoregressive models. We use the models to analyze deforestation patterns in Indonesia and the effectiveness of protected areas. Cross-validation indicated that models had an accuracy of 70–85%. We find that the spatial pattern of deforestation is explained by transport cost, agricultural rent and history of nearby illegal logging. The effectiveness of protected areas presented mixed results. After controlling for multiple confounders, protected areas of category Ia , exclusively managed for biodiversity conservation, were shown to be ineffective at slowing down deforestation. Our results suggest that monitoring and prevention of road construction within protected areas, using logging concessions as buffers of protected areas and geographical prioritization of control measures in illegal logging hotspots would be more effective for conservation than reliance on protected areas alone, especially under food price increasing scenarios. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Indonesia contributes significantly to deforestation in Southeast Asia. However, much uncertainty remains over the relative contributions of various forest-exploiting sectors to forest losses in the country. Here, we compare the magnitudes of forest and carbon loss, and forest and carbon stocks remaining within oil palm plantation, logging, fiber plantation (pulp and paper), and coal mining concessions in Indonesia. Forest loss in all industrial concessions, including logging concessions, relate to the conversion of forest to nonforest land cover. We found that the four industries accounted for ∼44.7% (∼6.6 Mha) of forest loss in Kalimantan, Sumatra, Papua, Sulawesi, and Moluccas between 2000 and 2010. Fiber plantation and logging concessions accounted for the largest forest loss (∼1.9 Mha and ∼1.8 Mha, respectively). Although the oil palm industry is often highlighted as a major driver of deforestation, it was ranked third in terms of deforestation (∼1 Mha), and second in terms of carbon dioxide emissions (∼1,300-2,350 Mt CO2). Crucially, ∼34.6% (∼26.8 Mha) of Indonesia's remaining forests is located within industrial concessions, the majority of which is found within logging concessions (∼18.8 Mha). Hence, future development plans within Indonesia's industrial sectors weigh heavily on the fate of Southeast Asia's remaining forests and carbon stocks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The effectiveness of land-sharing and land-sparing approaches has been widely debated. Yet, few studies quantify the environmental and socio-economic outcomes of these approaches within a real-world landscape. Indonesia's plans to increase its palm oil production present an opportunity to investigate the potential environmental and socio-economic implications of the land-sharing and sparing approaches., We developed a computer model to simulate the expansion of oil palm agriculture in Sumatra, Indonesia, under four different scenarios distinguishable by the dominance of scheme smallholders or industrial estates: business-as-usual, BAU (25 : 75, scheme smallholders:industrial estates); high-yielding industry dominated, ESTATE (10 : 90); low-yielding smallholder dominated, SMALLHOLDER (40 : 60), high-yielding smallholder dominated, HYBRID (40 : 60; but with improved smallholder yields)., Our results reveal several trade-offs associated with varying the proportion of scheme smallholders and productivity of oil palm plantations. The ESTATE scenario (reflecting land-sparing) resulted in lowest environmental costs in terms of forest conversion, greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity losses and nitrogen fertilizer usage. Additionally, infrastructural development and tax revenues were highest under the land-sparing approach, though fewer jobs were created. The SMALLHOLDER scenario (indicating land-sharing) resulted in highest environmental costs in terms of forest conversion, carbon dioxide emissions and biodiversity losses but involved more households in oil palm agriculture and thus created more employment opportunities. The HYBRID scenario ranked second best in terms of both minimizing forest loss and job creation. However, the drawbacks of this approach included high nitrogen fertilizer consumption, lower infrastructural development and lower tax revenues., Synthesis and applications. From an environmental perspective, it is far more important to implement spatial restrictions on oil palm expansion over forests since increasing the productivity of smallholdings and industrial estates among the four scenarios examined show minimal differences to biodiversity loss and greenhouse gas emissions. The hybrid approach shows that increasing the proportion of scheme smallholders need not come at a great environmental cost for achieving Indonesia's palm oil production target. From a policy perspective, this hybrid approach requires a change in legislation to increase the minimum land area an industrial estate owner must allocate to scheme smallholders (40%), as well as increased support to improve productivity in oil palm smallholdings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The expansion of large-scale oil palm plantations in Indonesia has taken a heavy toll on forests, biodiversity, and carbon stocks but little is known about the environmental impacts from the smallholder sector. Here, we compare the magnitude of forest and carbon loss attributable to smallholdings, private enterprises, and state-owned oil palm plantations in Sumatra. During 2000-2010, oil palm development accounted for the loss of 4,744 ha of mangrove, 383,518 ha of peat swamp forest, 289, 406 ha of lowland forest, and 1,000 ha of lower montane forest. Much of this deforestation was driven by private enterprises (88.3%) followed by smallholdings (10.7%) and state-owned plantations (0.9%). Oil palm-driven deforestation in Sumatra resulted in 756-1,043 Mt of total gross carbon dioxide emissions, of which ∼90% and ∼9% can be attributed to private enterprises and smallholdings, respectively. While private enterprises are responsible for the bulk of environmental impacts, the smallholder oil palm sector exhibits higher annual rates of expansion (11%) compared to private enterprises (5%). Both sectors will need careful monitoring and engagement to develop successful strategies for mitigating future environmental impacts of oil palm expansion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Indonesia and Norway have entered into a landmark deal that will pay Indonesia up to US$1 billion for forest-conservation activities aimed at slowing rampant deforestation and resulting greenhouse gas emissions. A recent Presidential Instruction in Indonesia outlines a key deliverable of this “Partnership”—a two-year suspension on new concessions for clearing or logging of peat and old-growth forest. Here, we discuss the implications of this instruction for carbon and biodiversity protection. The protection of highly threatened deep peatlands represents a clear victory. However, by focusing solely on old-growth forests, the instruction excludes over 46million ha of selectively logged rainforests, which often have high carbon storage and biodiversity. This leaves the logged forests, most of which are in accessible lowland areas, highly vulnerable to re-logging and conversion for oil palm and pulpwood plantations. The instruction also could allow large areas of peatlands and old-growth forest to be converted to sugarcane—one of the world’s most rapidly expanding biofuel crops. While the Partnership could potentially help reform land-use planning and reduce illegal deforestation in Indonesia, we argue that Indonesia must also strive to protect vulnerable logged forests, which comprise a large part of the country’s high-carbon, high-biodiversity lands. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary 1. The governments of Norway and Indonesia are collaborating on a REDD+ partnership that would contribute to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation, forest degradation and peatland conversion in Indonesia. Part of this agreement requires Indonesia to implement a 2-year moratorium to suspend the issuance of new permits for conversion of peat and natural forests for forestry or agriculture. 2. This partnership offers an unprecedented opportunity for Indonesia to mitigate its deforestation and carbon emission levels. However, it has also galvanized intense debates within Indonesian society regarding the scope of the moratorium and its consequent environmental and socioeconomic ramifications. 3. We developed a web-based application for evaluating the implications and trade-offs of implementing Indonesia's forest moratorium in Kalimantan. This spatially explicit tool quantifies the moratorium's benefits for carbon conservation and its opportunity costs under alternative user-defined moratorium scenarios. This application could serve as a useful framework for understanding the costs and benefits of REDD+ implementation across Indonesia and other forest-rich tropical nations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) provides financial compensation to land owners who avoid converting standing forests to other land uses. In this paper, we review the main opportunities and challenges for REDD+ implementation, including expectations for REDD+ to deliver on multiple environmental and societal cobenefits. We also highlight a recent case study, the Norway-Indonesia REDD+ agreement and discuss how it might be a harbinger of outcomes in other forest-rich nations seeking REDD+ funds. Looking forward, we critically examine the fundamental assumptions of REDD+ as a solution for the atmospheric buildup of greenhouse gas emissions and tropical deforestation. We conclude that REDD+ is currently the most promising mechanism driving the conservation of tropical forests. Yet, to emerge as a true game changer, REDD+ must still demonstrate that it can access low transaction cost and high-volume carbon markets or funds, while also providing or complimenting a suite of nonmonetary incentives to encourage a developing nation's transition from forest losing to forest gaining, and align with, not undermine, a globally cohesive attempt to mitigate anthropogenic climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Oil palm is one of the world's most rapidly expanding equatorial crops. The two largest oil palm-producing countries—Indonesia and Malaysia—are located in Southeast Asia, a region with numerous endemic, forest-dwelling species. Oil palm producers have asserted that forests are not being cleared to grow oil palm. Our analysis of land-cover data compiled by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization suggests that during the period 1990–2005, 55%–59% of oil palm expansion in Malaysia, and at least 56% of that in Indonesia occurred at the expense of forests. Using data on bird and butterfly diversity in Malaysia's forests and croplands, we argue that conversion of either primary or secondary (logged) forests to oil palm may result in significant biodiversity losses, whereas conversion of pre-existing cropland (rubber) to oil palm results in fewer losses. To safeguard the biodiversity in oil palm-producing countries, more fine-scale and spatially explicit data on land-use change need to be collected and analyzed to determine the extent and nature of any further conversion of forests to oil palm; secondary forests should be protected against conversion to oil palm; and any future expansion of oil palm agriculture should be restricted to pre-existing cropland or degraded habitats. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Conservation Biology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

A letter to the editor is presented which discusses recommendations to improve the "Oslo Pact," a pact signed by President Yudhoyono of Indonesia with the Norwegian government for forest conservation in Indonesia.

The Convention on Biological Diversity's post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework will probably include a goal to stabilize and restore the status of species. Its delivery would be facilitated by making the actions required to halt and reverse species loss spatially explicit. Here, we develop a species threat abatement and restoration (STAR) metric that is scalable across species, threats and geographies. STAR quantifies the contributions that abating threats and restoring habitats in specific places offer towards reducing extinction risk. While every nation can contribute towards halting biodiversity loss, Indonesia, Colombia, Mexico, Madagascar and Brazil combined have stewardship over 31% of total STAR values for terrestrial amphibians, birds and mammals. Among actions, sustainable crop production and forestry dominate, contributing 41% of total STAR values for these taxonomic groups. Key Biodiversity Areas cover 9% of the terrestrial surface but capture 47% of STAR values. STAR could support governmental and non-state actors in quantifying their contributions to meeting science-based species targets within the framework.