THE VALUE OF FORESTS

Posted by AsiaViews | May 24, 2019 | 0 |

LuxuryTravelGuide.com

In our concessions we have oil palm and conservation areas. Forests

help provide clean air, clean water, habitat for biodiversity and a stable

climate – services that have real economic value. Striking the balance

between the need for development and conservation is the constant

ongoing challenge. In the absence of a regulated carbon market, the

value of conservation forest is worth practically zero on our balance

sheet. In comparison, the market value of oil palm land ranges from US$

10,000 to 15,000 per hectare.

As long as forests are undervalued compared to productive assets, the

conversion pressure not only exists, but also increases with population

growth. In our producing estates, 25 percent of our land holdings are

conservation areas, for which the company incurs substantial costs to

protect. From a financial perspective these conservation areas are cost

centers, providing no return and few direct benefits.

All the rhetoric about saving critical ecosystems has not yet translated

into a sensible valuation or mechanisms that would encourage people to

protect, rather than convert, critical habitat. Currently, from a financial

perspective, the flora and fauna in the forests are worth more dead than

alive.

So, what are the incentives to conserve rather than convert critical

habitat? This leads to my second point. Conservation is not free but who

should pay for it? In each of our conservation areas, we face a constant and daily threat

from illegal logging, mining or desperate, poverty driven smallholders.

In our Kalimantan estate, we created an orangutan sanctuary. The

sanctuary was planned to cover an area of 6000 hectares, but was reduced to

2330 hectares when the local government awarded a license to a mining

company overlapping our estate.

When I first visited this property, illegal logging was rampant and all you

heard from dawn to dusk were chainsaws. We now have 150 orangutans

in the sanctuary and the logging has long stopped.

Our success was based on the following strategies. First, Empowering

Communities, providing the local community involved in the illegal

logging with alternative jobs in the estate. Some of our rangers in the

conservation team are ex-illegal loggers. Second, Enforcement,

working with local police to stop those behind the illegal logging. Third,

Integrated Landscape Management, collaborating with the local

government, community, and stakeholders to enhance the legal status of

the sanctuary to the special status of “Essential Ecosystem”. The

Essential Ecosystem is managed in alignment with the management

plan of the broader landscape. Fourth, Partnership with NGOs. Our company

staff are not experts in conservation. Working with like-minded NGOs,

we are developing the right conservation protocols.

The cost to the company to maintain the sanctuary is US$220/ha/year.

The national average government budget for Protected Areas is US$

4.40 /ha/year. We spend 50 times the national average to protect this

sanctuary. This leads me to my last point, how to pay for conservation?

One way is to adopt a Development by Design, which allows development

and conservation to go hand in hand. In the province of Papua the provincial

government has allocated 25 percent of the island for development and 75

percent for conservation. Our oil palm concession in located in the 25 percent

zoned for development, development that is needed to achieve the provinces

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Without active management and

funding, no forest within development zones will remain untouched.

Within our Papua concession, we hope to establish oil palm estates and

substantial conservation areas. From our Kalimantan experience, we

understand the time, effort and financial costs of conservation.

Balancing development and conservation is complex. The solutions are

equally complex and by jurisdiction, require alignment among landscape,

lifescape and government development goals.

Comments by George Tahija

Entrepreneur, Environmentalist and Panelist

At the Sustainable World Resources Conference in Singapore on 2 May 2019

About The Author

AsiaViews

Leave a reply Cancel reply

Neigborhood Watch

Subscribe To Newsletter

POINTS TO PONDER

EXTRICATING NDONESIAN CHILDREN FROM ISIS INFLUENCE ABROAD

Indonesia urgently needs to revisit the possibility of repatriating the neediest of its young citizens stranded abroad, whose families had earlier joined ISIS. Most of these children are in camps in northern Syria but there are also small numbers in the Philippines, Afghanistan and Iraq. “Extricating Indonesian Children from ISIS Influence Abroad”, the latest report from the Institute for Policy Analysis of Conflict (IPAC) argues that the government could begin by bringing back small groups of unaccompanied children under ten years of age, who pose minimal security risk and are most vulnerable to deteriorating conditions in the camps.“The problem is that health and security conditions are worsening by the day in the Syrian camps, and the children are growing older,” says Dyah Kartika, IPAC analyst. “They need access to schools, a nurturing environment, and medical attention. If the government waits too long, the children will be further exposed to ISIS ideology.” The new report examines a 2019 list of Indonesians in camps and prisons run by the Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). The Indonesian government has been trying to verify their citizenship, but with pseudonyms, misspellings and bad transliterations, it is a daunting task. At the time the data was collected, between March and June 2019, there were 555 Indonesians in SDF camps and prisons, including 367 children. Among the children, approximately 277 were under the age of ten and 34 were unaccompanied. In June 2021, there are fewer than ten children who are both unaccompanied and under the age of ten that could be prioritized for return. Bringing back children of ISIS families is no easy task. The report analyses the main challenges faced by the Indonesian government. These include definitional issues, bureaucratic competition, the difficulty of verifying nationality, evaluating the toll of exposure to conflict, assessing security risk, and finding relatives or others willing to provide care once the children are returned. In addition, COVID has meant stringent restrictions on travel, placing further obstacles in the way of repatriation. There are several models for rehabilitation of children exposed to violent extremism in Indonesia that could be modified to accommodate the needs of children repatriated from abroad. The report examines these models and argues that the government does not need to have every detail of rehabilitation programs in place before it starts extricating children from ISIS influence. It can start by bringing back the most vulnerable children and then modify programs as needed.

“It’s important that the government see these children as victims” says Dyah. “They deserve a chance to be children again.”

THE VALUE OF FORESTS

LuxuryTravelGuide.com