Work Sample-Forest Fires Prevention in Developing Countries as Disaster And Climate Change Risk Adaptation And Mitigation

Forest Fires Prevention in Developing Countries as Disaster And Climate Change Risk Adaptation
And Mitigation
Introduction
Developing countries range in size, distinct from one to another, from China-considered a
superpower- to countries like Tuvalu-a small-island state in the South Pacific with a population of about 10,000
people. While the terms of developing and developed may be applied vary and left a set of question to the
boundaries that lie between them, in this paper, the terms developing countries is used for the countries that
still have high rate of unemployment, and low income per capita, also characterized by their vulnerability to
external economic shocks and natural and man-made disasters.
The exposure to disaster risk become more common nowadays, exacerbated by unplanned and
unsustainable growth in many cities has exposed its residents to multi-hazard risks with devastating and costly
impacts. Disasters inevitably undermine the development process, in some cases wiping out 20 years of
development in a matter of hours. It also exacerbates the continuous global climate changes that compound
existing vulnerabilities, especially for the urban poor. So, disaster vulnerability is on the increase in rapid
population growth, unplanned urbanization, and environmental degradation. Global climate change has
contributed to the increased frequency of disasters.
According to UN report, 97% of all deaths related to natural disasters occur in developing countries
(IFRC, 2004). It is the poor who occupy high-risk locations, such as floodplains, river banks, steep slopes and
reclaimed land exposed to disasters. Moreover, the poor often lack the financial and material resources
needed to protect their lives and livelihoods from disasters. While real natural disaster affected by the
uncontrolled sequence of natural movement and phenomenon, there was natural disaster that induced by
disgraceful human activities such as intended forest fires that such cost haze across South-East Asia affected
Indonesia as well as the neighboring countries of Singapore and Malaysia. In 2015, CIFOR estimated that the
economic losses might have reached around US$14 billion (UN ESCAP, 2015). Within these fact it is essential
to not neglected any risk to be included in planning process. Moreover, after a decade of research, analysis,
and emerging environmental evidence tells that far from being merely just an environmental issue, climate
change will touch every aspect of our life as nation and as individuals.
Consequently, adaptation and mitigation to climate change and disaster risk more than ever must be
formulated based on various preconditions of developing countries that limited by budget constraints and the
allocation for improving socio-economical condition and physical infrastructure to enhance their
development. The discrete agendas of environmental conservation and sound urbanization can be brought to
converge if and when environmental planning addresses the structural (largely spatial) underpinning factors.
Developing Countries Risk
While all countries suffer disasters, they have the most significant impact on developing countries. For
example, 86 percent of deaths from flooding occur in low or low-middle income countries, compared with ten
percent in upper middle and four percent in high-income countries (Doocy S. et al., 2013). Disasters can cancel
progress on poverty reduction. For instance, the experience in the Philippines, struck in 2009 by tropical storm
and typhoon one of the provinces hit hardest, saw the poverty incidence almost double, from 5.5 percent in
2006 to 9.5 percent in 2009. Six years later, recovery was still far off, with 7.6 percent of families still below
the poverty line (Doocy S. et al., 2013).
Adaptation to climate change in developing countries is vital and has been highlighted by them as having
a high or urgent priority, while the challenge in developing countries is higher than in developed countries.
Because in developing countries, limitations in capacity would jeopardize adaptation process. The limitations
itself include both human capacity and financial resources. Any delays to implementing this adaptation
including delays in financing adaptation projects will lead ultimately increased costs. Delays in implementing
adaptation will also lead to greater dangers to more people. For example, extreme events including droughts,
floods and loss of glacial meltwater could trigger large-scale population movements and large-scale conflict
due to competition over scarcer resources such as water, food, and energy.
Challenge in developing countries to overcome disaster mitigation and adaptation is relatively higher than
in developing countries. As such these countries still on the process in fulfilling the most critical urban
environmental needs by people that include access to environmental infrastructure systems and services (e.g.,
water supply, sewerage, solid waste management, storm drainage, urban transport. Also, the availability of
open spaces regarding adequately designed community parks and other green areas, and environmental
surveillance.
The cost of climate change and disaster
Absolute financial losses are one of the impacts of disaster. While it is highly uncertain, the
macroeconomic costs of the impacts of climate change, but it is very likely to threaten development in many
countries. According to the United Nations, over the past twenty years, disasters from natural hazards have
affected 4.4 billion people, claimed 1.3 million lives and caused $2 trillion in economic losses. For the first
time, disaster losses globally have topped $100bn for three consecutive years (2010-2012), far outstripping
humanitarian aid (UNISDR, 2013). The number is higher in developed countries, but they take a more profound
toll in developing countries - the East Japan earthquake in 2011 was one of the most expensive disasters in
history, costing around $200bn, equivalent to three per cent of Japan's GDP; the 2010 earthquake in Haiti is
estimated to have cost $14bn, equivalent to 160 per cent of Haiti's GDP (Debbie Hillier et al. 2013).
According to UN ESCAP(2015), 160 out of the 344 globally recorded natural disasters hit Asia-Pacific,
accounting for 16,046 lives lost - more than a two-fold increase from 2014. The total population affected by
disasters in the region decreased from 79.6 million people in 2014 to 59.3 million people in 2015. However,
these numbers would be significantly higher if slow-onset disasters such as droughts, heat waves, and forest
fires and haze were taken into account. The most disaster-prone sub-region was South Asia, recording 52
disasters and 14,647 deaths - a staggering 64 percent of the global fatalities in 2015.
Study Case: Forest Fires in Indonesia
Indonesia as one of developing countries in South East Asia has ambitious goals towards climate change
adaptation and mitigation and reducing disaster risk. It is acknowledged by the country's high exposure to a
range of geophysical and hydro-meteorological hazards, combined with grave vulnerabilities resulting from
population growth, urbanization, unequal economic development and lack of social and environmental
considerations within development process. In Indonesia, disaster caused by environmental hazards are
becoming increasingly costly and severe. This country houses for some of the largest tropical forests in the
world, as well as large deposits of mineral, oil, and natural gas. However, inadequate enforcement of
environmental law has led to rampant deforestation, illegal logging, forest and land conversion as well as
forest and peatland fires (Korhonen-Kurki et al. 2013; Obidzinski and Kusters, 2015). Looking from its
commitment to reduce GHG emission through the Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) and
the Paris Agreement, Indonesia aimed to reduce carbon emissions amounting to 29% without international
assistance and 41% with its assistance in 2030 from 2.88 billion ton CO2 equivalent. However, deforestation
still the number one sectors that emitted the largest emission of GHG, followed by emission from energy
sector. So, deforestation contributes substantially to global greenhouse-gas emissions and consequently to
climate change (Harris et al., 2012), especially in Indonesia.
The most devastating deforestation act is through forest fires. For decades Sumatra and Kalimantan have
been subject to recurring and severe dry-season forest fires set by agribusinesses and farmers clearing land to
plant crops. In their natural state, the wet forests of these regions do not burn quickly, but extensive logging
has dried and degraded large areas of forest, thereby increasing vulnerability to fires. Fires in 1998 were
especially widespread, causing an estimated $4 billion in damage (Glover and Jessup 1999). Fires recurred
thereafter in 2002, 2005, 2006, 2009, 2013, and 2015, tend to be most severe during hot, dry El Niño years.
Where such fires occur on peatland, they are difficult to extinguish and can smolder underground for years
(Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies,2018).
The World Bank has estimated 2.6 million hectares (ha) of Indonesian land were burning between June
to October 2015, around 33% of which was in peatland (Glauber & Gunawan 2016:1). This lead to haze disaster
which lasts more than one month. The report revealed that the cost of construction had reached US $ 16,1
billion (IDR 221 trillion), it is doubled the cost of tsunami's impact. Moreover, its implications for agriculture
and forestry reached around 8,8 billion (IDR 120 trillion), the transportation sector approximately USD 372
million, 19 deaths and more than 500,000 cases of acute respiratory infections. In 2015, the estimated
economic cost of fire to Indonesia (USD 16,1 billion) was more extensive than the expected value added from
Indonesia's 2014 gross palm oil exports (USD 8 billion) and the value added from the country's entire 2014
palm oil production (USD 12 billion) (World Bank, 2016). It also had effects on schooling, with teaching and
learning process disrupted for one month (World Bank, 2016). By one independent estimate, on many days
the carbon emissions exceeded those of the entire US economy (Harris et al. 2015). Government of Indonesia
spends enormous amounts of money to extinguish forest fires, but forest fires still occurred. As recorded by
The United Nation Office for the coordination of Humanitarian Action (UNOCHA), the impact of forest fires
between 1995 to 2015 is higher than other disasters in Indonesia (UNOCHA 2015: 38).
Severe weather has contributed to making the effect of forest fire broad and uncontrollable, but it does
not ignite the fire. In 2015, 99% of forest fires happened because of human burning activity. However, the
causes of these forest fires could be seen in two approaches. The first approach in technical approach that
learned how to extinguish the occurred fires and second is the social, environmental and political approach
that refers to forest management effort that does not just extinguish the fire but investigate the underlying
causes of forest fires. While, in recent Indonesia's Policy, The Grand Design on Forest, Land, and Plantation
Fires 2017-2019 land use is divided into areas of the concession land (34%) and the outside concession land
(66%). There are four types of the concession land use: Natural Timber Forest (IUPHHK-HT), Industrial Timber
Forest (IUHHK-HT), Palm Oil Plantation and overlapping areas from the three of them (Aminingrum, 2017).
However, in this grand design states that burning the land is a cheaper method than the Zero Burning Land
Clearing Method (ZBLCM). It is seven times more affordable. After a month, the burned land will be planted
with oil palms or timbers. The method is easy and cheap (Purnomo et al.2017:22). It could be said that a match
is enough to clear the land.
Moreover, fires in peatland are very critical because they contribute to 90% of the haze (World Bank,
2015). Peatland is a crucial area for biodiversity and the environment, which is protected by government
regulation. Peatlands in Indonesia amount to 20,6 million hectares or 10,8% of Indonesia's land area (Risnawati
2016:27). According to UNEP, peat is one of nature's most effective ways of taking carbon out of the
atmosphere and stocking it underground, making it crucial to the fight against climate change. On the flip side,
when drained and set ablaze, they can release ten times more carbon than forest fires.
Since the continuous trend of demand in palm oil production, extensive conversion of land use to oil
palm plantation land is continue to raise. Oil palm plantation has played an important role in Indonesian
economic development. In 2015, smallholder farmers had 41 percent of oil palm plantations, the private sector
had 52 percent, and state-owned company had 7 percent (Purnomo et al., 2016). It is become acknowledged
that oil palm plantations have become driving factors in the process of deforestation though burning activity
since the 1990s (Aden et al. 2000).
From this perspective, it could be concluded that socio-economic factors are one of the main underlying
factors to the deforestation act through forest fires in clearing the land. Environmental aspect and
consequences are mainly neglected. Concerning sustainable development, over-exploitation of resources
could be harmful to the livelihood of future generation. At the same time, many people living in or close to
these forests are highly dependent on forest resources, and their livelihoods are threatened by deforestation
and non-sustainable forest use (Sunderlin et al., 2005). In response to the risks of forest fire, it is, therefore,
better to have integrated strategies and policies for forest fire prevention while acknowledging trade-offs
between environmental, social, and economic elements (FAO, 2010)
Indonesia itself has done many transformations including the establishment of the Peatland Restoration
Agency; and set up the actions of non-state actors, especially large agribusinesses, in managing forests and
peatland. Jokowi has made action by implementing two new policy decisions related peatland recovery.
Expanding the peatland moratorium was his first move followed by creating new ad hoc agency, the Peatland
Restoration Agency (BRG), which was established in January 2016. The BRG operates on a five-year mandate
through 2020. In November 2016 it received a budget for 2017 of Rp 865 billion, from a request of Rp 1.2
trillion. Of at least 15 million hectares of peatland across Indonesia, 7 million hectares have already been
converted while 7 million hectares remain intact. The BRG has identified 13 million hectares as priority and
has a target of restoring 2 million hectares of peatland by 2020 in seven priority provinces (Papua, South
Kalimantan, Central Kalimantan, West Kalimantan, South Sumatra, Riau, and Jambi), with restoration targets
by forest type. Papua retains most intact forest, while South Sumatra was opened earliest and has been the
most drained by palm oil, pulp, and paper. Specifically, South Sumatra has the most significant loss in 2015
period, reaching about 24,3% of total loss. The BRG has a target in 2017 of restoring 200,000 hectares, with
private companies responsible for restoration of an additional 200,000 hectares on their land (Bulletin of
Indonesian Economic Studies)
Currently, palm oil is a solution for regional and national economic development if it is managed
sustainably. The growth of palm oil industries are encouraged by Government of Indonesia, yet at the same
time, it also contributes to fires and environmental destruction. Good governance of value chains can reduce
forest and land fires. The fire uses in land preparation can be altered by using coercion, dis(incentives) and
dominant information that held by district and central governments, growers, and mill. The potential benefits
from green products, a strengthened growers' association, moving up scenarios can be used to compensate
the 'benefits' of using fire (H. Purnomo et al.2018).
Further forest management should be evaluated and be aligned with Indonesia's ambitious goals for
sustainability related to production and consumption of food, water, and energy. These goals will be achieved
by supporting empowerment and capacity building, improved provision of basic services in health and
education, technological innovation, and sustainable natural resource management, in compliance with
principles of good governance (First NDC Republic Of Indonesia, 2016). As a part of CO2 emission reduction,
Indonesia needs to increased sustainability of agricultural plantations, reducing deforestation and forest
degradation, and utilizing renewable energy (H. Purnomo et al.2018). Sustainable resource management,
especially in forest use, needs to make the paradigm shift from economic development to sustainable
development, from quantity of life to quality of life, and from short-term to long-term benefit.
To address the difficulty of forest fires prevention, Government of Indonesia already made The Grand
Design on Forest, Land, and Plantation Fires 2017-2019 and the National Standard Operational Procedure on
Forest Fires Prevention. It promotes five strategies on forest fires effort including : (1) providing the incentive
and disincentive economics, (2) strengthening community roles, (3) law enforcement and synchronizing
regulation and permit, (4) increasing infrastructure, and (5) enhancing the early warning system.
Specifically, South Sumatra as one of the provinces that experienced the most of significant loss in
agriculture, forestry, transport, trade, industry, and tourism sector. It includes direct losses of crops, forests,
houses, biodiversity, and infrastructure, as well as the indirect costs of responding to the extinguish the fires
and disruption of air, land and sea travel on account of to the 'haze,' or toxic smoke. It is also caused
widespread respiratory, eye and skin ailments and deaths, especially among the very young and elderly.
However, Government of South Sumatra has vision for a fire-free, and sustainable province features five areas
of achievement adopted from Indonesia's national development goals: 1) Sustainable economic growth; 2)
Inclusive and equitable growth; 3) Social, economic, and environmental resilience; 4) Healthy and productive
ecosystems as environmental services' providers; and 5) Reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions.
To achieve these goals, a thorough approach that includes environmental, social, economic, and
political approach needs to be conducted. From the environmental approach, it is clear that forest fires will
jeopardize sustainability of the resources, the limitation of land use for palm oil plantation that has been
regulated by Government of Indonesia should be enforced by all stakeholders. Restoration of degraded lands
needs to be carried out, so it could be brought into production without adding further deforestation. In social
perspective, building communities capacity to carry out sustainable production are essential, it should include
five capital of finance, human resources, physical, natural resources and social aspect. Sustainable
development required sustainable communities. From economic perspective, the continuous expansion of oil
palm plantation that used burning method to clear the land while inviting economic benefit initially, it could
attract higher cost of disaster restoration after the fires that surpass the gained profit. Good palm oil value
chain needs to be established to achieve maximum economic benefit. Through various national initiatives such
as Roundtable Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) and eco-certification, it is expected that palm oil will be more
environmentally friendly and better for local economies, and people could increase their economic welfare in
legal ways. Land access and institutional support are needed to improve their welfare. Land reform and social
forestry along with law enforcement are viable options. From the political approach, it could be simplified that
in all over Indonesia the development process are highly dependent on view of the leader, so it is essential to
relate leader that prioritize sustainable development. Finally, robust mechanisms need to be established to
reward or giving incentives and disincentive for people's actions to their surrounded ecosystems, and for
innovating to ensure continuous supply of quality commodities or eco-certification for higher sale prices. If
this approach implemented successfully, will allow South Sumatra and Indonesia or other developing counties
to grow theirs economic inclusively and raise the resilience of farmers, maintain biodiversity, reduce fire risks,
curb natural forest loss, and reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.
Conclusion
Developing countries spreading mostly throughout Africa and Asia. These countries still in challenge to
increase people's welfare and provide basic needs but should oppose the risk in climate change and decrease
of vulnerability to disaster. Pure natural disaster is unlikely to prevent, while natural disaster-induced by
human should be extinguished to meet sustainable development goals. However, through the impact of
disaster, the aftermath could serve us with huge economic, social, and environmental consequences. Forest
fires are one example of disaster caused by human that have intention of clearing the land cheaply and gain
maximal economic benefit. While this practice has had impact especially forest fires between 1995 to 2015 is
higher than any other disasters in Indonesia (UNOCHA 2015: 38). These huge disasters inevitably disrupt the
development process and move Indonesia further from sustainable development process. Indonesia as one of
developing countries that have commitment in reducing disaster risk and conduct mitigation and adaptation
towards climate change should eradicate forest fires practices by building capacity of the communities, giving
incentives and disincentive, improvement of value chains, eco-certification, and so on. Certain approach needs
to be conducted that cover environmental, social, economic, and political aspect to meet the sustainable
development goals.
References
Aden, J., T. Walton, G. Dore and J. Vincent (2000) ‘Indonesia–Environment and Natural Resource
Management in a Time of Transition’. Jakarta: The World Bank.
Aminingrum (2017) ‘The Case of Forest Fire Policy Design in Indonesia’.
Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies - tandfonline.com.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00074918.2017.1365404. Accessed 13 August 2018.
Doocy S. et al. (2013) 'The Human Impact of Floods: a Historical Review of Events 1980-2009 and
Systematic Literature Review’.
Debbie Hillier, Oxfam and Katherine Nightingale, Christian Aid (2013) ‘How Disaster Disrupt
Development’
UN Environment. ‘Fighting Fires Indonesia’s Peatlands’, www.unenvironment.org/news-andstories/story/fighting-fires-indonesias-peatlands/. Accessed 10 August 2018.
FAO (2010) ‘Assessment of Forest Fire Risks and Innovative Strategies for Fire Prevention’.
Government of Indonesia (2016) ‘First Nationally Determined Contribution Republic Of Indonesia’.
Glauber, A. and I. Gunawan (2016) 'The Cost of Fire: An Economic Analysis of Indonesia's 2015 Fire
Crisis'. Jakarta: The World Bank. Accessed 12 August 2018.
Glover, D. and Jessup, T. (eds. 1999) ‘Indonesia s Fires and Haze: The Cost of Catastrophe’. Institute of
Southeast Asian Studies; International Development Research Centre, Singapore.
Herry Purnomo, Beni Okarda, Ade Ayu Dewayani, Made Ali, Ramadhani Achdiawan, Hariadi
Kartodihardjo, Pablo Pacheco, Kartika S. Juniwaty (2018) ‘Reducing forest and land fires through good palm
oil value chain governance’.
IFRC (2004) ‘Managing Disaster Risk in Developing Countries – A Global Challenge’.
http://www.ifrc.org/en/news-and-media/opinions-and-positions/speeches/2004/managing-disaster-risk-indeveloping-countries-a-global-challenge/. Accessed 12 August 2018.
Korhonen-Kurki K, Brockhaus M, Duchelle AE, Atmadja S, Thuy PT, Schofield L (2013) ‘Multiple
levels and multiple challenges for measurement, reporting, and verification of REDD+’. [Article]. Int J
Commons 7(2):344-366
N.L. Harris, S. Brown, S.C. Hagen, S.S. Saatchi, S. Petrova, et al. ‘Baseline map of carbon emissions
from deforestation in tropical regions’. Science, 336 (2012), pp. 1573-1576
Obidzinski K, Kusters K (2015) ‘Formalizing the logging sector in Indonesia: historical dynamics and
lessons
for
current
policy
initiatives’.
[Article].
Soc
Nat
Resour
28(5):530-
541,doi:10.1090/08941920.2015.1014605
Purnomo, H., B. Shantiko, S. Sitorus, H. Gunawan, R. Achdiawan, H. Kartodihardjo and A.A. Dewayani
(2017) 'Fire Economy and Actor Network of Forest and Land Fires in Indonesia', Forest Policy and Economics
78: 21-3
Purnomo, H., R. Achdiawan, A. A. Dewayani, S. Komar, B. Okarda, and K.S. Juniwaty (2016). ‘Tata
Kelola Rantai Nilai Sawit Dan Kebakaran Hutan Dan Lahan’(Oil Palm Chain Management and the Forest and
Land Fires)
Risnawati (2016) ‘The Complexity of Forest and Land Fire Case in Indonesia: Exposure On Moral
Dimension Of The Environmental Policy’. Jurnal Perencanaan Pembangunan: No. 2 /Vol.2 /January 2016.
Jakarta: Kementerian PPN BAPENAS.
Sunderlin, W.D., Angelsen, A., Belcher, B., Burgers, P., Nasi, R., et al., 2005. ‘Livelihoods, forests, and
conservation in developing countries: an overview’. World Dev. 33, 1383–1402.
UN ESCAP (2015) ‘Disasters in Asia and the Pacific: 2015 Year in Review’.
United Nation Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Action (UNOCHA) (2015) Indonesia
Disaster Management Handbook. Hawai: The Center for Excellence in Disaster Management and Humanitarian
Assistance
(CFE-DMHA).
Accessed
14
August
2018
<https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/node/114085>.
UNISDR. (2013) ‘Towards the Post-2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction Tackling Future Risks,
Economic Losses, and Exposure'.
World Bank (2016) ‘The Cost of Fires: An Economic Analysis of Indonesia’s 2015 Fire Crisis’.