are not burdened with the expectation of economic income, like in the case of Pak
Nur. However, replicating the plot by expecting the participation of other people is
not an easy task. This action leads to our discussion about our third plot: that the
economic value of revegetation and/or rewetting would improve the participation
from the communities, like in the case of plot in Rasau Jaya II Village.
The absence of direct economic value may restrict the scaling-up of peatland
restoration. Extensive drainage-based agriculture practices have transformed local
and traditional peatland management. Reversing the function of peatlands poses a
particular challenge, namely, to find alternative economic development and sustainable livelihood. Meanwhile, it is argued that the current massive drainage based
economic development in Indonesia is still promising for cash crops compared to
ecosystem services like carbon payment (credit)(Buttler et al. 2009). Nevertheless,
another lesson learned is that, through action research, local wisdom in peat utilization can be promoted to give expected economic values given that more economical
approaches are available.
The economic values can be gathered from:
1. optimizing fishery program from selecting suitable fishes for peat water, producing fish food from locally available organic materials, breeding, and fishpond
enlargement (see sect. 28.4.1). However, the remaining issue to be considered is
how the improved peat ecosystem could increase peat natural fish production
while at the same time abiding by the local regulation in fishery to maintain the
balance of natural fish harvesting and production;
2. the application of probiotics to improve production quality of fishery and farming
(cattle, duck, and chicken);
3. eco-tourism;
4. local commodities including sago, Coffea liberica, areca nut, and so forth;
5. products from horticulture in short term.
The peatlands in Indonesia are important for climate change mitigation; and for
that purpose, we should put forward the phrase “Indonesia peatland for all nations.”
Degradation of peatlands should be reversed with realistic options in terms of
ecology and economy in Indonesia and by involving the local people. At the same
time, international benefit from restoring peatlands in Indonesia shall be
foregrounded and the existing activities shall be framed within the broader context.
This means that more collaboration is needed between the local-national-international parties. Given the important role of Indonesia’s peatland for carbon emission
mitigation measures (Afriyanti 2011; Afriyanti et al. 2019), the payment for ecosystem services (PES) shall be put in the ecological economy. Some payment for carbon
emission mitigation has been made in the voluntary carbon market and is beneficial
for the local livelihood, for instance, in eight villages located in peatlands in Central
Kalimantan. The payment has been transferred through economic programs and
rewards as the case in Rimba Raya (personal communication with Dewanto, 2019).
However, it is unclear how carbon emission mitigation from voluntary market
complies with the national carbon emission mitigation (see further GOI 2016) as
the national reference for emission in Indonesia excludes emission from peat fires,
28 Show Windows and Lessons Learned from Peatland Restoration in Indonesia
771
Nur. However, replicating the plot by expecting the participation of other people is
not an easy task. This action leads to our discussion about our third plot: that the
economic value of revegetation and/or rewetting would improve the participation
from the communities, like in the case of plot in Rasau Jaya II Village.
The absence of direct economic value may restrict the scaling-up of peatland
restoration. Extensive drainage-based agriculture practices have transformed local
and traditional peatland management. Reversing the function of peatlands poses a
particular challenge, namely, to find alternative economic development and sustainable livelihood. Meanwhile, it is argued that the current massive drainage based
economic development in Indonesia is still promising for cash crops compared to
ecosystem services like carbon payment (credit)(Buttler et al. 2009). Nevertheless,
another lesson learned is that, through action research, local wisdom in peat utilization can be promoted to give expected economic values given that more economical
approaches are available.
The economic values can be gathered from:
1. optimizing fishery program from selecting suitable fishes for peat water, producing fish food from locally available organic materials, breeding, and fishpond
enlargement (see sect. 28.4.1). However, the remaining issue to be considered is
how the improved peat ecosystem could increase peat natural fish production
while at the same time abiding by the local regulation in fishery to maintain the
balance of natural fish harvesting and production;
2. the application of probiotics to improve production quality of fishery and farming
(cattle, duck, and chicken);
3. eco-tourism;
4. local commodities including sago, Coffea liberica, areca nut, and so forth;
5. products from horticulture in short term.
The peatlands in Indonesia are important for climate change mitigation; and for
that purpose, we should put forward the phrase “Indonesia peatland for all nations.”
Degradation of peatlands should be reversed with realistic options in terms of
ecology and economy in Indonesia and by involving the local people. At the same
time, international benefit from restoring peatlands in Indonesia shall be
foregrounded and the existing activities shall be framed within the broader context.
This means that more collaboration is needed between the local-national-international parties. Given the important role of Indonesia’s peatland for carbon emission
mitigation measures (Afriyanti 2011; Afriyanti et al. 2019), the payment for ecosystem services (PES) shall be put in the ecological economy. Some payment for carbon
emission mitigation has been made in the voluntary carbon market and is beneficial
for the local livelihood, for instance, in eight villages located in peatlands in Central
Kalimantan. The payment has been transferred through economic programs and
rewards as the case in Rimba Raya (personal communication with Dewanto, 2019).
However, it is unclear how carbon emission mitigation from voluntary market
complies with the national carbon emission mitigation (see further GOI 2016) as
the national reference for emission in Indonesia excludes emission from peat fires,
28 Show Windows and Lessons Learned from Peatland Restoration in Indonesia
771