11 Transforming Exploitative Land-Based Economy to Reduce …
237
companies which could involve seizure of land from native people under the name of
development (Cramb 2016). Forest encroachment may also happen in the absence of
effective forest governance, as some of these ULC areas are located just next to the
remaining forests. Also, the fragmented ULC areas may actually contribute significantly to connectivity of forest patches and thus intensive use may cause impacts on
important ecosystem services (Evans et al. 2017).
Despite the multiple risks and tough challenges, activating ULC land for production is still a better option than converting forest or other high carbon lands for production especially in face of growing demand for food and materials. In addition, proper
management of these land may help to avoid further land degradation and replenish
lost carbon stock. Reviving abandoned timber plantation for both production and
restoration is a good example. However, there is currently no specific incentives for
activating ULC land resources in sustainable manners.
Creating Value for Carbon Stock: The Case of REDD+
The concept of capitalising Ecosystem Services (ES) is not new but exists for decades
already. It advocates incorporating ecosystem services with contemporary market
economy through creating values for ‘nature’ that are compatible with economic
accounting practices (Missemer 2018). The basis is to link ‘natural capital’ to human
benefits in terms of provisioning, regulating, supporting and cultural services (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). Quantification of ES is deemed crucial for this
strategy as it provides manageable attributes of natural capital stocks for interventions
to take place (Maseyk et al. 2017). However, it has been very challenging especially
for the last two categories (Gunton et al. 2017).
The concept was experimented since early 2000s in Kalimantan with carbon stock
which is among the most conceivable and measurable components and can be banked
on carbon trading. Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation
(REDD+) is the major programme widely promoted in Kalimantan (see Fig. 11.6
for the locations of the sites) (Sills et al. 2014). It aims to raise billions of US dollars
from international donors to compensate the stakeholders who avoid degradation
and deforestation for the opportunity costs of converting these lands for agricultural
production. The Kalimantan Forests and Climate Partnership (KFCP) that covers
120,000 ha of intervention area in Central Kalimantan was regarded the most established REDD+ programme among the others in the country (Atmadja et al. 2014).
The programme was designed to reduce ongoing GHG emissions from peatland
degradation using various measures (Aldhous 2004). The programme also includes
the four other projects throughout Kalimantan: Katingan Peatland Restoration and
Conservation Project, Rimba Raya Biodiversity Reserve Project, Ketapang Community Carbon Pools (KCCP) and the Berau Forest Carbon Program (Anandi et al.
2014; Indriatmoko et al. 2014a, b; Intarini et al. 2014).
These projects suffer from many challenges. First, there have been stiff competitions between productive-use and conservation of land which were demonstrated
237
companies which could involve seizure of land from native people under the name of
development (Cramb 2016). Forest encroachment may also happen in the absence of
effective forest governance, as some of these ULC areas are located just next to the
remaining forests. Also, the fragmented ULC areas may actually contribute significantly to connectivity of forest patches and thus intensive use may cause impacts on
important ecosystem services (Evans et al. 2017).
Despite the multiple risks and tough challenges, activating ULC land for production is still a better option than converting forest or other high carbon lands for production especially in face of growing demand for food and materials. In addition, proper
management of these land may help to avoid further land degradation and replenish
lost carbon stock. Reviving abandoned timber plantation for both production and
restoration is a good example. However, there is currently no specific incentives for
activating ULC land resources in sustainable manners.
Creating Value for Carbon Stock: The Case of REDD+
The concept of capitalising Ecosystem Services (ES) is not new but exists for decades
already. It advocates incorporating ecosystem services with contemporary market
economy through creating values for ‘nature’ that are compatible with economic
accounting practices (Missemer 2018). The basis is to link ‘natural capital’ to human
benefits in terms of provisioning, regulating, supporting and cultural services (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). Quantification of ES is deemed crucial for this
strategy as it provides manageable attributes of natural capital stocks for interventions
to take place (Maseyk et al. 2017). However, it has been very challenging especially
for the last two categories (Gunton et al. 2017).
The concept was experimented since early 2000s in Kalimantan with carbon stock
which is among the most conceivable and measurable components and can be banked
on carbon trading. Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation
(REDD+) is the major programme widely promoted in Kalimantan (see Fig. 11.6
for the locations of the sites) (Sills et al. 2014). It aims to raise billions of US dollars
from international donors to compensate the stakeholders who avoid degradation
and deforestation for the opportunity costs of converting these lands for agricultural
production. The Kalimantan Forests and Climate Partnership (KFCP) that covers
120,000 ha of intervention area in Central Kalimantan was regarded the most established REDD+ programme among the others in the country (Atmadja et al. 2014).
The programme was designed to reduce ongoing GHG emissions from peatland
degradation using various measures (Aldhous 2004). The programme also includes
the four other projects throughout Kalimantan: Katingan Peatland Restoration and
Conservation Project, Rimba Raya Biodiversity Reserve Project, Ketapang Community Carbon Pools (KCCP) and the Berau Forest Carbon Program (Anandi et al.
2014; Indriatmoko et al. 2014a, b; Intarini et al. 2014).
These projects suffer from many challenges. First, there have been stiff competitions between productive-use and conservation of land which were demonstrated